The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About99/03/23CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY MARCH 23, 1999 Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chamber '10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman McNiel __ Vice Chairman Macias __ Com. Mannerino __ Com. Stewart __ Com. Tolstoy __ II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 12, 1998, Adjoumed January 27, 1999, Adjourned February 10, 1999, Adjourned February 24, 1999, Adjourned IV. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items as 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 should be removed for discussion. TIME EXTENSION FOR THE DESIGN REVIEW OF VESTING TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR INC - A request for an extension of a previously approved subdivision map, including design review, for the development of 264 apartments on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone in the Victoda Planned Community, located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-091-14, 15, and 227-111-12 and 13. Staff has prepared a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items are public hearings in which concemed individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shaft be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each projecL Please sign in after speaking. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-32 CARDLOCK FUELS SYSTEM - The development of an unattended commercial fueling station consisting of a 3,210 square foot canopy and a 218 square foot utility building on 1.2 acres of land in the General Industrial Distdct (Subarea 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the east side of Charles Smith Avenue, north of San Marino Street - APN: 229-321-01. Related file: Preliminary Review 98-10. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15914 -ZOMMORODIAN - A request to subdivide 11 acres of land into 9 single family lots in the Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre), located north of Hillside Road, between Archibald and Hermosa Avenues - APN: 1074-071-20. Related file: Tree Removal Permit 98-26. Staff'has prepared a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-02, AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - A public hearing for a proposed project to be known as the Victoria Arbors Village on 291.8 acres of land in the Victoria Planned Community, generally bounded by Base Line Road, future Victoria Park Lane, future Church Street, future Day Creek Boulevard, and Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Channel - APN: 227-201-04, 13 through 18, 22, 28 through 30, and 36; 222-201-33; 227-161-33, 35, 36, and 38; 227-171-11,12, and 14. Related file: Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 98-01. This action will be fonNarded to the City Council for final action and the date of the Public Headng before the City Council will be separately noticed. (A) Land Use changes for the following areas: Subarea 1 - from Low -Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 21.13 acres of land for the area generally located south of Base Line Road, East of the future Victoda Park Lane; and the consideration of retaining the Low-Medium Residential designation. Page 2 Subarea 2a - from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre), Low-Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) and, Community Facility to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 13.69 acres of land, generally located at the south side of Base Line Road, east and west of the winery; and consideration of alternative land use designations of Community Facilities and Community Services. Subarea 2b - from Medium-Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre), Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), and Park to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 51.38 acres of land, generally located east of future Day Creek Boulevard and 600 feet south of Base Line Road, Subarea 3- from Medium -High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Regional Related Office/Commercial to Low- Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 13.76 acres of land generally located north of future Church Street, west of future Victoda Loop Street; and consideration of alternative land use designations of Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) Subarea 4 -from Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre). Regional Related Office/Commercial, and Park to Low- Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 39,45 acres of land, generally located at the north side of future Church Street and east of future Day Creek Boulevard; and consideration of alternative land use designations of Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre). Subarea 5 - from Regional Related Office/Commercial to Low- Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 53 acres of land, generally located at the west side of future Day Creek Boulevard, north and south of future Church Street; and consideration of retaining the Regional Related Office/Commercial designation. Subarea 6 - Re-align the boundaries of the Victoria Community Plan to include approximately 26 acres of land from the Etiwanda Specific Plan, generally located on the north side of Church Street and the west side of Etiwanda Avenue; and a request to change the land use designation from Office to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre); and consideration of alternative land use designations of a mix of Office and Low-Medium Residential Page 3 (4-8 dwelling units per acre); and the consideration by the City of retaining the area in the Etiwanda Specific Plan with an Office designation or a mix of Office and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). (B) Amend the Circulation and Park and Recreation Elements of the General Plan (C) Amend vadous graphics and text for Victoda Community Plan (D) The consideration by the City of alternative sites for Park and School within the project area of the Victoda Community Plan. (E) Modify the permitted and conditionally permitted uses and various development and design standards for Regional Related Office/Commercial, Regional Center, and Community Facilities of the Victoria Community Plan ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-02, AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to re-align the boundaries of the Etiwanda Specific Plan by re-designating approximately 26 acres of land, generally located at the noah side of Church Street and the west side of Etiwanda Avenue to the Victoria Community Plan; and consideration by the City of retaining the area in the Etiwanda Specific Plan and retaining the land use designation of Office; and consideration of alternative land use designations of a mix of Office and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) - APN: 227-171-11,12, and 14. Related file: Victoria Community Plan Amendment 98-01. This action will be forwarded to the City Council for final action and the date of the Public Hearing before the City Council will be separately noticed. VI. NEW BUSINESS ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENTAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99- 05 - QUI KSET - A request to review a master plan of development for a concrete and plastic products manufacturer for a total of 161,400 square feet of office and manufacturing buildings on a 40-acre site within the Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 15) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 12167 Arrow Route - APN: 229-121-15, (Continued from March 10, 1999) WITHDRAWN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW 98-32 - HERITAGE HOSPITAL - A request to construct an approximately 56,896 square foot (120 beds) one-story Skilled Nursing Facility on approximately 3.95 acres of land and to revise the Rancon Master Plan (totaling 33.14 acres of land) located in the Industrial Park Page 4 Distdct (Subarea 7) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The property is located east of Eucalyptus Street on the South Side of White Oak Avenue-APN: 208-352-24. Related file: Design Review 90-20 and Lot Line Adjustment 439. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. (Note: This item was inadvertently advertised as a public hearing item) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEVV 99- 04 - SILVERADO GROUP - A request to build a 3-story, 34,860 square foot hotel as part of a master planned development with three other retail buildings on 5 acres of land in Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan located on' the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Streets - APN: 208-352-82. Related File: Parcel Map 15282. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. VII. DIRECTOR°S REPORTS APPEAL OF A SIGN PERMIT NO. 98-30 - FLORES - An appeal of the City Planner's decision regarding a wall price sign for Vineyard Shell, a service station and mini-market in the Community CommercialDistrict (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-192-06. (Continued from March 10, 1999) APPEAL OF INCOMPLETENESS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-12 - PASTOR GLORIA HAYWOOD - An appeal of the City Planner's denial of a Conditional Use Permit due to a determination of incompleteness for an application to establish a church within 3200 square feet of leased space in a multi-tenant industrial center located in Subarea 3 (General Industrial) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan at 9330 Seventh Street, Suite "G" - APN: 209-171-57. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general pubtic to address the Commission. Items to be discussed hera are those which do not already appear on this agenda. IX. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00p. m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. Page 5 I, Lois Schrader Secretary for the Planning Division of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 18, 1999, at least 72 hours prier to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. Page 6 · VICINITY MAP o - O. c3 o O CITY HALL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: March 23, 1999 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller. City Planner Dan Coleman, Principal Planner TIME EXTENSION FOR THE DESIGN REVIEW OF VESTING TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR INC - A request for an extension of a previously approved subdivision map, including design review, forthe development of 264 apartments on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone in the Victoria Planned Community. located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-091-14, 15, and 227- 111-12 and 13. BACKGROUND: On March 5, 1997. the City Council approved Vesting Tentative Tract 15766 and on April 23. 1997, the Planning Commission approved a revised design review application for the application. Since then, the developer diligently pursued plan check and the final map was recorded on December 29. 1998. ANALYSIS: Staff has compared the project to current City standards and determined that the design meets all City requirements. There have been no changes in the City's development standards for multiple family housing since the design review was approved in April 1997. The project was originally approved in 1997 for two years with the possibility of 3 one-year time extensions for a possible approval period totaling five years. The City Council amended the time extension provisions for design review applications on January 7, 1999, to allow for a five-year approval period with no extensions. Therefore, this project is now eligible for a three-year time extension under the new amended provision. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: On March 5, 1997. the City Council adopted Resolution No. 97-29, which included a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. A Mitigated Negative Declaration means that changes made in the project design or agreed to by the developer would avoid the potentially significant effects on the environment or mitigate the effects to the point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur. The circumstances have not changed with respect to the property; hence, no further environmental review is necessary. ITEM A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'v-I-r 15766 - MARK TAYLOR, INC. March 23, 1999 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends granting a time extension for a three-year period through adoption of the attached Resolution. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:DC:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Site Amenities Exhibit "E" - Elevations Exhibit "F" - Applic, ant's Letter Resolution of Approval .I M~rk 11~ylor TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15788 TECtifCAI, SITE PLAN PLANTPALE1TEl i':-: '~--.-.~".~ TBV'/'~4 T/I/E T~'~ICT NO. 15766 m,~.,,...~ CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE 2 PLAN -I POOL FACILrFY ,/" PRIMARY GATED ENTRY TYPICAL BLDG. CLUSTER TYPICAL TOT LOT TENTA fiVE TRACT NO. 15766 m.~A~,f SITE AMENITY ENLARGEMENTS SIDE ELEVATION Exterior Elevations-BId8 2C DB,~IGN GROUP 602-991-9111 9508 I LoB No. SIDE ELEVATION FRONT & REAR ELEVATION Exterior Elevations - Bldg 2B *~ 9508 LoS No. FRONT & REAR ELEVATION SIDE ELEVATION Exterior Elevations - BId8 2A DESIGN GROUP 602-991-911! 9508 :_': , ,.,, · LoB No. REAR.ELEVATION IIII1" / KEY PLAN LEFT SIDE ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION Exercise Buildin8 Elevations 9508 LoE No. 602-991-9111 RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION 9508 _~.~ -~ Exercise Building Elevations . LoB No. RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION .... KEY PLAN REAR ELEVATION ~ y,~.,...,- FRONT ELEVATION Reception Building Elevations 9508 · LoE[ No. LEFT SIDE ELEVATION Reception Building Elevations 602-991-9111 9508 · Log No. ENTRANCE PORTE COCHERE Porte Cochere Elevations 602-991-9111 9508 · LoB No.. FRONT ELEVATION - 8 BAY GARAGE REAR ELEVATION - 8 BAY GARAGE SIDE ELEVATION (tYD) 8 Bay Garage Elevation & Carport · Lo6 No, FRONT & REAR ELEVATION - 6 BAY GARAGE 'SIDE ELEVATION (tvp) 12 Bay GaraSe Elevation 9508 I Lo~ No. TYPICAL SCREEN WALL TYPICAL RAMADA ELEVATION CABANA - FRONT ELEVATION CABANA - RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION CABANA - LEFT SIDE ELEVATION CABANA - REAR ELEVATION Cabana, Ramada, Fence Elevations ARCHITBCTURAL DESIGN GROUP 9508 Lo~ No. Charles Joseph Associates PUBUC/PRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES FebmaW 1, 1999 Brad Buller, City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 RECEIVED I 1 1999 City of Rancho CucamOnga Plannini~ Division RE: Mark Taylor San Carmela Project - Tract 15766 NWC Base Line Road/San Carmela Court, Rancho Cucamonga Request for Twelve-Month Design Review Approval Extension (97-21) Dear Brad: This is as a follow-up to our prior and recent discussions conceming the referenced matter. As I indicated to you, Mark Taylor has a new financial partner who is currently involved with performing their preliminary due diligence as to the current status of project entitlements. This activity includes 'value engineering" that I indicated was for the purpose of ensudng they are yew clear on the Financial cemmitments that are involved with the appreved project. As you are well aware, two signffica:lt approvals were granted to the San Carmela Apartments in 1997: Approval of Vesting Tract Map 15766 by the City Council (Resolution 97-29) on March 6, 1997. This approval was preserved by the December 16, 1998, approval of the Final Map by the City Coundl and subsequent recordation of this map by Mark Taylor. The Planning Commission appreved the Design Review for Vesting Tract Map 15766 on April 23, 1997 (Resolution 97-21). This approval will be preserved when building permits are issued or the approved use has commenced by Apd122, 1999. An extension of the Design Review approval can be extended at the discretion of the Planning Commission if the request for extension has been made pdor to February 20, 1999.' Thank you for your anticipated assistance with our request for extension. Should you have any questions or need of additional information, please feel free to centact me at your eadiest opportunity. Sincerely, Charles J. Buquet Charles Joseph Associates Cc: Michael Coghlin, Mark Taylor Office 909048101822 800*240,1822 Fax 909,48101824 City Cenzr · 10681 Foothill BIrd., Suite 395 * Rancho Cuctmongz, CA * 917_30 A CA~FORNIA COP-~RATION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN REVIEW FOR VESTING TRACT NO. 15766 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 264 APARTMENTS ON 22.2 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 800 FEET WEST OF VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 227-091-14, 15, and 227-111-12 and 13. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates has filed an application on behalf of the developer, Mark Taylor, Inc., for the extension of the approval of the Design Review for Vesting Tract Map No. 15766, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject time extension request is referred to as "the application." 2. On March 5, 1997, the City Council adopted its Resolution No. 97-29, thereby approving Vesting Tentative Tract 15766 and adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 3. On April 23, 1997. this Commission adopted its Resolution No. 97-21, thereby approving the application subject to specific ~onditions and time limits. 4. On December 29, 1998, the final map was recorded. 5. On the 23rd day of March 1999, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 6. 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 meeting on March 23, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The previously approved Design Review is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes and policies; and b. The extension of the Design Review approval will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes and policies; and c. The extension of the Design Review approval is not likely to cause public health and safety problems; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TE FOR V'Fr 15766 - MARK TAYLOR, INC. March 23, 1999 Page 2 ordinance. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Desloin Review Applicant Expiration VTT15766 Mark Taylor Inc. April 23, 2002 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby modifies the conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. 97-21 and the Standard Conditions, attached thereto and incorporated herein by this reference, to read as follows: Planninq Division 1) The applicant shall agree to defend, at his sole expense, any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees. because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City. its agents, officers. or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City. its agents, officers, or employees, may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate, at its own expense. in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve the applicant of his obligations under this condition. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH 1999. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiei, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City 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 23rd day of March 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CITY OF RANCFIO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF RE'PORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: March 23, 1999 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Bullet, City Planner Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-32- CARDLOCK FUELS SYSTEMS - The development of an unattended commercial fueling station consisting of a 3,210 square foot canopy and a 218 square foot utility building on 1.2 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the east side of Charles Smith Avenue, north of San Marino Street - APN: 229-321-01. Related file: Preliminary Review 98-10. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: Surrounding Land Use and Zoninq: North - Vacant:GenerallndustrialDistrictofthelndustrialAreaSpecificplan(Subarea13) South- Vacant:GenerallndustrialDistrictofthelndustrialAreaSpeci~cPlan(Subarea13) East - 1-15 Freeway West - Industdalwarehouses:GenerallndustrialDistrictofthelndustrialAreaSpeci~cplan (Subarea 13) General Plan Desiqnations: Project Site - General Industrial North - General Industrial South - General Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial Site Characteristics: The site is a vacant parcel. The 1.2 acre site was previously used for the cultivation of grapes. The site is bordered by the 1-15 Freeway on the east and located within the potential Delhi-Sands Flower Loving Fly habitat, The project site grade is essentially level with freeway grade. '~TEM B - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 98-32 - CARDLOCK FUELS SYSTEMS March 23, 1999 Page 2 Parking Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footaqe Ratio Required Provided Gas Station Canopy ANALYSIS: 3,210 3 Spaces 3 6 plus 2 for each service bay General: The project is proposed as an unattended commercial fueling facility. Commercial clients will purchase gasoline or diesel fuel through an electric card reading system. The project will consist of a 3,210 square foot canopy, four fueling islands, and a 261 square foot utility building/trash enclosure. The fueling station will be open 24 hours a day and will be monitored by remote video surveillance. The architectural scheme of the project will be compatible with the surrounding industrial area. The canopy features a roof line with a vertical variation in the center and decorative treatment, such as a recessed element along the center fascia and cornice detail to enhance the canopy's face and edges. A combination of berming (3 feet above curb grade), dense landscaping and a 6-foot high split face wall around the perimeter of the site, will screen the majority of the pump islands and vehicular activities from areas in public view. Land Use Compatibility: An unattended fueling facility qualifies as "automotive service station," in Subarea 13, of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. In Subarea 13 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, service stations are a conditionally permitted use. The parcels to the north and south of the site are undeveloped. To the west are industrial buildings and to the east the site is bordered by the 1-15 freeway. The location of the fueling facility is not likely to interfere with adjoining properties and the activities associated with the subject facility should not create any conflicts with neighboring businesses. The proposed facility is intended to provide fuel for large trucks, which frequent the surrounding warehouse distribution uses. Desloin Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (McNiel, Stewart and Henderson) reviewed the proposed project on February 16, 1999, and recommended approval with conditions (Exhibit "G"). D= Technical Review Committee: The Technical and Grading Committees reviewed the project and recommended approval with conditions contained in the attached Resolution of Approval. The project is in compliance with all applicable City Standards and Design policies. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been prepared by the applicant and staff has completed Part 11 of the Environmental Checklist. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified the project area soil type as Tujunga-Delhi Sands Soils, which is a type of soil that is associated with a federally listed endangered species: the Delhi Sands Flower- Loving Fly (DSF). As a result, a biological habitat assessment to determine potential impacts to DSF was prepared by a biologist permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Results of the PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 98-32 - CARDLOCK FUELS SYSTEMS March 23, 1999 Page 3 focused surveys indicated that no DSF were observed on the project site. In addition, based on the habitat evaluation of the site's existing environmental conditions, the project site has low potential to support DSF. No other potentially significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project. A project review meeting was held on March 2, 1999, to discuss potential impact to biological resources and possible mitigation measures. Both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the County of San Bernardino were notified of the meeting, but did not attend. In addition, staff did not receive any written comments from either agency, No other potentially environmental impacts were identified at this meeting. If the Planning Commission concurs, then issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-32 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:RZ:mlg Attachments: Exhibit"A" Exhibit "B" Exhibit "C" Exhibit "D" Exhibit "E" Exhibit "F" Exhibit "G" - Site Plan - Conceptual Grading Plan - Landscape Plan - Elevations - Utility Building/Trash Enclosure - Sign Program - Design Review Committee Comments dated February 16, 1999 Exhibit "H" - Initial Study Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions N CARDLOCK VICINITy MAP BITE PLAN (~) ~ N VICINITy ktAP LANDSCAPE NOTES -) N PLANT LEGEND NOTE: TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA IS 10.247 SQFT. TOTAL ON-SITE AREA 15 9,239 SOFT. T FRONT ELEVATION T 1 END ELEVATION LIe!NO CARDLOCK __ ~ ~ ~ -t-- FUELS ,~,~,o,,., /,./., 'T ,~',/, CANOPY ELEVATiONR TRASH ENCLOSURE & UTILITY BLD PLAN \ TRASH ENCLOSURE & UTILITY BLD, FRONT ELEVATION ®~A,~,,.E. LZ~AT*O" NOIES: TRASH ENCLbSURE & UTILITY BLD. DOOR LATCH DETAIL "E" CANE BOLT DETAIL "D" CARDLOCK FUELS :T:.:T:~. ",1: GATE POST DETAIL 'B" % % , T \ (~:~C~:L~K T PROPOSED SIGN SUMIdARy CARDLOCK CONCEPTUAL 81GN pROGRAM DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Rudy Zeledon February 16, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-32 - CARDLOCK FUELS SYSTEM - The development of an unattended commercial fueling station consisting of a 3,210 square foot canopy and a 218 square foot utility building on 1.2 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the east side of Charles Smith Avenue, north of San Marino Street o APN: 229-321-01. Related file: Preliminary Review 98-10. Desiqn Parameters: The proposed fueling facility is located on a vacant parcel that was previously used for the cultivation of grapes. The parcels to the north and south of the site are undeveloped. To the west are industrial buildings and to the east, the site is bordered by the 1-15 Freeway. The site is located within the potential Delhi-Sands Flower-Loving Fly habitat. The project site grade is essentially level with freeway grade. Project Description: The project is proposed as an unattended commercial fueling facility. Commercial clients will purchase gasoline or diesel fuel through an electric card reading system. The project will consist of one 30-foot by 106-foot, 11-inch canopy, four fueling islands, a 218 square foot utility building/trash enclosure, on- and off-site landscaping, street improvements with two approaches, curb and gutter, and ancillary improvements. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. Planning Commission Resolution No. 89-158 requires that proposed buildings in the industrial area be designed with two primary building materials. However, it is staffs opinion that the uniqueness of the project warrants the use one primary building material. The Committee may wish to discuss this matter further. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Provide decorative paving, outside the public the public right-of-way, at driveway entrances. 2. Provide decorative perimeter wall ( i.e., slump stone, split-face, stucco). Eliminate the wall inset On the southeast portion of property line which creates a "no-roans land" property maintenance problem. Instead continue the wall along to the south property line; move the utility building back, adjacent to east property line; and increase the height of utility building so that the proposed wall sign will project above the 6-foot wall. Extend berms the full length of the frontage between the drive approaches and pump islands for screening. Increase density of tree planting along north, south, and east property lines to screen from the I-15 Freeway. The opposite side of the freeway is characterized by Alder trees. City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-32 2. Related Files: PRELIMINARY REVIEW 98-10 Description of Project: The development of an unattended commercial fueling station consisting of a 3.210 square foot canopy and a 261 square foot utility building on 1.2 acres of land in the General Industrial District ( Subarea 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the east side of Charles Smith Avenue, north of San Madno Street- APN: 229-321-01. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Cardlock Fuel Systems, Inc. 1825 W. Collins Ave., Orange, CA 92887 General Plan Designation: General Industrial Zoning: General Industrial District ( Subarea 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is a vacant parcel. that was previously used for the cultivation of grapes. The parcels to the north and south of the site are undeveloped. To the west are warehouses and to the east the site is bordered by the 1-15 Freeway. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact Person and Phone Number: Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: , Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project. involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning ( ) Population and Housing (X) Geological Problems (X) Water (X) Air Quality (X) Transporlation/Circulation (X) Biological Resources ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Hazards ( ) Noise ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance ( ) Public Services ( ) Utilities & Service Systems (X) Aesthetics ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Recreation DETERMINATION On the basis of Ihis initial evaluation: (X) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment. and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ( ) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1 ) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation Signe~eas t ~o:d upon the proposed project. 2~o~n, Assistant Planner January 25, 1999 .. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ' ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal.' a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving.' a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 4 b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche hazards? e) Landslides or mudflows? Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: The topography will be altered to accommodate the project. The design of the project site and construction of the proposed grading shall follow the recommendations of the soils engineer and shall comply with the current building standards and codes at the time of construction, Grading of the site will be done under supervision of a licensed Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor. The impact is not considered significant. h) The General Plan indicates the Tujunga-Delhi soil association for the site which "may have soil bearing capacities that could limit some development. Structures proposed on this soil type should be permitted only after a site specific investigation has been prepared that indicates that the soil can adequately suppod the weight of the structure." A soils report will be required by the Building and Safety Division prior to the issuance of building permits. The impact is not considered significant. WATER. W'dl the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature. dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 5 d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? () () () () () () () () ( () ( () ( () (x) (x) ( ) (X) ( ) (X) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) Comments: a) The proposed project v~ill result in an increase in paved sun'ace areas, which could result in a decrease in absorption rates and an increase in the amount of surface water runoff. All runoff will be conveyed to existing and proposed drainage facilities which were designed to handle the subject water flows. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a) Air vapor emissions will result from the fueling operations for gasoline. Vapor emissions from the site are regulated by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The applicant is required to comply with the SCAQMD emission standards and to obtain the necessary permits to operate the facility. The impact is not considered significant. . Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 6 d) g) TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a) The project will generate additional vehicular movement (mainly truck traffic) in a localized area. The City's General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan address the short-term and long-term cumulative impacts of traffic upon these streets. Based upon this information. the proposed project has no potential to alter the present pattern of circulation. No mitigation is required. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects. animals, and birds)? b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 7 d) Wetland habitat (e.g. , marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? e) VV~ldlife dispersal or migration corridors? NO ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service identifies the project area soil type as Tujunga- Delhi Sands Soils which is a type a soil that is associated with the endangered Delhi Sands flower-loving fly (DSF). As a result, a habitat assessment and biological survey were required to determine potential impacts to the DSF. These surveys were prepared by a biologist permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct surveys forthe DSF. Results of the focused surveys (Tierra Madre Consultants, Inc., July 22, 1998) indicated that no DSF were observed on the project site. In addition, based upon the habitat evaluation of the site's environmental conditions, the project site has low potential to suppod DSF because: (1) there are soil disturbances due to agricultural use, (2) DSF is only defined by the presence of Delhi sands deposits. Based upon this information, the proposed development of the 1.2 acre site will not likely result in the adverse effects to the DSF. No other unique, rare, or endangered animal species are known to be located on the project site. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including. but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 8 b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with ~ammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) The project will be regulated and required to obtain permits from the AQMD and DEHS. Operation of the facility must meet all State and Federal standards for air emission and public safety. No mitigation is required. 10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in.' a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 9 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? b) Communication systems? c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? e) Storm water drainage? f) Solid waste disposal? g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) · -,( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal.' a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) Comments: c) New light and glare will be created on the property with development of the vacant site. A condition of approval requiring an on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram of the entire property, will be required for review and approval by the Planning Division and Rancho Cucamonga Sheriffs's Department, prior to the issuance of building permits. The plan will be checked to ensure that it meets City polices relative to avoiding the casting of excessive light and glare onto adjacent properties. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES, Would the proposal.' a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 10 b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? () () () () () NO (x) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal.' a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? No ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term. to the disadvantage of long- term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief. definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) () () () (X) NO ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Page 11 c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited. but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects. and the effects of probable future projects.) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process. one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the followind earlierdocument(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Inilial Study and are available for review in the City · of Rancho Cucamonga. Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (X) General Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981) (X) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (X) Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR (Certified September 19. 1981) APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would OCCUF. Signature: Print Name and Title: Date: City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Public Review Period Closes: March 23. 1999 Project Name: Project Applicant: Cardlock Fuel Systems. Inc. Project Location (also see attached map): Located on the east side of Charles Smith Avenue. north of San Madno Street - APN: 229-321-01. Project Description: The development of an unattended commercial lueling station consisting era 3,210 square foot canopy and a 218 square foot utility building on 1.2 acres of land in Ihe General Industrial District (Subarea 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. Related file: Preliminary Review 98-10. FINDING This Is to advise that the City of Raocho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine If the project may have a significant eftoct on the environment and Is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are Included In the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public Is Invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. Date of Determination Adopted By Cardlock Fuels System Inc. CUP 98-32 0.4 ~les cP parcels Strut Centlines N _m RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-32 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN UNATTENDED COMMERCIAL FUELING STATION CONSISTING OF A 3,210 SQUARE FOOT CANOPY AND A 218 SQUARE FOOT UTILITY BUILDING ON 1.2 ACRES OF LAND IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (SUBAREA 13) OF THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CHARLES SMITH AVENUE, NORTH OF 8AN MARlNO STREET, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 229- 321-01. A. Recitals. 1. Cardlock Fuels System. Inc., has filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit No. 98-32, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 23rd day of March 1999, 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. 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. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on March 23, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located on the east side of Charles Smith Street, north of San Marlrio Street with a street frontage of 264 feet and lot depth of 164.09 feet and which is presently not developed and lacks curb, gutter, and sidewalk. b. The property to the north of the subject site is within the General Industrial District Subarea 13, of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and is currently vacant, the property to the south is within the General Industrial District Subarea 13, of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and is vacant, the property to the east is the 1-15 fleeway and the property to the west is within the General Industrial District Subarea 13, of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and is developed with industrial warehouses; and c. The project is consistent with Industrial Area Specific Plan objectives in that it provides convenient refueling for commercial vehicles serving the industrial area and help diversify the economic base for the City; and . PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 98-32 - CARDLOCK FUELS SYSTEM March 23, 1999 Page 2 d. The project proposes intensified landscape treatment along the street frontage and site perimeter, which screen the pump islands and vehicular activities from areas public view; and e. The project architecture is designed to be compatible to the surrounding industrial uses and will provide positive enhancement when viewed from the 1-15 Freeway. 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. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The proposed use, 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. c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. The Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and. further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. Based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project. there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: Plannine Division 1 ) Signs shall be conveniently posted on-site for "no overnight parking," which shall be enforced by applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 98-32 - CARDLOCK FUELS SYSTEM March 23, 1999 Page 3 2) The 6-foot perimeter walls along the north and south property lines, shall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from Charles Smith Avenue (measured from ultimate face of curb). 3) Lights under the canopy shall be recessed and shall not project below the canopy. 4) Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. 5) Entire site shall be kept flee of trash and debris at all times and in no event shall trash and debds remain for more than 24 hours, 6) Station shall not be open to the general public. Enaineerina Division 1) The property owner is currently processing a one lot subdivision and Tentative Parcel Map No. 15207. This Conditional Use Permit 98-32 is proposed for Parcel I of said Tentative Parcel Map. The Tentative Parcel Map shall continue to be processed concurrently with this Conditional Use Permit and the map shall be recorded, pdor to issuance of a building permit. 2) A signed consent and waiver to join and/or form the appropriate landscape and lighting districts shall be filed with the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of building permits. 3) Public right-of-way street and parkway improvements (including street widening, drive approaches, sidewalk, street lights and parkway trees) shall be fully improved and constructed per City Standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: a) Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards No. 107-B. b) Revise City Engineer's Drawing No. 1256 or provide new Street Improvement Plans, prepared by a registered Civil Engineer for the required frontage improvements. c) Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the street improvements, prior to the issuance of building permits. d) Prior to any work being performed in the street right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit obtained from the office of the City Engineer. e) Raise the elevation of the sites northeast corner as required for on-site flows to surface drain in a westerly direction onto Charles Smith Avenue. - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 98-32 - CARDLOCK FUELS SYSTEM March 23, 1999 Page 4 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall cedify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH 1999. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do 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 23rd day ~f March 1999. by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Conditional Use Permit 98-32 Unattended Commercial Fuelin.q Station Cardlock Fuels System, Inc. East side of Charles Smith Avenue, north of San Madno Street ALL OF THE FOLLOWING,C.O, NDITIONS AppL _y To,yOUR pROJECT~ APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements Comple~on Date The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City. its agents. officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the Distdcrs 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 District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planners letter of approval. and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. Site 1. Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which 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 the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 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 facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to 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 or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. · A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 10. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 11. All landscaping shall be permanently maintained by property owner. D. Building Design All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties 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. 2 Pn:~ectNo. CUP98-32 CompleUon Date For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main building colors. E. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 2. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn-around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cam stacking into the public right-of-way. F. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or pdor final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. A minimum of 20% of trees planted within industrial projects, and a minimum of 30% within commercial and office projects, shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. 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 private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater 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 pdor to occupancy. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater 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. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 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. 3 P~ojectNo. CU~98-~2 Completion Date 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. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right--of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 10. 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. 11. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. 12. On projects which abut the 1-15 Freeway, the developer shall provide landscaping within the freeway right-of-way along the boundary of this project or pay an in-lieu of construction cash deposit. The landscape and irrigation plans shaft be prepared in conformance with Caltrans and City Standards through the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and City Engineer. Landscape and irrigation shall be installed prior to the release of occupancy of the project. If final approvals and/or installation is not complete at that time, the City will accept a cash deposit for future landscaping of the Caltrans right-of-way. Signs The signs indicated on the submitted plans am conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any signs. H. Other Agencies The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for 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. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, 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. 4 Pi'oje~l NO, CUP 98-32 CompleUon Date Pdor to issuance of building permits for a new commemial or industrial development or addition to an existin9 development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but am not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. Street addresses shall be provided by the Build ing Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday. J. New Structures Roofing material shall be installed as for wind-resistant roof covering at wind velocity not less than 90 mph. K. Grading Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. ePPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L. Street Improvements 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, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: Street improvement plans. including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved 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 private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of buildin9 permits, whichever occurs first. 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 Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. C, Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit. and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. project No. CUT' 98-32 ComploUon Date Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations appruved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2oinch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. Existing City reads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequatedetoursduringconstruction. Streetorlaneclosurepermitsarerequired. Acash 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. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. M. Public Maintenance Areas A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form 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. Utilities 1. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bemardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. 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 the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. O, General Requirements and Approvals A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 6 Project No, CLrP98-32 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, e OR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: P. General Fire Protection Conditions Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. Fire flow requirement shall be 3,000 gallons per minute. X a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. X b. 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 fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any. will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch 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 to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of the required fire protection system. 5. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 22. $132.00 Fire District fee(s), and a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District prior to Building and Safety permit issuance. '* A Fire District fee in the amount of $132.00 shall be paid at the time of Water Plan submittal. *'Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 U BC, UFC, UPC, UMC. NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. Q. Special PenTtits 1. Special permits may be required, depending on intended use, as noted below: X a. Flammable and combustible liquids (storage, handling, or use). APPLICANT SHALL CONTACTTHE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: R. Security Lighting All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. SC - 1119e99 7 CompleUon Date All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with direct lighting to be provided by all entryways, Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development, 3, Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. S. Security Hardware One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. If windows are within 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 2. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. T. Building Numbering Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. 8 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: March 23, 1999 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15914 ZOMMORODIAN - A request to subdivide 11acres of land into 9 single family lots in the Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre), located north of Hillside Road, between Archibald and Hermosa Avenues - APN: 1074-071-20. Related file: Tree Removal Permit 98-26. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Densitv: 0.8 dwelling units per acre, SurroundinQ Land Use and Zoninq: North Vacant land; Very Low Residential (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) South - Vacant land and the Alta Loma Basin #3 flood control facility; Very Low Residential (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) and Flood Control East - Vacant land and single family homes; Very Low Residential (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) West - Vacant land and single family homes; Very Low Residential (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) General Plan Desianations: Project Site - Very Low Residential (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) North - Very Low Residential (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) South - Very Low Residential (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) and Flood Control East Very Low Residential (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) West - Very Low Residential (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) Site Characteristics: The site is located between Tract 13316 to the north, a 123-1ot subdivision for which single family home designs have been submitted but not determined complete, and Alla Loma Basin #3 flood control facility to the south. There are existing single family homes in the distance to the west, south, and east. The site has significant variation in terrain with natural grades ranging from roughly 5 percent to in excess of 30 percent. The site contains a number of Eucalyptus trees, some of which are proposed to be removed to accommodate trails, corrals, and drainage improvements. The site is dependent upon access through Tract 13316 which has yet to be developed. ITEM C ' PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TI' 15914 - ZOMMORODIAN March 23, 1999 Page 2 ANALYSIS: General: The project is subject to the Hillside Development Standards of the Development Code. This requires specialized home construction and grading techniques to minimize adverse impacts of grading. Home sites are proposed to be "clustered" within the less steep areas (12 percent) of the site. The only grading proposed with the application is the minimum necessary to accommodate the streets, trails, and drainage improvements. No high, "mass graded" type slopes are proposed. Once the subdivision is approved and recorded, individual property owners would come in on a lot-by-lot basis with custom home applications. Desian Review Committee: The Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Henderson) reviewed the project on February 2, 1999, and recommended approval subject to staff's comments. Please refer to the attached Design Review Committee Action Comments for further details. Technical Review Committee: The Grading and Technical Review Committees have reviewed the project and recommend approval subject to the conditions included in the attached Resolution of Approval. D. Trails Advisory Committee: The Trails Advisory Committee reviewed the project on March 10, 1999, and recommend approval. Tree Removal Permit: The site contains several large Eucalyptus trees. The applicant has applied for a Tree Removal Permit to allow for removal of the trees to accommodate trails, corrals, and drainage improvements. The Tree Preservation Ordinance allows for tree removal subject to replacement at a ratio of 1:1. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study was completed by the applicant and staff completed Part II. In completing the Initial Study Part II, the Environmental Checklist, staff identified potential environmental impacts related to biological, water runoff, heritage tree removal, transportation, and fire hazards. The increased runoff from development necessitates storm drain and flood control infrastructure to accommodate the flows. The site contains several mature Eucalyptus trees which are subject to replacement and preservation per the Tree Preservation Ordinance. Any trees that are removed must be mitigated with replacement on a 1: 1 ratio. The site is indicated as being a potential habitat for endangered species; the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat and the California Gnatcatcher. Biological surveys were completed and found that the site does not support adequate habitat for either. The site is currently land locked, with no street frontage. It is planned to take access to Archibald Avenue through Tract 13316 to the north. If it develops before the tract to the north (Tract 13316), two means of access to Archibald Avenue must be constructed for the project. Finally, the site is subject to Fire Prevention District Wildland Interface Zone requirements to mitigate fire hazard potential. In all cases, the impacts are not considered significant with mitigation. Staff recommends issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within an expanded 600-foot radius of the project site. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'iT 15914 - ZOMMORODIAN March 23, 1999 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 15914 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions and issue a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Brad Buller City Planner BB:BLC/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "B" - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "C" - Grading Plan Exhibit "D" - Site Sections Exhibit "E" - 3-D Model, Existing Site Exhibit "F" - 3-D Model, After Project Exhibit "G" - Initial Study Part II Exhibit "H" - Design Review Committee Comments dated February 2, 1999 Resolution of Approval with Conditions ,,,,, TRACT 15914 9 LOTS 1074-20-04 SITE UTILIZATION MAP FOR 300'/600' RADIUS AREA LANTEC ENGINEERING 5055 AVENIDA [NCINAS SITE 230 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 (760) 931 - I000 (760) 931 - 9505 'rR~CT 15914 I(-X,.LOT/,12 ~ ~ CJ I / / 6 -" L, LOT 21 .... EOT TENTATIVE MAP TRACT NO. 15914 LOT,' 1! EOT - CONCEPTUAL GRADING TRACT NO t59'14 ,OT 6 LOT 5 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN FOR TRACT 15914 SECTION F - F NTS SECTION E - E mmemi~mmm~ma TYPIEAL PRIVATE DRIVEWAY DETAIL TYPICAL PRIVATE DRIVEWAY DETAIL CITY DF RANCHD CUCAMDNG~- 21 LOT t 5 SCALE ~'=40' LO"I:- I CROSS-SECTIONS TRACT NO 15914 \, LOT 5 ~ "C) LEGEND. ,,,. ~]TY DF RANCHD CUCAt4DNGA CRDSS - SECTIONS TRACT 15914 ! · SECTION L - L ~ ~'""~ SECTION H~ SCALE 1"=40~ ECTION J - · SECTION G - G CROSS-SECTIONS TRACT NO 15914 LEGEND. C|TY F1F' RANCHFI CUCAHE]NG~ SECTION X ~ X ~' ~ "* TRACT 15914 3D MODEL EXISTING TRACT 15914 3D MODEL City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract 15914 2. Related Files: Preliminary Review 98~03 Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15914 - LANTEC ENGINEERING - A residential subdivision of 9 custom single family lots on 11 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located north of Hillside Road between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue - APN: 1074-071-20. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Mohammad Zomorrodian Lantec Engineering 5055 Avenida Encinas, Suite 230 Cadsbad, CA 92008 (760) 931-1000 General Plan Designation: Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) Zoning: Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Vacant land and single family homes, approximately 84 acres to the north has been subdivided into 123 single family lots in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) and there is a Development Review application pending for grading and home construction. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact Person and Phone Number: Brent Le Count Associate Planner (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: EXHIBIT "S" Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15914 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning ( ) Population and Housing (v') Geological Problems (v') Water ( ) Air Quality (v') Transportation/Circulation (~/) Biological Resources ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources (v') Hazards (v') Noise ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance (v') Public Services (v') Utilities and Service Systems ( ) Aesthetics ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Recreation DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ( ) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. (v) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. () I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1 ) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signed: Brent Le Count, AICP Associate Planner March 17, 1999 Initial Study for · Tentative Tract 15914 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) ( ) ( ) d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) (v) () () Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15914 Page 4 b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche hazards? e) Landslides or mudflows? Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? ¸() (,/) (,/) () () () () () () ( ) (v) ( ) (v') () (1) () () () (~) () (~) () () () (~) Comments: a, b, and c) The Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone of the Cucamonga Fault lies to the north of the site. Also the site contains greater than 30% slopes and east facing slopes. The General Plan indicates that both of these factors contribute to moderate to high slope failure potential. A geologic investigation was conducted (GeoTek Inc. dated August 3, 1998) to determine if geologic hazards were present that may affect development of the TT 13316 site to the north. The investigation concluded that there are no known conditions on that site which are considered to be a significant constraint or cause unusual concerns to development as proposed. However, as an added precautionary measure, the report recommended a 100-foot setback from the fault zone. The subject site is much further than 100 feet from the fault zone. The impact is not considered significant. The project will cause changes in topography because the site is currently vacant. A soils report will be required prior to issuance of a grading permit and grading will be supervised by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer. The impact is not considered significant. h) The site is indicated to have "Tujunga-Delhi" soil type per the General Plan which states that this soil type "may have soil bearing capacities that could limit some development." The GeoTek Inc. geological investigation concluded that expansive soils are not expected on site but recommends certain mitigation measures should expansive soils be discovered during the grading process. Furthermore, a soils report will be required prior to issuance of a grading permit to ensure soil bearing capacities are adequate to accommodate the project. The impact is not considered significant. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15914 Page 5 4. WATEI~. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature. dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? f) Change in the quantity of ground waters. either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? () (v) () () () (v) () () () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () () (v) (v) (v) (v) Comments: a and b) There are existing streams to the northwest of the site which bisect Tract 13316. Per the conditions of approval for Tract 13316, certain drainage improvements will be required to handle the flows from these drainage areas. These improvements must be completed prior to the subject 9-lot tract being built. With mitigation, the impact is not considered significant. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15914 Page 6 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal.' a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 9) Rail or air traffic impacts? () () (v) () () () () (v) (v) () () () () (v) () () (v) () () (v) () () () (v) Comments: a) The project will not increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion in excess of projections for the adopted land use, for which the street widths were evaluated at a build out condition. The project will be required to install frontage street improvements in their ultimate configuration. per City Ordinance, and to pay Transportation Development Fees. The impact is not considered significant. c) The project has no developed means of access. If it is developed prior to Tract 13316 to the north, two means of access shall be constructed. A condition of approval requires the improvement of two means of access through Tract 13316. With mitigation the impact is not considered significant. - Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15914 Page 7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( ) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) () () () () () () () () () () Comments: a and d) The property is located in an area recently identified by the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife Service as potential habitat for endangered or threatened species. Habitat assessment and biological surveys were required to determine potential habitat value and any potential impacts, particularly to the federally-listed threatened California Gnatcatcher and the endangered San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat. Habitat assessment and protocol surveys were conducted by Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc., consulting biologists permitted by the U.S. Fish and WildFire Service. The results of the surveys indicate that the site does 'not contain suitable habitat for the Gnatcatcher and no Gnatcatchers were detected on site. The surveys also indicate that the site is not suitable habitat for the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat and no signs of the rat were present. Based on this information, the proposed development of the 11 acre site will not likely result in adverse effects to rare, sensitive, or endangered animal species. b and c) The project will cause the removal of several Eucalyptus trees to accommodate trail and drainage improvements. The applicant has filed a Tree Removal Permit for consideration by the Commission. The Tree Preservation Ordinance requires replacement of Eucalyptus trees on a 1:1 ratio. The same requirement shall be placed on the subject Development Review. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15914 Page 8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? () () () (~) () () () (~) () () () (~) 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) b) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances iincluding, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? Increased fire hazard in areas with ~ammable brush, grass, or trees? () () () (~) () () () (1) () () () (~) () () () (~) () (f) () () Comments: e) The site falls within the "Wildland/Urban Interface" zone and is therefore subject to fire hazard mitigation requirements such as vegetation management, specialized home construction methods, and other requirements. A condition of approval requires compliance with Fire District requirements. With such mitigation, the impact is not considered significant Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga · Tentative Tract 15914 Page 9 10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? () () (v) () () () () (v) Comments: a) The project will increase existing noise levels since the site is currently vacant. The project is not expected to increase noise levels beyond anticipated limits. The impact is not considered significant. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) (v') ( ) ( ) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Comments: b) The site falls within the "VVildland/Urban Interface" zone and is therefore subject to fire hazard mitigation requirements such as vegetation management, specialized home construction methods, and other requirements. A condition of approval requires compliance with Fire District requirements. With such mitigation, the impact is not considered significant. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? () () () (v) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15914 Page 10 No (,/) b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) ( ) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') e) Storm water drainage? ( ) (~/) ( ) ( ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/) Comments: e) There are existing streams to the northwest of the site which bisect Tract 13316. Per the conditions of approval for Tract 13316, certain drainage improvements will be required to handle the flows from these drainage areas. These improvements must be completed prior to the subject 9-lot tract being built. With mitigation, the impact is not considered significant. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal.' a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) b) C) d) e) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) (v') (,/) (,/) (,/) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15914 Page 11 15, RECREATION. Would the proposal a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? () () () (v) () () () (v) 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long- term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief. definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects. the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? c) d) () () () (v) () () (v) () () (v) () () (v) ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES Geological Problems: Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the mitigation measures identified in the Geological Evaluation by GeoTek Inc. dated August 3, 1998. Initial Study for · Tentative Tract 15914 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 12 Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Transportation: The developer shall install frontage street improvements to their ultimate configuration per City ordinance and pay applicable Transportation Development Fees. If the project is developed prior to Tract 13316 to the north, two means of access shall be constructed. Biological Resources: All non fruit bearing trees in excess of fifteen feet in height and 15 inches in trunk circumference that are removed to accommodate the project shall be replaced at a minimum ratio of 1:1 with same species as those removed as required by Municipal Code Section 19.08.100. Hazards: The project shall compjy with the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District standards. A Fuel Modification/Management Plan shall be submitted for Fire Chief and City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. Water/Utilities: Sufficient storm drainage infrastructure, within Tract 13316, shall be installed to protect the site to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiedng, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (~/) General Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981) (v') Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) 82/25/1999 18:89 7689319585 LAN'TEC ENGII, EERING PAGE 81 #313 SENT SY: R CUCAMONGA COg DEV; 2-25-gg I :59PM; 901~4712647 kqitiml Study for Tentative Tract 15914 City of Rencho Cucemonga Page 13 APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I ~ertify that I am the applicant for the project described In this ImtJel Study. I e~ge that I have reed this Initial Study and the proposed miligetlo~ measures, Further. I have revled the project plans or ~oposale and/or hereby agree to the I~gposed mitigation menlutes to avoid the effed~ or m|tlg~te the eftads to · point where clearly no significant environmental effects would PrlntNm',eandTm,: k/ftz f--q ~'e...~or~6 d ~ t.r~ Pre ~l~[e~b~1~ I:tBRENT~fSgI4.env City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration Is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract 15914 Project Name: Project Location (also see attached map): HermosaAvenues-APN: 1074-071-20. Public Review Period Closes: March 23, 1999 Project Applicant: Mohammad Zomorrodian Located north of Hillside Road, between Archibald and Project Description: A request to subdivide 11 acres of land into 9 single family lots in the Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre), Related file: Tree Removal Permit 98-26. FINDING This Is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine If the prpJect may have a significant effect on the environment and Is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included In the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public Is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. March 23. 1999 Date of Determination Adopted By /~!~ Figure 1. ,.-. Vicinity Map of the Project (Cucamonga Peak U.S.G.S. 7.5' Quadrangle) DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Brent Le Count February 2, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15914 - ZOMMORODIAN - A request to subdivide 11 acres of land into 9 single family lots in the Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre), located north of Hillside Road, between Archibald and Hermosa Avenues - APN: 1074-071-20. Related file: Tree Removal Permit 98-26. Desiqn Parameters: The site is located to the southeast of Tract 13316, a 123-1ot subdivision forwhich single family home designs have been submitted, but not determined complete. There are existing single family homes, in the distance, to the west, south, and east. The site has significant variation in terrain with natural grades ranging from roughly 5 percent to in excess of 30 percent. Homes are proposed to be "clustered" within the less steep areas (12 percent) of the site, The site contains a number of Eucalyptus trees, some of which are proposed to be removed to accommodate trails, corrals, and drainage improvements. The project is subject to the Hillside Development Standards of the Development Code. This requires specialized home construction and grading techniques to minimize adverse impacts of grading. The only grading proposed with the application is the minimum necessary to accommodate the street, trails, and drainage improvements. No high, "mass graded" type slopes are proposed. Once the subdivision is approved and recorded, individual property owners would come in on a lot-by-lot basis with custom home applications, 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: 1. Staff feels there are no major design issues. SecondaN Issues: Once all or the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Provide contour grading for proposed cul-de-sac street so that grading has a softer, more natural appearance and blends with the existing terrain. 