HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996/11/13 - Agenda PacketCITY OF RANCH() CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 13, 1996 7:00 PM
Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center
Council CharnbE;r
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California
I. CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
Chairman Barker __ Vice Chairman McNiel _
Commissioner Bethel __ Commissioner Macias __ Commissioner Tolstoy __
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting of September 11, 1996
October 9, 1996
October 23, 1996
Adjourned Meeting of October 23, 1996
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be ~utine and non-
controversial. They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without
d~scussion. If anyone has conGem over any item, it should be removed for
discussion.
A. VACATION OF NON-BUILDABLE EASEMENTS RECORDED WITH
TRACT NO. 14365 WHICH AFFECT TRACT NO. 15526 - LEWIS
DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to find the vacation of portions of
three non-buildable easements in conformance with the General Plan
- APN: 1077-821-53.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice
their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman
and address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions
shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after
speaking.
B. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the antenna regulations in all
zones to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission
recent regulations. (Continued from October 9, 1996) (TO BE
CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 11, 1996)
C. INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-04 - CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the antenna
regulations in all zones to be consistent with Federal Communications
Commission recent regulations. (Continued from October 9, 1996)
(TO BE CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 11, '1996)
D. SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the antenna
regulations to be consistent with Federal Communications
Commission recent regulations. (Continued from October 9, 1996)
(TO BE CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 11, 1996)
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
14972 - BOVVMAN - A subdivision of 1.278 acres of land into 2 parcels
within the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area
Specific Plan, located on the east side of Utica Avenue north of Jersey
Boulevard - APN: 209-491-22. Staff has prepared a Negative
Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR - A request to develop 264
apartments, with a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2 acres of
land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone in
Page 2
the Victoria Planned Community and consideration of a request to
vacate Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street known as
Hanley Avenue, located on the north side of Base Line Road,
approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane. Staff has prepared
a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for
consideration. APN: 227-091-14, 15, and 227-111-12, 13. Related
file: Tree Removal Permit 96-13.
VI, PUBLIC COMMENI'S
This is the time and place forthe general public to address the Commission. Items
to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda.
VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS
G. COMMERCIAL LAND USE STUDY DISCUSSION - (No report)
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00
p.m. adjournment time. If iterns go beyond that time, they shall b~; heard only with
tha Consent of the Commission.
The Planning Commission will adjourn to a workshop
immediately following in the De Anza Room regarding
Pre-Application Review 96-05.
I, Gaff Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the
foregoing agenda was posted on November 7, 1996, at least 72 hours prior
to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center
Drive, Rancho Cucamonga.
Page 3
VICINITY MAP
· ' '1
,
\
· I
· A' CITY HALL
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
DATE: November 13, 1996 STAFF REPORT
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer
BY: Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: VACATION OF NON-BLrILDABLE EASEMEN'FS RECORDED WITH TRACT NO. 14365
WHICH AI~'!~'ECT TRACT NO. 15526 - A request to find the vacation of portions of three non-
buildable easements in conformante with the General Plan - APN 1077-821-53
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
On December 12, 1990, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract 14365 with a condition that the final
map delineate a 10-foot minimum building restriction area on each lot adjoining a zero lot line. Tract 14365 ~as
recorded on April 28, 1992 (Exhibit "B"). On said map, the owner .dedicated and the City accepted "the right to
the construction of (residential) buildings (or other structures) within those areas designated as building
restriction areas."
On May 14, 1993, Lot Line Adjustment No. 368 (Exhibit "C") was recorded. LLA 368 shifted the east property
line westerly adjacent to lots 34, 35 and 36 of Tract 14365. As a result of the lot line adjustment this silver of land
was ncluded in Tentative Tract 15526 (Exhibit "D"), approved by the Planning Commission on September 8, 1993.
The final map for Tract 15526 was approved by the City Council on August 21, 1996, and recorded September 6,
1996. The applicant's title company has determined it is necessary to vacate those portions of the original building
restriction areas which are no longer applicable as a result of the lot line adjustment which occurred after
recordation of Tract 14365 (Exhibit "E").
Staff recommends the Planning Commission make the finding through minute action that the proposed vacation
by the City of portions of three non-buildable easements, established by Tract 14365 but now a part of Tract 15526,
is in conformance with the General Plan. This finding wilI be for~varded to the City Council for further processing
and final approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Senior Civil Engineer
Attachments: Vicinity Map (Exhibit "A")
Tract 14365 (Exhibit "B")
Lot Line Adjustment No. 368 (Exhibit "C")
Tract 15526 (Exhibit "D")
Vacation Areas (Exhibit "E")
ITEM a
BASELINE
UJ
>.
RENAINDER PARCEL
,._.4 z,', .o POR. OF L'OT 1, z
TR. NO. 2202
59 ,--.
as M.B. 3~157 & 57 IIB
, OJ ~m 26
r~
~-
,.. ..........,~ ....
ro(~.' P.n. B. 132127-29
- N
CI~F~z OF ]"~F~,~: ~AsF_/~F-~T ,VACAT/ON'
RANCH0 CUCAMONGA TFfZ~,: TP-AGT
~INGII~,ERING DIV'ngION EXF~IT:
As
TR,. NO. 12671-1,
/
/ /
' / M.B. 201/84--86
'<//
247/89-91 /
J ~ ~0
' ~ / ~ / / ~ ~ ~ ':~' '~o'
' "~"/~/ i
,., , ~ / I~ --
~ ~, ~ J8 AUlATA DRIVE Z
PARCEL ~AP NO. 102g5,
P.~.B. 132-/27-29 NT5
N
R~CHO CUC~0NGA ~,~r TRacT
~G~~G D~ON
" ~E .IP~TAIL OF
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNZ J c"'O
PARCEL "A" EAST LINE PCL. 'I'. CERT.
OOMPLI,NCE FO.
N0. 388, INST. L0 LIE AOJ. L~
COR PCL. "H". CERT. OF
COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE
13'0I'W I~ ~OJ. NO. 368. INST. NO. g3-20721g
NW C0R PCL.
COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE -- 83'30'24'~ 2.31 ~
NO. 358. INST. NO. 93-2072~S EAST LINE PCL. 'H'. CERT. OF
COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE AOJ.
N 25' 13'01'W . 358. INST. N0. g3-20721g
POINT 0F 8EGI 29'52'37': 10.89
PARCEL "A" & "8'
~ "B"
N 25' ~'0~ 'W
N~ COR PCL, 'G'. CERT. 0F
COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE
J. N0, 358. INST, NO. ~3-20721~
NW COR PCL. 'G'. CERT. 0F
~ E~ST LINE PCL, 'G'. CERT. OF
COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE AOJ.
POINT 0F BEGINNING / s 29'52'37'~ 10.89
PARCEL "C" ~
PARCEL "C"
-- '3 ' ' , '
EXHIBIT "B" '
0.52t
TITLE: VACATTDt'J A,4_EA 5 AZ~ __/TIER: ~AS~MENT VACATION
CITY OF RANCZHO CUCAtMONGA ' ~
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 13, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
A request to amend the antenna regulations in all zones to be consistent with
Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. (Continued from October
9, 1996)
INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMEENDMENT 96-04 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the antenna regulations in all zones to be
consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations.
(Continued from October 9, 1996)
SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the anlenna regulations to be consistent with
Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. (Continued from October
9, 1996)
These items were continued from October 9, 1996. Staff recommends that they be continued to
December 11, 1996, to allow additional time for the City Attorney's office and staff to revise the
Ordinances.
Respectfully submitted,
BB:DC/jfs
,
ITEM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~MONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 13, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission,
FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: ENVIRON1VENTAL ASSESSMENT AN3D TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14972
- BOWlVlAN - A subdivision of 1.278 acres offand into 2 parcels within the General
Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the east
side of Utica Avenue noah of Jersey Boulevard - APN 209-491-22. Staff has
prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map as shown on Exhibit
B. Existina Zoning: General Industrial (Subarea 8 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan)
C. Surroundino. Land Use and Zonina:
North - Industrial
South - Industrial
East - Industrial
West - Industrial
D. Surroundina General Plan and Development Code Desianations:
Project Site - General Industrial
Noah * General Industrial
South - General Industrial
East General Industrial
West - General Industrial
E. Site Characteristics: The property fronts Utica Avenue and is fully developed with two
industrial buildings.
ITEM~E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PARCEL MAP 14972 - BOWMAN
November 13, 1996
Page 2
ANALYSIS
The property is currently fully developed with two industrial buildings and parking. The proposed
Parcel Map will subdivide the property into two parcels, each with an industrial building and
parking.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
In completing the Initiil Study, staff determined that the project will have no environmental impacts.
CORRESPONDENCE:
This item has been advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the
property has been posted, and notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project
site.
RECOMMENDATION,:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all input and elements of the Tentative
Parcel Map 14972. If after such consideration, the Commission deems appropriate, then the
adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval would be in order.
Respectfully submined,
DS~ee~
Senior Civil Engineer
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Plan/Parcel Map
Exhibit "B" - Vicinity Ivlap
Envirommental Assessment: Part I and Part II
Resolution and Recommended Conditions of Approval
TEN TA El VE
,,,~,.,.~,,~.~,.,,,~: I:::IAI:::!r':-EEL MAP NO. 1497::::s
·.. ..,::d:...,=-,~......,",-."r",.....,-, ~ -] ,. ,.-,.,..,.,.,~ .,,.,..,,..,,.,,.: , ,o.-~. ;,-.._
.......... ' ' ' ...... .... "' ' .... (D-
'~' ~' I~ ' ' .... t ~'~11"
; ;; ,: .' ...........................
CITYOF
RANCH0 CUCAMONGA ~ ITEM: Site Plan
ENGINEERING DIVISION TITLE: TPM 14972
EXHIBIT: "A"
CITY OF
RANCH0 CUCAMONGA ~ ITEM: Vicinity Map
ENGINEERING DIVISION TITLE: TPM 14972
EXHIBIT:
The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of
the proposed project so that the City may review the project pursuant to City
policies, ordinances, and guidelinesl the California Environmental Quality
Act; and the City's Rules and Procedures to Implement CEQA- It is importan~
that the information requested in this application be provided in fulll
INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCES:SED. Please note that it is the '..
responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at ·
the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work:-'i
required to provide missing information.
GEIR~RAL INFORMATION
Application Number for the project to which this form pertains:
Project Title: Tentative Parcel Map N0. 14972
Name & Address of project owner(s): Mr. Peter Bowman
1Latig0 Lane
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
Name & Address Of developer or project sponsor:
Kevin Knox dba The Fifth Day,
741 East Ball Road, Suite 202
Anaheim, CA 92805
Contact Person & Address: Same as sp0nser
Telephone Number: 714-991-1727, Fax 714-991-1729
Name & Address of person preparing this form (if different from above):
Telephone Number:
C I T Y o f R A N (~_,,~D C U C A M O N G A
PROJECT INFORMATION & DESCRIPTION
Information indicated by asterisk (') is not required of non-construction
CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff.
Provide a full scale (8-1/2 X 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s)
which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries.
2) Provide a set of color photographs which show representative views into
the site from the north, south, east and west; views into and from the
site from the primary access points which serve the site; and
representative views of significant features from the site. Include a
map showing location of each photograph-
3) Project Location (describe): 8677-g6g7 Utica Avenue
4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary):
209-491-22
*5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft-): 1.278 acres
Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed
dedications):
1.278 acres
7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would
affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary):
None Required
8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the
City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental agencies in order to
fully implement the project:
Approval of Tentative and Final MaDs,
No Physical construction proposed
9) Describe the physical setting 0f the site as it exists before the
project including information on topography, soil stability, plants and
animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainag~ courses, and scenic
aspects. Describe any existing structures on site (including age and'
condition) and the use of the structures. Attach photographs- of
significant features described. In addition, site all sources of
lnformatid~ (i-e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and
archeological surveys, traffic studies):
The site consists of two free-standing concrete tilt~up industrial
buildings on a single 1.278 acre site.. The site is fully improved and
occupied by-!tenants. The site drains to the west via exi'sting c0ncretp
drainage structures exiting to Utica Avenue and the existing storm drain
system. The buildings are currently served by all utilities. The bui]d-
on Proposed Parcel 2 is approximately 10 years of age while the building
on Proposed Parcel 1 is newer, approximately 7 years old. The site is
fu]]~ landscaped and each building is protected ~.y Fire Supression Fire
Sprinklers.
Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of .the site. Site
all sources of information (books, published reports and oral history):
None Known
Describe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site
(aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses:
Roadway traffic noise from Utica Avenue. No change from existing
configuration as a result of this proposal,
12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an
adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use which will
result from the proposed project- Indicate if there are proposed phases
for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and
the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional
sheet(s) if necessary:
The project is a two lot subdivision for conveyance and finaDding mlrpn~eS.
13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and
~.. animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects- Indicate the
type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use
(one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc-) and scale
of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.):
Properties to the north~ east~ and south are currently developed as
General Industrial buildinqs similar in size and activities as those on
the subject site. The properties to the west are currently vacant and
will ultimately be developed in a similar fashion. This proposal does not
propose any additional construction or alteration of the existinq improvements]
14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale or character of the
surrounding general area of the project?
N0,
15) Indicate the type of short-term ~nd long-term noise to be ~enerated,
including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect
adjacent properties and on-site uses- What method~ of sound proofing
are proposed?
None Known or anticipated as a result ~f this ProPOSal.
Indicate proposed removals and/or .replacements of mature or scenic
trees:
None Proposed.
17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into
which the site drains:
Project Site is currently served by storm drainage system.
18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage
estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga
County Water District at 987-259~.
a- Residential (gal/day) NYA Peak use (gal/day)
b- Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) FXi~t'gPeak use (gal/min/ac)
Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. Septic Tank F×iq~ing
Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests- If
discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected
daily sewage generation: (see Attachment A for usage estimates). For
further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga County Water
District at 987-259~-
a. Residential (gal/day) N/A
b- Industrial/Commercial (gal/day/ac) Existing
RESIDENTIAL P~DJT~CTS
20) Number of residential units:
Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum
lot size:
N/A
Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units):
N/A
2~) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents:
Sale Price(s) $ N/A to S
Rent (per month) $ N/A to $
22) specify num]~er of bedrooms by unit type: N/A
23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type:
24 Indicate the expected number of school children who will Be residing
within the project: Contact the appropriate School Districts as show~
in Attachment B:
a. Elementary: N/A
b. Junior High: N/A
c- Senior High: N/A
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND INSTI-iVrIC~4AL
25) Describe type Of use(s and major function(s) of commercial, industrial
or institutional uses:
The project site c0ns]stes of two existing industrial buildings for ]ease.
0ne of the two structures is currently occupied.
26) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by
type:
As to Proposed Parcel 1, Existing structure is 10,870 sq.ft.
As to Proposed Parcel 2, Existing structure is 12,07~ sq.ft.
27) indicate hours of operation: Unknown (N/A)
28) Number of employees: Total: N/A
Maximum Shift:
Time of Maximum Shift:
29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and
salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each
classification (attach additional sheet if necessary):
N/A
30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in
the City:
N/A
'31) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type and
amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be verified through the
South Coast Air Quality Management District, at (818) 572-6283):
N/A
32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the
project been contacted to determine their ability to provide adequate
service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their
response.
Project is currently served.by all utilities and facilities.
33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage,
or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous
and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB'S~
radioactive substances: pesticides and herbicides; fuel, oils, solvents,
and other flammable liquids and gases. Also, note underground storage
of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use,
storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use,
if known.
None Known.
34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use,
storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, including But
not limited to those examples listed above? If yes, provide an
inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of
disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and
shipment areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans.
None anticipated.
if hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached
exhibits present the data and information required for ade~/uate evaluation of
this project to the best of my ability, that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
. belief. I further understand that additional information may be reguired to
be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
Date: Signature:
K
Title: Principal
ATTACHMENT A
Water Usage
Average use per day
Residential
Single Family 600 gal/day
Apt/Condo 400 gal/day
Cx~,_ercial/Iudustrial
General and Regional Commercial 3000 gal/day/ac
Neighborhood Commercial 1500 gal/day/ac
General Industrial 1500 gat/day/ac
Industrial Park 3000 gal/day/ac
Peak Usage
For all uses
Average use X 2-0
Sewer Flows
Residential
Single Family 270 gal/day
Apt/Condos 200 gal/day
Ccemercial/Industrial
General Commercial 2000 gal/day/ac
Neighborhood Commercial 1000-1500 gal/day/ac
General Industrial 2000 gal/day/ac
Heavy Industrial 3000 gal/day/ac
Source= Cucamonga County Water District Master Plan, 9/86
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1) Project File #/Name: Tentative Parcel Map 14792
2) Related Files: None
3) Applicant: Bowman
Address: 1 Latigo Lane, Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
Telephone #:(310) 373-4605
4) Project Description: A-subdivision of a developed industrial property into two parcels
5) Project Accepted as Complete (date): September 18, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, explanation of the potential
impacts identified as "Yes" or "Maybe" answers are required. An explanation shall also be provided in each
instance where a potentially significant effect has been determined not to be significant and is marked
Yes Maybe N__~o
EARTH - W~// the proposa/ result in:
a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in the geologic structure? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction or over covering of the soil? ( ) ( ) (.X)
c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features? ( ) ( ) (X)
d) The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical
features? ( ) ( ) (X)
~) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? ( ) ( ) (.X)
f ) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sand, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? ( ) ( ) (X)
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
II. AIR - Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) The creation of objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Alteration of air movement moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally? ( ) ( ) (.X)
SUBSTANTIA hON:
Ill. WATER - Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either
marine or fresh waters? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Changes in the absorption rate, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface runoff? ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? ( ) ( ) (X)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? ( ) ( ) (X)
e) Discharge into surface waters, or in alteration of surface water quality, including,
but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? ( ) ( ) (X)
f) Alteration of the direction or rate of ground waters? ( ) ( ) . (X)
g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ( ) ( ) (X)
h) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water
supplies? ( ) ( ) (X)
I) Exposure of people or propeFty to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal
pools? ( ) ( ) r.X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
IV. PLANT LIFE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Reduction in the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? ( ) ( ) (X)
c)Introduction of new species of plants into an area or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?
d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural ~:rop? ( ) ( ) r.X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
V. ANIMAL LIFE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, including reptiles, fish and shellfish benthic organisms or
insects)? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of
animals? ( ) ( ) r.X)
c) Introduction of any new species of animals into the area or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals? ( ) ( ) (X)
d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
Vll. LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposah
a) Produce new light and glare? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
LAND USE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? ( ) ( ) (.X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
IX. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
X. RISK OF UPSET - Will the proposal involve:
a) A risk of explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to, oil, pesticicles, chemicals or radiation) in the ew;nt of an accident or
upset conditions? ( ) ( )' CX)
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) (X)
$UBSTANTIATION:
Xl. POPULATION - Will the proposah
a) Alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population
of an area? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
:11. HOUSING - Will the proposal.'
a) ,Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
XIII. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION - Will the proposal result in:
a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? ( ) ( ) (X)
· b) Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? ( ) ( ) (X)
C) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? ( ) ( ) (X)
d) Alterations to the present pattems of circulation or movement of people and/or
goods? ( ) ( ) (X)
e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? ( ) ( ) (X)
f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES - Will 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? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) (X)
3
d) Parks and'other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) (X)
e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) [X)
f) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBS TA NTIA TION:
XV. ENERGY - Will the proposal result in:
a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the
development of new sources of energy? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
XVI. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS - Will the proposal result in a need for new
systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural ga';? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Communications systems? ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Water? ( ) ( )
d) Sewer or septic tanks?
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (X)
f)' Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
XVII. HUMAN HEALTH - Will the proposal result in:
a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental
health)? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
XVIil. AESTHETICS ~ Will the proposal result in:
a) The obstructibn of any scenic vista or view open to the public? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
XIX. RECREATION - Will the proposal result in:
a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
XX. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in:
a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic
archeological site? ( ) ( ) (X),
b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure or object? ( ) ( ) CX)
c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique
ethnic, cultural values? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
XXI. 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
restdct the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve shotNorm, to the
disadvantage of Iongcterm, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a relatively bdef, definite period of time.
Long-term impacts well endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate
resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the
effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) ( ) ( ) (.X)
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will
· cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly? ( ) ( ) (X)
SUBSTANTIATION:
XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) -
The subdivision being a split of a fully developed industrial parcel is not expected to have any
environmental impacts.
XXIII. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS (Examine whether the project would be consistent with existing
zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls) -
'fhe subject two (2) lot industrial subdivision is consistent with the General Plan, the Industrial Area Specific
Plan and with the zoning for the area in which it is Iocatec'..
XXIV. 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). In this case a discussion should identify the following on
attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used - Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed - Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
c) Mitigation measures - For effects that are "less than significant with mitigation incorporated,"
descdbe the mitigation measures which were incorflorated or refined from the eadier document and
the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
XXV. DETERMINATION - On the basis of this initial evaluation:
a) I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared ....................................................................
b) 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 mitigation measures described on the attached
sheets have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will ne prepared ................................................................... ( )
c) I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment.
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required .........................................................(
Prepyer's Signat4,Jre - J
Date
XXVI. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION (To be completed by applicant) -
I certifythat I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study, I acknowledge that I have read this
Initial Study and 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
RECEIVED OCT 17 1996
Print Name and Title
Date
h:~nvironrnentaJ~envcheck,pt2
RESOLUTION NC).
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14972, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
UTICA AVENUE, NORTH OF JERSEY BOULEVARD, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 209-491-22
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 14972, submitted by Mr. Peter Bowman,
applicant, for the purpose of subdividing into lwo parcels, the real properly situated in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardtrio, State of California. identified as APN 209-491-22,
located on the east side of Utica Avenue north of Jersey :Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 1996, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public
hearing for the above-described map.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVES
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
a. That the map is consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Plan.
b. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the Industrial Area
Specific Plan and the General Plan.
c. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed subdivision.
d. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial
environmental damage or public health problems or have adverse effects on abutting properties.
SECTION 2: 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 Cal[fomia
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, fuEher, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Negative Deolaration with regard to the application.
b. That, based upon the changes and alteration 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.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PARCEL MAP 14972 - BOWMAN
November 13, 1996
Page 2
SECTION 3: Tentative Parcel Map Number 14972 is hereby approved subject to the
attached Standard Conditions and the following Special Conditions:
Enqineerinq Division:
1) The ddve approach shall be reconstructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer,
to be handicap accessible.
2) A "No Parking" sign shall be installed on existing street light.
3) All conditions shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior
to recordation of the final map or a cash deposit shall be made in the amount of
150 percent of the estimated cost of the improvements at the time of final map
recordation.
Building & Safety Division:
1 ) Fence and access gate must conform to RCFD Standards (Ordinance 22) applicant
must submit site plan in accordance with RCFD Ordinance 22.
2) Provide access agreement between owners.
Grading Section:
1) The drainage easement shall be redefined to encompass the flows from the site.
Cucamonqa County Water District:
1) An agreement shall be prepared providing for payment of bi-monthly bills for fire
service and landscape meter.
SECTION 4: The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PARCEL MAP 14972 - BOWMAN
November 13, 1996
Page 3
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 13th day of November 1996, by !~he following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
'rgNrA'r v-g PARCEL 14c) 2--
Those items checked are Conditions of ADnraval.
A. Dedications and Vehicular Access
~ 1. Rights-of-way and easements shah be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails,
public pancos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance and pfiblic
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 tentati;'e map.
__ 2. Dedication shall be made of the following righu-of-way for the perimeter streets (measured from street
centerline):
total feet on
total feet on
total feet on
total feet on
3. An irrevocable offer of dedication for roadway purposes shall be made for the private streets.
4. Corner property, line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards.
5. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved
openings:
Z 6. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by C C & R's or by deeds and
shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the final parcel map.
x/ 7. Reciprocal parking agreements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensurin,, joint maintenance
of all common roads, drives, or parking areas shall be provided by C C & R's or deeds and shall be
recorded prior to or concurrent with the final parcel map.
__ 8. All existing easements lying within future right-of-way are to be quitclaimed or delineated on the final
parcel map per the City Engineer's requirements.
~ 9. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be
dedicated to the City.
x/ 10. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the
final parcel map.
I I. 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 parallel
street tree easement shah be provided.
12. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquEre the required off-site propert}.' interests necessa~'
to construct the required public improvements and, if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall at
least 120 days prior to submittal of the final parcel map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete
the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the
property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the
developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property. interests required in connection
with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the
amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developer's cost. The appraiser shall
have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. This condition applies in
particular, but not limited, to:
B. Street Improvements
I. All public improvements, (interior streets, dra nage fa :ilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas,
etc. ) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street
improvements shah include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches.
sidewalks, street lights, and street trees.
~ 2. A minimum, of 26-foot '.vide pavement v.'ithln a 40- foot wide dedicated right-of-way shale be constructed
for atl half-section streets.
__ 3. Construct the following missing perimeter street improvements including. but not limited to:
Street Name Curb AC Side- Drive Str.-et S~.'eet Cornre. Median Bike Other
Gutter
I
Notes: (a) Median [sinrid includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pa"ement reconst~ction and overlays ;vi be
determined during plan check. (c) If so marked. sidewalk will be cur,'ilinear pcr STD. ~114. {d) if so marked. an in-lieu
ofconstrucIion fee shall be provided [br this item.
,/
__ 4. improvement Plans and Construction:
a. 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 Ci;'il Engineer and shall be
submitted to and approved by the Ci.ry Engineer. Securi~' shah be posted and an agreement executed to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Ci~' Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or
private street improvements, prior to finaI parcel map approval.
b. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, fees shalI be pad and a construction
permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's office in addition to an>' other permits required.
c. Pavemen strip ng, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect
conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pulI 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 str~*eu. a maximum of 200 feel apart, unless othenvis~
specified by the C y Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at inters~clions), or 2-inch (~[ong streeu) galvanized steel
with pullrope or as specified.
e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on ale comers of intersections per City Standards or as
directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours
during conjrmction. Street or lane closure permiu 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.
g. 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 b,v the City Planner prior to submittal For first plan check.
5. Street improvement plans per City Standards For all private streets shah be provided for review and
approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be paid and
construction permits shall be obtained from the Ci~' Engineer's office in addition to an>' other permits required.
6. Street trees, a minimum of I5 - gallon size or larger shall be installed per City Standards in accordance
with the City's stree tree program.
7. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the Ci~' Eng neer for conformance with adopted
policy. On collector or larger street, 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.
8. A Permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS (or any work within the following right-of-way:
9. All public improvements on the following streets shah be operationally complete prior to the issuance of
building permits.
C. Public Maintenance Areas
1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public x, Vorks Standards shall be subm ined
to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final parcel map approval The following landscaped
parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails, or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance
District:
2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts
shah be flied with the Ci~ Engineer prior to final parcel map approval. Formation costs shall be borne by the
developer.
3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer
until accepted by the City..
4. Park',~'ay landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification
Master Plan:
D. Drainage and Flood Control
__ 1. The project (or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, flood protection
measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and apprnved by the Ci~ Eng neer.
__ 2. [t shall be the developer's responsibility to have the cu,Tent FiRM Zone designation removed from
the project area. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessap,.' reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydrau c
calculations. A Conditional Lener of Map Revision (CLOMR) shah be obtained from FEMA, prior to
final parcel map approval. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy
or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first.
3. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City. Engineer pr or o final parcel
map approval. All drainage facilities shall be installed as ri:quired by the City Eng ricer.
4. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the propert.,,'
from adjacent areas.
5. A permit from the San Bemardino County Flood Control District is required for work within it's ri~,ht-of-
way.
__ 6. 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.
7. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey everflows n the event of blockage in a sump catch
basin on a public street.
4
E. Imorovement Completion
I. If the required public knpros'ements are not completed prior to approva of the final parcel map, an
improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the Developer and the City. will be required
for:
2. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, an
improvement certificate shall be placed upon the final parcel map, stating that the>' will be completed upon
development for:
F. .Utilities -
__ I. 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 Util ty S andards Easements shall
be provided as required.
2. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet requiremenu of the Cucamonga County
Water District (CC~,~'T)), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health
Department of the County of San Bemardino. A letter of compliance from CCWD is required prior to final
parcel map approval.
3. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of
the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them.
4. The developer shall be responsible for the relocatinn of existing utilities as necessary,.
G. General Requirements and Approvals
N// I. The tentative map approval is valid for the 94 month period following, the approval date. Time extensions
may be granted by the Planning Commission, ifrequested prior to the expiration date.
__ 2. Final grading plans for each parcel shall be as required by the Bud ng and Safety Division prior to
issuance of grading permits.
3. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (C C & R's) approved bv the City Anomev is
required prior to approval of the final parcel map.
4. An easement for a joint use driveway sha be provided prior to final parcel map approval for:
5. Prior to approval of the final parcel map a deposit shall be posted with the CiLy covering the estimated cost
of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District , among the newly created parcels.
6. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new
street lights for the first 6 months of operation, prior to final parcel map approval.
5
7. Prior to fmalization of any deve opment phase, suffic ent reprovemeat plans shall be completed beyond
the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the Ci~' Engineer.
Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map.
8. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan Drainage Fees shall
be paid prioi' to final parcel map approval.
9. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right-of-way.
10. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the Law Enforcement Communi~ Facilities District
shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final parcel map approval. Formation costs shall be borne by the
developer. '-
I I. Prior to recordalton of the final parcel map, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the
establishment ofa Mel[o-Roos Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary
school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities
District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of
such existing district prior to the recordalton of the final p;~rcel map. Further, if the affected school district has
not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of
the project and prior to the recordalton of the final parcel map for said project, this condition shall be deemed
null and void.
This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have
entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project.
12. Me~~~R~~sC~mmunityFaci~itiesDistrictrequirementsf~rtheRanch~Cucam~ngaFirePr~tecti~nDistr~ct
shall apply to this project.
13. Pursuant to provisions of California Resources Code Section 21089(b), this application shah not be
operative, vested or final, nor will building permits be issued or a map recorded. until (1) the Notice of
Determination (NOD) regarding the associated environmental action in filed and posted with Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardtrio; and (2) any and all required handling charges, are paid to the
County. Clerk of the County of San Bemardino. 'l'ne applicant shall provide the Engineering Depara'nent with
a stamped and copy of the NOD together with a receipt showing that all fees have been paid.
In the event this application is determined exempt from such filing fees pursuant to the provision of
the California Code, or the guidelines promulgated theretlnder except for pa,.Tnent Ofany required handling
charge for filing a Certificate of Fee Exemption, this condition shall be deemed null and void.
Rev. 10/14/96 G ~q
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' ~
STAFF RF, PORT
DATE: November 13, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 -
MARK TAYLOR INC - A request to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium
subdivision map, on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium residential (8-14 dwelling
units per acre) zone in the Victoria Planned Community and consideration of a
request to vacate Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street known as
Hanley Avenue, 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, 13.
Related File: Tree Removal Permit 96-13
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Proiect Density: 11.9 dwelling units per acre.
B. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq:
North Former rail line and single family residential; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling
units per acre)
South - Winery; High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre)
East Apartments and shopping center; Medium High Residential (14-24 dwelling units
per acre) and Village Commercial
West Mini-storage; Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre)
C. General Plan Desiqnations:
Project Site - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre)
North Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
South - High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre)
East Medium High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre)
West Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre)
D, Site Characteristics: The site is an abandoned vineyard. The row of trees along the northerly
boundary is primarily a Eucalyptus windrow. The land slopes from north to south at a 3-4
percent grade.
ITEM
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 2
E. Parking Calculations:
Number of Number of
Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces
of Use Footaqe Ratio Required Provided
96 Apadments 1 bedroom 1.5/unit 144
120 Apartments 2 bedroom 1.8/unit 216
48 Apartments 3 bedroom 2.0/unit 96
Guest Parking N/A .25/unit 66
TOTAL 522 647
RV Parking NA .20/unit 53 53
BACKGROUND: The applicant first appeared before the Planning Commission on
January 24, 1996, for a use determination (see minutes attached as Exhibit "J"). The issue was
whether the Victoria Community Plan allows apartments. The Plan allows "single family dwellings -
attached or detached, including, but not limited to townhouses, triplexes, fourplexes, and
condominiums." The consensus of the Commission was that the applicant could proceed by filing
a condominium map.
The Planning Commission conducted a Pre-Application Review of the initial design concepts on
February 14, 1996. Commissioners expressed design concerns with architecture, density. size of
open space areas, and the use of a single trash compactor in lieu of individual trash enclosures
conveniently located throughout the project. The minutes of this meeting are attached (see Exhibit
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant is proposing to build 1, 2, and 3 bedroom apartments surrounding a
central open space system featuring an exercise building, large open lawn areas, tot lots, and
barbeque facilities. The project will be secured with a gated entry system and architeGtural[y
designed guardhouses and porte cocheres, as well as the Victoria theme walls. Access to
the project will be provided from Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue (a new cuPde-sac
street).
B. Desiqn Review Committee: The Committee (Macins, Tolstoy, Fong) reviewed the project on
October 15, 1996. and recommended changes. The applicant submitted revised plans
addressing the Committee's recommendations, including architectural enhancements and
providing eight trash enclosures throughout the project. The revised project was reviewed
by the Committee (Macins, McNiel, Fong) on November 5, 1996, and recommended for
approval subject to minor revisions. The recommendations are listed in the attached Design
Review Committee minutes (see Exhibit "H"). All of the Committee's November 5
recommendations have been included as conditions of approval.
During the Pre-Application Review, some Commissioners expressed the desire for a Victorian
style of architecture to blend with the style used on the two projects on either side along Base
Line Road. The Design Review Committee felt that the proposed Mediterranean style of
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
V I I 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 3
architecture (stucco with tile roofs) was consistent ~vith the neighborhood. The Committee
noted that the adjoining Crescent Heights apartments were Mediterranean style, as were
many of the single family homes to the north.
C. Technical Review & Gradinq Committee: The Technical Review and Grading Committees
reviewed the project on October 16 and October 2;.TM, 1996, respectively. The Committees
determined that the project design, together with the recommended conditions of approval,
is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances.
D. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed the Initial Study Part II (see Exhibit "1").
Staff relied. in part, upon earlier analyses, including the Victoria Planned Community
Environmental_Impact Report (EIR), the City's General Plan EIR, and the Master
Environmental Assessment for the 1989 Update o~! the General Plan. In addition, traffic
impact analysis, acoustical analysis, and arborist reports were prepared for the project. Staff
identified the following potential impacts:
Schools - The project will generate students at all grade levels. Both affected school districts
have indicated current impaction problems and have asked the developer to participate in the
Chaffey Joint Union High School District's Mello-Roos District and pay school fees to the
Etiwanda School District to fund needed school facilities. Therefore, the impact is considered
to be reduced to a level of not significant.
Water- The project will reduce absorption rate and increase the amount of surface water
runoff due to buildings and paving. As a mitigation, the developer will construct a private
drainage system to connect with an extension to thE; existing storm drain across the entire
Base Line Road frontage and remove the existing ::nterim storm drains across Base Line
Road.
Plant Life ~ The project will remove a row of 18 trees along the northerly boundary. As a
mitigation, the developer will replant the row of trees with a more appropriate Eucalyptus
variety to maintain the windrow character.
Noise - The project is exposed to traffic noise levels along Base Line Road which are
estimated to exceed City standards. The project design includes 7-foot high sound walls.
As a mitigation, the developer will also construct (S-foot sound barriers for second floor
balconies. In addition, special glazing and construction techniques will be required to attain
acceptable interior noise levels.
Traffic - The project will increase traffic on Base Line Road. The project design includes
construction of full street improvements on the northerly side of Base Line Road. As a
mitigation, the developer will be required to incorporate specific design features into the street
improvements and pay transportation development fees as their fair share contribution for
area-wide "backbone" street improvements.
Public SeNices - The project wile increase demands fcr fire and emergency medical ser,zices.
As a mitigation, the developer will be subject to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District
for fire protection.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VTT' 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 4
These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. The developer
has agreed to these mitigations. If the Planning Commission concurs with staffs
recommendations, then issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts
would be in order.
CORRESPONDENCE: The public hearing was advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners in an
expanded area beyond the usual 300-foot radius (see attached Exhibit "A"), including those
residents who attended the neighborhood meeting on October 1, 1996. Ten residents participated
in the meeting and expressed concerns with traffic impacts, school impacts, environmental impacts.
and the impact upon views for existing residents.
RECOMMENDATIOI~: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the project, and
related tree removal permit, through adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with
conditions and issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration.
City Planner
BB:DC/jfs
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map & Notification Boundary
Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map
Exhibit "C" - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit "D" - Site Plan
Exhibit "E" - Landscaping Plan
Exhibit "F" - Grading Plan
Exhibit"G"- Elevations
Exhibit "H" - Design Review Committee Minutes
Exhibit "1" Initial Study Part II
Exhibit "J" Minutes of January 24, 1996, Use Determination 96-01
Exhibit "K" - Minutes of February 14, 1996, Pre-Application Review 96-13
Resolutions of Approval with Conditions
~"TRACT 13873 """:*::: ' * ~.T "' '
. :~ .................
~:~ .- .- .; ......-~- ~2~"'
:~ ~ t II I
o~ ~ ~ ~co TENTATIVE
...... - ............................ TRACT
....... ;':: ................. NO. 15766
........................... TENTATIVE
"PR CT- 3UMMAJRY
, EXTSI'FNC~/~_~.----.~'2.~E01UM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
..j--FJNIT.,~_,~P_,,E_,~' ! t-r'i TOTAL # OF UNITS:
1 BEDROOM ! '4 96
2 BEDROOM ;! ';i 120
!TOTAL UNITS THIS F~ROJE~T 264
TH,s P. p/y BE D ELoPED ,N ONE P,ASE
PARKING ANALYSIS: "'
UNIT TY'PE: ~ PARKING REQUIRED: ~ TOTAL/TYPE RED'D:
1 BEDROOM UNITS 11.5 SPACES/UNIT I 144
2 BEDROOM UNITS 11.8 SPACES/UNIT I 216
5 BEDROOM UNITS I 2 SPACES/UNIT 96
GUEST PARKING I 25% of UNITS t 66
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: 522
of that, GARAGES REQUIRED: 156
of that, CARPORTS REQUIRED: 156
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 647
of that, GARAGES PROVIOED: 156
of thor, CARPORTS PROVIDED: 156
of that, RV PARKING PROVIDED: 53
ACCESSIBLE SPACES: ! I 8
LOT DENSITY:
GROSS LOT AREA: 22.2 ACRES
NET LOT DENSITY: 11.9 DU/ACRES
OPEN SPACE CALCULATION:
ACRES/SQ.F'F. Y~ OF NET AREA
BUILDING COVERAGE: 3.0 1
LANDSCAPE COVERAGE: 11.9. 56.9Y~
VEHICULAR AREA: 5.8 27.7%
COMMON OPEN SPACE: 17.7 84.7%
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 0.2 1.0~
USABLE OPEN SPACE: 17.9 85.6Y,
(COMMON AND PRIVATE)
PLANT PALETTE
:':'.:':'~:'
::::: .......'_-_~7"
:1'-':.'
i.'.','5.'L-'E.: '5.':',':j_.
:-:",?':=;;'.,=
........ :',: 'J:.:;":. .:::: ..........,.~
TEN TA fiVE
TRACT
_._ Z_----~._:~',-~__~, ..... -_ NO. 15766 .....
............. ~_ CONCEPTUAL
LANDSCAPE
PLAN
~/' · ...............
1}()01- IrACII-ITY TYI'ICAI, IH~I)G. CI,US'I'I,:I~,
/ ......
~" ~:~";': :~ :E~ 'V~v~5~ '%' ':.- '~ ....~',-- .....~ ';" ==~ ............
'?~ ,. ' '~ I ' '",/ _..~ "' ' / :.
.,~ .. l_ . ' ~ ""5~';.¢s~ G~ '. "' " NTA BEE
[ ~ SITE
AMENITY
PI{IMAI{Y (;ATEI) ICNTRY TYPICAl, TOT LOT ENLARGEMENTS
FRONT &REAR ELEVATION J~ ....... "95o8
SIDE ELEVATION
FRONT &REAR ELEVATIONS =,~-==..
;..,,; A3..
Exterior E[evations-B]dg 2C . Lo~
REA~ ELEVATION - ~ BAY GARAGE
SIDE ELEVATION (Iyp) CARI'ORT ~' "' 9508
" ~:~'~' "'~': "'~' d If ....... "~" """ ' ' 'J'' '~'~:'~
......... .~_j~ ~i~ 8 Bay Garage Elevation &Carport
p
FRONT & REAR ELEVATION - 6 BAY ~ARACE
"SIDE ~LEVATION
-22-~.: 6
]2 Buy Guru~c E{evnl}on .....
. Lo~
RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION KEY PLAN
~,~":;',..,~.,=- ....................
REAR ELEVATION ~ ','~" . ,'-0'
FRONT ELEVATION
~1,-,~-'~" Reception Building elevations
· Lo~ No.
602'991-9111
LEFT 51DE ELEVATION
,c~c, -~,~.,. ,'-o- 9508
Reception Building Elevations !."l~'¢;t: No.
REAR ELEVATIO~N KEY PLAN
LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
FRONT ELEVATION
Exercise Building Elevations
L~}j~ No.
RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
$c,,~b ~,, ,--o- 9508
Exercise BuiJdin8 Elevations .'~'~ No..
ENTRANCE PORTE COCHERE :~
~c: ~'~' Porte Cochere Elevations , LoU No.
'~=~;~' ....~'~;':"" ....': ':'~! ":" :"'
TYPICAL SCREEN WALL TYPICAL RAMADA ELEVATION
CABANA - LEFT SIDE ELEVATION CABANA - REAR ELEVATION
Cabana, Ramada, Fence Elevations
. I,o~ No. .
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
5:30 p.m. Dan Coleman October 15, 1996
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR - A request to develop 264 apartments,
with a condominium subdivision map, on 222 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14
· .. dwelling units per acre) zone, located in the Victoria Planned Community on the north side of Base
Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-091-14 and 15 and
227-111-12 and 13.
Desiqn Parameters: The site is an abandoned vineyard and slopes from north to south at a 3
percent grade. There is row of trees along the northerly boundary. primarily Eucalyptus. There
are no known cultural resources on the site. To the west is a mini-storage facility, to the east is an
apartment project and an undeveloped phase of the Victoria Village shopping center site, to the
north is an abandoned railroad line, and to the south is a winery. The project is proposed as a
gated community.
Pre-Alaplication Review: This project was the subject of a Pre-Application Review by the Planning
Commission on February 14, 1996. Commissioners expressed design concerns with architecture,
density, size of open space areas. and lack of trash enclosures conveniently located throughout
the project. Minutes of the meeting are attached.
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. Density - The project has been designed at 11.9 dwelling units per acre. The Commission
has traditionally required exceptional design quality for projects desiring to build at the upper
end of the density range. During the Pre-Application Review, density was raised as an issue
as it relates to the design of open space areas and the space between buildings. The project
has been redesigned to meet or exceed all City standards for open space and building
separations. The project density is lower than the density of the apartment project to the east
(15.9 dwelling units per acre).
2. Architectural Style - Commissioners expressed concern that the proposed style was out of
character with the surrounding neighborhood, most notably the Victorian architecture of the
adjoining shopping center. The project's contemporary stucco scheme is similar to the
existing apartments to the east; however, the primary concern is the context along Base Line
Road.
3. Garages - The long garage buildings should be revised to break-up the long roof line.
Suggestions would include varying the roof height or adding intersecting gables. Also.
garage door patterns should be varied.
4. Carports - Their basic "stick-like" appearance is contrary to the City's design guidelines for
multi-family projects. Substantial design elements should be incorporated, such as tile roof
treatment similar to garage buildings and solid end walls..
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
'./-"
DRC COMMENTS
VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
October 15, 1996
Page 3
1. Balconies - For the five buildings along Base Line Road, the acoustical study recommends
a 6-foot high sound wall for all balconies facing the s~:reet. Suggest this be accomplished by
using Lexan panel extensions above the normal patio waft height to achieve the necessary
sound attenuation.
:2. Open Space - Staff believes the open space layout is superior to most multi-family projects
in terms of size and relationship to units. A total of 58 percent of the site is in common and
private open space compared to the City's standard of 40 percent. The open space has
been arranged as a large 'X' shaped greenbelt which allows 30 out of 35 buildings to orient
directly onto the central common areas.
Recreational A_rnenities - The recreational amenities exceed City standards.
4. Colors - Provide color variation between buildings to avoid monotony. All buildings are
proposed with the same color scheme: same roof tile, a single wall color (off white) and two
accent colors (teal and rust).
5. Landscaping - Should existing windrow be preserved or replaced? The Victoria Community
Plan states that windrow style planrings are "crucial to the Plan" to provide a strong visual
unifying element. The applicant proposes to remove the existing row of trees along the north
boundary, Most of the trees are in good health; however, preservation in place would require
that the grading plan would have to be revised to maintain the natural grades underneath the
drip line of the trees. Staff recommends replanting a Eucalyptus windrow along the north
project boundary. Suggest Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum) spaced 8-10 feet on center.
6. Trash Compactor - The project features a single point of collection for all trash at the north
project boundary. During the Pre-Application Review, one Commissioner expressed concern
that this was inconvenient and required tenants to walk too far carrying their trash or to drive
to the compactor. Only 6 out of 35 buildings are within 300 feet of the compactor.
7. Stairways - The open stairways lack any architectural treatment. Stairs should be integrated
into the building by enclosing them with walls.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
None
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and returned for review by the Design Review
Committee.
DRC COMMENTS
VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
October 15, 1996
Page 4
Desiqn Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Rich Mac/as, Peter Tolstoy, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Dan Coleman
The Committee recommended that the applicant's architect work with staff to revise the project to
address the design issues and return to Design Review Committee on November 5, 1996.
1. Architectural Style - The Committee supported the Mediterranean style subject to
refinements:
a. Provide window surrounds.
b. Provide architectural treatment to blank wall areas such as the Bldg. 2A side
elevation.
c. Stairways - Study alternative designs with solid decorative walls. Areas beneath stairs
may be enclosed for storage.
d. Colors - Study alternative color schemes to provide color variations. Suggested that
a subtle color change be used as accents on popout elements or between buildings.
2. Garages - Break-up long roof line with intersecting gables or varying roof height. Vary garage
door patterns.
3. Carports - Completely redesign to match quality of apartment buildings and garages by
incorporating tile roof elements and end walls. The Committee supported the concept of
enclosing the ends with storage units.
4. Recreational Amen/ties - One of the three tot lots may be converted to open space. One
possibility is to provide a smaller tot lot adjoining the pool area.
5. Landscaping - Remove and replace existing windrow with more appropriate tree species.
6. Trash Compactor - Provide at least four trash enclosure locations throughout the project for
the convenience of residents.
The Committee also requested floor plans.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
5:00 p.m. Dan Coleman November 5, 1996
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 - MAPd-C. TAYLOR - A request to develop 264 apartments, with
a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2 acres offand in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per
acre) zone located in the Victoria Planned Community, 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, 13.
The Committee recommended that the applicant's architect work with staff to revise the project to address
the design issues and return to Design Revie`.v Committee on November 5, 1996.
I. Architectural Style - The Committee supported the Mediterranean style subject to refinements:
a. Provide window surrounds.
b. Provide architectural treatment to blank wall areas such as the Bldg. 2A side elevation.
c. Stairways - S~dy alternative designs with solid decorative wails. Areas beneath stairs may be
enclosed for storage.
d. Colors - Study altemative color schemes to provide ~:olor variations. Suggested that a subtle color
change be used as accents on popout elements or be;tween buildings.
2. Garages - Break-up long roof line with intersecting gables or varying roof height. Vary garage door
patterns.
3. Ccsrl~orts - Completely redesign to match quality of apartment buildings and garages by incorporating
tile roof elements and end walls. The Committee supported the concept of enclosing the ends ,,vith
storage units.
4. Recreational Amenities - One of the three tot lots may be converted to open space. One possibility is
to provide a smaller tot lot adjoining the pool area.
5. LandscaFing - Remove and replace existing windrow with more appropriate tree species.
6. Trash Compactor - Provide at least four trash enclosl.~re locations throughout the project for the
convenience of residents.
The Committee also requested floor plans.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval subject to:
1. Provide decorative cap (i.e., stucco over) on the stairways.
2. Use heavy, duty wood lattice, instead of vinyl lattice panels, at the ends of carports or enclose with
solid walls.
3. Provide layered wood fascia detail, instead of fiat metal, on carports to match apartments and garage
stmctures.
4. Project ,.rill be conditioned to provide at least four trash enclosure locations throughout the site.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Nancy
H-
DRC AGENDA
VTT 15766-MARK TAYLOR
November 5, 1996
Page 2
The Committee recommended approval subject to the following revisions:
1. Provide decorative cap (i.e., stucco over) on stairways to match patio wall cap.
2. Replace vinyl lattice on carport ends with 2"-3" metal tubing espalier.
3. Carport fascia profile and texture to match apartments.
4. Vary garage door pattern.
5. Replace wood lattice on Building 2A with 2"-3" metal tubing espalier.
6. . Add window on right-hand side of first floor of Building 2B.
7. The alternative E'olor samples were accepted.
The applicant should revise the plans accordingly prior to the Planning Commission hearing.
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 and21092 of the Public Resources Code.
Project File No.: Vesting Tentataive Tract Map 15766 Public Review Period Closes: Novembert3,1996
Project Name: San Vineyard Project Applicant: Mark-Taylor. Inc.
Project Location (also see attached map): North side of Base Une Road, approximately 800 feet west of
Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-091-14, 15, and 227-111-12, 13.
Project Description:' A request to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium subdivision map. on 22.2
acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone in the Victoria Planned Community
and consideration of a request to vacate Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street known as Hanley
Avenue.
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 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 Negaffi/e 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 agsncy that the project as revised may have a
significant effect on the environment.
ffadopted,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
EXHIBIT"I"
'k\FINAL%CEQA%INSTUOY.PT2 (July 17.1996)
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1) Project FiFe #/Name:/27'
2) Related Files: ~ P ~?~' 'f~..~ ~hR ':7'(~' -d) t
3>Applicant:F kL
4) Project Description: 2_~zf-- ,:~/'2~¢~..~ ,
da e
5) Project Accepted as Complete ( t ):
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for
all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers on attached sheets, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects
identified.
I. EARTH - Will the proposal result in.'
a) Unstable eadh conditions or changes in the geologic structure? (
b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction, or over covering of the soil? ( [,'O/''
c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features? ( [./j/
d) The destruction. covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical
features? ( (
e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? ( ( "Y"
f ) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sand, or changes in si[tation,
deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or
the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet, or lake? ( (/~'
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? (
II. AIR - Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ( (.d"
b) The creation of objectionable odors? ) ( (.d"
J
c) Alteration of air movement moisture, or temperatul-e, or any change in
climate, either locally or regionally? ( ) ( ) (....T/'
Ill. WATER - Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in
either marine or fresh waters? ( ) ( )
b) Changes in the absorption rate, drainage patterns. or the rate and amount
of surface runoff? ( ) (-d" ( )
c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? ( ) ( ) (--'f
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any body'? ( ) (./)" ( ,
e) Discharge into surface waters. or in alteration of s~arface water quality,
including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity? ( )
0 Alteration of the'~irection or rate of flow of ground waters? ( ) ( ) (
g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public
water supplies? ( ) ( )
i) Exposure of people or proper~y to water related hazards such as flooding
or tidal waves? ( ) ( )
PLANT LIFE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? ) [./'Y' ( )
b) Reduction in the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of ) ( (d"'
plants?
c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area cr in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing species? ( (.,d"'
d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ( ( (4"
V. ANIMAL LIFE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals
(birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish, and shellfish benthic organisms
or insects)? ( [ (/'f'
b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of
animals? ( (
c) Introduction of any new species of animals into the area. or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals? ( ( (,O"'
d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? [ [
2
VI. NOISE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels?
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
VII. LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposal.'
a) Produce new light and glare?
VIII. LAND USE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? ( ) (/)/ ( )
IX. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in.'
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
X. RISK OF UPSET - Will the proposal involve:
a) A risk of explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but
not limited to. oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an
accident or upset conditions?
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
XI. POPULATION - Will the proposal:
a) Alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human (/.y/'
population of an area? ( )
Xll. HOUSING - Will the proposal:
a) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing?
Xlll. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION - Will the proposal result in.'
a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? ( (4/' ( )
b) Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? ( ( )
c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? ( C,O"' ( )
d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? ( ( ) (.,,'5'
e) Alterations to waterborne. rail, or air traffic? ( ( ) (-'O//'
0 Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? ( (,-5'/' ( )
3
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES - Will 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) Parks and other recreational facilities?
e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) (,,'~
f) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) (,-)"
XV. ENERGY - Will the proposal result in:
a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require
the development of new sources of energy?
XVI. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS - Willtheproposalresultin a needfornew
systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( )
b) Communications systems? ( ) ( )
c) Water? ( ) ( )
d) Sewer or septic tanks?
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) (/)/ ;: ,
0 Solid waste disposal? ( ) ) (/)"'
XVI I. HUMAN HEALTH - Will the proposal result in.'
a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental
health)? ( ) )
b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ( ) ( )'~
XVIll. AESTHETICS - Will the proposal result in.'
a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? ( ) ( (),'~
b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ( ) ( ()if/
XIX. RECREATION - Will the proposal result in.'
a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational opportunities?
4
~b 2J3
b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area?
XX. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal.'
a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic
archeological site? ( ) ( ) (,"~/
b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic
building. structure, or object? ( ) ( ) ( 'f/
c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( (4'
XXI. 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 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.)
c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are individually limited.
but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more
separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small,
but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is
significant.)
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
XXll. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) -
XXltl. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS (Examine whether the project would be consistent with existing
zoning. pla~t~e controls) -
XXIV. 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):
ZGeneral Plan EIR
10/1~/96 TUE 11:51 E~.X 602 991 9138 I&RK-TAYL0[: INC. ~002
SENT ~Y; R CU~ tOM O~V; 10- 8-g~ 4:~GPM; ~ ~ 2847 ~ M~RK-T~YLOR~ INC.; ~Ol~
Z Master Environmen[at Assessment for :be 1989 Update of ~e General Plan
__ Industrial Area Specific Plan
,L~ctoria Ranned Community E1R
__ Tenra Vista Planned Communi~
__ Foot.hill Boulevard Specific Ran
__ Etiwanda North Specific Plan ElFTM,
__ Other.
__ Other.
Xxv. DETERMINATION - On the basis cf this initial evaiua.~cn:
a) I find that the propGsed project could not have a signi~can~ affect on the environment.
A NEGAT!VE DECLARATION will be prepared ........................................................................... ( )
b) I find that although the proDosed prcject could hove a si~]ni~cant effect on the environment. there
not be a significant effed i~ ~is case b=-_cause rn~i~atio~ measures described on the attache~ shee~s
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will De prepared ................................................. : .......................
c) I find that the proposed project may have a significant effec~ on the envircnment.
L~ENVIRO~'~/. TAL IMPACT REPORT is recruited ......................................... : .....................C ]
Preparer's Signature'~'
P~n~ Na~e a~d Title
Date
XXVI. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION (To b~ completed by applicant) -
I .~'ed!~; t,"",.~t l am the applicant ~r the projBct described in this ~nitial S~dy. I acknowledge ~.hat I have read thi=
nSG Study and the proposed mit~.Gatian measures. Funkher I have :evised ~e pm oct plans or proposals and/or
h
hereby ~gree To the prop. osed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a poinf. w ere
cleariy no significant environmental erie ' ould occur.
Signature: ..~12.~Z22_ L,~,~'/,v-.,._, Date:.
· j~'~A~-~-- ~fA"tLO
· '. · ,'~ .:~: ' , ,.I
I
-,, ,. , ........................................MDS~t~'~,~
..~E ......
.,.....
~"""~: :.]]j.."~:-'.' "' "..S':_~';:~ .~'L~'~ ~'::" ~','
TENTA T/VE
' .~j~.. .......... ~_J.,:',_,_'~LL"=__,= ..... ~ ....... .~. ..... .....~ ..... ~ TRACT
' "'~ ......." ~ ...... ' ' "~' ~ NO. 15766
~ ,. ~2~'~ ":'~?.~,' .-....... .,, . ~
TREE
R EM 0 VA L
PLAN
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKI,IST
Initial Study - Part II
Discussion of Environmental Evaluation
Project Description: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR - A request
to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2
acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units/acre) zone
located in the Victoria Planned Community on the north side of Baseline
Road, approximately 800 feet west o f Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-091-14,
15and227-111-12, 13.
XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
I. Earth: -
a) The site is not within any 'known unstable earth condition area.
b) The site will be graded to accommodate the building pads for the proposed use. The
impact is not significant.
c) The topography of the site will be altered sli~;htly to accommodate the building pads.
The grading will be supervised by a licensed soils engineer or registered geologist
to ensure compliance with Building Code requirements. The impact is not
significant.
d) No 'known or unique geologic or physical features exist on this site.
e) Upon completion, the site will be landscaped and/or paved to prevent soil erosion.
f') The facility will not affect any river, charmel, ocean, lake, or bay.
g) The majority of California is susceptible to earthquakes. The project is not within any
'kno~vn special study zone that will require additional studies or that poses a unique
hard. The impact is not significant.
II. Air:
a) The proposed project will generate air emissions from vehicles; however, the
proposed use is consistent with the land use designation for the site. The impact is
not significant.
b) The proposed project will not create any objectionable odors.
c) The proposed project will not result in altervtion to the climate or air movement.
I[I. Water:
a) The development of the project will not affect the currents or course of water
movement.
b) The absorption rate will be altered because of the paving and hardscape proposed.
All waters will be conveyed to approved drainage facilities. The project is designed
to collect all surface water runoff into catch basins that will feed into underground
pipes to the public storm drain system. As mitigation, the conditions of approval
will require the developer to extend the existing public storm drain west of
Hanley Avenue (at east project boundary) to connect with catch basins at the
Victoria mini storage facility (at west project boundary).
c) The project will not alter the course or flow of flood waters.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
INITIAL STUDY - PART II
VTT 15766
Page 2
d) The project proposes to collect surface water runoff into a storm drain which will
discharge into existing interim basins south of Baseline Road. As mitigation, the
conditions of approval will require an alternative drainage solution in which the
developer extends the existing public storm drain ~vest of Hanley Avenue (at
east project boundary) to connect ~vith catch basins at the Victoria mini storage
facility (at west project boundary) and eliminate the discharge into the existing
interim basins.
e) The project proposes to collect surface water runoff into a storm drain which will
discharge into existing interim basins south of Baseline Road. As mitigation, the
conditions of approval will require an alternative drainage solution in which the
developer extends the existing public storm drain west of Hanley Avenue (at
east project boundary) to connect with catch basins at the Victoria mini storage
facility (at west project boundary) and eliminate the discharge into the existing
interim basins.
f') No alteration ofgroundwater is expected to occur with this project.
g) No direct additions or withdrawals of ground water are proposed.
h) The project is anticipated to use only that amount of water necessary to handle
sanitary conditions of the bathrooms and a single residence. The amount of water
usage is not significant.
i) The project is outside of the established flood plain and is protected by existing
development and storm drain facilities to the north (upstream).
IV. Plant Life:
a) Vegetation on site consists of an abandoned vineyard and a row of 18 trees along the
northerly boundary. The trees were planted to provide windbreaks for the vineyard.
An arborist report (Roth, August I, 1996) has been prepared which indicates that 16
of the trees are in physiologically good condition. The arborist concluded that the
proposed grading cut of 3 to 5 feet in the vicinity of the trees is not consistent with
· preservation in place. Further, the arborist concluded that the predominant tree
species (Eucalyptus) and very sandy soil are not suitable for transplanting. As
mitigation, the Conditions of approval will require the developer to remove the
trees and replace them with another species of Eucalyptus to maintain the
windrow character.
b) There are no 'known rare, unique, or endangered species on-site.
c) Landscaping introduced to the site will be compatible with existing landscaping
material. Similar materials have been used throughout the area with no impact to
native species.
d) The existing vineyard on the site has been abandoned for years and is proposed to be
removed in its entirety. The impact is not significant.
V. Animal Life:
a) There are no known animals that currently occupy the site on a regular basis.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
INITIAL STUDY - PART II
VTT 1.5766
Page 3
b) There are no known rare, unique, or endangered species on-site.
c) No new species will be introduced as a result of the project.
d) The project is surrounded by development on all sides. In that no animals currently
use the site on a regular basis, the development of the project will have no impact on
fish or wildlife habitat.
VI. Noise:
a) The project will not significantly increase existing noise levels.
b) The project is located along Baseline Road, a major arterial street, and is subject to
exposure to traffic noise in excess of the C'eneral Plan standard of 65 CNEL. An
acoust~al analysis (Bricken, August 22, 1996) confirms that noise levels will exceed
the allowable noise levels for this zone based upon existing or projected traffic
volumes. The acoustical engineer concluded that the project will require exterior
noise mitigation to achieve 65 CNEL at all exterior living spaces and common open
space areas. The project design includes the orientation of building mass along
Baseline Road and the construction of a 7 fo~2t high sound wall along the entire south
property line next to Baseline Road; therefore.. there will not be a significant effect for
first floor level. As mitigation for noise levels for the second floor levels, the
Conditions of approval will require developer to construct 6 foot high sound
walls on all south facing private balconies of the five buildings along Baseline
Road. Additional mitigation to achieve an interior noise level of 45 CNEL
maximum, special glazing is required for certain windows and sliding glass
doors for those units identified by the acoustical analysis.
II. Light and Glare:
a) New light and glare will be created because the property is currently vacant. City
codes require lighting fixtures to be directed away from or shielded from adjoining
properties. The project design includes a minimum 20 foot landscape buffer,
including a 6 foot high wall, around the project perimeter. A condition of approval
requires the applicant to submit a lighting plan for review and approval to ensure the
light does not spill over onto adjacent properties. The impact is not significant.
VIII. Land Use:
a) The project would substantially alter the present vacant land use (an abandoned
vineyard). The proposed construction of 264 apartments is consistent with the
Medium Residential zone of the Victoria Community Plan. The impact is not
significant.
IX. Natural Resources:
a) The project will not significantly increase the rate of use of natural resources.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
INITIAL STUDY - PART It
VTT 15766
Page 4
X. Risk of Unset:
a) The project will not be storing any hazardous or explosive material.
b) The project construction will not interfere with emergency response.
XI. Population:
a) The project will generate an increase in population of 816 persons using 3.09 persons
per dwelling unit per State Department of Finance estimates. The impact is not
considered significant because the same increase in population ~vould result if the site
~vere developed as single family residences according to the State Department of
Finance.
XII. Housing:
a) The project will reduce the need for additional housing by constructing 264
apartments.
XIII. Transportation:
a) The project wilt generate additional trips because of the new construction. A traffic
impact analysis (RKJK, July 2, 1996) prepared for this project which analyzed the
existing, Opening Year and the Year 2015 with and without the proposed project.
The report concluded that the project ~vill generate 1,740 trip-ends per day with 125
vehicles per hour during the AaM peak hoar and 155 vehicles per hour during the PM
peak hour. The report presents several recommendations for on-site and off-site
improvements. As mitigation, the Conditions of approval will require the
developer to do the following:
1. Install a stop sign for egress at the project's main entry to
Baseline Road.
2. Provide minimum 25 foot radius curb returns to baseline Road
at its intersections with project's main entry and with Hanley
Street (Street "A").
3. Provide a 150 foot inbound left turn lane for eastbound left turn
traffic at the intersection of Baseline Road and Hanley Street
(Street "A").
4. Construct Baseline Road full width from Hanley Street (Street
"A") westerly to future Day Creek Boulevard.
5. Developer shall pay transportation development fees upon
issuance of building permits, at the rate adopted by City, as fair
share contribution for area wide improvements.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
INITIAL STUDY - PART II
VTT 15766
Page 5
b) Additional parking will be necessary to accomodate the apartment tenants. The
project has been designed with adequate parking spaces to meet the parking
requirements.
c) The project will generate additional traffic which will impact existing transportation
systems (See XIII.(a) above). The proposal is consistent with the Victoria
Community Plan and General Plan for which the street widths were evaluated at a
build-out condition.
d) The project will maintain the existing cimul~?tion patterns for the movement of goods.
e) The project will not affect air, water or rail traffic.
f) The application is expected to increase thl: risk of traffic hazards due to vehicles
enterikg and exiting the site. The project has been designed consistent with City
standards and policies for public improvements and driveways spacing to provide
maximum safety available. Pedestrian amenities (sidewalks) will be installed as part
of the project. Baseline Road is ultimately planned for a Class II Bike Lane; however,
completion of the bicycle trail will occur in the future when sufficient pavement
width exists to accommodate the lane. The impact is not significant.
XIV. Public Sen'ices:
a) The project will increase demands for fire protection and emergency medical services
provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. The District receives
revenue from property taxes and from Mello-Roos Community Facilities District 85-
I for this area. As mitigation, the Mello Roos CFD requirements shall apply to
this project.
b) No substantial new services are expected with the project.
c) The Chaffey Joint Union High School District and the Eti~vanda School District
serve the project. The project will generate 115 K-5 students and 51 students in
grades 6-8 (Newton, 1996). The project 'will generate 53 high school students
(Sundell, 1996). Both districts have notified the City of the current impaction
problems. Adequate school facilities will not exist to serve this development. School
funding sources for new development include school impact fees, tax increment
revenues from the City Redevelopment Agency, and Mello-Roos Community
Facilities fees. School impact fees are regulated by the State of California
Government Code Section 65995. Under GC Section 65996, the City is prohibited
from denying the project based on the adequacy of school facilities. The Chaffey
Joint Union High School District has formed a Mello-Roos District. The number of
students generated by this project alone are not sufficient to require the creation of
new elementary, middle or high schools (i.e., schools are normally designed for at
least 500 students). However, there would be the need for additional and/or renovated
classrooms, more teachers, transportation services, curriculum and equipment.
Project will be conditioned to join the Me[lo-Roos District for the Chaffey Joint
Union High School District and pay school impact fees to Etiwanda School District;
therefore, the impact is considered to be reduced to a level not significant.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
· INITIAL STUDY - PART II
VTT 15766
Page 6
d) The project ~vill have an insignificant effect on existing park facilities or result in the
need for additional facilities. The existing Windro~vs Neighborhood Park, located
1800 feet a~vay, is the nearest public park which serves the project. Phase I of the
Eti~vanda Creek Community Park was recently completed and also serves the project.
e) The site abuts a road that is being maintained by the City. No additional impacts on
public facilities are expected.
f) No other government services are expected to be affected by this proposal.
XV. Energ-v
a) The project is not expected to use substantial amounts of fuel or energy.
b) The development is not expected to result in substantial increase on the demand of
existing energy sources or the need for new energy sources.
XVI. Utilities and Service Systems:
a) The project will not result in the need for new power or natural gas systems.
b) The project will not result in the need for new communication systems.
c) The project will use ~vater readily available from existing water lines in Baseline
Road.
d) The discharge from the site will be handled by the existing sewer facilities.
e) The project proposes to collect surface water runoff into a storm drain which will
discharge into existing interim basins south of Baseline Road. As mitigation, the
conditions of approval ~vill require an alternative drainage solution in which the
developer extends the existing public storm drain west of Hanley Avenue (at
east project boundary) to connect with catch basins at the Victoria mini storage
facility (at west project boundary) and eliminate the discharge into the existing
interim basins.
f') The project design includes a common trash compactor and source recycling
facilities to reduce the volume of solid waste. No significant solid waste disposal will
be necessary to serve the site·
XVII. Human Health:
a) The development is not expected to create any health hazard.
b) No exposure of people to potential health hazards is expected.
XVIII. Aesthetics:
a) The project will construct 2 story "8 plex" apartment buildings. The existing single
family homes to the noah are 1 story, except for one home northeast of the subject
site which has a second floor windory facing south. The apartment buildings are
approximately 200 feet away from the nearest single family residence. The proposed
project has been designed with pad grades I 1-12 feet lower than these homes. These
private homes have limited views to the south over the subject site due to the pad
grade differential and existing 5'6" high block wall along their south properly line.
]ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
INITIAL STUDY - PART II
VTT 15766
Page 7
The City's General plan identifies no public scenic view corridors or vistas for this
site. The project will not obstruct any scenic vista or view open to the public. The
impact is not significant.
b) The project site is exposed to public views from Baseline Road. The project design
includes a 7 foot high decorative wall alor{g Baseline within a minimum 44 feet
landscape setback. Views into the site will :~e further limited by the five buildings
along Baseline Road. The project design ir~cludes a major landscape statement at
both project entrances, including covered entry gates, enhanced paving, and focal
trees. The project will conform to the strict design guidelines of the City thereby
eliminating any offensive site open to public view. The impact is not significant.
XlX. Recreation:
a) The project will not impact the quality of existing recreational opportunities.
Adequate facilities exist within the area, most notably Windrows Park and Etiwanda
Creek park. The City's Recreation Department also offers various recreation classes
and programs at nearby Windrows Elementary.
b) No 'kno~vn religious or sacred uses are presently conducted on-site.
XX. Cultural Resources:
a) There are no 'known prehistoric or historic archaeological sites on the property..
b) There are no 'known prehistoric or historic buildings, structures or objects on the
property.
c) The project should not impact any unique ethnic cultural values.
XXIII. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE I~IPACTS
The project density of 11.9 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the Medium Residential zone
(8-14 du/ac) of the Victoria Community Plan.
~mmissioner Melcher stated that he agreed with Commissioner McNiel regarding the signage an
the applicant should be cautioned that making automobile dealerships a condit
~e in this Subarea would not necessarily assure approval of any specific
he also ~e questions that need [o be answered regarding access.
Mr. Plies asked concern was regarding access.
Chairman Barker said he understand how it will wl
Commissioner Lumpp asked if Mr. perry.
Mr. Plies responded affirmatively.
Commissioner Lumpp text amendment shou He felt the City should also
be looking at a large ' such as an auto mall.
It was the the Commission to support initiation of text changes to
allow and Leases as a conditionally permitted use to acent to the
, in Subarea 8 upon submission of an application and payment of the ass s.
~-.E: USE DETERMINATION 96-01 - A request to determine if apadments are a permitted or
conditionally permitted use in the Medium Residential zone of the Victoria Community Plan.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report.
Chairman Barker asked if Mr. Coleman had worked on the Victoria Community Plan.
Mr. Coleman replied he worked for the City at the time but he did not work on the plan.
Chairman Barker recalled that the Victoria Plan was not particularly pro-apartments after a period
of time. He also thought that when the City Council rezoned various propedies several years ago,
one of the objectives was to decrease the number of apartments in the community. He stated that
at one time he had a responsibility of trying to devise a formula Io determine how many children
reside in various types of housing. He said the community where he worked had a number of
apartments, condominiums, town houses, and single family dwellings. He reported a survey was
conducted and it was concluded that an apartment house has an immediate impact on schools
because a fairly high percentage of apadment dwellers have children when they move in. He said
they discovered that only one out of five condominium units have resident children because
condominium owners are quite often downsizing after children have left home or just entering the
housing market with no children or just starting a family. He was concerned that adding apartments
would produce a major immediate impact on the schools. He also questioned if the City needs more
apartments and felt that enough have already been provided for the population. He thought that
apartment dwellers are generally short-termed. He did not feel that density is a question, so much
as the population, the age of the youngsters, and the impact on schools. He invited public comment.
Keith Lamparter, Mark-Taylor, Inc., 6623 Nodh Scottsdale Road, Phoenix, Arizona, gave a brief
background of the company and stated their development partners are the largest apartment real
estate investment trust in the United States traded on the New York stock exchange. He stated they
understand the concerns about apartments. He said they build very high-end apartments with
square footages substantially above other apartments in the communities where they locate. He
said they would provide attached and detached garages, covered porte-cocheres, private security
entrance gates, and security systems and laundry facilities within the units. He observed the City
has strict guidelines for apartments and reported they had submitted a conceptual plan which would
R annin Corn s ' utes /~-~ January 24, 1996
require no variances while providing just under 14 unites per acre. He said their plan exceeds the
recreational arechilies requirements and provides more opl;n space than necessary. He noted their
rental fees are generally higher than owning a house and they do not get many families with children
in their developments because of the higher rents. He reported that he had contacted the school
districts and was told they are not operating at capacity and could accommodate their development.
He noted they would have to pay school fees of over a million dollars. He pointed out that the
Victoda Commdnity Plan states that Medium Residential can have attached and detached residential
of 8-14 dwelling units per acre. He said the definitions indicate an apartment is an attached
residential unit.
He acknowledged that the text does not specifically list apartments as a permitted use but felt that
it does not specifically prohibit apartments and states that uses include. but are not necessarily
limited to, those which are listed.
Commissioner Melcher asked why the applicant does not build a condominlum project and rent it out.
Mr. Lampafter replied he was told he should not do that because he had already told the City it will
be an apartment project.
Commissioner Melcher stated accessibility requirements are different for apartments versus
condominiums.
Mr. Lamparter agreed.
C;ammissioner Melc..her noted there are a lot of condominium projects in the City which are operated
as apartments. He said the developers built them that way so that they would not have to meet the
accessibility requirements and also so they could sell off the; units as condominiums if the economy
should change. He questioned why the developer was not taking that approach.
Mr. Lamparter said they had considered that but his company philosophically does not like to condo-
map any projects at present because of liability problems. He said if he could get direction that it
would be permissible to build it under a condo-map, he would do so.
Commissioner Melcher noted that Lewis Homes has been doing that for years.
,Mr. Lamparter did not think it would be wise business to advise a neighborhood they are going to do
condominiums and then advise them after the project is built, that it is really an apartment project.
Commissioner Lumpp asked for a definition of condominium.
Mr. Coleman replied that the Victoria Community Plan refers to the State Subdivision Map Act.
Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated it refers to a type of property ownership, not in fee, but
a right to air space or a portion of property and a deed in common for the common area.
Commissioner Lumpp stated that as the definition of condominium is ownership of air space, it
means that single family detached, town homes, td-plexes, fcur-plexes, etc. could be condominiums.
He said it has nothing to do with the type of product, but rather the type of ownership.
Mr. Lamparter said the text of the plan defines a four-plex as a multi-family use but it was his
understanding that multi-family uses are precluded from the zone.
Mr. Coleman observed that the Victoria Community Plan defines Multiple Family Use as "The use
of a site for two or more dwelling units, which may be in the same building or in separate buildings
on the same site."
Planning Commission Minutes -16- January 24, 1996
Commissioner Melcher asked if the applicant could proceed with a condominium project.
Brad Buller, City Planner, confirmed that he could.
Commissioner McNiel thought Mr. Lainparlor had indicated he would have trouble getting a
condominium financed.
Mr. Lampafter felt they could get financing if they stipulated that the units could not be sold for a
certain number of years.
Commissioner Melcher felt that the applicant should let the residents in Victoria know that they are
planning to construct apartments. He noted those residents had been some of the most vocal
opponents to apartments when the City was considering land use changes. He did not think the
Planning Commission should determine that apartments are a permitted or conditionally permitted
use without informing those residents.
Mr. Buller indicated that staff felt the applicant had made some good arguments that the omission
of the word "apartments" does not necessarily mean that the use is prohibited so staff brought the
matter to the Commission to make a determination. He acknowledged there has been opposition
to apartments in V~ctoria but he noted there is a successful apartment project immediately adjacent
to this property which was well received by the community and there have been no issues. He
observed that the property immediately to the south is zoned for High density. He noted the
. a~plicant had committed to hosting a neighborhood meeting to introduce their proiect. He stated the
Commission conld make a finding that apartments are not prohibited merely because they have been
omitted from the definitions or it could direct that the applicant could file for an amendment to the
plan to add apartments to the definition.
Commissioner Lumpp asked why condominium was being considered a product rather than a type
of ownership.
Mr. Bullet replied that staff thought the intent of the writers of the Victoria Community Plan was that
they did not envision apartments in the Medium Residential area but they envisioned single family.
Commissioner McNiei stated he was on the Commission when the plan was proposed. He recalled
that when the William Lyon Company approached the City, they did not intend Io have any
apartments at all. He said that condominiums were in vogue at the time. so that use was included
in the text.
Chairman Barker recalled that the William Lyon Company wanted only single family housing, not
condominiums, but certain members of the communi,'b' and Commission had pushed to have a wider
selection of housing available. He noted that condominiums were thought of as a product type and
they were considered an alternative to single family homes.
Mr. Bullet reported that this parcel was envisioned as being a higher density and was originally
specified as Medium High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) but it had been rezoned during the last
cycle of zoning considerations.
Commissioner Metchef remarked that in 1991 the Cit't Council decided the City would have too many
apartments at build-out.
Mr. Lampafter said they focused on this property because it is near the entrance to the planned
community but is not truly within it. He observed it is bounded on the north by railroad tracks and
a 200-foot buffer with two-story homes and they propose two-story apartments. He noted there is
Commercial and Medium-High Residential to the eas~, a mini-storage facility to the west, and
Planning Commission Minutes ,222)L/2/1~ January 24, 1996
30 units per acre planned across the street on Base Line Road. He said they felt this would be a
good transition for that area.
Commissioner Lumpp stated he would support, a determine;rich tha~ apartments are not a permitted
use. He thought the Commission would be making a grave mistake by defining apartments as a
permitted use because he felt it would be disrespectful to th~ residents to make such a determination
without allowing community input.
Chairman Barker wondered if Victoria has changed and the community attitude has changed. He
agreed with Commissioners Melcher and Lumpp that the community should be advised before the
Commission made a decision that apartments are an acceptable use.
Commissioner Lumpp observed that if the Commission were to allow apartments, another applicant
may not provide an upscale project such as what this apFlicant proposes.
Commissioner Melcher noted that the staff report indicated there are nine sites in Victoria which
could be affected.
Commissioner McNiel remarked that the Commission would still have authority to deny an
application if apartments were a conditionally permitted use.
Chairman Barker felt such a determination would still bypass the direction from the City Council and
_ b? colgtrary to pFevious community input.
Commissioner McNiel said he understood the potential for criticism if the Commission were to make
~,hat determination but he saw the project as a potential opportunity. He thought that if the applicant
were to construct in an upscole apartment building, it could be used as leverage to upgrade
;apartment projects to be built elsewhere in the City. He thought the location is adjacent to Victoria
in the eyes of many residents. He felt the City might have any opportunity Io bring in higher end
apartments,
(:hairman Barker agreed it may be an opportunity but he cluestioned ff allowing the use would not
be bypassing the desires of the residents.
Commissioner McNiel did not think so because the applicant had committed to holding neighborhood
meetings.
Commissioner Melcher agreed with Commissioner t,,4cNiel that it may be an opportunity. He said he
could support apartments if the action would apply only to the applicant's site, but he observed that
the determination will affect nine sites.
Moved by McNiel, seconded by Barker, carried 3-1-1 (Melcher no, Tolstoy absent) to continue the
meeting beyond 11:00 p.m.
Chairman Barker agreed with Commissioner Melcher that allowing apartments at this site would
open Pandora's Box as the other sites had not been analyzed. He thought the public has a right to
comment.
In response to a question, Mr. Buffer stated the Commission could send out notices and have a
public hearing on a Use Determination.
Planning Commission Minutes .~,27..~ January 24, 1996
Commissioner Melcher suggested that if the applicant ',.,'anted [o pursue apartments, that staff
contact the newspaper to write a story, have an article published in the Active Bulletin. and contact
known community activists and bring the matter back in four weeks. He suggested the applicant
could also pursue a condominium map.
Commissioner McNiel felt that the City is missing an opportunity to do better.
Chairman Barker suggested con[acting the neighbors. He asked where the application is in the
process.
Mr. Lampafter replied they submitted a fairly well detailed concept site plan today.
Chairman Barker asked if it is detailed enough to bring to a neighborhood meeting.
Mr. Lampafter responded that it is. He said they would also like to get initial input on the concept
site plan. He thought they could produce detailed colored renderings within the next three to four
weeks.
Chairman Barker said he was uncomfortable making a decision that affects all nine locations.
Commissioner Lumpp felt the Commission should not make such a determination that will affect all
the parcels.
' ' 'C~mn~issioner McNiel asked if a decision could be made on a site specific basis.
Mr. Buller thought the Commission could find that the plan does not preclude the concept of
apartments, but is subject to Planning Commission review on a case-by-case basis to determine if
apartments fit into an area. He felt that would give the Commission the opportunity to delermine on
a neighborflood-by-neighborhood basis if apartments are acceptable. He said the project could be
presented to the community. He observed the applicant could also change the proposal to a
condominium because the plan does specify that condominiums are allowed. He said if another
applicant then indicates that apartments are a matter of right in the Medium designation. the
Commission could still interpret the Plan to say that is not the case.
Commissioner Lumpp felt it is not possible to tell which building is a condominiums and which is an
apartment unless you know how an operation is run. He noted that staff has indicated you can build
a condominium. but not an apadment. He said he would not support making apartments a permitted
or conditionally permitted use in the Medium district in the Victoria Community Plan.
Commissioner Melcher noted that the staff report states that a use determination would affecl more
than the applicant's site; however. he understood Mr. Bullet to now say the Commission could make
a determination that it would be acceptable on this si~e, ,,';hile not on other sites.
Mr. Buller responded that a determination on this site would affect other sites only in that a developer
on the next site may claim that a precedent had been set if apartmores are permitted on this site.
He said the deanest way to approach the question would be to indicate that all Medium sites can
have the same types of development.
Chairman Barker indicated he was not willing to accept apartments on the other sites without
specifically studying them. He asked what else the applicant could do.
Mr. Hanson stated it would be necessary to rezone the parcel if the Commission wanted to create
a special zone.
Planning Commission Minutes '~Z.,~tD(~Y January 24, 1996
Chairman Barker felt it would be best to fezone the property to Medium High, which would allow
apartmenls.
Commissioner Melcher noted that a zone change is expensive and time consuming.
Mr. Bullet sensed that the Commission wanted to say that apartments are not permitted in the
Medium Residential zone. He suggested the applicant could submit a Pro-Application review for the
Commission to look at the design and concurrently introduce the project to the community. He
stated the applicant should advise the community that he is filing a condominium plan, which is a
permitted use; however, he intends to rent the project.
It was the general consensus of the Commission that, in light of the text of the Victoria Community
Plan, thgy could not determine that apartments are a permitled use in the Medium Residential zone.
However, the Commission indicated that Mr. Lamparter could proceed with the project using a
condominium map and that he should meet with the neighbors and explain what he plans to do.
G. COMMERCIAL LAND STUDY DISCUSSION
Commissioner Melcher asked if there was any crucial reason that the matter needed to be discussed
this evening. He noted that it was 11:40 p.m. and he suggested that the discussion be deferred until
the next meeting if possible.
Brad Bullet, City Planner. indicated that the item is also included on the February 14 agenda. He
observed that the Commission had previously received a letter from Peter Desforges raising a
question about the study and staff had included the matter on tonight's agenda at the Commission's
direction.
Commissioner Melcher suggested that a meeting be held on January 31 if there is urgency regarding
the matter.
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Lumpp, to continue the Commercial Land Study Discussion
to January 31 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
Brad Buffer, City Planner, noted that the Commission had a memorandum from staff regarding the
McDonalds site at Base Line Road and Carnelian Avenue.
Commissioner Lumpp asked when McDonalds expects to be in compliance with the conditions.
Mr. Bullet responded that McDonalds has indicated they plan to have the work done within 14 days.
Planning Commission Minutes -2 - January 24, 1996
H~ :hought a plan should drive land use changes and not a single tenant with sales tax rev,~e
Chairman ~raised the GIS colored map of Foothill Boulevard between Deer"~'reek Channel
and Day ~el and looked forward to seeing the rest of Foothill rpap~a%d.
Commissioner Lumpl lid be helpful to post updated aera$~r~aps and General Plan maps
for Commission meetings.
Mr. Bullet indicated updated aedals and ma just not posted in the Council chamber.
Chairman Barker invited public comment.
Greg Hoxworth, Lewis Homes. 1' Mounl said it has been difficult to
attract tenants to their current because of the unce additional land along Foothill
Boulevard being development, for example Vestar is the availability of
300.000 square feet space on the southwest corner of and Foothill
Boulevard. He co ' nted that a zone change without a project could make a r a landowner.
He also state at if the City is to enterlain rezoning the south side of Fo levard for
Commerci · etail. th'e remainder of the north side should be considered at the sam~
D. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 96-01 - Mark/Taylor - The review of 264 condominiums on 19
acres of land in the Medium Residential zone (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located in the
Victoria Planned Commun ty on the north s de of Baseline one block west of Victoria Park
Keith Lamparter. Mark-Taylor. Inc., 6623 Noah Scottsdale Road. Phoenix. Arizona. introduced
himself.
Michael Coghlin, Mark-Taylor, Inc.. 6523 North Scottsdale Road, Phoenix, Arizona. gave a brief
presentation of their company's experience.
Wade Felkins, architect for Mark-Taylor, briefly presented their proposed project. He showed the
Planning Commission a revised conceptual site plan prepared in respofise to staff comments and
colored elevations of the proposed product.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff issues and concerns which included the
following:
1. Is the project design so outstanding as to merit a density at the top of the Medium range?
2. Vacation of Railroad Avenue South and incorporate into project.
3. Acquisition of Redevelopment Agency properly to the east.
4. Site Plan
a. Extend decorative paving inside entry gate.
b. Stronger connections from parking coups into project interior.
I nning Commission utes
,,~5D February 14, 1996
c. Add decorative paving at en',rance to parking courl, s.
d. Add tot lot in south half of project.
5. Architecture
a. Single white color and stucco over details.
b. Blank walls
c. Garage roof heights/form along Baseline.
Mr. Felkins indicated that the colored elevations represented a Prairie style architectural theme.
Commissioner McNiel asked about the tot lot locations and their potential locations in the southerly
half of project.,
Commissioner Toi~oy asked about parking provided. He stated that the main entr7 pode cochere
must meet fire access standards.
Commissioner Lumpp stated that a condominium is not a product, rather it is a form of ownership.
He commented that the applicant had previously stated their intent to market these units as rental
.. ap. arlments which, in his opinion, is not allowed by the Wctoria Community Plan Medium Residential
designation. He expressed concern with the applicanl's intent to offer garage space rental and
asked for clarification of this concept. He stated that he was opposed to the exclusive use of a trash
compador because of the inconvenience for tenants to have to take their trash to a single collection
point.
Commissioner Tolstoy inquired whether the Base Line Road access point will be used all the time
or just for emergencies? He indicated a concern with traffic on Base Line Road.
Mr. Coleman replied that the code requires two points of ingress and egress for tenants.
Commissioner Tolstoy liked the conceptual site plan layout. He expressed a desire to see recycling
facilities in conjunction with the trash compactor. He felt that Railroad Avenue South and the
Redevelopmerit Agency property should be incorporated into the project. He disliked the concept
of renting garage spaces to tenants.
Commissioner McNiel stated that he liked the conceplual site plan. He felt that the proposed
architecture was not acceptable. He suggested neigbborhaod meetings be held to obtain input from
Victoria residents.
Commissioner Melcher expressed concern with the site plan in relation to proposed density. He
noted a lack of substantial open spaces. He cited Tract 13273 (southeast corner of Milliken and
Mountain 'view Ddve) as an example of the kind of open space desired. He expressed concern with
the design of the perimeter drive aisle, in particular, the 90 degree turns and parking along sides.
He thought that the architecture seemed "plunked dov;n" and did not successfully address the
surrounding context ol' Victorian architectural theme. Fie felt the proposed elevations were hum
drum. He said that he liked that a tenant would be able to walk from one unit to another unit without
crossing a driveway.
Commissioner Barker expressed concern with the proposed density being at the highest end of
the range. He suggested that the applicant address how the project would feel to pedestrians. He
indicated a desire to avoid creating a tunnel-like feeling bet~Neen buildings. He stated that Base Line
Road is also a .primary entrance and should receive the same level of design treatment as the
Planning Commission Minutes "~'~/ February 14, 1996
Street "A" entrance. He suggested larger open spaces. He said that the architecture must blend
with the surrounding context. He expressed concern that he saw nothing special about the project
design.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
There was no additional Commission business.
ADJOURNMENT
10:50 p.m. - The Planning Commission adjourned to a workshop immediately following in the Rains
Room regarding Modification No. 2 to Conditional Use Permit 93-49.
' T~e Workshop adjourned at 12:00 midnight and those minutes appear separately.
Respectfully submitted,
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes "~)~"~ February 14, 1996
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 15766, A CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION OF ONE LOT
FOR 264 APARTMENTS ON 22.2 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE),
APPROVING THE VACATION OF RAILROAD AVENUE SOUTH AND THE
EAST COLLECTOR STREET KNOWN AS HANLEY AVENUE, AND
APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 96-13, LOCATED ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 800 FEET WEST OF
VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -
APN: 227-091o14 AND 15 AND 227-111-12 AND 13.
A. Recitals. __
1. Mark Taylor Inc. has filed an application for the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No. 15766, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Vesting Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 1 st day of October 1996, a neighborhoocl meeting was conducted by the applicant
to explain the proposed project to area residents and solicit their input. All property owners within
the public hearing notification area were invited to attend.
3. On the 13th day of November 1996. 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.
4. 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 thal 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 November 13, 1996, 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 north side of Base Line Road,
approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane, with a street frontage of 800 feet and lot depth
of 1,100 feet and presently contains an abandoned vineyard; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is a 40-foot wide strip of vacant land
known as "Railroad Avenue South" proposed to be vacated, an unused rail corridor, and single family
homes; the property to the south consists of a winery; the property to the east is aparlments and a
shopping center; and the property to the west is a mini-storage facility; and
c. The project is proposed to include a vacant parcel owned by the City's
Redevelopment Agency along the easterly boundary, which includes an easement for a rail spur
proposed to be vacated; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 2
d. The project design includes a 7-foot high sound attenuation wall along Base Line
Road consistent with the acoustical analysis (Bricken, August 22, 1996); and
e. The project design is consistent with the Victoria Community Plan, including, but
not limited to the use of the Victoria's theme wall treatment along Base Line Road; and
f. The project design includes 57 percent common open space and 58 percent usable
open space; and
g. The proposed density of 11.9 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the Medium
Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) o[ the Victoria Community Plan; and
h. Th~ vacation of Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street, known as
Hanley Avenue, is consistent with the General Plan; and
i. The project design includes a private drainage system to collect all surface water
runoff into catch basins that will connect with the public storm drain system; and
j. The project design includes a minimum 20-foot landscape buffer and 6-foot high
decorative wall around the perimeter; and
k. The affected school districts have submitted written comments consistent with the
recommended conditions of approval requiring the developer to padicipate in the high school Mello-
Roos District and payment of school fees to the elementary school district; and
I. The project has been designed with a minimum 200-foot setback from the nearest
single family residence and pad grades 11-12 feet lower than the single family residences to the
north.
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 tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and
Victoria Community Plan; and
b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General
Plan, Development Code, and Victoria Community Plan; and
c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and
d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to 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 properly within the proposed
subdivision.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 3
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative
Declaration, together with all wdtten 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 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, fu:ther, 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 projeEr, 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. Furlher, 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 fodh 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.
Planninct Division
1 ) Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 15766 is granted subject to the
applicant's obtaining ownership of Railroad Avenue South and the
properly to the east, Assessor's Parcel No. 227-111-12, and the
vacation of the rail spur easement located thereon.
Enqineerinq Division
1) Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street, HartIcy Avenue,
shall be vacated and incorporated as part of the project.
2) Verification of ownership change or let'{er of intent from the City of
Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency stating approval and
pending ownership change for the properly to the east, Assessors
Parcel No. 227-111-12, under current ownership by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, as shown within the project
boundary.
3) Construct Base Line Road full width from !Day Creek Boulevard (future)
to the existing limit of full width improvements at Hanley Avenue,
including, but not limited to. curb, gutt~;r, asphalt paving. sidewalk,
street lights, street trees, median island, bike trail (Class II), and
necessary transitions both east and west of the project limits. except as
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 4
otherwise modified by the City Engineer, pursuant to City standards.
Also, provide the following:
a) Median island construction shall also include full landscaping in
accordance with the Base Line Road Master Plan.
b) Traffic Signal Improvements - install conduits (with pull rope),
including interconnect conduit, pull boxes, and poles for future
traffic signal at Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue.
4) Construct Hanley Avenue full width including, but not limited to, curb,
gutter, asphalt paving, sidewalk, street lights, and street trees, pursuant
to_.City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Parkway
improvements may be deferred on the easterly side with the exception
of street lights. The existing secondary access to Base Line Road shall
be abandoned and the access realigned and constructed to Hanley
Avenue as shown on the tentative tract map.
Right-of-way dedication of 66 feet, including the cuPde-sac, as shown
on the tentative tract map, shall be provided. The Developer shall
make a good faith effort to acquire off-site property interests necessary
to construct the required public improvements along Hanley Avenue, as
shown on the tentative tract map, and, if he/she should fail to do so, the
Developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for
approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements
pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City
acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such
agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs
incurred by the City to acquire the off-site properly interests required in
connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs
shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an
appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost.
The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to
commencement of the appraisal.
5) A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the
estimated cost of operating all new street lights during the first six
months of operation. prior to building permit issuance or approval of the
Final Map, whichever occurs first.
6) No median breaks will be allowed between Victoria Park Lane and Day
Creek Boulevard (future), except at Hanley Avenue.
7) Gated ddveways are to be in accordance with the City's gated driveway
entrance design guide for turnaround area.
8) Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue to be posted with R 26(s) "NO
STOPPING ANY TIME" signs.
9) The sidewalk along the Hanley Avenue cul-de-sac shall be property line
adjacent.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 5
10) On-site drainage shall be collected by a private drainage facility to the
satisfaction of the Building Official. Connection to a public drainage
facility or outletting into the public right-of-way shall be to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Buildinq & Safety Division
1) Provide private drainage easement at the north property line. No
drainage over slope is allowed (see Section A-A); collect and
discharge. Submit final hydrology report prior to issuance of any
permits.
2) Proof of right-of-entry to do work, if there is any work on surrounding
pr~'perties, shall be provided prior to issuance of grading permit.
3) Positive drainage away from buildings shall be provided.
Environmental Mitic~ation
1) Extend the existing storm drain in Base Line Road west of Hanley
Avenue to connect with the catch basins at Victoria Station and remove
the existing interim storm drains across 13ase Line Road.
2) Tree Removal Permit No. 96-13 is hereby approved and shall be valid
for a period of 90 days starling from the date of final map recordation
or issuance ol' any grading or building permits, whichever comes first,
subject to extension by the Planning Division. Developer shall replace
removed trees with Eucalyptus Maculata (.Spotted Gum), minimum 15-
gallon size, and spaced at 8 feet on center to maintain the windrow
character along the northerly boundary.
3) Developer shall follow all recommendations of the acoustical analysis
(Bdcken, August 22, 1996), including, but not limited to, constructing 6
foot high sound barriers on all south facin.q private balconies of the five
buildings along Base Line Road and special glazing for windows and
sliding glass doors in certain units.
4) Install a stop sign for egress at the project's main entry to Base Line
Road prior to occupancy.
5) Provide minimum 25-foot radius curb returns to Base Line Road at its
intersection with project's main entry and with Hanley Avenue (Street
6) Provide a minimum 150-foot inbound left turn lane for eastbound left
turn traffic at the intersection of Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue.
7) Construct Base Line Road full width on the northerly side from Hanley
Avenue to the westerly tract boundary.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 6
8) Developer shall pay Transportation Development Fees upon issuance
of building permits as fair share contribution for area-wide
improvements.
9) Project shall be subject to Mello-Roos Community Facilities District
requirements for fire services.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buffer, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary for the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
cerlify 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 13th day of November 1996, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJEECT#: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT OF 264 APARTMENTS W/CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION MAP
APPLICANT: MARK TAYLOR, INC.
LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, WEST OF VICTORIA PARK LANE
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. Time Limits completion Date
1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Cornmission, if buiiding permits are not
issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 monlhs from the date of approval.
2. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced,
participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Communib/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 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. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first,
the applicant shah consent to. or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However.
if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant
shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such
existing District prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits,
whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and
prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this
condition shall be deemed null and void.
This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school
districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts
as a result of this project.
sc- ~olse
Proiect NO. VT'T 15796
Completion Date
4. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to the issuance of building permits when no map is __/__/
involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water
facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the
Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district
within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of
permits in the case of all other residential projects.
B. Site Development
1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include / /
site plans. architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and
grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained heroin, Development Code
regulations, and the Victoria Community Plan.
2. Prior to any use of ~e project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions __/__/__
of Approva~ shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
3. 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 shah 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.
4. 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.
5. 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 approvar in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved
use has commenced, whichever comes first.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9.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.
C. Building Design
1. An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for heating any swimming
pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are demonstrated to be of equivalent
Project No. V'Fr 15766
Completion Date
capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shall be
supplemented with solar heating. Details shall be inc[udecl in the building plans and shall be
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
2. All roof appurtenances. including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or
projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound bu~:ered 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 buirding plans.
D. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans)
1. 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).
2. 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.
3. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances,
and exits shall be striped per City standards.
4. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth
from back of sidewalk.
5. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall prohibit recreational vehicle parking on interior
circulation aisles other than in designated recreational vehicle parking areas.
6.Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City PLanner, City Engineer. and Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval priclr to issuance of building permits.
7. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office. industrial, and multifamiiy
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 p~rking 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.
E. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping
in this case of residential development, shah 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 era custom lot subdivision.
2.A minimum of 45 trees per gross acre, comprised of the follov,,ing sizes, shall be provided within
the project: 10% - 36-inch box or larger. 10% - 24- inch box or larger, and 80% - 15-gallon.
3. 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 neon ori August 21.
Project No. V'FF 15756
Completion Date
4. All private slopes in 5 feet or less 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 shal[ include a permanent irrigation system to be
installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
5. 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.
6. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible for /
the continuar maint~'Rance 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.
7. 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.
8. Special landscape features such as mounding. alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering
sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Base Line
Road;
9. 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.
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. 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.
F. Signs
1. 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.
2. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or town homes prior
to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior
to issuance of building permits.
Project No. V'FT 15766
Completion Date
G. Environmental
1. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City PlannE;r review and approval prior to the
issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation
to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construotion techniques provided, and if
appropriate, verity the adequacy ofthe mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked
for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in Ihe final report.
H. Other Agencies
1, 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 tht; 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.
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
I. Site Development
1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code. Uniform Mechanical
Code. Uniform. Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes.
ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact
the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable
handouts.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling 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.
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after trac~/parcel map recordation and
prior to issuance of building permits.
J. Grading
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.
2. 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. VTF 15766
Completion Oate
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
K, Dedication and Vehicular Access
1. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from / /
street centerline):
60 total feet on Base Line Road for Riqht Turn Lane / /
66 total feet on Hanley Avenue includinq cul-de-sac / /
2. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for __1__1__
approved openings: Base Line Road.
3. All existing easemGRts lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the / /
final map.
4. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall __/ /
be dedicated to the City.
5. Additional street right-of-wa~, 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 parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided.
L. Street Improvements
1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including. but not limited to: / /
Street Name Gutter Pvrn~ walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail
Base Line Road X X,b X,c X X X X,a X X
Hanley Avenue X X X X X X X
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 STD. 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of constrdction fee shall be provided for
this item. See Special Conditions.
2. Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. 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.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way. fees shall be paid and a / /
construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any
other permits required.
Project No. VTT 15766
Completion Date
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.
d. 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 shah 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 Nc. 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.
e. Handicappe'~ access ramps shall be installed on a!l corners of intersections per City
Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. 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 satisfactioo of the City Engineer.
g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be
installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots.
h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner plior to submittal for first plan check.
3. 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.
4. 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
1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall
be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map approval or issuance
of building 'permits. whichever occurs first. The followin.o landscaped parkways, medians.
paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance
District: Median island on Base Line Road.
2. 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,
3.All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the
developer until accepted by the City.
4. Median island and parkway landscaping on the following stred(s) shall conform to the results of
the respective Beauti~cation Master Plan: Base Line Road.
sc - lo/s6 7
N. Drainage and Flood Control
1. 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.
O. Utilities
1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system. water. gas. __/ /
electdc 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. __/ /
3. Water and sewer plans shah be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the __/ /
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the
Environmental HeaTf'h 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.
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. I__1__
2. Fire flow requirement shall be 2,500 gallons per minute. / /
a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the buildeddeveloper and witnessed by fire department __ I__1__
personnel prior to water plan approval.
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 the fire department 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" riser with a 4"
and a 2-1/2" outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the
Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers.
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 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. VT]' 15766
Completion Date
Other: 1994 Uniform Buildinq Code.
Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as
woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, fiammable liquids storage, high piled
stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if sprinkler system is adequate
for proposed operations.
8. 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.
10. Roadways within p_r?ject shall comply with the Fire District',<; fire lane standards, as noted:
X All roadways.
X Other: See attached Ordinance No. 22 for access/width requirements.
11. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emelgency apparatus.
12. Emergency access, a minimum of 26 feet wide, shall be provided, and maintained free and dear
of obstructions at all times, during construction in accordanoe with Fire District requirements.
13. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimn~ed a minimum of 14'6" from ground
up so as not to impede fire apparatus.
14. A building directory shall be required, as noted below: __ __./__
X Lighted directory within 20 feet of main entrance(s).
15. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire
Safety Division for specific details and ordering information.
16. Plan check fees in the amount of S~0 have been paid. An additional S 125.00 shall be paid:
X Prior to final plan approval.
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.
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) 47'7-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Q. 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.
Project No. V'FT 157e~
Completion Date
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.
R. Security Hardware
1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors.
2. 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.
3. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices.
S. Security Fencing
1. When utilizing security gates, a Knox box sub-master system secudty device shall be used since
fire and law enforcement can access these devices.
T. 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.
U. 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 1/2" x 11" sheet with the numbering pattern of all multi-tenant
developments to the Police Department.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW
FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15766, LOCATED ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 800 FEET WEST OF
VICTORIA PARK LANE IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14
DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF - APN: 227-091-14 AND 15 AND 227-111~12 AND 13.
A. Recitals.
1. Mark Taylor Inc. has filed an application for the Design Review of Vesting Tentative Tract
No. 15766, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Design Review request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 13th day of November 1996, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga held a meeting to consider the application.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of 1his Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, snd 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 November 13, 1996, including wdtten and oral staff reports, this Commission
hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to properly located on the nodh side of Base Line Road,
approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane, with a street frontage of approximately 800 feet,
a lot depth of approximately 1,100 feet, and which presently has an abandoned vineyard; and
b. The property to the north of the subject :site is a 40-foot wide strip of vacant land
known as "Railroad Avenue South" proposed to be vacated, an unused rail corridor, and single family
homes; the property to the south consists of a winery; the properly to the east is apadments and a
shopping center; and the property to the west is a mini~storage facility; and
c. The project is proposed to include a vacant parcel owned by the City's
Redevelopment Agency along the easterly boundary, which includes an easement for a rail spur
proposed to be vacated; and
d. The project design includes a 7-foot high sound attenuation wall along Base Line
Road consistent with the acoustical analysis (Bricken, August 22, 1996); and
e. The project design is consistent with the Victoria Community Plan, including, but
not limited to the use of the Victoda Community Plan's theme wall treatment along Base Line Road;
and
f. The project design includes 57 percent common open space and 58 percent usable
open space; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR V'TT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 2
g. The proposed density of 11.9 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the Medium
Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan; and
h. The vacation of Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street, known as
Hanley Avenue, is consistent with the General Plan; and
i. The project design includes a private drainage system to collect all surface water
runoff into catch basins that will connect with the public storm drain system; and
j. The project design includes a minimum 20-foot landscape buffer and 6-foot high
decorative wall around the perimeter.
k. The affected school distdcts have submitted written comments consistent with the
recommended conditions of approval requiring the developer tO padicipate in the high school Mello-
Roos District and payment of school fees to the elementary school dislrict.
I. The project has been designed with a minimum 200-foot setback from the nearest
single family residence and pad grades 11-12 feet lower than the single family residences to the
north.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced meeting on November 13, 1996, and upon the specific findings of facts set fodh in
paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and
b. That the proposed design 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 design is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions
of the Development Code; and
d. That the proposed design, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not
be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity and a mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for Vesting
Tentative Tract 15766 and adopted by separate Resolution of this Commission.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this
Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set fodh below and
in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by Ibis reference.
Planninq Division
1) Approval of Design Review for Vesting Tentative Tract No. 15766 is
granted subject to the applicant's obtaining ownership of Railroad
Avenue South and the property to the east, Assessor's Parcel
No. 227-111-12 and the vacation of the rail spur easement located
thereon.
2) Provide 225 square feet of private open space within patios for ground
floor units and 150 square feet for upper story units (RCMC
17.08.040.C.).
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR '¢f'T 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 3
3) Provide 125 cubic feet of exterior lockable storage space off patio area
or within garage/carports (RCMC 17.08.[)40.R.1 ,).
4) Provide washeddryer hookups inside all units (RCMC 17.08,040. R.2.),
5) Within garages, each car space shall b~; separated with a solid wall
except where two or more spaces are designated to a single dwelling
unit. For single garage car spaces, the; inside dimension shall be
increased to a minimum of 10 feet by 20 feet for convenience of use
(RCMC 17.08,090.C.4.b.),
6) All appliances and fixtures shall be energy conserving (RCMC
17.08.040.1.2).
7) All required visitor parking spaces shall be clearly marked with signs,
such as pavement markings and freestancling signs. A minimum of 66
visitor parking spaces shall be provided. Visitor parking shall be
provided within 150 feet of all units (RCMC 17.08.040.L.).
8) RV parking spaces shall be clearly marked with signs, such as
pavement markings and freestanding signs.
9) Provide a site directory monument sign at both project entrances to
direct visitors and emergency vehicles to buildings. The signs can be
up to 12 square feet in area, with a maximum of 8 feet high and must
be illuminated for legibility 24 hours a day. Contents shall include
building locations, driveway locations, address of each building, fire
hydrant locations (RCMC 14.20.080).
10) Any common mailbox structures shall be designed to architecturally
match buildings.
11 ) Provide climbing vines along northerly wall with small openings in base
of wall to encourage vines to grow on nor:h side of wall to discourage
graf~ti.
12) Construct sidewalk connection, with lockable gate, for access to future
Community Trail planned along the adjoining rail corridor to the nodh.
13) Provide decorative cap (i.e., stucco over) on stainNays to match patio
wall cap,
14) Replace vinyl lattice on carport ends with 2- to 3-inch metal tubing
espalier.
15) Carport fascia profile and texture shall match apartments.
16) Garage door pattern shall be varied.
17) Replace wood lattice on Building 2A with 2- to 3-inch metal tubing
espalier.
18) Add window on right*hand side of first floor of Building 2B.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 4
19) Provide subtle stucco color variations, such as varying between
buildings or using as accent on pop-out elements.
Engineerinq Division
1 ) Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street, Hanley Avenue,
shall be vacated and incorporated as pad of the project.
2) Verification of ownership change or letter of intent from the City of
Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency stating approval and
pending ownership change for the properly to the east, Assessors
Parcel No. 227-111-12, under current ownership by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, as shown within the project
boundary.
3) Construct Base Line Road full width from Day Creek Boulevard (future)
to the existing limit of full width improvements at Hanley Avenue,
including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, asphalt paving, sidewalk,
street lights, street trees, median island, bike trail (Class II), and all
necessary transitions both east and west of the project limits, except as
otherwise modified by the City Engineer. pursuant to City standards.
Also, provide the following:
a) Median island construction shall also include full landscaping in
accordance with the Base Line Road Master Plan.
b) Traffic Signal Improvements - install conduits (with pull rope),
including interconnect conduit, pull boxes, and poles for future
traffic signal at Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue.
4) Construct Hanley Avenue full width including, but not limited to, curb,
gutter, asphalt paving, sidewalk, street lights, and street trees, pursuant
to City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Parkway
improvements may be deferred on the easterly side with the exception
of street lights. The existing secondary access to Base Line Road shall
be abandoned and the access realigned and constructed to Hanley
Avenue as shown on the tentative tract map.
Right-of-way dedication of 66 feet, including the cul-de-sac, as shown
on the tentative tract map, shall be provided. The Developer shall
make a good faith effort to acquire off-site property interests necessary
to construct the required public improvements along Hanley Avenue, as
shown on the tentative tract map, and, if he/she should fail to do so, the
Developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for
approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements
pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City
acquires the properly interests required for the improvements. Such
agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs
incurred by the City to acquire the off-site properly interests required in
connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs
shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an
appraisal repor~ obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost.
The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to
commencement of the appraisal.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR VTT 15766 ~ MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 5
5) A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the
estimated cost of operating all new street lights during the first six
months of operation, pdor to building permit issuance or approval of the
Final Map, whichever occurs first.
6) No median breaks will be allowed between Victoria Park Lane and Day
Creek Boulevard (future), except at Hanley Avenue.
7) Gated driveways are to be in accordance with the City's gated driveway
entrance design guide for turnaround area.
8) Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue to be posted with R 26(s) "NO
ST(~PPING ANY TIME" signs.
9) The sidewalk along the Hanley Avenue cul.-de-sac shall be property line
adjacent.
10) On-site drainage shall be collected by a private drainage facility to the
satisfaction of the Building Official. Connection to a public drainage
facility or outletting into the public right-of-way shall be to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Bulldine & Safety Division
1) Provide private drainage easement at the north property line. No
drainage over slope is allowed (see Section A-A); collect and
discharge. Submit final hydrology report prior to issuance of any
permits.
2) Proof of right-of-entry to do work, if there is any work on surrounding
properties, shall be provided prior to issuance of grading permit.
3) Positive drainage away from buildings shall be provided.
Environmental Mitiqation
1) Extend the existing storm drain in Base Line Road west of Hanley
Avenue to connect with the catch basins at ",4ctoria Station and remove
the existing interim storm drains across Base Line Road.
2) Tree Removal Permit No. 96-13 is hereby approved and shall be valid
for a period of 90 days starting from the date of final map recordation
or issuance of any grading or building permits, whichever comes first,
subject to extension by the Planning Division. Developer shall replace
removed trees with Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum), minimum 15-
gallon size, and spaced at 8 feet on cen[er to maintain the windrow
character along the northerly boundary.
3) Developer shall follow all recommendations of the acoustical analysis
(Bdcken, August 22, 1996), including, but not limited to, constructing 6-
foot high sound barriers on all south facing private balconies of the five
buildings along Base Line Road and special glazing for windows and
sliding glass doors in certain units.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR
November 13, 1996
Page 6
4) Install a stop sign for egress at the project's main entry to Base Line
Road prior to occupancy.
5) Provide minimum 25-foot radius curb returns to Base Line Road at its
intersection with project's main entry and with Hanley Avenue (Street
6) Provide a minimum 150-foot inbound left turn lane for eastbound left
turn traffic at the intersection of Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue.
7) Construct Base Line Road full width on the northerly side from Hanley
Avenue to the westerly tract boundary.
8) Developer shall pay Transpodation Development Fees upon issuance
of building permits as fair share contribution for area-wide
improvements.
9) Project shall be subject to Mello-Roos Community Facilities District
requirements for fire services.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall cedify the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buffer, 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 13th day of November 1996 by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT#: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT OF 264 APARTMENTS W/CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION MAP
APPLICANT: MARK TAYLOR, INC.
LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, WEST OF VICTORIA PARK LANE
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. Time Limits completion Date
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
2. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced
participated in, or consummated, a Meflo-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. Prior to recordafion of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first,
the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However.
if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District. the applicant
shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such
existing District prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits.
whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and
prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this
condition shall be deemed null and void.
This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school
districts have entered into an agreement to privately accomrrlodate any and all school impacts
as a result of this project.
sc- 101se 1
P~oject NO VTT 15766
Completion Date
4. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to the issuance of building permits when no map is
involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water
facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the
Department of Community Development. Such [etter 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.
B. Site Development
. 1. 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 Victoria Community Plan.
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions
of Approval shall b~' completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9.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.
C. Building Design
1. An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for heating any swimming
pool or spa, uniess other alternative energy systems are demohstrated to be of equivalen't
capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shall be
supplemented with solar heating. Details shall be includeit in the building plans and shall be
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
2. 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 plane.
D. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans)
1. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum ou[side dimension of 6 feet and shall /
contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb).
2. Textured pedestalaFt'pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided /
throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open
spaces/plazas/recreational uses.
3. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances /
and exits shall be striped per City standards.
4. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth /__
from back of sidewalk.
5. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall prohibit recreational vehicle parking on interior /
circulation aisles other than in designated recreational vehicle parking areas.
6.Plans for any secudty gates shall be submitted for the City P[anner, City Engineer, and Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
7. 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 slotage 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.
E. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping
in this 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.
2.A minimum of 45 trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within
the project: 10% - 36-inch box or larger, 10% - 24- inch box er larger, and 80