2. Surface drainage improvements should be as natural in design and appearance as possible. Suggest use of river rock cobble to create a dry stream bed look. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. No cut or fill shall exceed a height of 5 feet. 2. Eucalyptus trees removed to accommodate the project shall be replaced on site at a rate of 1:1 with the largest available nursery grown trees. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee recommend approval subject to the above, DRC COMMENTS TT 15914 - ZOMMORODIAN February 2, 1999 Page 2 Desicln Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart. and Larry Henderson Staff Planner: Brent Le Count The Committee (McNiel. Stewart, Henderson) reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to staffs comments. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15914, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 9 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 11 ACRES OF LAND IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (UP TO TWO DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND HERMOSA AVENUE. AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1074-071-20. A. Recitals. 1. Lantec Engineering has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15914, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 23rd day of March 1999, 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. 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. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on March 23, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located north of Hillside Road, between Archibald and Hermosa Avenues with no street frontage and which is presently vacant; and b. The site is landlocked with no street frontage. At least two means of access through Tract 13316 to the northwest are required to provide access from the site to Archibald Avenue; and c. The property to the north of the subject site is vacant, the property to the south consists of the Alta Loma Flood Control Basin Number 3, the property to the east is vacant and developed with single family homes (the "Woods"), and the property to the west is vacant and developed with single family homes; and d. The project is designed to limit building sites to the flatter areas of the site leaving the steeper portions undisturbed; and e. The project is consistent with the intent of the Hillside Development Standards of the Development Code in that grading is limited to the minimum necessary to accommodate roadway, trails, and drainage improvements; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15914 - LANTEC ENGINEERING March 23, 1999 Page 2 f. The site contains a significant grove of Eucalyptus trees. The project is consistent with environmental preservation objectives in that trees removed to accommodate project improvements are kept to a minimum and replaced on a 1:1 ratio; and g. There are existing streams to the nodhwest of the site which bisect Tract 13316. Drainage infrastructure improvements associated with Tract 13316 must be completed to protect the subject tract. 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. ThatthetentativetractisconsistentwiththeGeneralPlan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project. no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 'IF 15914 - LANTEC ENGINEERING March 23, 1999 Page 3 of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Plannina Division 1) Provide contour grading for proposed cul-de-sac street so that grading has a softer. more natural appearance and blends with the existing terrain. 2) Surface drainage improvements should be as natural in design and appearance as possible. Suggest use of river rock cobble to create a dry stream bed look. 3) No cut or fill shall exceed a height of 5 feet. EnaineerinQ Division 1) If the tract develops prior to the tract to the north, two means of access through Tract 13316 shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 2) Extend the Tract 13316 storm drain in Birdsong Place through this tract to outlet into Alta Loma Basin Number 3. 3) Installation of storm drain outlets within Alta Loma Basin Number 3 will require a Flood Control District permit prior to the issuance of building permits. 4) The private cross lot drainage facilities adjacent to local trails shall extend across all lots and discharge to the storm drains. This will also provide erosion protection at the bottom of the graded area. 5) The temporary outlet for rear lot and Community Trail drainage at the southeast corner of Tract 13316 (northeast corner of Lot 1) shall be removed and replaced with a pipe, designed as a minimum 24-inch main line, which extends to the basin. 6) Private on-site drainage facilities shall be hard-lined whenever the slope of the flow line exceeds 6 percent. 7) The overflow swale within the public drainage easement on Lot 5 shall be hard-surfaced to the bottom of the basin. The materials of construction shall be approved by the City Engineer and the City Planner. 8) The bulb of the cul-de-sac shall be designed as a warped plane, such that the cross slope for parked or turning cars is no greater than 6 percent. Locate the low point at the catch basin. · PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15914- LANTEC ENGINEERING March 23, 1999 Page 4 9) The right-of-way at the bottom of the cul-de-sac shall be graded to direct overflows to the storm drainage easement on the east side of Lot 5 and away from private property. 10) The following items shall be provided to the satisfaction of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District: a) Lot A shall be dedicated to San Bernardino County Flood Control District in fee title. b) San Bernardino County Flood Control Improvements shall be installed, including boundary fencing and outlet protection. c) A berm shall be constructed along the southerly property line of Lots 5 and 6. d) Provide a 50-foot building setback from District rights-of-way for Lots 3 through 6. e) Manured areas shall not drain to the Alta Loma Basin. 11) The final drainage study shall address design of the local trail along the east property line Within the storm drain easement and the trap channel on Lot 5 to be sure Q-100 overflows remain within public easements. 12) Sidewalks shall be installed on one side of the cul-de-sac. Select the same side as the portion of Birdsong Place within Tract 13316. 13) The access reserved for Lot 29 across Lot 15 of Tract 12902 shall be vacated except for the portion necessary to access the Community Trail from Lots 2.3, and 4. 14) Dedication for community trail purposes, at the northwest corner of Lot 9, sufficient for maintenance vehicle turning radius. shall be made to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Improvements necessary to complete the corner shall be installed. Environmental Mitiqation Measures 1) Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 2) Sufficient storm drain infrastructure, within Tract 13316 to the north, shall be installed to protect the site to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 3) Sufficient storm drain and flood control infrastructure shall be installed on site to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. .PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 'I'I' 15914 - LANTEC ENGINEERING March 23, 1999 Page 5 4) If Tentative Tract 15914 develops prior to the tract to the north, two means of access through Tract 13316 shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 5) All non fruit bearing trees in excess of 15 feet in height and 15 inches in trunk circumference that are removed to accommodate the project shall be replaced at a minimum ratio of 1:1 with the same species as those removed as required by Municipal Code Section 19.08.100. 6) All provisions of the San Bernardino County Fire Safety Overlay District shall apply. A Fuel Modification/Management Plan shall be submitted for Fire Chief and City Planner for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 7) Sufficient storm drainage infrastructure, within Tract 13316, shall be installed to protect the site to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH 1999. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman A'FI'EST: 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 23rd day of March 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: TENTATIVE TRACT 15914 9-LOT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION LANTEC ENGINEERING NORTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD, BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AND HERMOSA AVENUES ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements complellon Dale 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its / / agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City. its agents, officers. or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, / / participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the District's 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 District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. 3. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in .__/ / legible form on the grading plans, building and construction plans. and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits 1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not / / issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. Site Development Completion Date 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which .J / include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program. and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein. and Development Code regulations. 2. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / / consistency prior to 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. 3. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, / / all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 4. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall not prohibit the keeping the equine / / animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors of homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&R's. 5. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) 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. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the name and address of their otficers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 6. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property __J / owner, homeowners' association, or olher means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link .__/ / to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be J / manufactured products. D, Landscaping 1. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier / / in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the 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 arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 2, All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater 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. 3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater / / 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. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 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 irrigations shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment, If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: E. Site Development Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., TT 15914). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, 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. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. For projects using septic tank facilities, written certification of acceptability, including all supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bemardino County Department of Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday, F. Grading Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. Completion Date /___/ /~ __/ / / / / / / / / / / / 5. As a custom-lot subdivision, the following requirements shall be met: Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all on-site drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to final map approval and prior to the issuance of grading permits. 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 Safety Division prior to issuance of grading and building permits. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering 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. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building and grading permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis). 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 method 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 not release the applicant/developer from compliance with the slope planting requirements of Section 17.08.040 1 of the Development Code. In hillside areas, residential developments shall be graded and constructed consistent with the standards contained in the Hillside Development Regulations Section 17.24.070. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: G. Dedication and Vehicular Access Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, 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. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. H. Street Improvements 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, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights. and street trees. 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be / / / / / / / / / / /__J / / ___/ / Projecl NO. posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing Completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, 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 Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Completion Date / / / / / / Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City __./.__/ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. / / Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are 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. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single tamily residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program upon development. I. Public Maintenance Areas A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form 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. J, Drainage end Flood Control The project (or portions thereol) is located 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. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone A designation removed from the project area. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter ol Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever / / / / /.__/ __J__J / / / / Project NO 1~' 15gl4 Completion Date occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. 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. A permit from the San Bernardino 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 public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. 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. K. Utilities Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (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. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. 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 the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. L. General Requirements and Approvals Prior to approval of the final map, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District 84-2 among the newly created parcels. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTtON/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909)477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: M. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. .,__/ / / / / / / / / / /.__,/ /__/ __/ / / / / / / / / / Project No. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 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 fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants. if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch 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 to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of the required fire protection system. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. All roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance No. 22. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. Emergency secondary access shall be provided in accordance with Fire District standards. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet, 6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus. ~;132.00 in Fire District fee(s). and a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District prior to Building and Safety permit issuance. °" A Fire District fee in the amount of $132.00 shall be paid at the time of Water Plan submittal. '*Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. Project is located in a high fire hazard area and is subject to special wildland/urban interface hazard mitigation requirements. Such requirements may include requirements related to vegetation management plans, special construction enhancements, emergency access. water supply, automatic fire extinguishing systems, and other special requirements. A SEPARATE SET OF PLANS IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO THE FIRE PREVENTION NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT AT TIME OF PLAN SUBMITTAL TO BUILDING AND SAFETY. Contact the Fire Prevention New Construction Unit located in the Building and Safety Division. 'IT 15q14 Completion Dale /__1 __J,__l / / I / I I IJ .~1__1 __1 I I I I I I___1 /- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: March 23, 1999 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-02, AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - A public hearing for a proposed project to be known as the Victoria Arbors Village on 291.8 acres of land in the Victoria Planned Community, generally bounded by Base Line Road, future Victoria Park Lane, future Church Street, future Day Creek Boulevard, Foothill Boulevard, and the Day Creek Channel - APN: 227-201-04, 13 through 18, 22, 28 through 30, and 36; 222-201-33; 227-161-33, 35, 36, and 38; 227-171-11, 12, and 14. Related file: Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 98-01. (A) Land Use changes for the following areas: Subarea 1 - from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 21.13 acres of land for the area generally located south of Base Line Road and east of future Victoria Park Lane; and consideration of retaining the Low-Medium Residential designation. Subarea 2a - from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre). Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), and Community Facility to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 13.69 acres of land, generally located on the south side of Base Line Road, east and west of the winery; and consideration of alternative land use designations of Community Facilities and Community Services. Subarea 2b - from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre), Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), and Park to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 51.38 acres of land, generally located east of future Day Creek Boulevard and 600 feet south of Base Line Road. Subarea 3- from Medium-High Residential ( 14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Regional Related Office/Commercial to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 13.76 acres of land, generally located north of future Church Street, west of future Victoria Loop Street; and consideration of alternative land use designations of Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre). ITEMS D & E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23, 1999 Page 2 Subarea 4 - from Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre), Regional Related Office/Commercial, and Park to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 39.45 acres of land, generally located on the north side of future Church Street and east of future Day Creek Boulevard; and consideration of alternative land use designations of Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre). Subarea 5 - from Regional Related Office/Commercial to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre), and High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 53 acres of land, generally located on the west side of future Day Creek Boulevard, north and south of future Church Street; and consideration of retaining the Regional Related Office/Commercial designation. Subarea 6- Re-align the boundaries of the Victoria Community Plan to include approximately 26 acres of land from the Etiwanda Specific Plan, generally located on the north side of Church Street and the west side of Etiwanda Avenue; and .a request to change the land use designation from Office to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre); and consideration of alternative land use designations of a mix of Office and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre); and consideration by the City of retaining the area in the Etiwanda Specific Plan with an Office designation or a mix of Office and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). (B) Amend the Circulation and Parks and Recreation Elements of the General Plan. (C) Amend various graphics and text for the Victoria Community Plan. (D) Consideration by the City of alternative sites for Park and School within the project area of the Victoria Community Plan. (E) Modify the permitted and conditionally permitted uses and various development and design standards for Regional Related Office/Commercial, Regional Center, and Community Facilities of the Victoria Community Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-02. AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to re-align the boundaries of the Etiwanda Specific Plan by re-designating approximately 26 acres of land, generally located on the north side of Church Street and the west side of Etiwanda Avenue to the Victoria Community Plan; and consideration by the City of retaining the area in the Etiwanda Specific Plan and retaining the land use designation of Office; and consideration of alternative land use designations of a mix of Office and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) - APN: 227-171-11, 12, and 14. Related file: Victoria Community Plan Amendment 98-01. · PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23, 1999 Page 3 ABSTRACT: The purpose of this public hearing is for the Commission to take public testimony and discuss the merits of the proposed project. The environmental review is still in process and is due to be completed by the end of April; therefore, no action is being requested tonight. The advertised public hearing for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be scheduled for May. The above- described project will also be considered at the same time. BACKGROUND: The applicant, American Beauty Development Co., first contacted the City in July of 1997 and informed staff of their property ownership of Victoria Lakes. As a result of reviewing their preliminary development concepts, staff determined that the proposed changes in land use, circulation, open space, and park were significant and would require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and multiple land use amendment applications. In January of 1998, the applicant formally submitted their General Plan, Community Plan, and Specific Plan Amendment applications. After selecting LSA, Inc. as the City's consultant, preparation of the EIR commenced in April of 1998. Although the draft EIR was completed last December and circulated for public review, it is not ready for the Commission's review and consideration because additional land use analysis is needed to address the impacts of land use alternatives raised during the workshops with the Planning Commission. The Commission held a total of four workshops that began in January of this year, to understand and familiarize themselves with the different components of the project. Attached for the Commission's review are the minutes from the four workshops as shown in Exhibit OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS: Below is a brief listing of various opportunities and constraints to be considered by the Commission. A. Opportunities Reevaluate the fourth and final village concept of the Victoria Community Plan and ensure a successful project into the next century. · Reexamine the current higher density residential land uses and their location. · Create a new Open Space Element that would be the focal design theme of this village. Build on the winery theme and create a dynamic mix of single family and multi-family neighborhoods. The winery theme would highlight the agricultural heritage of the City. Construction of Day Creek Boulevard between Foothill Boulevard and Base Line Road would enhance traffic circulation in the area and possibly promote more commercial development near Foothill Boulevard. Group and/or link public and quasi-public uses such as a school, parks, paseos, passive open space, and the winery as major visual community elements in this village. Incorporate and maintain the wetland as a biological sanctuary and teaching tool for our children. B. Constraints Removal of the lakes creates the void of a strong and unique focal Open Space Element. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23, 1999 Page 4 The historic winery facility, with its business of wine producing and storage, wine sales, and banquet facilities, could be a potential conflict with adjoining single family residential land uses. Land use conflicts between low-intensity, single family residential land uses and the City's most intense regional commercial center. The wetland could impact the maintenance costs for the City and offers limited public aCCeSS and use. ANALYSIS: In reviewing the Arbors project, the Commission should consider how well the project fits in with the long-term goals of the land use plan for the City. The Commission should also consider the best land use arrangement for the Arbors (Lakes) project. including the proposed land use change for the area west of Etiwanda Avenue, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. De The Victoria Communitv Plan and Victoria Lakes (The Lakes) Villaae. Victoria was created to be an integrated planned community, It consists of four villages with a focus on linking a series of centrally located neighborhood park and school centers through passive and active green belt paseos. Three of the villages, the Groves, the Vineyards and the Windrows, are more single family residentially oriented. The Lakes is the last and most distinctive village in the planned community affd is undeveloped. The intent of this village is to create a unique, multi-use community, including a series of lakes, with each surrounded by a succession of land uses from multi-family residential to office, commercial, and the regional center. The village, together with the lakes system, is intended to reinforce the connection between the residential and commercial land uses. It serves as an open space element for all of Victoria and is considered a focal point and public park for the City. Further, Victoria Park Lane is also a major linear park which ties the planned community together and was intended to continue across Base Line Road to terminate at the "Lakes Park." Between 1989 and 1991, a City Council Task Force and staff, together with the developer's (William Lyon Co.) Lakes engineer, extensively reviewed the design, amenities and improvements, construction costs, maintenance costs, as well as how and who pays for the 'Lakes Park." Exhibit "J" is the 1991 City Council Staff Report that discussed these issues. Exhibit "D" contains excerpts of the current Victoria Community Plan, including a conceptual plan of the village. Exhibit 'E" shows the acreage of park and open space by village for the entire planned community. Proposed Victoria Arbors (The Arbors) VillaGe. The applicant has ownership of approximately 291.8 acres within the Lakes Village. The lake element of the village is within their ownership. Their proposal is to modify the project land uses to be more single family and eliminate the lake feature. The project area that requires land use changes encompasses approximately 192.4 acres of land. Land use changes are not being proposed for the remaining acreage (79.4 acres), which are commercially zoned. The development concept would result in a significantly lower density within this village. Exhibit "C" shows the existing and proposed zoning for the 192.4 acre project area. Evolution of the Applicant's Development Concepts: Given the complexity of the project, staff and the applicant have been meeting regularly since last April to review the identified impacts and to evaluate technical issues in areas of drainage, circulation, park/school location, infrastructure phasing, etc. As a result of staff's meetings with the applicant and the Commission workshops, the applicant continues to demonstrate his willingness to address the identified concerns by modifying his development concepts to the extent that he could PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23, 1999 Page 5 agree. The draft EIR was prepared based on the applicant's Development Concept "U" provided to the City in September. The discussion in Section E below, is based upon the proposed land use changes, including alternatives of Concept "U." Exhibit "K" shows the proposed development concepts "U," "X1 ," and "X2." Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The environmental analysis for the proposed amendments is contained in the draft Environmental Impact Report. As stated previously, the detailed review of the EIR will be considered at a future advertised public hearing tentatively scheduled for May. According to the City Attorney, the Planning Commission can hold a public hearing for the proposed amendments to take public comments, but cannot take action on the project until the EIR has been reviewed by the Planning Commission. Discussion on Proposed Land Use and Community Plan Chanqes. According to the goals and policies of the General Plan and Development Code, the City should plan and arrange land uses that are compatible with one another so as to minimize land use conflicts. To analyze the appropriateness of the proposed land use changes, staff has divided the project area into smaller subareas, as shown in Exhibit "F." As stated previously, the base line discussion on the proposed land use changes iS based on Development Concept "U." Subarea 1 - is located at south side of Base Line Road and east of the future Victoria Park Lane. The proposed change is from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre). Staff Comment: To be consistent with properties immediately east and adjacent to this site, the Low-Medium Residential designation is most compatible. Recommendation: Subarea 1 should maintain the current zoning of Low-Medium Residential. Subarea 2a - is generally located at the south side of Base Line Road, east and west of the existing winery facility. The proposed changes are from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Community Facilities to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), Staff Comment:. This subarea abuts the Filippi Winery, which is an active, producing winery with retail sales of wine, wine tasting, and a banquet facility. Recently the City and the Inland Empire Chapter of the American Institute of Architects cosponsored a Design Charrette for the winery site. Several of the land use concepts prepared by the Design Charrette teams showed a mixed use of commercial, winery, and senior housing including buffering that went beyond the winery site. The results of the Design Charrette were reviewed by the Commission at the workshop on February 10. The consensus of the Commission at that meeting, was to preserve the history of the wine industry and protect the Filippi winery site by having compatible and complimentary land uses that ensure its economic viability. The Commission also concluded that the preservation of the winery must include grapevines and pertinent winery structure for maintaining the historic integrity and atmosphere which is unique to the site. The applicant has agreed to look into providing a mixed-use concept similar to the land use and buffering concepts from the Design Charrette. - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23, 1999 Page 6 Consideration of Low-Medium Residential. The placing of single family residential development adjacent to the east and west sides of the winery is likely to create land use conflicts. In addition, single family homes in these planning areas will be subject to the impacts of Base Line Road, Day Creek Boulevard. and Victoria Park Lane. The burden of buffering and addressing any potential land use conflicts may render these sites unacceptable for single family development. Therefore, the proposed Low-Medium Residential designation would not provide compatibility of land use to the winery site. Consideration of the Community Facilities Designation: Based upon the desire of the Commission to preserve the winery site, a Community Facilities designation for the subarea would be appropriate. The purpose of this zoning district is to provide community support uses such as schools, parks. public facilities, chui'ches, clubs, or a convalescent center. Staff believes that additional uses such as historic wineries and other pertinent winery uses, Village Commercial uses, banquet facilities, senior housing (SHOD), and inclusion of the requirement for master planning would be compatible with the community support uses and meet the purpose of this district. Further, the proposed Victoria Arbors Village within the Victoria Community Plan could be modified to include specific language and graphics that. depict the historic winery, compatible land use, and buffering. Recommendation: Staff recommends a Community Facilities designation for the east and west sides of the winery site. The uses and development standards in the Community Facilities zoning district should be modified to include the additional uses and requirements as described above. If the Commission concurs with staff's recommendation, then staff should be directed to initiate an amendment for the winery site recommending the change from High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) to Community Facilities. The changes to the land use designation would be accomplished through City~initiated General Plan and Community Plan amendments. Subarea 2b - is generally located 600 feet south of Base Line Road, immediately south of the winery, and east of the future Day Creek Boulevard. The proposed change is from Medium Residential, Low-Medium Residential, and Park to Low-Medium Residential, Park, and School designations. The discussion for Open Space, Park. and School designations is under Sections F and G of this report. Staff Comment:. Placing single family residential development next to the winery site creates land use conflicts. Staff believes that the conflict in land use could be mitigated through creating green belt open space corridors, which would provide buffering. The applicant has shown concepts of buffering consisting of a double row of trees and a corridor area for planting grapevines. This buffering corridor would protect the historic winery integrity and serve as a paseo linking pedestrians to the proposed park or school sites. The proposed Arbors Village in the Victoria Community Plan should be modified to include specific graphics and language that depict the significance of the historic winery and the special design criteria for buffering. Recommendation: Staff supports the proposed Low-Medium Residential designation with the provision that the proposed Arbors Village in the Victoria Community Plan be amended to include specific graphics and language describing the significance of the historic winery and the design criteria for buffering. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01- AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23,1999 Page 7 Subareas 3 and 4 - are generally north of the future Church Street and east of the future Day Creek Boulevard. The proposed changes are from Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre), Regional Related Office/Commercial, and Park to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). Staff Comments: A major concern with the proposed land use changes is the compatibility of single family development with the future regional shopping center south of Church Street. Because a regional mall is planned for the 100-plus acres, which is the most intensive commercial use possible, major land use conflicts will occur. Staff believes that a buffer area immediately north of Church Street should be created by placing compatible land uses that would have the least conflicts with the commercial uses. Examples of compatible land uses are Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) or Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre). The regional shopping center site is the most prestigious piece of commercial property and the City should ensure that it is protected from any land use conflicts that hinder its development. Consideration of Medium or Medium-High Residential on the North Side of Church Street:. Both zoning designations would provide a similar level of compatibility to commercial uses. Consideration of Modifying the Regional Center on the South Side of Church Street to Allow a Mixed Use of Commercial and High Density Residential.' In a previous workshop, the applicant has suggested shifting the buffering to the south side of Church Street by creating a buffer zone of mixed use consisting of senior housing or apartments and commercial uses. He stated that there is an opportunity for his company and the property owner of the regional mall to swap a 300-foot strip of land along the future Day Creek Boulevard between Church Street and Foothill Boulevard with an equivalent strip of land from the regional center along south side of Church Street. He believed that this would be a win- win scenario because the future regional mall would have Day Creek Boulevard street frontages while there would be buffering between the single family residences and the regional shopping center from Church Street. The buffer zone could be achieved by modifying the regional center zoning district to include a mixed use of senior housing or apartments and less intensive commercial uses with special design criteria for providing compatibility to adjacent single family use. With or without swapping land, shifting the burden of buffering on the regional mall site will place constraints on its development. Staff is of the opinion that a buffer zone should be provided on the north side of Church Street. Recommendation: A compatible land use such as Medium Residential or a larger open space buffer should be provided between the regional center and the Low-Medium Residential on the north side of Church Street. If the Commission determines that there is merit in studying the buffering requirements on the south side of Church Street, then direct the applicant to submit proposed changes to the text and graphics for the Victoria Arbors Village and the text changes to the Regional Center Standards. Subarea 5 - is approximately 51.8 acres and is located west of the future Day Creek Boulevard, north and south of the future Church Street. The proposed changes are - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23, 1999 Page 8 replacing the current Regional Related Office/Commercial zoning to a succession of land uses from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre), and High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) zoning. Staff Comments: The major concern is the compatibility of single family development with future commercial centers. Again, land uses should be organized to avoid creating land use conflicts. The applicant's reason for the proposed change was that the City has too much commercial land and that the site's distance from Foothill Boulevard would make it undesirable for commercial development. In considering the proposed changes in previous workshops, the Commission questioned whether the City should reduce the acreage for commercial property here. The consensus of the Commission at the workshop was that there is not enough information to convince them to re- designate this subarea to residential uses. Consideration of Retaining the Regional Related Office/Commercial Designation: Retaining the current land use designation would be status quo. Consideration of Retaining the Regional Related Office/Commercial Designation and Adding a Mixed Use Provision Within the Districl:. At a previous workshop, staff presented the option of adding a mixed-use provision of commercial, senior housing, and apartments to the Regional Related Office/Commercial District, subject to meeting certain site development criteria such as part of a larger master planning, etc. This option will retain the current land use designation but provide more flexibility and opportunities for mixed-use development. Recommendation: Staff recommends retaining the current land use designation of Regional Related Office/CommerciaL If the Commission determines that there is merit in having a mixed use in this land use category, then direct staff and the applicant to provide detailed text, graphics, and design or special development criteria showing the concept of a mixed use. Subarea 6 - is approximately 26 acres in size and is located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, north of Church Street and is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, The proposed change is from Office to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) and to change the boundary from the Etiwanda Specific Plan to the Victoria Community Plan. The request to remove this property from the Etiwanda Specific Plan would allow a smaller standard lot size of 5,000 to 6,000 square feet instead of the 10,000 square foot lot size required in the Etiwanda Specific Plan, Staff Comments: Staff is not opposed to residential development in this subarea but believes that attention to lot size and orientation and the goals and policies of the Etiwanda Specific Plan should be kept. Modifying the designation of this property would leave a remnant Office/Professional designated parcel for the site occupied by the Buddhist Temple. Primary access to this site is from the west through the Arbors project which could be justification for including the west portion of the property under the Victoria Community Plan. The retaining of property frontage along Etiwanda Avenue under the standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan would be recommended by staff. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23, 1999 Page 9 Consideration of Retaining Office Designation for the 26-Acre Parcel in the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Consideration of Retaining the Office Designation along the Etiwanda Avenue Street Frontage and the Remaining Area to be Low-Medium Residential within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Consideration of Retaining the Office Designation along the Etiwanda Avenue Street Frontage within the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the remaining area to be Low-Medium Residential within the Victoria Community Plan. Recommendation: Staff recommends retaining the current Office designation for an area along the Etiwanda Avenue street frontages with a lot depth appropriate for office and commercial development within the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and the remaining area could be re-designated as Low-Medium Residential within the Victoria Community Plan. Acreaae for Park and Open Space: As discussed in a previous section of this report, the park, open space, and lakes in the Lakes Village serve as key components of the Open Space Element of the Community Plan. The 37 acres of park. lakes, and open space areas link various parks within the entire planned community, provide open space for the residential, commercial and office uses that surround the lakes, and provide a terminus to the regional mall site. The impact identified by the EIR was based on the proposed Development Concept "U," which requires a total of 20.68 acres. The amount of park and open space proposed under Development Concept "U" is 13.7 acres. However, in response to the concerns raised by the Commission at the workshops, the applicant revised his development concept, which shows an increase in the acreage for open space in a form of buffering and paseos. The total acreage, as provided by the applicant, is 16.8 acres. The issue is whether the buffering, paseos, park, and wetland provide the same level of open space element as originally envisioned within the planned community. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed development concept lacks a strong focal point. Wetlands: The applicant processed and received a 404 Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers to remove 3 acres of the wetlands with the agreement of preserving 1.3 acres of wetlands. Staff reviewed the applicant's proposal of preserving the wetland and raised the long-term liability and maintenance issues. The Commission discussed the wetlands in the workshops and was in agreement with staff regarding long-term liability and maintenance issues. The consensus of the Commission was not to preserve the wetlands. Staff has been researching this issue with the Army Corps of Engineers for the removal of the entire wetlands. Staff will have updates at the meeting. The Consideration bv the Citv of Alternative Sites for Park and School Within the Project Area of the Victoria Communitv Plan. Schools - The applicant, early in the process, contacted the Etiwanda School District to discuss the school impact issue. Also, staff has involved the Assistant Superintendent of Etiwanda School District in the various meetings related to the project. There is a mutual agreement between the applicant and the School District that a 10-plus acre site for an elementary school within the Arbors project would be required. The applicant has included a school site in his proposed development concept. The school board has reviewed, and supports, the proposed location. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23, 1999 Page 10 Parks - Because the current Victoria Lakes Village shows a 7-acre, active park, the applicant also included a similar size park site within his development concept. A unique element of the Victoria Community Plan is to place a school and park side-by- side for possible joint use and thereby increase the open view of a village. The applicanrs proposal shows a school and park adjacent to one another and centrally located in the neighborhood. The Park and Recreation Commission also reviewed the proposed concept location and supports it. The final acreage for the park will be determined by the EIR mitigation and as approved by the Planning Commission. The final shape and design of the park would have to be reviewed in greater detail by the Park and Recreation Commission at a later date. Related Out Parcels: As a result of the proposed project, there are several out parcels that the Commission should consider with regards to the appropriate land use zoning. They are as follows: Two small parcels approximately one acre each, located at the south side of Base Line Road east and west of Victoria Park Lane, are currently zoned Medium (8-14 dwelling units per acre) Residential. Both parcels contain single family residences. It would be appropriate to consider changing the zoning to be consistent with the surrounding land uses. If the Commission concurs, then direct staff to initiate General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendments for these two out parcels. The property owners/residents of these two parcels have been kept informed of the proposed development concepts. Another out parcel is located at the northwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Church Street and is currently zoned Office within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The site contains a single family residence. Staff believes that the current zoning of Office should be maintained. The third area consists of a 1 O-acre pamel located at the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of the most easterly project area. The site is partially developed with a Buddhist Temple while the westerly half is undeveloped. The site is currently zoned Office within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Recently staff received two proposed subdivision maps (TT t 5947 and TT 15948) for the area at the south west corner of Base Line Road and Etiwanda Avenue and is being reviewed. With the proposed residential projects to the north and the proposed land use changes to the west and south sides, the Commission should review the appropriateness of the current land use for the site. If the Commission determines that a review of the zoning for the parcel is warranted, then direct staff to initiate General Plan and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendments to study land use options for the parcel. Amend the Circulation and Parks and Recreation Elements of the General Plan. The Circulation Element would be amended to extend the length and change the alignment of Victoria Park Lane to be reflective of the proposed Arbors Village. as shown in Exhibit "H." In addition, the Parks and Recreation Element would show symbols of a school and a park site within the area, and as shown in Exhibit "1." Amend Various Graphics and Text for the Victoria Community Plan. Staff has reviewed the first draft of the written and graphic descriptions of the proposed Arbors Village and provided comments to the applicant stating that the proposed changes lack the sophistication of the "b+ E lO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 98-02, VCPA 98-01, & ESPA 98-01 - AMERICAN BEAUTY March 23, 1999 Page 11 existing Lakes Village. Staff anticipates additional changes as a result of Commission's review of the proposed land use changes. Therefore, staff recommends the Commission direct the applicant to prepare written and graphic changes to the Community Plan reflecting the recommended land use changes. Modify the Permitted and ConditionalIv Permitted Uses and Various Development and DesiOn Standards for the Reclional Related Office/Commercial, Reqional Center, and Community Facilities Districts of the Victoria Community Plan. As discussed previously in the report, if the Commission concurs with the merits of adding mixed use provisions, design and development criteria to address the land use, and the buffering concerns, then direct the applicant to prepare the proposed text and/or graphic changes subject to staff review before forwarding to the Commission for review. CORRESPONDENCE: The General Plan, Victoria Community Plan, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendments have been advertised for public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the properties have been posted with three 4-foot by 8-foot large public hearing signs, and notices were sent to property owners within 1,000 feet around the project site. Also key community representatives and residents of the Victoria Planned Community and Etiwanda Community have been invited to the workshops. The proposed amendments will be advertised again once the EIR is completed and ready to be reviewed by the Commission. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission discuss the issues listed above and provide direction to staff and the applicant. I City Planner BB:NF/jfs Attachments: Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit "A" - Project Site and Surrounding Areas "B" - Opportunities and Constraints Map "C" - Proposed and Existing Land Uses for the Project Site "D" - Excerpts of The Lakes Village in Victoria Community Plan "E" - Comparison Tables of Park and Open Spaces by Villages and between the Lakes and the Arbors "F" - Proposed Land Use Changes by Subareas "G" - Planning Commission Workshop Minutes dated January 27, February 10, February 24, and March 10, 1999 "H" - Amendment to Circulation Element of the General Plan "1" - Amendment to Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan "J" - City Council Staff Report on the Victoria Lakes Park Project dated September 18, 1991 "K" - Development Concepts "U," "X1 ," "X2" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GPA 98~02 VCPA 98-01 AND ESPA 98-01 m I "11 II I PROJECT BOUNDARy. AREA PRO, ECT ~REA uJ STUDY BOUNDARY F~II AREA ' EXHIBIT "A" LAND USE CONFLICT, REQUIRES BUFFERING BETWEEN SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING LAND USE CONFLIC'I', , EEDS BUFFERING NEEDS PROPER tRANSITION OF DENSITY ASSET WINERY, PARK, OPEN SPACE, CREATE A VISUAL COMMUNITY ELEMENT /11111111 PA~ rillIll REGIONAL MALL WETLANDS LAND USE CONFLICT, REQUIRES BUFFERING FROM COMMERCIAL AREA AND FREEWAY STRONG NORTH - SOUTH CORRIDOR FROM 210 FREEWAY TO REGIONAL MALL EXHIBIT "B" OPPORTUNITIES AND ~ CONSTRAINTS · '.:: toL .. I - ~,:--. :.',] -i. · - MHto LM &P · MAP LEGEND ~ Project Boundary [""'] Victoria Corrununity Plan [ Etiwanda Specific Plan ~ Area orProposed Land Use Amendments RFSIDENTIAL L Low Density LM Low Medium Density (44 DUI,~C) M Medium Density ~-14 DUI.4O MH Medium High Density (14-24 DUI/IC) H High Density (24-30 DU/.4C) COMMERCIAL CF CO~Ot~IY F~jur, f OP Of'rice Park RRC Regional Related Commercial RR Regional Related Office/Commercial VC Village Commercial PUBLIC & OUASI PUBLIC P Parks/School SBCFC San Bcrnardino County Flood Control UC Utility Con'idor EXHIBIT "C" Figure 3.3 0 506' I000' Proposed and Existing Land Uses EXHIBIT "D" VICTORIA LAKES THE VlT.T~GE OF VICTORIA L~KES A UNIQUE WATF. R-RZLA~ED U]~BAN COMMUIqITY The character of Victoria Lakes is formed by the unique relationship of the residential, commercial and recreational land uses surrounding the lakes which become the village's central open space. The intent is to create a high quality, water related community, with an active, people-oriented water edge that serves the residents of the Victoria Lakes Village, the entire community of Victoria, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga in general. VILLAGE ENTKY The most gracious entrance to residenti~ portions of the Village is on ViCtoria Park Lane at Baseline. North of Baseline, Victoria Linear Park's landscape character and design is similar throughout its entire length. South of Baseline, however, Victoria Park Lane takes on a more formal character, with regularly spaced trees. Victoria Park Lane terminates at a large circular pedestrian plaza at the north end of North Victoria Lake. Victoria Park Lane terminates at a large circular pedestrian plaza at the north end of North Victoria Lake. There will be a lake overlook at this point, a destination where pedestrians and bicyclists can gather and look across the open vista created by the lakes and lakes' edges. A conceptual plan of the pedestrian plaza is shown below: [1] This circular pedestrian plaza shall be softened to reduce the impact of the amount of bardscape. ~'~/~5) ~EVtSED DArE THE VILLAGE, The Village edges are the railroad tracks on the North, Etiwanda Avenue on the East, the Devote Freeway on the Southeast and Day Creek on the West. The edge treatment for Etiwanda Avenue and the railroad tracks have been discussed previously. The proposed treatment bf the Day Creek right- of-way and the adjoihing Southern California Edison corridor is shown in below. Because of the excellent visibility of the southern half of the Village from the Devote Freeway, most of the !and adjacent tc~ the freeway will be occupied by the regional shopping center and related commercial facilities. This serves the needs of the major department stores for freeway visibility and access, and the needs of the residential community for buffering from the freeway. Day Crrz/c / S C E VICTORIA LAKES LINK T~ RESIDENTIAL AND COMMIRCIAL COMMUNITY The lakes proposed for this Village will p~cvide the visual and land use connection between the residential, commercial and recreational facilities. [2] Some of the uses which may be provided at the lakes include fishing, model boat sailing and paddle boating pending Planning Commission and/or City Council approval. Because of the change in grade, there will be a series of terraced lakes, each large enough to create a dramatic visual impact. An illustrative drawing depicts how the lakes might be arranged to accomplish the intent of this plan is shown on Page 77. North Victoria Lake is bordered by single-family residential to the east and a public park to the west. Central Victoria Lake provides lake frontage to multi-family residential to the west, single-family residential to the east, the park to the northwest and multi-family to the southeast. South Victoria Lake is situated between multi-family residential land uses and regional related uses. 75 PUBL/C PAi~K AT NORTH VICTORIA LAI~E Along the western edge of North Victoria Lake, a public park facility will be located. This park will serve the entire community and provide uses compatible with the character of the lake. Lake edges will be public to provide maximum access to this special park. A conceptual plan of the park and lake is shown on page 76a. REGIONAL RELATED USES ON LAKE EDGE The regional related uses adjacent to South Victoria Lake would be compatible with both the residential community to the north and the regional center to the south. Some commercial activity, such as restaurants, etc., would be appropriate in this area. Additional residential uses, should they be necessary, would also be appropriate on the lake edge. TRAILS FOLLOW LAKE SYSTEM INTO HEART OF THE REGIONAL CENTER [3] continue around Avenue where it regional center. appears as The park and trail system of victoria Park Lane shall both sides of all three lakes down to Miller is expected to cross Miller and continue into the The quality of the edge, that is, whether it a natural lake edge or an urban water edge may vary. [3] However, the lower lake edge shall be designed with a more urban water edge, such as bulk-heads. The Natural Lake Edge cross- section shows a typical eight-foot trail and edge condition at the lake in the residential areas along North Victoria Lake. A cross section depicting a portion of the trail system that connects the lake area to Victoria Loop Road between the residential areas east of the lakes is shown on page 76a. 76 REVISED DATE ( Se~ Page 76a ) j I, ,-__. I ~,.=._= ,= fI :t., ...... EXHIBIT "D" Victoria .~.,.:~.~':/ - in Rancho Cucamonga ,..~- .. ....... ~~'~)-o r,,.) PARK / LAKE CONCEPT :j TRAIL SECTION (See Page 77) T RESIDENTIAL LAND USE IN VICTORIA LAKES The residential land uses of this village will be consistent with the character of the place that is being proposed. Residential densities will range from Low-Medium to Medium-High in this village. The Low-Medium residential (LM) designation allows from 4 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The Medium-High Density residential land use category (MH) includes housing products in a range of 14 to 24 dwellings per acre. Because of their location on the lake edge these dwellings will be of quality character and highly desirable, matching their unique setting. 78 REVISED DAE 4113189 RR E3 M(I~qUM e*14 OU/A ,¢ COMMUNITY PLAN Victoria A Ranned Community in Rancho Cucamonga I1EvISED DATE REGIONAL CENTER IS URBAN FOCUS FOR VICTORIA The regional center will be the commercial focus of Victoria and of the region (which extends beyond the City of Rancho Cucamonga to include western San Bernardino County). It is important that this center fulfill its role as the active terminus of the community-wide open space system, and as an outstanding regional commercial facility. The array of department stores and commercial activities that typically fill a regional center will be a great credit to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, both in the image it creates for the city, and in the revenue it provides through sales taxes collected by the regional center merchants. The pedestrian plaza and trail system that connects the center to the community will make this development a unique place that will function as the civic plaza for Rancho Cucamonqa, and where many public functions can occur. On the following page is an illustrative diagram showing the character of the center's north entry that will make this place exciting, people-oriented and active. This entry to the regional center is conceptually designed to function in concert with the entry to the Regional Related uses directly north across Miller Avenue. The potential for two specialty restaurants at this location would include water features flanking their entry. The trail system will have direct, convenient access to the center from the expected specialty restaurant uses. 80 ~EVtSED DATE MALL Ruj~,ru~Z Cc'r~rer - C]tanzcr~'r 5'~rcl~ A SPECIAL ENTMY TO T}[E REGIONAL C~NT=R AREA The main automobile entry into the center will be from the Devote Freeway and Foothill Boulevard. There is an opportunity to create a special entry into the regional center. The drawing b~low is a typical cross-section of Day Creek Boulevard, located west of the center, showing the kind of planting that will help achieve the appropriate entry landscape. Day Crd 13o l var 4 REVISED DArE "f'YPICAL REGIONAL RELATED LAND USES The category called Regional Related Commercial and Office Use includes those activities that typically orient themselves to a regional center, but, for various reasons, do not need to be contained within the center itself. Below is a conceptual diagram that shows how these various uses may fit into a coherent pattern. The illustration is not to be construed as a specifically proposed plan at this time. The intent of =his diagram ~d the following description, however, is to describe what a ty?ica! scheme might be like. South of Foothill might be a !ar~e home improvement center including a !~=ber yard, nursery and do-it-yourself hardware center. Facing Foothill, north of the home improvement center the diagram shows a discount department store, and next to it, a medium size motor hotel. At the north west corner of the north-south boulevard and Foothill might be another discount deparr_ment store, facing =he boulevard. A high rise hotel would probably be surrounded by quality restaurants, banks, savings and loans or other uses desiring prime visible locations. Behind the hotel, and paralleling the western SCE corridor, smaller offices and commercial buildings could develop that do not require high visibili=y, such as a veterinarian's office, a T.V. repair center, an office equir--ment store, or other service commercial. At Miller and Day Creek Boulevard, typical uses might 'include various offices. At the intersection of Baseline and Day Creek Boulevard a small convenience commercial center for the Victoria Co"~"unity might be established. Facilities here might include a locksmith, dry cleaners, and a hardware store. All street= and parking lots will be landscaped and will make provision for safe and efficient pedestrian and bicycle circulation. Each project will have a landscaped character rather ~an a "strip development" image. This will be accomplished by minimizing driveway entrances =o major arterials, and landscaping the edges to buffer objectionable views of parking and service areas. Future market demand may indicate a need for additional residential land uses within the Regional Related !and use category. Such use will be permitted if it is clear that the amount of commercial land uses will no= be absorbed over a reasonable period of time, or a concept of combined cc=ercia! and residential land uses can be acccmp!ished. VILLAGE COMMERCIAL CENTER MEETS LOCAL NEEDS To provide for the convenience needs of local residents within Victoria Lakes, a small village commercial center should be centrally located. This center should contain those facilities that are not normally found within a regional center or its related facilities, such as a food market or drug store. To assure convenient access by pedestrians and bicycles, as well as automobiles, this center should be located at Victoria Parkway and Baseline. COMMUNITY FACILITIES The Fire Station on Baseline near Day Creek will serve the fire protection needs of the community. Should the existing railroad right-of-way become a mass transit corridor, a mass transit station could be located in the area between Bas~!ine and the railroad tracks, west of Day Creek Bouievard. Any parking that could not be accommodated on this site could ideally be located in the SCE corridor just east of the road. A mass-transit tie to the regional center from this location would also be appropriate. This site would also be an ideal location for other community related facilities because of its central location and excellent access. Should this area not be suitable for a rapid transit station or other community facilities, it should be developed with residential land uses. Any land use consistent with the Medium Density ("M") land use would be appropriate. In addition, mobile home parks will be permitted here, and should be developed according to the standards of the City of Rancho Cuc~monga. Comparison of Existing and Proposed Acreages for Park Open Space and Amenities Neighborhood Park 5 7 6.33 Victoria Park Lane/Linear Park 10 5.7 3.81 Communily Trails 3 0 0 Lakes 19 0 0 Vineyard Buffers 0 0 3.90 Wedand/Park Edge 0 1.0 2.24 Total 37 13.7 16.28 Active park acreage based on the proposed land uses according to Concept "U" 20.68 · "' ,Victoria Groves :VIctoria Neighborhood Park 6 21 Victoria Park Lane 4 20 Community Trails 8 13 Lakes* Total by Village 18 54 *Lakes (Water Surface Area) = 13 Acres Lake Edge Trail = 6 Acres Note: Acreages arc rounded 1o the nearest acre. 8 5 40 12 10 46 5 3 29 19 19 25 37 134 EXHIBIT "E" SUBAREA NO. 2A SUBAREA IL / Ijl ,'., ,-,,,I .x'/'c I,-,,,NO1 "" ! I [ ~ Base Line Rd ! ~ · SUBAREA "'~""';'~'~ L,~,'~ ' N0. 2B' ~ ~,jiF' "' ' ~ SUBAREA ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .i, ..I II RR RR to MII ~ SUBAREA -- to II RR Foothill Blvd NO. 4 SUBAREA RR SUBAREA R~c NO. 3 RI RR . ~ NO. 6 ~,l' I,EGEN[') ; I'rojcct llound;tr'/ --'----3 Victoria CutTio|nnily Plan ~ |:.liwand;t SpcciIic Pi:m , Area ol'l'roposcd ~ Land Use I{FSIDFNTIAI. L Low Dcnsily LM Low Medium Density H-8 ~UI. IC'J M Medium Dcnsity (~-I~ I)fJlAO MII Medium Iligh Density I I I li~h Density (~.]~ DII~.trJ CQMHERCIAL CF Commcrcial Facility OP Or~cc Park RRC Regional Rclalcd Commcrciul RR Rcgional Rclatcd O~cc/Commercial VC Village Commercial PURI.IC ,t QUASI I, HnI. IC p I'alk~School SBCFC San Bcrnardino County FIo~ Control UC Utility Conidor GPA 98-02/VCPA 98-01/ESPA 98-01 Figure 3.3 N "~- E'3 1EXHIBIT "F" PROPOSE. D LAND USE CHANGES CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting February 24, 1999 Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:35 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: John Mannerino, Larry McNiel, Pare Stewart ABSENT: Rich Macias, Peter Tolstoy Brad Buller, City Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Duane Morita, Contract Planner OLD BUSINESS THE VICTORIA ARBORS '(FORMERLY VICTORIA LAKES) - AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - An overview of the proposed land use and development concepts for Victoria Arbors within the Victoria Community Plan on approximately 291.8 acres of land, generally bounded by Base Line Road, Foothill Boulevard, Etiwanda Avenue, and the Day Creek Channel - APN: 227-201-04, 13 through 18, 22, 28 through 30, and 36; 222-201-33; 227-161-33, 35, 36, and 38; and 227-171-08, 11, 12, 14, 20, 22, and 23. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner provided an overview of the project issues and the Commission concerns and comments expressed at the last workshop John Morrisette, American Beauty Development Co., summarized that he took the Commission's concerns seriously and went back to the drawing board to review their development concepts. He then handed out colored development concepts showing two design alternative plans to the Commission and staff for discussion. Bob Lacoss, PDS West, presented the two design alternative plans to the Commission. He explained that Design Alternative A is a mixed use (senior housing and commercial) designation along the east and west sides of the winery property with a buffer landscape area consisting of a double row of trees and vineyards separating the residential development immediately to the south, He then described Design Alternative B as similar to the first one except that the senior housing was being proposed near the corner of Base Line Road and Victoria Park Lane. He thought that senior housing or high density residential could be proposed along areas south of Church Street, which he felt would buffer the regional shopping center to the south. Mr. Morrisette felt the City has an over abundant supply of commercial areas already and the loss of commercial land within the project site would not adversely affect the fiscal soundness of the City. He introduced Matt Disston, an economics consultant, to provide his fiscal opinion. Matt Disston outlined his qualifications. He supported Mr. Morrisette's comments that the City has large amount of approved commercial land and stated the following: · City has approximately 1,800 to 1,900 acres of commercial land Only 400 to 500 acres of commercial land are needed to support the City · Region is "retail-rich" · Foothill Boulevard is the commercial spine for the City · Base Line Road is not a good retail area Mr, Disston concluded that office development is not viable for the area because of the current market. Gino Filippi, Filippi Winery, indicated that he preferred Design Alternative A. John Goldman, Etiwanda School District, indicated that the proposed school "fits" nicely within the area. He too supported Design Alternative A. He liked the joint use of the school and park and liked the access roads. He did not object to the location of the wetland in relation 1o the park and school. John Lyons, resident, suggested the City establish a building moratorium for the area. He suggested that commercial be allowed from Foothill Boulevard to Base Line Road. Mrs. Little, resident, inquired when a grocery store would be built in the Etiwanda area. Mr. Buller, City Planner, responded that he did not believe a grocery store would be built in the area until more residential development occurs. He indicated that the City recognizes the lack of supermarkets in the area. He then provided direction to the Planning Commission on issues to discuss for the evening. Commissioner Mannerino encouraged the protection of the winery property's integrity and supported Design Alternative A. Commissioner Stewart believed that the site could serve as a tourist destination point for the City and did not support development of senior housing within the area. She supported Design Alternative A and encouraged commercial uses for the area. Chairman McNiel supported the location of the school and discussed the land swap issue. He encouraged the need to further evaluate the commercial viability of the area. Mr. Buller announced that the project would be scheduled for a March 23, 1999, Planning Commission meeting to further discuss the issues. He indicated that text to the Victoria Community Plan would have to be changed to ensure that the Arbors project compliments the winery property and that design guidelines would have to be provided as to what the City envisions for the site in relationship to design, trails, etc. He also indicated that staff was researching the wetland issue to determine whether it should be retained onsite. He then introduced the next item of discussion relating to development west of Day Creek Boulevard. He suggested that an overlay zone could be created to allow mixed use. He also reiterated that the commercial site would be valuable in the future and stated that he was reluctant to relinquish commercial zoning for the area. Mr. Morrisette agreed that further analysis should be conducted to determine the viability of commercial development in the area, Commissioner Mannedno felt that Route 30/210 would make the area valuable in the future, He did not envision large commercial development in the area. He supported the idea of allowing mixed use within the area. Commissioner Stewart agreed with Commissioner Mannerino and did not support residential use for the area west of Day Creek Boulevard. She supported the idea of mixed use for the area. Mr. Buller then introduced the next item of discussion relating to the Buddhist temple parcel, He indicated that the representatives of the temple supported retention of the office designation and would object to a residential designation. He indicated that the site might be too large and deep for office development and that staff would evaluate other land use options. Ms. Fong indicated that the applicant is proposing to take parcels out of the Etiwanda Specific Plan area and include them in the Victoria Community Plan area. Mr. Buller requested discussion relating to the office parcels. Chairman McNiel reminded everyone that the office classification was originally intended to allow for local and neighborhood offices, such as dentist offices. He expressed concern that this had not occurred. Commissioner Mannerino did not envision any potential for office use in the area. Mr. Buller indicated that he received comments from Commissioners Tolstoy and Macias that were to be reflected in the minutes. He said Commissioner Tolstoy indicated the following: Provide strong buffering to the winery and the regional center from single family residential developments The lakes are amenities for the entire planned community. The City approved the Lakes Village in exchange for higher densities. The proposed reduction in densities does not relieve the applicant's obligation to provide sufficient amenities for the planned community in some form or another if not the lakes He reported that Commissioner Macias indicated the following: Provide good buffering to the winery Believed that Team I of the Design Charrette is the most realistic Look for sufficient open space (not necessarily the lakes} that maintains the integrity of the Lake's Village and the Victoria Community Plan Chairman McNiel expressed the need for substantial park/open space amenities. Commissioner Mannedno did not consider the lakes as usable open space. Commissioner Stewart expressed the need for the types of open spaces that people could walk through because the regional shopping area is a terminus for the region. She indicated that the project needs to be creative so as to encourage those pedestrian activities. Mr. Bullet next presented the Community Trail System exhibit and discussed how people would move through the area. He then announced the next workshop would discuss fiscal impacts and phasing of improvements, PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. February 24,1999 ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes -4- February 24, 1999 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting February 10, 1999 Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:25 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, John Mannedno, Larry McNiel, Pare Stewart, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFFPRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner NEW BUSINESS PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 99-01 - MIGHTY DEVELOPMENT, INC. - A request for confirmation of the grading concept for the previously approved Tentative Tract 13674, consisting of 18 lots on 11.29 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Amethyst Street, north of Valley View Drive - APN: 1061-401-03. Brad Buller, City Planner, opened the meeting by introducing the project to the Commission and briefly explaining the purpose and goals of the pre-application review process. John Wang, representative for Mighty Development Inc., explained that Tentative Tract Map No. 13674 expired in May of 1993, a few months before the State Legislature passed the law that granted a three-year automatic extension. He indicated that their intention is to now resubmit the Tentative Tract Map and he requested comments from the Commission on the appropriate direction to take. He went on to explain that the previously approved grading plan was designed to accommodate drainage from north of the tract to the south. He introduced a revised south gate entrance concept based on City Engineering Department Standards. Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner, summarized comments regarding the grading and site plans. He pointed out that even though the project was approved prior to the adoption of the Hillside Development Ordinance, it still meets the intent of the ordinance. He explained to the Commission that mass grading is often defined as the movement of large quantities of earth over a large area and the disruption of the natural topography of the land; however, in order to meet the intent of the Hillside Ordinance, mass grading was proposed in order to reconstruct the natural slopes of land to properly accommodate drainage and street layouts. He said that split level foundations were also proposed in order to minimize alterations of the natural land form. He suggested the Commission may want to discuss the proposed use of cross-lot drainage and explained that the previously approved map was approved prior to the adoption of Resolution No. 92-17, which limits drain through Lot 15 and Lots 9 through 11 drain through Lot 8. He said that because of the downward slopes on Lots 9 through 11, cross-lot drainage was really the only acceptable approach because the only other alternative would be to create steep slopes with high retaining walls to direct the drainage flow directly north to the street. He explained that this would require intensive grading, which would disrupt the natural slope of the land. Chairman McNiel asked what the existing grade of the site is. Mr. Zeledon indicated that the grade is approximately 12 percent. Chairman McNiel thought that cross-lot drainage is a "recipe for disaster." He supported the grading plan but thought that the proposed cross-lot drainage plan should be reconsidered. He agreed that the cross-lot drainage through Lots 9 through 11 on the south portion of the property could be considered but felt the cross-lot drainage on Lots 16 through 18 could be addressed. Commissioner Tolstoy felt cross-lot drainage creates maintenance problems. He suggested the applicant rethink the use of cross-lot drainage, especially on Lots 15 through 18. He asked how the drainage flow on Amethyst Street would be addressed. Mr. Buller responded it was unknown at this time but it would be carefully addressed when the project is resubmitted. Commissioner Mannedno voiced his concerns about the maintenance problems associated with cross-lot drainage. He agreed with the previous Commissioners that the use of cross-lot drainage for this project should be reconsidered, especially for Lots 15 to 19.. Mr. Buller summarized the Commissioner's comments. He stated that the Commission appeared to be in agreement that, with the exception of some of the cross-lot features, the proposed grading plan would be acceptable. He also stated that the Commission would like staff and the applicant to revisit the cross-lot drainage on Lots 15 through 19 but accepted the use cross-lot drainage on the southern Lots 8 through 11. He said the Commission determined that other grading conflicts may result from modifying the drainage concepts for Lots 8 to 11 that would not be consistent with the development to the south. Chairman McNiel concurred with Mr. Buller's summary. Mr. Buller commented that staff would work with the applicant in an attempt to resolve the cross-lot drainage issues. OLD BUSINESS THE VICTORIA ARBORS (FORMERLY VICTORIA LAKES) - AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - An overview of the proposed land use and development concepts for Victoria Arbors within the Victoria Community Plan on approximately 291.8 acres of land, generally bounded by Base Line Road, Foothill Boulevard, Etiwanda Avenue, and the Day Creek Channel - APN: 227-201-04, 13 through 18, 22, 28 through 30, and 36; 222-201-33; 227-161-33, 35, 36, and 38; and 227-171-08, 11, 12, 14, 20, 22, and 23. Brad Buller, City Planner, explained that the purpose of the workshop was for discussion only and not for decision making. PC Adjourned Minutes -2- February 10, 1999 Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented a recap from the January 27 meeting and noted that each of the Commissioners were given copies of the minutes of the public hearings for the development of the Victoria Community Plan. She also gave an overview of the six concepts of the Design Charrette. Chairman McNiel opened the meeting for comments. Commissioner Mannerino stated the six concepts all have similar characteristics but he particularly liked the concepts from Teams 2 and 3. He questioned whether it is appropriate to have concepts that go beyond the winery boundary. Mr. Buller replied that concepts could go beyond the winery boundary. Commissioner Macias stated that his major concern is the compatibility of surrounding land use with the winery site. He questioned whether the Commission was being asked to advise the Redevelopment Agency on the compatible land use for the winery. Mr. Buller replied affirmatively. He stated that the winery could be treated as the "jewel" or the focal point within the proposed Arbors project where land uses around it should be complimentary. John Morrisette, American Beauty Development Co., requested direction from the Commission so that he could plan the buffering around the winery. Commissioner Macias responded that the winery should be the central focus of the proposed project and that the EIR must address its historic significance and the potential adverse impacts from the adjacent land uses. Commissioner Stewart commented that she would like the preservation of the winery site because of its historic significance. She went on to say that the school and the park sites should not relate to the winery, a mixed use zoning should be planned around the winery and beyond the site's boundary, and the site should have an entrance from Day Creek Boulevard to enhance tourismo She believed that senior apartments and garden types of commercial development with arbors and trellises would go well with the winery site. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed that the winery needs to be preserved. He commented that land uses planned around the winery should compliment the site and that having Day Creek Boulevard exposure would enhance the viability of the winery. Chairman McNiel agreed with the comments from the Commissioners and that the winery is a "jewel." He remarked that historic sites such as the Thomas Winery have lost the identity and the essence of historic significance because the grapevines and structures pertinent to winery facilities were taken out. Commissioner Macias agreed that the integrity and the identity of a winery facility must be maintained to create a draw to the site. Jim Frost, Etiwanda resident, stated that the City started a Task Force with the goal of reviewing the current General Plan and bringing it to the next millennium. He added that the Commission should look at the project site as a clean slate and take advantage of reviewing it as such when planning the appropriate land uses. Mr. Buller summarized that the Commission's direction was to preserve the winery as the focal feature and to plan complimentary land uses around it. PC Adjourned Minutes February 10, 1999 Mr. Morrisette asked the Commission whether they would consider single family development if proper buffering were provided. Mr. Buller asked the Commission to discuss the buffering issues with respect to the Regional Center and the loss of open space/lakes (Subarea 1 ) and the proposed residential development west of Day Creek Boulevard (Subarea 2) and west of Etiwanda Avenue (Subarea 3). The consensus of the Commission was to provide a strong buffer against the Regional Center. The Commission also stated that the loss of the lakes would mean the loss of view corridor which would need to be mitigated. The consensus of the Commissioners was that they do not support residential development south of Church Street and that there is not enough information for review to support convening commercial and office zoned land to residential development. Mr. Buller asked the Commission to discuss the wetland issue. The consensus of the Commission was not to keep the wetland. The Commission directed staff to obtain more information from the Army Corps of Engineer with regards to the long term responsibility and maintenance of the wetland. Mr. Buller commented that the next workshop topics of discussion would be the buffering issues with the winery and the Regional Center and the fiscal issues of converting commercial and office zoned land to residential uses. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes February 10, 1999 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting January 27, 1999 Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 8:30 p,m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, John Mannerino, Larry McNiel, Pare Stewart, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner NEW BUSINESS PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 98-13 - SUNRISE DEVELOPMENT o The proposed development of a 59-bed assisted living facility for senior citizens on a 1.5 acre site located at 9519 Base Line Road in the Office Professional District - APN: 208-541-01. Brad Buller, City Planner, explained the purpose of the pre-application review process. He introduced the Sunrise Development project and requested that the applicant describe the nature Of the proposed assisted living facility and its development plan, Wolfgang Hack, project architect, introduced B~II Herrick, Sunrise Development, and David Wagner, civil engineer. Mr. Hack described the goals of Sunrise and its desire to provide a high quality facility with a strong residential character. He stated most residents are generally in good health and ambulatory, but require assistance in cooking or personal care. He presented the site plan, described the architectural features, and presented photographs of a newly-constructed Sunrise facility. Mr. Herrick explained the differences between acute care, skilled nursing and assisted living. He said assisted living patients are mostly ambulatory and almost, but not quite, functional in daily activities. He indicated some are at a stage of life where they do not really need, but desire, to have extra care. Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner, stated the use is consistent with the zoning and staff does not have any major issues with the project. She noted the applicant filed a preliminary review so the technical issues have been identified and forwarded to the applicant. She indicated the site is within a small Office-Professional island surrounded by residential. She pointed out the parcels to the west are awkward shaped lots such that a master plan of access will be requested. Chairman McNiel asked the applicant to describe the rooms and kitchen arrangements. Mr. Hack explained rooms are single or double bedroom, have a small refrigerator, but do not have kitchens. He said there is a main dining room for all residents, and a smaller, informal activity area which would have cereal and snacks for more flexibility. Commissioner Stewart asked how many Alzheimer and dementia patients are accommodated. Mr. Hack stated it is a small group, about 15 patients. He indicated the area is an outdoor area secured for their protection. Commissioner Macias asked about the tenancy of the facility. Mr. Hack replied it is month-to-month rentals ranging from about $1,800 to $3,000 a month depending upon room and care. Commissioner Stewart asked what attracted Sunrise to this site. Mr. Herrick stated in addition to size and availability of land, it involves the demographics of qualified care-givers, such as the sons and daughters that care for their parents, and the qualified seniors. The Planning Commission discussed the need to ensure the compatibility between the assisted care facility and the residential neighborhood, as well as the personal safety of patients with traffic on Base Line Road. The Commission said a neighborhood meeting would be beneficial if the applicant decides to submit a formal application. Mr. Buller summarized the discussion. He stated he did not hear issues with the proposed design that could not be addressed. He said a master plan and neighborhood meeting will be requested. He indicated the architecture is moving in the right direction. The Sunrise development team thanked the Commission for its comments. THE VICTORIA ARBORS (FORMERLY VICTORIA LAKES) - AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - An overview of the proposed land use and development concepts for Victoria Arbors within the Victoria Community Plan on approximately 291.8 acres of land, generally bounded by Base Line Road, Foothill Boulevard, Etiwanda Avenue, and the Day Creek Channel - APN: 227-201-04, 13 through 18, 22, 28 through 30, and 36; 222-201-33; 227-161-33, 35, 36, and 38; and 227-171-08, 11, 12, 14, 20, 22, and 23. Brad Buller, City Planner, explained that the purpose of the workshop was for discussion only and not for decision making. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Buller summarized the issues as follows: the proper edge treatment for the winer,/given the unknown development proposal of the site; the inherent land use conflicts between single family residential development and the commercial development or the proximity to the freeway; the appropriateness of giving up commercially zoned land for residential development at the west side of Day Creek Boulevard; the lack of community facility within the plan; and, the change from office zoned land to residential development within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Chairman McNiel opened the meeting for public comment. PC Adjourned Minutes Janua~ 27,1999 Nick Karavidas, Filippi Winery, stressed the importance of buffering the winery with vineyards. Marsha Banks, Etiwanda resident, reminded the Commission that Eitwanda Avenue was the first street in the area to have river rock curb and stressed the importance of the continuation of this special curb treatment. She felt the development proposal is detrimental to the winery because it crowds the site with small houses. Jim Banks, Etiwanda resident, commented on the history of the Victoria Community Plan and observed there was a commitment to give higher density to the developer in exchange for a regional mall to benefit the City and the lakes as public recreation to benefit the Etiwanda area. He suggested that the Commission review the minutes of the public hearings back in the 1980s. Commissioner Mannerino indicated he is particularly concerned with the wetland. He believed that the wetland would create nuisance problems such as odors, vector control, etc. He remarked that he needs to see numbers and facts before considering giving up land zoned for commercial and office. Commissioner Stewart agreed with Commissioner Mannedno that she has not been convinced to give up the commercially zoned land west of Day Creek Boulevard for residential development. She stated that buffering the winery is a major issue. Commissioner Macias asked about the phasing construction of the school and the park. He stated that the City should be cautious in accepting any wetland because of long term maintenance issues with Army Corps of Engineers which would be very expensive. He commented that the EIR should address the impact of the proposed development to the winery and mitigation measures. He felt the school should not be too close to the winery. He requested information on the history of the lakes and the Victoria Planned Community. Chairman McNiel agreed with the comments from the other Commissioners and stated that information on the history of the Victoria Planned Community and the phasing of the project should be provided. Mr. Buller commented that the Design Charrette on the winery planned on Saturday would provide results that would give a clearer direction of any development proposal for the winery site. He summarized the topics of discussion for the next workshop as follows: history of the Planned Community, the lakes, open space/park, and the winery. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. COMMISSION BUSINESS C. QUARTERLY DISCUSSION AND REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PROJECTS - A discussion and review of projects considered by Design Review Committee during previous quarter. PC Adjourned Minutes January 27,1999 The Planning Commission briefly discussed the list of projects reviewed during the last quarter and indicated an interest in a field trip to review some of the developments that are currently in the construction stage. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes January 27,1999 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting March 10, 1999 Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 8:20 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, John Mannerino, Larry McNiel, Pare Stewart, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Bullet, City Planner; Nancy Fong. Senior Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Duane Morita, Contract Planner; and Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner OLD BUSINESS THE VICTORIA ARBORS (FORMERLY VICTORIA LAKES) - AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - An overview of the proposed land use and development concepts for Victoria Arbors within the Victoria Community Plan on approximately 291.8 acres of land, generally bounded by Base Line Road, Foothill Boulevard, Etiwanda Avenue, and the Day Creek Channel * APN: 227-201-04, 13 through 18, 22, 28 through 30, and 36; 222-201-33; 227-161-33, 35, 36, and 38; and 227-171-08, 11, 12, 14, 20, 22, and 23. Mr. Brad Buller, City Planner, explained those issues and items to be discussed at the workshop, including fiscal implications and phasing of improvements to service the project. He summarized the fiscal impact report prepared by Agajanian and Associates. He explained that the report concluded that though the proposed project would be a net fiscal gain for the City, the amount of gain would not be as great as the approved Lakes project. Commissioner Macias inquired as to what the City strategy was for commercial development in the City. Mr. Buller responded that this }articular issue would be addressed with the City's General Plan Update. Mr. Matt Disston, DMG Economics, provided an overview of his review of the Agajanian report. He agreed that the regional mall site was a good location for commercial development, as were areas along Foothill Boulevard. He suggested that commercial development along Day Creek was not advantageous and explained why. He clarified that this review was completed within one week and is very preliminary. Commissioner McNiel asked Mr. Disston how could "borderline" commercial development in the west side survive? Mr. Disston responded that any commercial use would survive if it was economically viable. He also noted that 5,000 roof tops were required to service a grocery store. Mr. Buller indicated that this issue was very complex and that the Planning Commission should hear the applicant's conclusions tonight, but address any comments during the March 23, 1999, Planning Commission public hearing. Mr. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, provided an overview of the project's improvement phasing plan. He mentioned that improvements north and south of Church Street could be developed independently. Chairman McNiel indicated that he did not support half street improvements. He preferred street improvements be provided on both sides of the road and suggested that Church Street be improved to full width. The full Commission concurred with Chairman McNiel. Mr. Bob Lacoss, PDS West, presented drawings of the green belt paseos being proposed with their application. Chairman McNiel inquired as to what the City's obligation is for maintaining landscaping. Mr. Buller responded that the city would maintain the landscaping through a Landscape Maintenance District. NEW BUSINESS PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 99-02 - OVERLAND COMPANY - Consideration of land use and site plan alternatives for approximately 150 acres of land located south of Interstate 15, north of Foothill Boulevard, and west of East Avenue in the Etiwanda Specific Plan - APN: 1100-031-08, 1100-041-04 through 10, 1100-061-02 through 04, 1100-071-01 and 02, 1100-081-01 through 06, 1100-031-01 and 02, 1100-141-01 and 02, 1100-151-01 and 02, 1100-181-01 and 04, and 1100-191-04 and 05. Brad Buller, City Planner, explained the purpose of the pre-application review process. Joseph Oleson, project representative, introduced Fred Liao of Overland Company. Mr. Oleson stated that Overland Company is working in collaboration with Nelson Chung of Pacific Communities, who owns the 283 single family lot subdivision recently approved in this area (Tentative Tract 15711 ). Mr. Oleson identified seven sites which surround Tentative Tract 15711. Mr. Oleson provided an overview of the package provided to the Commissioners showing development concepts for Planning Areas "A" through "G." Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner, provided an overview of the issues for each planning area. Ms Van Buren stated that staff was concerned with the shifting of the neighborhood park from Tentative Tract 15711 to a site along the freeway and, secondly, the proposed Office Professional use in the triangular area labeled Planning Area "G" (south of the freeway, west of Etiwanda Avenue. and north of Foothill Boulevard). She noted that there is an existing row of houses which would become a poorly planned island in the center of the office area. She stated that staff recommends the park remain in the approved location as shown in Tentative Tract 15711 plans and that the triangle be either comprehensiveiy planned to integrate all uses or left alone. PC Adjourned Minutes March 10, 1999 Commissioner Macias commented that he did not feel the park should be moved from its centralized location in the neighborhood. Commissioner Stewart concurred with Commissioner Macias and indicated that she was not convinced an office/professional land use would be viable in the triangular Planning Area "G." Commissioner Tolstoy also agreed with the other Commissioners. He stated that the present location allows park expansion into the utility corridor, He further commented that the triangular area is problematic for an office use because it has very little exposure to the street. He indicated that multi*family (Planning Area "E") might be a good transition to the commercial corridor. Commissioner Mannerino stated that he was not opposed to multi-family residential transitioning to the commercial corridor. He commented that the air pollution associated with a freeway is not conducive to a park. He noted that an office/professional use in the triangle would only be feasible for stand-alone businesses. Chairman McNiel expressed his view of the park issue which differs from his colleagues. He envisioned two parks, an Etiwanda Avenue park and a utility easement park. He stated that multi- family next to a commercial corridor might be viable. He further said that the office/professional triangle is questionable; it may not be planning for success. He elaborated that the site would be difficult to access and would need a use that did not rely upon much traffic. Mr. Buller summarized the discussion and clarified that comments regarding the shifting of multi- family land use should not be interpreted as increasing density overall. He further elaborated that a master plan for the entire triangle bounded by Foothill Boulevard, Etiwanda Avenue, and the I-15 Freeway should be presented to' show alternatives and that the park should be retained in a centrally accessible location to the neighborhood it serves. PUBLIC COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted. Brad Buller Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes March 10, 1999 Figure I11- 3 CIRCULATION PLAN COLLECTOR ........ SECONDARY MAJOR ARTERIAL .............. MAJOR DIVIDED ARTERIAL .......... · EXISTING INTERCHANGE O PROPOSED INTERCHANGE FREE,.VVAY INTERCHANGE FREEWAI' TO FR[[WAI** NO LOC/.L ACCESS I I GRADE SEPARATION · INTERSECTION FOR POSSIBLE WIDENING ~ SPECIAL BOULEVARD ~: SPECIAL DESIGN [:3_':! SPECIAL IMPACT STUDY ZONE EXTEND VICTORIA PARK LANE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 111-6 PARKS AND RECREATION PLAN PARKS E":'] PROPOSED PARKS ~- EXISTING PARKS <'~,~ :: FLOATING DESIGNATION SCHOOLS* ~ EXISTING SCHOOLS [T;;?'q PROPOSED SCHOOLS ["7"1 SPECIAL USE FACILITy PARKS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT September 18, 1991 Mayor and Members of the City Council Rick Gomez, Community Development Director STATOS OF VICTORIA LAKES PARK PROJECT The City Council has requested an update on the status of the proposed Victoria Lakes Park for the September 18, 1991 Council agenda. The primaryquestions identified by the City Council have been addressed as follows: OUESTION NO. 1 - where is the Lakes Park in the process? RESPONSE: k On March 1, 1989 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 393, approving Victoria Community Plan Amendment 88-05. This approval was for iand use revisions and circulation changes for the Lakes South Village (south of Base Line Road). Conceptual designs for the Lakes Park were reviewed by both the Planning Commission and City Council as part of this amendment. On June 12, 1991, the Planning Commission adopted their Resolution No. 91-75 approving Tentative Tract 15060. This approval was for the master "superblock" map for the Lakes South Village, which created a parcel for the Lakes Park. A condition of approval requires that the Lakes Park be completed prior to the occupancy release of the 500th dwelling unit. The WilliamLyon Company is currently working on future tract map applications which would subdivide individual lots for development. EXHIBIT "J" All public facilities are accessible to all people. OUESTION NO. 4~ How is the Lakes Park Proposed construoted? to be RESPONSE: The proposed Victoria Lakes Park encompasses a total of 25 acres. The park, comprising of a trail, play area, parking lot, and maintenance building takes up 12 acres. The lakes, comprising of the upper lake being 7.4 acres, the middle lake being 4.1 acres, the lower lake being 1.34 acres, and the ponds being 0.16 acres takes up 13 acres. The lakes will have a concrete edgin~ with periodic clusters of boulders. The slopes of the lakes will be concrete with .a fiber reinforcement over a m-mhrane liner and a geotextile matting. The slopes will be at a 5:1 ratio until it reaches the bottom of the lake at a depth of 8 feat. The bottom will have the membrane liner and geotextile matting. There will beno flow of water betweenthe lakes but, by means of a pump, water will be circulated to give the affect of water flowing from the upper lake to the lower lakes. The surrounding tracts will use the dirt excavated-from the lakes to balance the grading. Any definite phasing schedule as to when excavation occurs in conjunction to overall grading operations has not been finaled. OUESTION NO 5x Wh~t is the costs for maintenance of the Lakes with'theLakes Vilage being the colsest and the Groves Village being the furthest from the Lakes park. This results in the Lakes Village bearing the majority of the maintenance cost with it proportionately decreasing to the remaining Villages in Victoria based on distance. Even within the Lakes Village itself, as you go further away from the park, there is a decrease in assessment. The following are the estimated assessment ranges for residential properties: Lakes 870.66 - $128.47 Windrows $21.70 - $ 25.63 Vineyards $16.28 - $ 19.15 Groves $10.85 - $ 12.77 These costs are in 1991 dollars and the precise assessment must berefinedbased upon final construction drawings for the Lakes Park and the final subdivisions. These cost projections are, however, within a reasonable range of probability. These have been calculated based on spreading the cost on both residential and non-residential properties. Any delays will have to incorporate a 6% annual inflation factor. Should you have any additional questions regarding these issu s, p contact me anytime prior to the mee ~g. R I submitted, ' z Development Director Council I BASE UNE ROAD ".'.',',':: ,/ i /'~llfllllll . ,~ ~ll;lllfl ~ ~ ' IIIIIIIIIIIIL · x CHURCH$7R~'T ' N. AP. VICTORI4 LOOP COMMERC/N, FOOTHII ~ B[~/I FVARD Map Source: American Bcauty Dcvclopmcm Co.. 1998. 12/I 6/98(CRG83 I/EIR) EXHIBIT "K- 1" Figure 3.6 Development Concept U Conceptual Plan Not A Port L~ 45'X 90' Lots 45'X 90' Lots Medium , Residential i i i 55'X llO'Lots L~ 50'X 100' Lots "5oft"Commerclal/Mixea Use Not A Part Potential Regional Commercid Center 7 p____j ,h,~j Community Center ~ Vincyord Buffer Foothill Bh'd. The Arbors - Rancho Cucamonga IAGRAMATIC PLAN- ALTERNATIVE 1 iCAMONGA 220 LP - 16380 Vcntura BIrd., Suite 401 - Encino, CA 91436 EXHIBIT "K-2" Development Concept X1 ~ f E U"-~ PDS West Boseline Rood Not A Part LM I 5 LM 45'X ~0' 5 'X llO'Lots Lots .:~ :~,'C, ~.>~* ~"Commerclol/Mixed U~~ Not A Part Potential ~eglonol Comme~claf Center Caromunity Center Vineyard ihffee Foothill glvd. 1If The Arbors - Rancho Cucamonga EXHIBIT, "K-3" DIAGRAMATIC PLAN -ALTERNATIVE 2 Development CUCAMONGA 220 LP - 16380 Ventura Bird., Suite 401 - Encino, CA 91436 Concept X2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: March 23, 1999 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Dan Coleman, Principal Planner Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-05 - QUIKSET - A request to review a master plan of development for a concrete and plastic products manufacturer for a total of 161,400 square feet of office and manufacturing buildings on a 40-acre site within the Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 15) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 12167 Arrow Route - APN: 229-121-15 In response to new developments within the Quikset Organization, the applicant has respectfully requested their application be withdrawn. No further action on this project by the Planning Commission is necessary. R~~tt~ Dan Coleman Principal Planner DC:RVB:Is Attachment:: March 18, 1999 1etterfrom Master Development, applicant representative Y ITEM F 9497248887 M*ASTSR DE~ELOPMEi'ff MASTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIC)N PAGE 02/02 March 18, 1999 Via Fax and US Mail 909-477-2847 City of Rancho Cucamonga Phum/n~; Commission do Ms. Rebecca Van Buren Associate Planner Conununi.ty Development Department Platruing Division The CiLy of Rancho Cueamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive R2mcho Cucamonga, CA. 91729 Re: Design Review 99-0'~ - Qulck.qet Organistion Den: Ms. Van Burcn: Per our discussion and on behalf of the Applicant, we respectfully request that the Planning Commission v,'ithch-aw the above application for desi.~n review approval. The apMi~.umt will not be proceeding with the prcctts( concrete operation on d'zc subject propert)-. Shortly, a new design review application will be submined to City staff for a industrial building project. We apFeciatc the effort the City staff ha~ demonstrated through tiffs procos3 mid we look forv,~rd to developing the property for higher and better u.'~e. Very Truly Yours, Bruce McDonald President cc: lC'~'l Stockbridge Ken Cohen file 3<;91 MocArtht~ B~vd $i.,~i'e 2 5. New1:)G~ Beoc:h CA ~,q~-,Y)~'S m Phone: 040-724-8886 e FCz~' g4~724-6887 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: March 23, 1998 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Salvador M. Salazar, AICP. Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW 98-32 - HERITAGE HOSPITAL - A request to construct an approximately 56,896 square foot (120 beds) one-story Skilled Nursing Facility on approximately 3.95 acres of land and to revise the Rancon Master Plan (totaling 33.14 acres of land) located in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The property is located east of Eucalyptus Street on the south side of White Oak Avenue - APN: 208-352-24. Related file: Design Review 90-20 and Lot Line Adjustment 439. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: Surroundinq Land Use and Zonina (to the proposed skilled nursincl facility): North Hotel: Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7) South - Vacant; Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7) East Vacant: Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7) West Hospital; Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7) General Plan Desiclnations: Project Site - Industrial Park North Industrial Park South - Industrial Park East Industrial Park West Industrial Park C. Parkina Calculations: Number of Number of Type Number Parking Spaces Spaces of Use of Beds Ratio Required Provided Nursing Facility 120 1/4 beds 30 66* A total of 354 parking spaces is required for the operation of the existing hospital and the skilled nursing facility, The project will provide a total of 358 parking spaces on both parcels. Y ITEM G -PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 98-32 - HERITAGE HOSPITAL March 23, 1999 Page 2 ANALYSIS: Backc~round: On October 9, 1991, the Planning Commission approved the Master Plan for the Rancon Center. The Master Plan divided the site into 18 parcels ranging in size from 0.97 to 4.66 acres. Project amenities included items such as a one-acre plaza and green belt paseos linking the project elements together. All development within the Master Plan is required to obtain approval of a separate Development/Design Review. B. General: The skilled nursing facility is a permitted use in the Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7) (Medical/Health Care Services). The facility will operate 24 hours a day. Site Characteristics: The site is currently vacant with vegetation consisting of vineyards and weeds. The site is relatively fiat with a north to south slope of approximately 2 percent. The developer is proposing to construct and to operate a new, one-story, 56,896 square-foot skilled nursing facility within a 3.95 acre site on the northeasterly portion of the Master Plan. An existing medical complex is located on the west side of the subject property. The hospital and skilled nursing facility are designed to operate together. The Master Plan and proposed design provides for a transition between the two projects utilizing landscaping and pedestrian walkways. The skilled nursing facility building will have a total of 120 beds and is separated into four separate wings. The purpose of this new facility is for Heritage Hospital to extend its services to Alzheimer, Acute Care, Skilled Nursing and Psychiatric Care patients. The Floor Plan of the facility is as follows: the main entrance is located on the north side of the building; and the main entrance area from the drop-off area is accentuated by decorative paving and trellis. Additionally, in order to provide privacy and easy access to the nursing facility, each of the four wings has a separate entrance to the central area of the building. The Acute Nursing section is located on the west side of the building. The AIzheimer section is located on the northeast section and the Psychiatric wing is located on the southeast section of the building. Each wing has a private courtyard. The courtyard area for each wing is approximately 550 square feet in size. The proposed design of the skilled nursing facility compliments the architectural style of surrounding buildings. Additionally, in order to further enhance the architectural appearance of the facility, staff is recommending as a condition of approval, that the developer provide a minimum of two tones on the stucco veneer color (natural grey). Master Plan: The revision to the Rancon Master Plan consists on the shifting of a property line to the south from its present location. The property line is being shifted in order to make the subject parcel large enough to accommodate the proposed skilled nursing facility. A Lot Line Adjustment (LLA 439) has been filed in order to accommodate the adjustment. No other revisions are proposed to the Master Plan. Desicln Review Committee: On March 2, 1999, the Design Review Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Henderson) considered and recommended approval, subject to minor revisions, of the Development/Design Review application and the proposed modification to the Master Plan. See Exhibit "H." PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 98-32 - SKILLED NURSING FACILI'FY March 23, 1999 Page 5 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH 1999. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do 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 23rd day of March 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ,PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 98-32 - HERITAGE HOSPITAL March 23, 1999 Page 3 Technical/Gradincl Review Committees: The Technical/Grading Committees have reviewed the project and recommend approval with conditions. Environmental Assessment: The applicant completed Part I of the Initial Study and staff has completed Pad II. Staff has found that there are no impacts associated with the project. Therefore, if the Planning Commission concurs with these findings, then issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development/Design Review 98-32 and Revision to the Rancon Master Plan (Design Review 90-20) through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Brad Buller City Planner BB:SS:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Grading Plan Exhibit "D" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "E" - Floor Plan Exhibit "F" - Elevations Exhibit "G" - Initial Study Exhibit "H" - Design Review Committee Action Comments dated March 2, 1999 Resolution of Approval with Conditions i1'/ t.\,\ \ PM ~ \ '\ \ PMB · 3.5 A~ 10696 120/8-9 3 CIVIC CEI~'I'ER DR. / i //' /~ I. I I .iI '~ J/I I / ;INITY MAP O~I~2~T "A'~ SaFE F)AIA RANCON CENTER TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS ~ I'i'f "=," h%,- h"~-~- -' u MASTER PLAN VICINITY MAP I ! LOTTING DIAGRAM CONCEPT SITE PLAN RANCON CENTER CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONIIA 4 // PROJECT DATA AIO .m...%'3°-~ ~rd~..,~,-,, HERITAGE HOSPITAL~ ~'4TRY I SCHEDULE A9 ceu~'rv,~ ',-;-,' NORTHEAST SOUTHEAST A4 cou.~Y^.o ',, PLANT SCHEDtJLE U.IoJ EAST :',,~*': PLANT L1.3 , FLOOR PLAN ' s,~ u~ s~u~ SIGHT LINE STUDY ROOF PLAN & BUILDING SECTIONS NORTH E],EVAT1ON NORIH ELEVATION/BtJg, DI~'~I 8EQTION 80UTH ELEVATION PROPOSED ELEVATIONS WEST F1;VAl!ON EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED ELEVATIONS City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW 98-32 2. Related Files: DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW 90-20 Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW 98-32 HERITAGE HOSPITAL - A request to construct an approximately 56,896 square foot (120 bed) skilled nursing facility on approximately 3.95 acres of land and revise the Rancon Master Plan (Design Review 90-20) totaling 33.14 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located east of Eucalyptus Avenue on the south side of White Oak Avenue - APN: 208-352-41 Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Heritage Hospital 10841 White Oak Avenue . Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 5. General Plan Designation: Industrial Park 6. Zoning: Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project is surrounded to the north by a hotel. to the west by an existing hospital, and to the east and west by vacant parcels. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact Person and Phone Number: Salvador M. Salazar, AICP (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval Is required: California Department of Fish and Game Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Review 98-32 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning ( ) Population and Housing ( ) Geological Problems ( ) Water ( ) Air Quality ( ) Transportation/Circulation IX) Biological Resources ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Hazards ( ) Noise ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance ( ) Public Services ( ) Utilities and Service Systems ( ) Aesthetics ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Recreation DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ix) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment. there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards. and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards. and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signed: ~ M. Salazar, AICP February 25. 1999 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga 'Development Review 98-32 Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposaL' a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) ( ) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) ( ) d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ( ) ) (x) ) ) () (x) (x) (x) 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? () () () () () () NO (x) (x) (x) GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving.' a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Review 98-32 Page 4 b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche hazards? e) Landslides or mudflows? Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 4. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? g) h) i) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? Impacts to groundwater quality? Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga 'Development Review 98-32 Page 5 AIR QUALITY. Would the proposak a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? c) Alter air movement, moisture. or temperature, or cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? () () () () () () () () () (x) (x) (x) (x) TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby USes? Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? Conflicts with adopted policies supportin9 alternative transportation (e.g, bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Rail or air traffic impacts? d) g) () () () () ) () () () () () () () () () (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered. threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including. but not limited to: plants, fish, insects. animals, and birds)? b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? () () () () (x) () No () (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Review 98-32 Page 6 c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e,g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? e) Wddlife dispersal or migration corridors? () () () No (x) (x) (x) Comments: a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service identifies the project area soil type as Tujunga-Delhi Sand Soil which is a type of soil that is associated with the endangered Delhi Sands flower-loving fly (DSF). A habitat assessment was prepared (Impact Sciences, November 20, 1998) by a biologist permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct surveys for DSF. In summary, the results of the habitat-based survey indicate that the site does not currently support habitat consistent with potential DSF habitat. However, sandy/loamy soils are present and several scattered native plant species were recorded on-site. These species do not constitute a functional native plant community consistent with occupied DSF habitats and/or relatively undisturbed potential DSF habitat. Moreover. the upper five feet of soils (characterized as Delhi sands or Tujunga Ioams) are comprised of imported fill material. As such, the natural Quaternary alluvial layer has been buried beneath the fill material. Major soil perturbation, such as those associated with the placement of extensive amounts of fill material (up to five feet) on site, reduce the potential occurrence of DSF. Therefore, based on the biological report, the proposed development of the 3.5 acre site will not likely result in adverse effects to DSF. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Review 98-32 Page 7 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with ~ammable brush, grass, or trees? No ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? () () () () () () (x) (x) 11. PUBLIC SERVICES, Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas.' a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e) Other 9overnmental services? () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () NO (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Review 98-32 Page 8 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? b) Communication systems? c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? e) Storm water drainage? f) Solid waste disposal? g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposaL' a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? c) Create light or glare? No ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposah a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological resources? c) Affect historical or cultural resources? d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? () () () () () (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Review 98-32 Page 9 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal.' a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? NO ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species. cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve shod-term, to the disadvantage of long- term. environmental goals? (A shod-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief. definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) ( ) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Review 98-32 Page 10 EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where. pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (X) General Plan EIR (Cedi~ed April 6, 1981) (X) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (X) Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR (Certified September 19, 1981) APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for !he project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would OCCUr. Signature: Print Name and Title: Date: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Sal Salazar March 2, 1999 DESIGN REVIEW 98-32 - HERITAGE HOSPITAL (NURSING CARE FACILITY) - Design Review approval for the construction of a new 56,896 square foot skilled nursing building and revision to the Rencon Center Master Plan (Design Review 90-20). The Master Plan is located on the nor/h side of Civic Center Drive between White Oak and Red Oak Streets. Background: On October 9, 1991, the Planning Commission approved the Master Plan for the Rencon Center. The Master Plan is divided into 18 parcels ranging in size from 0.97 to 4.66 acres. Project amenities include items such as a one-acre plaza and green belt paseos linking the project elements together. All development within the Master Plan is required to obtain approval of a separate Development/Design Review. Design Parameters: The site is currently vacant with vegetation consisting of vineyards and weeds. The site is relatively fiat with a north to south slope of approximately 2 percent. The developer is proposing to construct a new, one-story, 56,896 square-foot skilled nursing facility on the northeasterly portion of the Master Plan. An existing medical complex is located on the west side of the subject properly. The Master Plan and proposed design provides for a transition between the two projects utilizing landscaping and (recommended) pedestrian walkways. The skilled nursing facility building will have 120 beds and is separated into four separate wings. Under current regulations, the site is required to provide 30 parking spaces. The site provides the minimum number of parking spaces as required under the Development Code. The purpose of this new facility is for Heritage Hospital to extend its services to Alzheimer, Acute Care, Skilled Nursing and Psychiatric Care patients. The Floor Plan of the facility is as follows: The main entrance is located on the north side of the building. The main entrance area from the drop-off area is accentuated by decorative paving and trellis. Additionally, in order to provide privacy and easy access to the nursing facility, each of the four wings has a separate entrance to the central area of the building. The acute nursing section is located on the west side of the building. The AIzheimer section is located on the northeast section and the psychiatric wing is located on the southeast section of the building. Each wing has a private courtyard. The courtyard area for each wing is approximately 550 square feet in size. The skilled nursing facility building is done in good taste and compliments the architectural style of surrounding buildings. Although at the time the report was prepared, staff did not have a materials and color board sample to analyze them. Staff is of the opinion, however, that the building texture and colors could be designed to compliment surrounding buildings. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Landscaping along the frontage of the property. Staff is recommending that this landscaped area be redesigned, Landscape treatment along this street shall be provided to ensure the parking areas are adequately screened from adjacent street views. Berming in these parking areas shall be a minimum of 3 feet high and have a natural appearance in form. The applicant is proposing to install two new monument signs on the property. Under current regulations the site is permitted to have one monument sign only, Therefore, staff is recommending the developer to remove one of them. 3. The southwest portion of the building is proposed to be primarily hardscape with two palm trees. However, staff is recommending the developer to increase the number of trees and to add outdoor furniture similar to the one used in the coudyard areas. DRC COMMENTS DR 98-32 - HERITAGE HOSPITAL March 2, 1999 Page 2 Green belt/pedestrian links between adjoining properties. Staff is recommending that the developer incorporate two additional green belt/pedestrian links between the existing Hospital and the proposed skilled nursing facility. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Design Review Committee to approve the project, subject to the recommended modifications. All changes to the development plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to Planning Commission review. Desion Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewad, Larry Henderson Staff Planner: Salvador M. Salazar The developer agreed to modify the plans as recommended by the Design Review Committee and staff. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW NO. 98-32 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A ONE-STORY 56,896 SQUARE-FOOT SKILLED NURSING FACILITY IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, AND A REVISION TO THE Rancon MASTER PLAN, LOCATED EAST OF EUCALYPTUS STREET ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WHITE OAK AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 208-352-24. A. Recitals. 1. Heritage Acute Care/Skilled Nursing Facility has filed an application for the construction and operation of a new one-story 56,896 square foot skilled nursing facility and a revision to the Rancon Master Plan (Design Review 90-20) as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development/Design Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 23rd day of March 1999, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed 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. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meeting on March 23, 1999, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located east of Eucalyptus Street on the south side of White Oak Avenue; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is developed with a hotel, the property to the east and south are vacant, the property to the west is improved with a hospital; and c. The proposed Skilled Nursing Facility project is allowed in the Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7) (Medical/Health Care Services); and d. The project will comply with all applicable provisions of the Development Code, Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the General Plan; and e. The project is designed to be compatible with surrounding development and provide a high degree of aesthetic appeal; and -PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 98-32 - SKILLED NURSING FACILITY March 23, 1999 Page 2 f, The proposed use is in accordance with the goals of the General Plan and the Industrial Area Specific Plan, (Subarea 7) Industrial Park, 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. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The proposed use, 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. c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. The Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. Based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title ~14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: Planninq Division 1) The minimum width for the drive aisle around the building shall be 26 feet from face of curb to face of curb. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 98-32 - SKILLED NURSING FACILITY March 23, 1999 Page 3 2) The developer shall provide a pedestrian walkway connecting the existing hospital with the proposed skilled nursing facility. Final location and design to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner. 3) The developer shall be required to enhance the pavers, with additional amenities, at the main driveway. Final design and style to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner. 4) All other design modifications recommended by the Design Review Committee shall be incorporated into the project. 5) Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall obtain a letter of drainage acceptance from the property owner located on the south side of the project site. Enqineerincl Division 1) The developer shall install ultimate sidewalk along the west side of White Oak Avenue from the project boundary to Civic Center Drive and improvements up to the end of curb return. The developer shall be entitled to reimbursement from future development of the site. Condition No. 3 will change to include the above information. 2) The three cul-deosacs shown on the plan will be plan checked upon development of the site. The developer does not need to change any plans. 3) A contribution in-lieu of construction for the Foothill Boulevard median island shall be paid to the City as indicated below, The amount of the contribution shall be prorated on a per acre basis from the total contribution attributable to Parcel Map 6725. The calculated amount for said contribution is $753.56 per acre. 4) Lot Line Adjustment 439 has to be approved and recorded, prior to issuance of any building permit. 5) Install ultimate sidewalk along west side of White Oak Avenue from project boundary to Civic Center Drive. 6) Revise existing Street Improvement Plans, City Drawing No. 404, Sheets 1, 16, and 17, to reflect the above improvements as required by the City Engineer. 7) Driveway accent paving shall be located outside the public right-of- way. 6) All toes of slopes shall be located outside the Line of sight for the drive approach and the future cul-de-sac opposite Elm Avenue. The tree and signage placement within "Areas of Concern" shall be approved by the City Engineer. -PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 98-32 - SKILLED NURSING FACILITY March 23, 1999 Page 4 9) The three interior cul-de-sacs shown on the proposed Master Plan amendment do not conform to City Standards (see attached Standard Drawing No. 111 ). In padicular, Street "C" is shown with a centerline radius substantially less than the 300-foot minimum for local residential streets (600 feet for local industrial). Thus, the narrow portion of Parcel 2, adjacent to the proposed project, will extend further west than is indicated. Fire Prevention/New Construction Unit 1) Applicant must review Ordinance No. 22 for special access requirements and classifications of occupancy in accordance with KACT-24/1994 UBC. Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. Note: A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading Plan shall be prepared, ~tamped and signed by a California Registered Civil Engineer. Fire District 1) Existing fire hydrants not shown on plan. Additional fire hydrants will be required per UFC and/or Fire District ordinance, 2) Turning radius may be insufficient to accommodate fire apparatus. Inside and outside turning radius to be shown on Fire District access driveways. 3) Fire hydrant spacing will be per Fire District ordinance/standard. 4) Building to be fully fire sprinklered. 5) Fire alarm system required. Smoke detectors required. Fixed fire extinguishing system required for all cooking surfaces, 6) Fire extinguishing systems and fire alarms to be monitored 24 hours a day. 7) Portable fire extinguishers required. 8) Heavy timber trellises to be fire sprinklered. 6. The Secretan/to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Develoment/Design Review 98-32 Construction of a skilled nursing facility Herita.qe Hospital (WRS Architects) East of Eucalyptus, south side of VVhite Oak Avenue ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT, APPLICANT SHALL CONTACTTHE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval. or in the alternative. to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents. officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the District's 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 District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. B. Time Limits Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission. if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. Completion Date C. Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 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 facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to 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 or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. · A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination. location, height, and method of shieldin9 so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of Concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner. including proper illumination. 10. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property 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 approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 11. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shaft be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. D. Building Design All roof appurtenances, includin9 air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated Project No DR 98-32 Completion Date with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. E. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parkin9 stall (includin9 curb). Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across cimulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/recreational uses. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. Handicap accessible stalls shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more parking stalls. Designate two percent or one stall, whichever is greater, of the total number of stalls for use by the handicapped. Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for commercial, office. and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area. If covered, the vertical clearance shall be no less than 9 feet. , Motorcycle parking area shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more parking stalls. Developments with over 100 parking stalls shall provide motorcycle parking at the rate of one percent. The area for motorcycle parking shall be a minimum of 56 square feet. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial. and multifamily residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. F. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan. including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the 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 arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. CompletlonOate A minimum of 20% of trees planted within industrial projects, and a minimum of 30% within commercial and office projects, shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. Trees shall be planted in areas of 3ublic view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. , All private slopes of 5 feet or less in vedical hei9 ht and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope plantin9 required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vedical height and of 2:1 or greater 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. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 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. 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. Landscapin9 and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right*of-way on the perimeter o1' this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 10. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 11. 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. 12. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Signs The signs (only one monument sign) indicated on the submitted plans is conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any signs. H, Other Agencies The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for 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. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01 ). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, 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. , 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 fees may include. but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees. Permit and Plan Checking Fees. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday. New Structures Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use, area, and ~re-resistiveness. Roofing material shall be installed as for wind-resistant roof covering at wind velocity not less than 90 mph. K. Grading Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. City Grading Standards. and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of buildin9 permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L. Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name White Oak Ave. Curb & A.C. Side- Odve Street Street Comm Median Bike Other Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trait C X X X E Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Install R26(s) signs. 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved 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 private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 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 Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer.. Notes: ( 1 ) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets. a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are 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. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street trees. a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. Project NO DR 98-32, Completion Date Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. M. Public Maintenance Areas A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form 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. Utilities Provide separate utility services to each parcel including san ta~y sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (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. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. 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 the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. General Requirements and Approvals A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: P. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. MeIlo Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. 2. Fire flow requirement shah be 3,000 gallons per minute. X a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. X b. 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 hy fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants. if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6*inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch 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 to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of the required fire protection system. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if the sprinkler system is adequate for proposed operations. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of sprinkler system. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. X California Code Regulation title 24. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 22. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet. 6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus. 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 ordering information. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. $677.00 per building Fire District fee(s), and a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District prior to Building and Safety permit issuance. ** A Fire District fee in the amount of $132.00 shall be paid at the time of Water Plan submittal. *"Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. Special Permits 1. Special permits may be required, depending on intended use, as noted below: __X a. Compressed gases (storage, handling, or use exceeding 100 cubic feet).Storage of readily combustible material. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Security Lighting 1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. 2. A~~bui~dingssha~~haveminima~securityIightingt~e~iminatedarkareasar~undthebui~dings`with direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development. 3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. 2. At the entrances of complex, an illuminated map or directory of project shall be erected with vandal-resistant cover. The directory shall not contain names of tenants, but only address numbers, street names, and their locations in the complex. North shall be at the top and so indicated. Sign shall be in compliance with Sign Ordinance, including an application for a Sign Permit and approval by the Planning Division. 3. All developments shall submit a 8 %" x 11" sheet with the numbering pattern of all multi-tenant developments to the Police Department. Alarm Systems 1. Install a burglar alarm system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of false alarms and in turn save dollars and lives. 2. Alarm companies shall be provided with the 24-hour sheriffs dispatch number: (909) 941-1488. Project No. DR 98-32 Completion Date __/ __ City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project FIle No.: Design Review 98-32 Public Review Period Closes: March 23, 1999 Project Name: Project Applicant: Heritage Hospital Project Location (also see attached map): The property is located east of Eucalyptus Street on the South Side of White Oak Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, San Bemardino County - APN: 208-352-24. Project Description: A request to construct an approximately 56,896 square foot (120 beds) one-story Skilled Nursing Facility on approximately 3.95 acres of land and to revise the Rancon Master Plan (totaling 33.14 acres of land) located in the Industrial Park Distdct (Subarea 7) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. Related file: Design Review 90-20 and Lot Line Adjustment 439. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Ra~cho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and Is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where cleady no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included In the attached Initial Study, The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The pubtic is Invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. March 23. 1999 Date of Determination Adopted tr CITY OF RANCFIO CUCAMONGA ' STAFFREPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: March 23, 1999 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-04 - SILVERADO GROUP - A request to build a 3-story, 34,860 square foot hotel as part of a master planned development with three other commercial buildings on 5 acres of land in Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Streets - APN: 208- 352-82. Related file: Parcel Map 15282. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Requested Action: Approval of a 3-story hotel and a master plan for development of three other commercial buildings. ' Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq: North - Term Vista Shopping Center; Community Commercial District Terra Vista Community Plan South - Offices; Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) East Magic Wok restaurant; Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) West Applebee's restaurant and Brooklyn Dell restaurant (under construction); Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) Cm General Plan Desiqnations: Project Site - Industrial Park North Community Commercial South - Industrial Park East Industrial Park West Industrial Park Site Characteristics: The site has frontage on both Foothill Boulevard and Laurel Street with existing curb and gutter improvements on both streets. The site has been rough graded and slopes at approximately 3 to 4 percent from north to south, with a 14-foot grade difference from Foothill Boulevard to Laurel Street. Slopes are proposed along the south side of Foothill Boulevard (down slope) and along the north side of Laurel Street (up slope) to accommodate the grade. Slopes along street frontages present a design challenge for screening of parking areas due to the difficulty of providing herins, and a challenge for required handicap access. This is especially true along the Laurel Street frontage where the site (parking area) is elevated above the street. ITEM H .PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 99-04 - SILVERADO GROUP March 23, 1999 Page 2 E. Parkinq Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footaqe Ratio Required Provided Hotel 124 rooms l/room 124 128 Office 6,500 1/250 26 28 Retail 3,615 1 ~250 14 20 Restaurant 6,950 1/100 70 71 TOTAL 234 247 ANALYSIS: General: The hotel is intended to serve business travelers. It would rely on restaurant and consumer service uses in the vicinity rather than providing them within the hotel. At this time, the other three buildings are anticipated to be a restaurant, retail, and business services. The project will take primary access from Foothill Boulevard; however, access is also available from Aspen Street to the west, Laurel Street to the south, and Spruce Avenue to the east. The hotel building is proposed to have stucco, brick veneer, and copper roofing. The use of brick veneer and copper roofing is intended to compliment the Applebee's restaurant architecture to the northwest. Desiqn Review Committee: The Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Henderson) reviewed the project on March 2, 1999 and requested revisions. The Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Henderson) again reviewed the project on March 16, 1999, and recommended approval with conditions (see Exhibit "G"). Technical Review Committee: The Technical and Grading Review Committees reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to the conditions outlined in the attached Resolution of Approval. Environmental Assessment: The applicant completed Part I of the Initial Study and staff has completed Part II. Staff has found that there may be a significant noise impact caused by traffic on Foothill Boulevard and Laurel Street. A noise study was required to address noise levels and identify mitigation. The report found that the traffic noise would be reduced to acceptable levels of the wall and window construction proposed by the project. The site is identified as potential Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly (DSF) habitat. A biological assessment was conducted which indicates that the site is not suitable DSF habitat. No mitigation is necessary. If the Planning Commission concurs with these findings, then issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 99-04 - SILVERADO GROUP March 23, 1999 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review 99-04 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions and issuance of a Negative Declaration. City Planner BB:BLC:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan/Master Plan Exhibit "C" - Grading Plan Exhibit "D" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "E" - Hotel Floor Plans Exhibit "F" - Elevations Exhibit "G" - Design Review Committee Action Agendas dated March 2 & 16, 1999 Exhibit "H" - Initial Study Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions !i %" --1 FDD THIL L iUL E ViIRD r :~o,-e. II L A UREL S TREE r ] f r "l' h IllllNII ' 55' TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AND CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN ,...,~. ,,i TPM NO 15282 ]{ I I \ _~ ILL E~OULEV'XJRD L~UREL STREET 9\ k RANCHO C~CANO~GA HOTEL RANCHO CUCA~GA HO TEL A2-2 RANCHO C~CAJf~lOA HOTEL RANCHO HOTEL A2-4 NORTH ELEVATION T EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION ® TYPICAL ELEVAllON NOTES: ELEVATION RANCHO HOTEL A3-I DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Brent Le Count March 2, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-04 - SILVERADO GROUP - A request to build a 3-story, 34,860 square foot hotel as part of a master planned development with three other retail buildings on 5 acres of land in Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Streets - APN: 208-352-82. Related File: ParceiMap 15282. Desicln Parameters: The site has frontage on both Foothill Boulevard and Laurel Street with existing curb and gutter improvements on both streets. The site has been rough graded and slopes at approximately 3 to 4 percent from north to south, with a 14 foot grade difference from Foothill Boulevard to Laurel Street. Slopes are proposed along the south side of Foothill Boulevard (down slope) and along the north side of Laurel Street (up slope) to accommodate the grade. Slopes along street frontages present a design challenge for screening of parking areas due to the difficulty of providing berms, and a challenge for required handicap access. This is especially true along the Laurel Street frontage where the site (parking areas) is elevated above the street. The exterior walls of the hotel building are proposed to have stucco and decorative block veneer treatment. Asphalt shingle roofing is proposed due to its lighter weight in comparison to concrete tile. The applicant contends that the roof planes will not be visible due to the height of the building; however, staff respectfully disagrees because the building will be visible from Foothill Boulevard and other public streets. Staff Comments: The following ~omments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Replace fluted block veneer and split face block veneer with brick veneer for a richer look consistent with Applebee's to the northwest. Brick would also complement the copper roofing proposed. 2. Eliminate composition shingle as roofing and replac. e with fiat concrete tile. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Provide variation and undulation in slopes along street frontages to elicit a softer. more natural appearance. Also suggest varying slope grade and rounding off top and toe of slope. Intent of Industrial Area Specific Plan is to create 3-foot high berms to screen parking. 2. Copper roofing shall be real copper as opposed to copper-looking metal roof product. The main hotel entrance on the east side of the building should have a double door foyer design to help mitigate strong Santa Ana winds. Provide dense tree planting around main hotel entry to enhance entry statement and protect area from strong Santa Ana winds. Provide tall, vertical trees, such as Mexican Fan Palms, along north and east sides of hotel between building and driveways. DRC COMMENTS DR 99-04 - SILVERADO GROUP March 2, 1999 Page 2 Provide intensified landscaping, including hedgerow planting and low walls along the Laurel Street frontage to screen views of parking areas from the street. Decorative ddveway and pathway paving shall match that of Applebee's. Majority of Foothill Boulevard entrance driveway throat should have decorative paving. 8. Enclose pool/spa area with a decorative masonry wall and/or wrought iron fence. Provide a clearer pedestrian connection from the large parking area to the east and the main hotel entrance. Also, consider a pergola extending from the copper roof entry element out into the parking area to further enhance the entry statement. 10. Provide a sidewalk, with handicap ramps and striped crosswalks, connecting all three pads along Foothill Boulevard. 11. Provide ADA handicap access, with maximum 5 percent grade, to connect from public sidewalk on Foothill Boulevard to on-site (see Comment #10 above). 12. Pedestrian pathways appear to be approximately 3 feet in width, which is very tight. Suggest at least 4 to 5 feet of width and provision of occasional "nodes" with benches or similar along the paths. 13. Eliminate 3-foot wide pathway along east side of building, which leads to nowhere and replace with landscaping. 14. All roof drainage fixtures shall be located inside the building. No exterior down spouts or other drainage fixtures. 15. Trash enclosure on south side of building should be as decorative as possible given proximate to Laurel Street. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Any roof-mounted equipment, such as HVAC, satellite dishes or other form of communication fixtures shall be completely screened through the use of decorative walls that are incorporated into the building architecture. Provide, at a minium, one tree per 30 linear feet of building wall exposed to public view, one tree per 30 linear feet of site perimeter, and one tree per 3 parking spaces to provide shade. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised per the above comments and be brought back for further review. DesiOn Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Larry Henderson Staff Planner: Brent Le Count CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS 8:10 p.m. Brent Le Count March 16, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-04 - SILVERADO GROUP - A request to build a 3-story, 34,860 square foot hotel as part of a master planned development with three other retail buildings on 5 acres of land in Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Streets - APN: 208-352°82. Related File: Parcel Map 15282. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Larry Henderson Staff Planner: Brent Le Count The Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Henderson) reviewed the revised project and recommended approval subject to the following: The alignment of the main driveway intersection near the center portion of the site shall have as little offset as possible. Brick veneer shall have 90 degree angled pieces for corner treatment to avoid a grout line at building corners. Staff shall verify with Building and Safety Division that the light roof material proposed can handle seasonal high winds.' City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND Project File: Development Review 99-04 2. Related Files: 3. Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-04 - SILVERADO GROUP - A request to build a 3-story, 34,860 square foot hotel as part of a master planned development with three other retail buildings on 5 acres of land in Subarea 7 (industrial Park) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Streets -APN: 208-352-82. Related File: Parcel Map 15282. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Silverado Group 7514 Brava Street La Costa, CA 92009 General Plan Designation: General Industrial Zoning: Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site has frontage on both Foothill Boulevard and Laurel Street with existing curb and gutter improvements on both streets. The Applebee's restaurant is located to the northwest and the Brooklyn Dell restaurant is under construction to the southwest. To the east is the Magic Wok restaurant. The Terra Vista shopping center is to the north across Foothill Boulevard and to the south lie offices. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact Person and Phone Number: Brent Le Count (909) 477-2750 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DR 99-04 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages, ( ) Land Use and Planning ( ) Population and Housing (v') Geological Problems (v') Water ( ) Air Quality (~) Transportation/Cimulation (t/) Biological Resources ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Hazards (v') Noise ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance ( ) Public Services ( ) Utilities and Service Systems (v') Aesthetics ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Recreation DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (v) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. () Signed: I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1 ) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Brent Le Count Associate Planner March 1, 1999 JA ,17 Initial Study for 'DR 99-04 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~') b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) POPULATION AND HOUSING, Would the proposal.' a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: HIg a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DR 99°04 Page 4 b) g) h) i) Seismic ground shaking? Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? Seiche hazards? Landslides or mudflows? Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? Subsidence of the land? Expansive soils? Unique geologic or physical features? Comments: ( ) ( ) ( ) (v,) ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') ( ) ( ) ( ) h) () () () (~) () () () (~) () () (~) () () () () (~) According to Figure V-5 of the General Plan, the site contains Tujunga-Delhi soil association which "may have soil bearing capacities that could limit some development. Structures proposed on this soil type should be permitted only after a site specific investigation has been performed that indicates the soils can adequately support the weight of the structure." A soils report will be required prior to issuance of permits. The impact is not considered significant. WATER. W/I/the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( () (f) () () () (~) () () (~) () () (~) () () (~) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DR 99-04 Page 5 g) h) i) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) NO () () (v) () () (v) () () (v) () () (v) Comments: a) The project will increase the amount of surface runoff due to the amount of hard scape proposed. However, the drainage will be conveyed to facilities designed to handle the flows. The impact is not considered significant. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal.' a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) () (~) () No Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga ' DR 99-04 Page 6 b) c) d) g) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) Conflicts with adopted policies suppoding alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) () () () () () () () () No (,/) (v) (~,) (v) (./) (~/) Comments: a) The project will generate additional vehicular movement. The City's General Plan and Industrial Area ,Specific Plan address the short term and long term cumulative traffic impacts upon surrounding streets. Based on this information, the proposed project has no potential to alter the present pattern of circulation. The impact is not considered significant. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including. but not limited to: plants, fish. insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( ) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) (,/) () () (~) () (~) () (~) () (v) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga 'DR 99-04 Page 7 Comments: a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service identifies the project area as potential habitat for the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly (DSF). As a result. habitat assessment and biological survey were required to determine potential impacts to the DSF habitat. These surveys, which were conducted by a biologist permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct surveys for DSF. Results of the surveys (Tierra Madre Consultants, Inc, December 28, 1998) indicated that the site does not contain adequate DSF habitat since there is a lack of actual Delhi series soils present, the site has been disturbed through rough grading practices. and there are not extensive areas of exposed sand. No other unique. rare, or endangered animal species are known to be located on the project site. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V') c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including. but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DR 99-04 Page 8 10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? No () () (v) () () () (v) () Co111111e~ts: a) The project will increase existing noise levels because the site is currently vacant. However, the increase will be nominal in relation to existing surrounding development and traffic. The impact is not considered significant. b) According to Figure V-9 of the General Plan, the site is subject to future noise levels between 60 and 65 dB CNEL. New construction may only be undertaken after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the project design. A noise study was conducted (P.A. Pardini and Associates, February 26, 1999) which indicated that the maximum ultimate exterior traffic noise level impacting the building is 65.1dB CNEL which results in a maximum interior noise level of 40 dB CNEL with windows closed. The building is proposed to have closed windows with individual air conditioning units for each room. Therefore, the traffic noise is mitigated via project design. The impact is not considered significant, 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the fo~owing areas: a) b) C) d) e) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V') Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga 'DR 99-04 Page 9 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) b) c) d) 0 g) Power or natural gas? Communication systems? Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste disposal? Local or regional water supplies? NO () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? c) Create light or glare? () () () () () (v) No (v) (v) () Comments: c) New light and glare will be created since the site is currently vacant. However, a Standard Condition of Approval will require the preparation of a photometric diagram to demonstrate that no light or glare will be cast upon adjacent properties or public rights-of-way. The impact is not considered significant. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological resources? c) Affect historical or cultural resources? () () () (v) () () () (v) () () () (v) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DR 99-04 Page 10 d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? No Impact ( ) ( ) ( ) (v) ( ) ( ) ( ) (v) 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal.' a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? Na () () () (v) () () () (v) 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term. to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief. definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) NO () () () (v) () () () (v) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga 'DR 99-04 Page 11 c) d) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? () () () (v) () () () (v) EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (v) General Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981) (v,) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (v,) Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR (Certified September 19. 1981) APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures, Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. Signature: Print Name and Title: Date: City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The fo~owing Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Development Review 99-04 Public Review Period Closes: March 23, 1999 Project Name: Project Applicant: Silverado Group Project Location (also see attached map): Located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Streets - APN: 208-352-82. Project Description: A request to build a 3 - sto~/. 34,860 square foot hotel as part of a master planned development with three other retail buildings on 5 acres of land in Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. Related File: Parcel Map 15282. FINDING This Is to advise that the City of Ra.ncho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine If the project may have a significant effect on the environment and Is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included In the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. March 23. 1999 Date of Determination Adopted By SPRUCE AVE. S1 NOT A PART · APPROXIMATE T N SAMPLE LOCA IO .j SUBJECT ~.~ . S:TE~.~,~_~j (:~)~ S2e ~ 3~) ....... OBSERVED ST~KPILE J ~ (~2 FEET HIGH) I NOT A PART ASPEN ST. SITE LOCATION MAP N .T.S. 5 +/- ACRE PARCEL, FOOTHILL BLVD. RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA PROJECT NO. 98G179 PLATE 1 Southern California Geotechnical RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 99-04, A REQUEST TO BUILD A 3-STORY, 34,860 SQUARE FOOT HOTEL AS PART OF A MASTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH THREE OTHER COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ON 5 ACRES OF LAND IN SUBAREA 7 (INDUSTRIAL PARK) OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD BETVVEEN ASPEN AND SPRUCE STREETS, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 208-352-82 A. Recitals. 1. Silverado Group has filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. 99- 04, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafier in this Resolution, the subject Development Review' request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 23rd day of March 1999, 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, Pad A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meeting on March 23, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Streets with a street frontage of 563 feet on Foothill Boulevard and 309 feet on Laurel Street and lot depth of 395 feet and is presently vacant; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is developed with the Terra Vista Shopping Center, the property to the south consists of offices, the property to the east is vacant and occupied by a restaurant, and the property to the west is developed with a restaurant and a restaurant under construction; and c. The project includes berming and landscaping along street frontages to screen views of parking from the streets; and d. The project is consistent with Industrial Area Specific Plan objectives in that it provides convenient services to workers and business visitors as well as the needs of local businesses; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. - DR 99-04 - SILVERADO GROUP March 23, 1999 Page 2 e. The project is consistent with Industrial Area Specific Plan objectives in that it provides high quality architecture compatible with existing development and is a positive enhancement to the immediate area. 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. ThattheproposedprojectisconsistentwiththeobjectivesoftheGeneralplan;and b. That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code 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 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 facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further. this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration. the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing. the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: Plannincl Division 1) Thealignmentofthemaindrivewayintersectionnearthecenterportion of the site shall have as little offset as possible. F( 3b PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 99-04 - SILVERADO GROUP March 23, 1999 Page 3 2) Provide enhanced paving, stop signs, and other vehicle control measures to enhance vehicle safety at the main driveway intersection near the center portion of the site. 3) Provide terraced retaining wall(s) along the Laurel Street frontage where slope grade is 2:1 or steeper. 4) Brick veneer shall have 90 degree angled pieces for corner treatment to avoid a grout line at building corners. 5) Provide a bench at the northeast corner of the building. 6) Provide Palm tree planting around entire building to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 7) Provide variation and undulation in slopes along street frontages to elicit a softer, more natural appearance. 8) Provide dense shrub planting, including hedgerow planting along the Laurel Street frontage to screen view of parking areas from the street. 9) Copper roof material on porte-cochere element shall be real copper. 1 O) Provide double d6or foyer design for main hotel entry on east side of building to mitigate seasonal high winds. 11) Provide dense tree planting around hotel entrance to enhance entry statement and to mitigate seasonal high winds. 12) Decorative driveway paving and parking lot light standards shall match that of the Applebee's restaurant to the nodhwest. 13) All roof drainage features shall be located inside the building. No exterior down spouts. 14) Enclose pool/spa area with a decorative masonry wall and/or wrought iron fence, 15) Any roof or ground mounted equipment shall be completely screened from view. Enqineerinq Division 1) Provide a right turn lane from the Foothill Boulevard drive approach with Standard Drawing No. 119. The right turn lane shall be 11 feet wide and at least 210 feet long, including the transition. Sidewalk shall be 6 feet wide curb adjacent along the right turn lane and should meander for the balance ofthe project frontage. The driveway shall be 35 feet wide at the right-of-way. 2) Parcel Map 15282 shall be recorded, prior to issuance of building permits, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, DR 99-04- SILVERADO GROUP March 23,1999 Page 4 3) The vacation of that portion of vehicular access rights to Foothill Boulevard required for the project shall be processed through the City and approved, prior to the issuance of building permits. 4) A contribution in lieu of construction for the Foothill Boulevard median island shall be paid to the City as indicated below. The amount of the contribution shall be prorated on a per acre basis from the total contribution attributable to Parcel Map 10444. That total contribution shall be one-half the cost of the median (estimated at $60.00 per linear foot) times the length of the Foothill Boulevard frontage from a protection of the westerly right-of-way line for Aspen Street to a projection of the westerly right-of-way line for Spruce Avenue: a) Contribution for Parcel 4 (Development Review 99-04) of Tentative Parcel Map No. 15282 shall be paid, prior to approval of the final parcel map. b) Contribution for Parcels 1, 2, and 3 of Tentative Parcel Map No. 15282 shall be paid, prior to building permit issuance for these parcels. 5) Parkway shall slope at two percent from the top of curb to 1-foot behind the sidewalk along all street frontages. 6) All frontage improvements shall be installed with the first parcel to develop in Tentative Parcel Map 15282. 7) To reflect new or relocated improvements, existing Street Improvement Plan No. 404 shall be revised by a registered civil engineer. Plan check fees will be required. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH 1999. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do 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 23rd day of March 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Development Review 99°04 RC Hotel Silverado Group South side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Streets ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACTTHE PLANNING DIVISION, (909)477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements Completion Dato The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees. because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City. its agents, officers. or employees. for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents. officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may. at its sole discretion. participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced. participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the District's property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shaft Comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, buildin9 and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission. if buildin9 permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. Project NO. DR ~.04 Completion Date Co Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program. and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Industrial Area Specific Plan. Prior to any use of the project site or bus ness act vity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. / / / / / / / Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to 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 or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. ' A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by/he City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height. and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping tO the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. D. Shopping Centers The Master Plan is approved in concept only. Future development for (each building pad/parcel) shall be subject to separate Development/Design Review process for Planning Commission approval. Modifications to the Shopping Center Master Plan shall be subject to Planning Commission approval, A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles, free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. Provide for the following design features in each trash enclosure, to the satisfaction of the City Planner: a. Architecturally integrated into the design of (the shopping center/the project). b. Separate pedestrian access that does not require the opening of the main doors and to include self-closing pedestrian doors. c. Large enough to accommodate two trash bins. d. Roll-up doors. e. Trash bins with counter-weighted lids. f. Architecturally treated overhead shade trellis. g. Chain link screen on top to prevent trash from blowing out of the enclosure and designed to be hidden from view. 4. Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. 5. The entire site shall be kept free from trash and debris at all times and in no event shall trash and debris remain for more than 24 hours. 6. Signs shall be conveniently posted for "no overnight parking" and for "employee parking only." 7. All operations and businesses shall be conducted to comply with the following standards which shall be incorporated into the lease agreements for all tenants: a. Noise Level - All commercial activities shall not create any noise that would exceed an exterior noise level of 60 riB'during the hours of 10 p.m. until 7 a.m. and 65 dB during the hours of 7 a.m. until 10 p.m. 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 other similar objects between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. unless otherwise specified herein, in a manner which would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area. 8. Textured pavement shall be provided across circulation aisle, pedestrian walkway, and plaza. They shall be of brick/tile pavers, exposed aggregate, integral color concrete, or any combination thereof. Full samples shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. All future building pads shall be seeded and irrigated for erosion control. Detailed plans shall be included in the landscape and irrigation plans to be submitted for Planning Division approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 10. The lighting fixture design shall compliment the architectural program. It shall include the plaza area lighting fixtures, building lighting fixtures (exterior), and parking lot lighting fixtures. 11. All future projects within the shopping center shall be designed to be compatible and consistent with the architectural program established. 12. Any outdoor vending machines shall be recessed into the building faces and shall not extend into the pedestrian walkways. The design details shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. Completion Date E. Building Design All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties 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. For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main building colors. / / / / / / / / I / / F. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/recreational uses. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City Standards. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner. City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn-around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars stacking into the public right-of-way. Handicap accessible stalls shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more parking stalls. Designate two percent or one stall. whichever is greater, of the total number of stalls for use by the handicapped. Motorcycle parking area shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more parking stalls. Developments with over 100 parking stalls shall provide motorcycle parking at the rate of one percent. The area for motorcycle parking shall be a minimum of 56 square feet. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial. office, industrial, and multifamily residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for commercial, office, and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area. If covered, the vertical clearance shall be no less than 9 feet. G. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. A minimum of 30% within commercial and office projects. shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. Within parking lots. trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. Trees shall be planted in areas of }ublic view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. All private slopes of 5 feet or less ~n vertical height and of 5:1 or greater 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. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater 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. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 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 multi-family residential and non-residential development. propen',/owners are responsible 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 shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in 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. 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 landscapin9 plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. Special landscape features such as mounding. alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Foothill Boulevard and Laurel Street. 10. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 11. All walls Shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. Project NO. DR ~)-0-1 Completfon Date / / / / I / / / 12. 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. 13. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. H. 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 require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any signs. A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., DR 99-04). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, 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. Prior to issuance of buildin9 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 fees may include, but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, Street addresses shall be provided by the Buildin9 Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of buildin9 permits. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday. J. New Structures Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use. area, and ~re-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for required occupancy separation(s). Roofing material shall be installed as for wind-resistant roof covering at wind velocity not less than 90 mph. Plans for food preparation areas shall be approved by County of San Bemardino Environmental Health Services prior to issuance of building permits. Project NO DR ~-04 Completion Date / / / / Grading Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. Project No. DP, 9q.04 Coml)letton Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACTTHE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L. Dedication and Vehicular Access Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of buildin9 permits, where no map is involved. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 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. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a para$1el street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. Street Improvements 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, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Curb & A.C. Side- Ddve Sireat Streel Comrn Median Bike Other Sireel Name GuIler Pvmt walk Appr. LIghts Trees Trail Island Trail Foothill Blvd. B C X X D F Laurel Street X E X F Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Reconstruct existing drive approach 35 feet wide. (f) Post R26 or R25(s) signs. Improvement Plans and Construction: Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Projec~ NO. DR Completion Date Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved 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 private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 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. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing. street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Signal condu it with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: ( 1 ) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by'the City Engineer. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are 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. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. A permit shall be obtained from Caltrans for any work within the following right-of-way: Foothill Boulevard. N. Public Maintenance Areas A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form 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. Om ProleG1 NO DR Completion Date Utilities Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary 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. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCVVD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits. whichever occurs first. 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 the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: P. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be 3,000 gallons per minute. X a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. X b. 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 fire depar~rnent personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operable prior to 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 fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any. will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of the required fire protection system. 6. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. 7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. Project NO. DR ~-04 Completton Date Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, ~ammable liquids storage, high piled stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if the sprinkler system is adequate for proposed operations. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of sprinkler system. 9. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. X California Code Regulations Title 24. 10. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 22. 11. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. 12. Emergency access, a minimum of 26 feet wide, shall be provided, and maintained free and clear of obstructions at all times during construction, in accordance with Fire District requirements. / / / 13. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet, 6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus. 14. A building directory shall be required, as noted below: X Standard Directory in main lobby. 15. 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 ordering information. 16. $677.00 Fire District fee(s). and a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District prior to Building and Safety permit issuance." A Fire District fee in the amount of $132.00 shall be paid at the time of Water Plan submittal. **Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal ol' plans. 17. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWtNG CONDITIONS: Q, Security Lighting All parking. common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. / / 2. All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development. 3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. Security Hardware 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. 2. All roof openings giving access to the building shall be secured with either iron bars, metal gates, or alarmed. Security Fencing 1. When utilizing security gates, a Knox box sub-master system security device shall be used since fire and law enforcement can access these devices. Windows 1. All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be lifted from frame or track in any manner. 2. Store front windows shall be visible to passing pedestrians and traffic. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga C A 91729 03-23-99 Vineyard Shell 8919 Foothill Blvd Rancho Cucamonga C A 91730 Attn: Donald Granger Planning Commission Dear Sirs. At this time we are requesting to withdraw the appeal for sign permit 98-30. We are exploring other changes to our monument price signs in hopes that this will resolve the visibility issue. This was one of the reasons that we had requested an extension until April 4-28-99 Commission meeting, in order to allow us the time needed to ~nalize these changes and to study the results. We appreciate the time that you have put into this matter, and hope that we can resolve this issue soon. Sincerely, RECEIVED MAR 2 3 1999 City of Rancho Cucamonga Plann)ng Division CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: March 23, 1999 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Donald Granger, Planning Technician APPEAL OF A SIGN PERMIT NO. 98-30 - FLORES - An appeal of the City Planner's decision regarding a wall price sign for Vineyard Shell, a service station and mini-market in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-192-06. (Continued from March 10, 1999). BACKGROUND: In a letter dated 'March 8, 1999, the applicant requested a time extension to the April 28, 1999 Planning Commission meeting. The applicant cited the need for additional preparation time because of "business-related" issues. The Planning Commission, noting the fact that the sign is illegal and non-permitted, granted an extension to March 23, 1999, giving the applicant an opportunity to explain in greater detail the need for an extension to April 28, 1999. For the Commission's information, the applicant recently submitted and received approval for changing the two monument signs and one wall sign to a Mobil brand gasoline. The approved Mobil signs are consistent with staff's suggestion of placing the gasoline prices nearest the curb face for increased visibility as shown in Exhibit "B.' RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission uphold, by minute action, the City Planner's decision and deny the appeal. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:DG:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Applicant's Letter Dated March 8, 1999 Exhibit "B" - Approved Mobil Monument Exhibit "C" - Staff Report Dated March 10. 1999 ITEM I City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga C A 91729 Attn: Donald Granger Planning Commission 03-8-1999 Vineyard Shell 8919 Foothill BIrd. Rancho Cucamonga 91730 Dear Sirs. ! am writing to request a continuance for item" F" on the March 10 th planning commission meeting regarding sign permit 98-30. We are not prepared to appear by 3-10-99 due to business related issues. We need some time to prepare for this meeting. Please reschedule this item on the 4-28-99 planning commission meeting. Your understanding in granting this continuance will be greatly appreciated. Art and Diana Flores RECEIVED MAR 0 9 1999 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division NEW FACES ONLY FOR TWO EXISTING D/F MONUMENT SIGr Scale: 1/2" = 1'- 0" Cucamonga, CA I 12/8/98 Poblocki J .A./Rev. 2 2/18/98 CITY OF RANCFIO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: March 10. 1999 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Bullet, City Planner Donald Granger, Planning Technician APPEAL OF A SIGN PERMIT NO. 98-30 - FLORES - An appeal of the City Planner's decision regarding a wall price sign for Vineyard Shell, a service station and mini-market in the Community Commercial district (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-192-06. ABSTRACT: The applicant is seeking approval to install a third pricing sign at the northwest tower elevation. The applicant contends that the installation of the third price sign is necessary for both public visibility and sales volume. , BACKGROUND: On July 27, 1994, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 93-46 for the construction of a gas station and mini-market. Subsequently, in March of 1996, the Planning Division approved a sign package for the Vineyard Shell that included two monument signs for the Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue frontages (Exhibit "D") and one Shell logo sign on the northwest tower elevation. ANALYSIS: Presently, the applicant has installed a third price sign adjacent to the wall logo sign on the northwest tower elevation, as shown in Exhibit "E." The Sign Ordinance states that "the monument sign shall be designed to include the identification of the station and gasoline prices. No other price signs are allowed." Approval of the third wall price sign would be inconsistent with the Sign Ordinance. Staff has made field visits to all service stations in the City and found them to have gasoline pricing signs on monument signs only. Therefore, approval of the appeal would set a precedent for the City and would lead to more requests by other service stations. The two existing monument signs for the station are located 19~ feet behind the curb face, just behind the right-of-way on Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue. Staff finds no justification for a visibility or business identification hardship. To further increase the visibility, the applicant could request to switch the pricing sign cabinet with the shell logo sign cabinet so that the pricing sign is closer to the property line, as shown in Exhibit "F." Another option that the applicant could explore is to relocate the monument signs closer to the building. Based upon the above analysis, staff concluded that the Vineyard Shell has adequate business identification and advertising opportunity. Staff also finds no unique circumstances about the request that would justify any action for approval. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'SP 98-30 - FLORES March 10, 1999 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission uphold the City Planners decision and deny the appeal by minute action. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:DG/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Appeal Request Letter Exhibit "B" - City Planner Denial Letter Dated January 11, 1999 Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Existing Monument Sign Elevation Exhibit "E" - Proposed Wall Sign Elevation Exhibit "F" - Suggested Placement Change to Price Sign Cabinet Exhibit "G" - Excerpt from Sign Ordinance Ace,f-- C:~\'~o \'7Z%:'-0 The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga 91729 SUBJECT: SIGN PERMIT. 98-30 VINEYARD SHELL 8919 FOOTHILL BL. RANCHO CUCAMONGA 91730 (909)483-0100 1-21- To the Planning Division: Dear Sirs: I am ~vriting this letter to appeal your decision about the price sign at my service station, on Foothill and Vineyard. The reason that this sign was needed was due to the many customer complaints about the lac.._._Xk_Of visibility. of the pd_qes~the existing monument signs. Due to the set back the signs are too far on the property and many customers complain that they could nol see that this was a service station, and the prices were not visible to them until they had already passed the station. On Vineyard Ave.traveling south or north bound it is impossible to see the monument sign unless you are walking. Traveling east on Foothill the trees obstruct the view of the price sign. Since we installed the price sign on the comer customers are able to see the prices and we have seen a tremendous increase in business and positive comments about finally being able to see the prices. It is required by law to post the prices in a visible location. We invested 2.5 Million in this business due to the rigid requirments imposed by the City of R.C. We need to maintain a certain amount of business to meet our financial obligations . If your decision is to remove our sign it will adversely affect our business. We would be willing to remove the prices from the monument signs or if you have any other sugesstions please let us know. Sincerely //'/ .,xn Fbres. (_~,/ c",t - T H E C i T Y O F A NC HO C UC A PIO NG A Mr. Art Flores Vineyard Shell 3762 Henderson Place Claremont. CA 91711 SUBJECT: SIGN PERMIT NO. 98-30 Dear Mr. Flores; Thank you for submitting the above-described sign permit applica [ion for a proposed third gasoline price sign. As a result of reviewing your proposed sign with the current Sign Ordinance, staff has made the following findings and determination: Service sialions are permitled one wall sign and one monument sign per sireel fronlage up to a maximum Of three signs, which could be a combinalion of wall and monumenl signs. However. only monument signs are allowed Io include the gasoline prices. No other price signs are allowed. 2. The site already has two monument signs with gasoline prices. one each at Vineyard Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. 3. The proposed gasoline price sign placed at the northwest (lower) elevation is a wall sign which is not allowed. However. the shell logo wall sign is acceptable in ils present location. Based on the above analysis and findings. your sign permil application is denied. The gasoline price wall sign shall be removed within 21 calendar days from Ihe date of this letter. This decision shall be final followlng a ten-day appeal period beginning with Ihe dale of this letter. Appeals must be filed in writing with the Planning Commission Secretary. state the reason forappeal. and be accompanied by the $62 appeal fee. For your information the City now has a provision to allow Ihe identification of subtenants within a service station. The sign standards are one wall sign per subtenant up to a maximum of two per station and a maximum of 12 square feet per sign. Therefore, you could submit a separate sign permit application requesting a wall sign for your olher business. Church's Fried Chicken. If you have any questions, please contact Donald Granger, Planning Technician. at (909) 477-2750. Sincerely. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City Planner BB:DG/jfs cc: Brian Jackson. Code Enforcement Officer Jack Lain. AICe Csty Manac'j,;r 105C0 C,'/:': Cen,*.."f Dr,re · P 0 Bo~ ~.OZ · PcnCr~rl~,]l. CAgl/2O · (';CO)/.z7.27C13 Existing Monument Sign Elevation Possible Alternative Monument Cabinet Design ,, _ XGas '109 9/10Shell .~ Prices119 9/10Logo I"~ ;: Here 129 9/10'Here 14,20,100 Permitted Signs - Commercial and Office Zones - The following signs may be permitted in the commercial and office zones subject to the provisions listed: CLASS c spec~ SIGN TYPE waa~G~nd MAXIMUM NUMBER MAXIMUM SIGN AREA 12 s~lua~e feel 6 soNate feet MAXIMUM HEIGHT REMARKS Up to 8 feel I. TO dked visitors and emergency vehicles to buiidings. 22 Revised 8/97 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: March 23, 1999 TO: C airman and Members of the Planning Commission FRO rad Buller, City Planner BY' Alan Warren, Associate Planner ~NDiTiONAL USE PERMIT 98-12 On the afternoon of March 22, 1999, the architect for Center of His Will Christian Faith Center submitted the material previously requested in the City's letter of incompleteness of July 6, 1998. With the information, the Church requested a withdrawal of its appeal of the City Planner's denial due to incompleteness. As a result of this new information and request, the Planning Commission may consider the following alternatives: Act on staffs report recommendation and deny the appeal request and affirm the City Planners denial without prejudice due to application incompleteness. This would still allow the church to reapply (with a new fee and supporting information) for a new use permit application. Accept the church's withdrawal of the incompleteness/denial appeal and allow staff to reopen and continue the existing CUP 98-12 application with the recently submitted incompleteness plans and information. Staff has recommended representatives of the Church to attend the meeting should the Commission have any questions about the scheduling of anticipated improvements. BB:AW:Is Attachments: Letter from John Melcher, March 22, 1999 k, tl ,7 JOHN MELCHER, AIA · ARCHITECT 6779 Treeline Place · P.O. Box 1085 · Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 · 909.948.8777 · FAX 909.948.8677 9839 22 March 1999 RECEIVED Alan Warren. AICP, Associate Planner CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 MAR ,I g/999 City of Rancho Cucarnonga Ptanning Division Subject; Conditional Use Permit No. 98-12 9330 Seventh Street, Shire G (Center of His Will Christian I:aith Center) Dear Alan: The following materials are submitted with this letter in response to the City's completeness letter of July 6, 1998: Lcttcr ol' Pastor Gloria I Iaywood dated JanuaD' 12. 1999. The letter provides information about church operating hours and other details. Tenant listings for 9330 Seventh Street and 9350 Seventh Street. The Cornmr houses the church: it and the Iattcr are the two buildings most likcly to bc impacted by church operations. Site plan of Pacific Gulf Business Park, the project within which the church is located. Eight (8) copies of Drawing Number I as prepared by this oflicc. The drawing includes a floor plan o/the church's space; a partial site plan of the project, showing the building in which the church is located in relationship to adjacent buildings within the project and to Hellman Avenue; and a 1994 California Building Code analysis. To the best of my knowledge and belief, these materials respond fully to the City's completeness concerns. A number of comments were includcd/attachcd to the completeness letter that are better addressed in the tenant improvement drawings which '.','ill bc submitted in connection with the church's application for a building permit; those comments arc hereby acknowledged and the tenant improvement drawings will contain a proper response to each of them. Pastor Flaywood has asked me to withdraw the church's appeal of thc City's tinding of incompleteness, which is scheduled to be heard by the Planning Commission tomorrow evening, and to resume rcvicw of its CUP application. If fbr any reason this isn't possible, or if you nccd liarthor information of any sort, please lct mc know right away. 9839 AlanWarren, AICP 22M,'u'ch 1999 Page 2 Thank you very much for the consideration the City has shown the church throughout this matter. and for your continuing assistance with it. Sincerely, JOH MELCHER, AIA / ARCHITECT e attachment(s): as listed cc: Pastor Gloria Haywood CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: March 23, 1999 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner APPEAL OF INCOMPLETENESS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-12 - PASTOR GLORIA HAYWOOD -An appeal of the City Planner's denial of a Conditional Use Permit due to a determination of incompleteness for an application to establish a church within 3,200 square feet of leased space in a multi-tenant industrial center, located in Subarea 3 (General Industrial) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan at 9330 Seventh Street, Suite "G" -APN: 209-171-57. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On May 31, 1998, the church began operating without proper City permits. On June 17, 1998, Pastor Gloria Haywood submitted an application requesting a Conditional Use Permit to operate a church facility within an existing multi-tenant industrial center at the northeast corner of Seventh Street and Hellman Avenue. Under Industrial Area Specific Plan provisions, religious assembly may be conditionally permitted within Subarea 3 (Table II1-1, revised November 1996). On July 6, 1999, Planning staff responded to the application with an incompleteness letter. The letter outlined those items that needed to be submitted to satisfy minimum application requirements. Additional items were also requested in order to make an informed decision regarding the appropriateness of the use within the complex. Planning requests included the following: Provide a list of tenants/businesses within the complex. The list is to include business addresses, total floor area for each use, description of the activity/business and hours of operation. Provide a fully dimensioned Floor Plan, drawn to scale. Dimension all room s~zes, corridors, hallways, and aisle widths. Submit a revised letter or new letter stating how long the church has been at this present location. Because the building, designed as an industrial facility, was not constructed to satisfy building code requirements for public assembly, the Building and Safety Division's Fire Prevention/New Construction Unit included a number of items to be covered in the requested resubmittal. These issues were raised at that time because of the scope of the required building code safety items. Staff requested that the resubmittal show sufficient detail so that the applicant understood the scope and potential costs of the mandatory code requirements. Most of the safety issues could be shown on an improved floor plan as requested by Planning staff. ITEM J PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'CUP 98-12 APPEAL - HAYVVOOD March 23, 1999 Page 2 Church representatives met with City staff (Planning, Building, and Fire Safety) to ascertain the requirements for continuing the process. After more than 120 days, no additional information was submitted and the City Planner denied the application without prejudice because of inaction on the incompleteness items. The Church filed an appeal of the denial on November 23, 1998. Also, the church enlisted the services of an architect, familiar with City procedures, to help on improving the application plans and exhibits to keep the application open and moving forward. Planning staff withheld action of the appeal application in hopes that the requested information would be submitted and that the CUP process could continue. After a number of contacts with the architect, staff anticipated that the requested information would soon be submitted. No additional submittals were provided and the City Planner decided that action on the appeal request must be scheduled. As of the writing of this report, the Planning Division has not received any of the incompleteness information requested in July of 1998. Staff believes that an informed decision cannot be made without the requested information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission affirm the City Planners denial of CUP 98-12 because of application incompleteness. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:AW/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Appeal Letter Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Floor Plan Exhibit "D" - Letter of Incompleteness dated July 6, 1998 Exhibit "E" - Letter of Denial dated November 16, 1998 Resolution of Denial CEzVTER ~ i F HIS g/ILL CHRISTL-I: V F,-,I ~ICS'-~ CE. VTER 9330 Seventh Street. Suite G Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 r909) 944-9744 November 3,1.19~S SUB/ECT: CONDITIONAL USE PER.MIT APPEAL To the Cin.' or P,~ncho Cucamonga. We respectfull}. submitted a request for a Conditional Use Permit front the Citv of R.lncho Cucamonga to allow us to conduct Church Sen'ices at 92,30 Seventh Street. Unit G in the ~ity of Rancho Cucamonga. We have been at tiffs location since ,Xtav 3 1 1993. It has been an on-going process for us as `.'.c have continualh' atzcmpted to get clarification for the items of completeness. The irtformation for the completion included'many items for 'New Construction.' which ~ere not applicable to us. When '.~e applied for the conditional use pcrntit ~e ~'.ere moving into an existing building ~dth no construction changes. Front the first receipt of the letter for completion x~c have spoken Several times over the telephone to Alan V,/arrcn as ,.',ell as made numerous visits to the Citv to speak v,'ith hint. We continued to return beck to the city because ~'.c couldn't get the full under'standing as to ~dtat ~c ,.~cre to do. In the meantime ttc met with city fire department inspectors. At titat time ~c onh' had t~'.o small itcnts. xdtich included adding blank covers to our fuse box and rcnto,.'ing an extension cord. W'c ~`.crc told titat they ~ould be beck on October 8. 1998 to reinspeer those' items and they ~ould then write them off. As to titis date; no one has returned. Again. tic have called several times dm~n'to the city to get Ihc rcinspection and no one .%'eRrs to know who t~ould have come out in the first place. In our pursuit [o complete our items '4c contacted Mr. Dan Coleman on Novcntber 4.1998. v. ho '.'`'as extremeIv helpful. He took the dmc to explain [o mc the need of an architect because of the building codes. Mr. Colcma'n stated that 'he ~ould be happ:,.* [o meet with us and our architect and that hc ~tas titere to help us." I ',,,as concerned about the 30 day extension and was advised by Mr. Coleman that ~vould not be a problem. He assured me that the interest is to ensure that t~e continue t~rkjng to`.~ard the conditional use Fen'nit. After my convcrsstion with Mr. Coleman [ immediately contacted the architect Pete Pimssi ~vho because of his hca',Ycaseload refen'ed me to Jon Melcher. Mr. Melc~erand|hadan appoimmcnt on Novcmber 19, 1998at 2:00 p.m. At that same dine we were met with citv o~cicals serving a nodce not to have serv'ices anymore in the facilities. The')' stated a letter had been dated b:,' the ci.ty for 11/16/98 c:xplairdng a denial. which we had not received. The letlet did come on 11/21/98. the ~cx)s;mark shov.'s mailed on 11119198. We arc asldng for an appeal of the conditional use permit application due to our constant active pursuit to comply v,,'ith ~'en.l. hing that v.'e have understood to do. Our architect. Mr. Mclchcr. begun v.'orking with us on Thur.'.'Rhy. November 19. 1998. Please reconsider our application and an extension se that we may continue havingserv'icc'.~hilcthearehiteeliscomplctingtheplans. Thank you in advancc for your considemtlon. [ may be contaclcd at (909) 944-9744. Sincerely. Pastor Gloria Hay','.ood PACIFIC GULF BUSINESS PARK RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA Leasing & Management 9500 7th St. Suite "L" To Archibald A~B. ~ Roll-Up Door D Exit Door 3200 SQ FT [] Pulpit Area AISLEWAY DR D D D D D DDR 50 CtlAIRS AISLEWAY D iIF1DD El D FI El FI FI D El CIIAIRS FI AISLEWAY AISLE I WOMEN'S RESTROOM PASTORS OFFICE J tlALL FRObFF OFFICE MEN'S RESTROOM RECEIrHON AREA T ~ : C I T ¥ 0 F 1Q A ,.'Xl ClIOC U C A O N G July 8, 1998 Pastor Gloria Haywood 9335 Calle Vejar Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-12 - 9330 SEVENTH STREET, SUITE 'G" Dear Pastor Haywood: Your application for the above-referenced project has been reviewed for completeness and accuracy of filing. As a result of the review. the project application has been found to be incomplete for processing. Attached please find a list outlining additional information needed prior to finding the application complete. non- conformtries with development standards, and major design issues. . Further processing of your project cannot begin until, at a minimum, the Completeness Items are submitted and the application accepted as complete. However, to expedite processing of your project, it is recommended that all issues on the attached list be addressed now. Submit eight copies of the information requested to the Planning Division as soon as possible. The applicant must submit the information and/or plans necessary to make the application complete within 60 days of the date of this letter. Failure to submit within this time limit may result in denial of your application. This decision regarding the incomplete ~tatus of your application shall be final following a ten-day appeal period beginning with the date of Ihis letlet. Only Completeness Items may be appealed al Ihis time. A written slatemerit of reasons for the appeal must be submitted to/he Planning Commission Secretary and be accompanied by a 562 appeal fee. Should you have any questions regarding the review process, or if we can be Of further assistance. please feel free to contact the project planner, Alan Warren. at (909) 477-2750. Monday through Thursday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sincerely. Cp~~EVEL NT DEPARTMENT ., NING IVI~ Da Principal Planner DC:AW:mlg Attachment cc: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer Karen Mosley, Office Specialist II FILE NO.: CUP 98-12 (COMPLETENESS COMMENTS) NOTE: This information is provided to assist in the preparation of a development package complete for processing. Additional information or comments may be necessary based upon a more thorough analysis during the Development Review Process, I. Plannine Division: A. Completeness Items - Additional information that must be submitted prior to finding the application complete: Provide a list of tenants/businesses within the complex. The list is to include business addresses, total floor area of each use, description of the acfivity/business, and hours of operation. The centers leasing agent may be able to help you in obtaining this information. Provide a fully dimensioned Floor Plan drawn to scale. Dim.ension all room sizes, corridors, hallways and aisle widths. Submit revised letter or new letter stating how long the church has been at this present location. II. Buildinq and Safety Division: Completeness Items - Additional information that must be submitted prior to finding the application complete: If you have any questions regarding the Building comments, please contact Allen Brock, Building Plan Check Manager at extension 2233. Plans are incomplete and additional information is required. Refer to enclosed 'Preliminary/Technical Project Review' comments of June 30. 1998 for construction and occupancy issues. Building Code issues relate to safety concerns regarding the use of an industrial building for public assembly uses. Project has outstanding life safety issues which require additional submittals by proponent (prior to Planning commission). as noted: a. Plan is incomplete and requires additional information such as. accurate dimensions, type of construction. s structure sprinklered';". etc. Substantial requirements may arise outlining a more detailed review such as, occupant load/occupancy, existing. restroom facilities. etc. 3. Exterior walls shall be constructed of the required I~re rating in accordance with UBC Table 4. Openings in exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with UBC Table 5-A. Plans shall be submitted and plans approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC. and NEC. 6. Submit three (3) complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan. ':Z'7 COMPLETENESS COMMENTS CUP 98-12 Page 2 b. Foundation Plan. c. Floor Plan. d. Ceiling and Floor Plan. e. Electrical Plans (2 sets detached) including size of main switch. number and size' of service entrance conductors. panel schedules, and single line diagrams. Plumbing and Sewer Plans including isometrics, underground diagram. water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixlure units, gas piping. and heating and air conditioning. Submit two (2) sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and soils report. Architect's/Engineer's stamp and 'wet" signature is required, prior to plan check submittal. 8. Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be required. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' compensation to City prior to permit issuance. 10. Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the building and S~fety Division. III. Fire Prevention/New Construction Unit: Completeness Items - See page 4 of "Preliminary Project Review" comments of June 30, 1998. Fire Code issues relate to safety concerns regarding the use of an industrial building for public assembly uses. If you have any questions regarding the Fire comments, please contact John Thomas, Fire Plan Check Manager at extension 2202. 1. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: a. Confirm if sprinklers are existing. Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, ~ammable liquids storage, high piled stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety division to determine if sprinkler system is adequate for proposed operations. 2. A fire alarm syslem(s) shall be required as noted below: a. Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District ordinance 15. 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 ordering information. A Fire District fee in the amount of S132.00 and a 81 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to t.he Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District prior to building and Safety permit issuance. COMPLETENESS COMMENT,, CUP 98-12 Page 3 Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems. alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submital of plans. Plans shall be submitted and plans approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC. UMC, NEW. and RCFD Standards 22.15. 6. Special permits may be required. depending on intended use, as noted below: a. Places of assembly (except churches, schools, and other non-profit organizations). T H E C I T Y O F ANCHO CUCAPIONG November 16, 1998 A Pastor Gloria Haywood 9335 Calle Vejar Rancho Cucamonga,.CA 91730 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE P~RMIT NO. 98-12 iCENTER OF HIS WILL CHRISTIAN FAITH CENTER). 9330 SEVENTH STREET, SUITE "G" Dear Pastor Haywood: Based upon a review of your application file. staff has determined that it has now been more than 120 days since our notification that your application was incomplete. Also, it has been over 30 days since our notification of. our intent to deny your application due to inaction on your incomplete application. To date, the City has not received the requested plans and/or information nor a letter of withdrawal or letter requesting continuance on the matter. Therefore, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.04.020.B, your application has been denied without ore, judice to refile at a later date. This decision shall be final following a ten-day appeal period beginning with the date of this letter. Appeals must be filed in writing with the Planning Commission Secretan/, state the reason for the appeal. and be accompanied by a $62 appeal fee. As a result of this action, the use of the subject site as a church assembly facility must cease until the required conditional use permit and building permits have been approved and inspected for final compliance with City regulations. Should you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitale to contact Alan Warren. project planner. at (909) 477-2750. Sincerely. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION City Planner BB:AW/jfs cc: Karen Mosley. Public Service Technician Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer Richard Alcorn, Code Enforcement Supervisor Jim Schroeder, Building Inspection Supervisor ':5,:;: C v': Cerr~r Dn,,'e · /','3r:':c ,Suc.o'T'."';:~ :-'. ;: 7_;';';Cc,~-:' '-2 '.:? · FAX :-;S'D} 477-2.-:~ RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AFFIRMING AND UPHOLDING THE CITY PLANNER'S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-12 BECAUSE OF AN INCOMPLETE APPLICATION, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 209-171-57. A. Recitals. 1. On June 17, 1998, Pastor Gloria Haywood submitted Conditional Use Permit No. 98-12 on behalf of the Center of His Will Christian Faith Center, Inc. to operate a church facility in an existing multi-tenant industrial complex at 9330 Seventh Street, Unit "G." Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit application is referred to as "the application." 2. On July 6, 1998, a letter of application incompleteness was sent by the City to the applicant requesting additional information regarding the application and surrounding uses. 3. On November 16, 1998, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.04.020.B, the City Planner denied the application without prejudice because of the incompleteness of the application. 4. On November 23, 1998, Pastor Gloria Haywood filed an appeal of the City Planner's denial of the application. 5. On March 23, 1999, 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. 6. 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 the substantial evidence presented to this Commission at the above- referenced public hearing on March 23, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The use in question, a church facility, may be authorized at the location requested in Subarea 3 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan (ISP) subject to conditional use permit approval as specified in Table li1-1 of the ISP; and b. That the applicant submitted an incomplete conditional use permit application and was informed of the incomplete items within 30 days of the application submittal; and c. Development Code Section 17.04.020.A.3 requires the applicant to respond to incompleteness items within sixty (60) days of the notice of incompleteness. The applicant has not submitted the requested information. - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. APPEAL OF CUP 98-12 - HAYWOOD March 23, 1999 Page 2 d. Development Code Section 17.04.020.B allows for denial of applications when information is not provided within the time period specified by the Development Code. Information whose absence would constitute a reason for such denial includes (17.04.020.B. 1 .o): "Information without which the City's decision to approve a project would not be supported by substantial evidence." e. That the applicant has not provided the information requested to make the application complete and, as a result, the processing of the application has not progressed to a point where the City may hold the required public hearing; and 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 applicant has not provided sufficient information in order for the City to make a determination of the compatibility of the use with the surrounding land uses; and b. That the applicant has been given more than sufficient time to gather and submit the requested application information. 4. Based upon the finding~ and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby denies the requested appeal of the City Planner's decision and reaffirms his determination to deny the subject application without prejudice to reapply for the same permit. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH 1999 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do 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 23rd day of March 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: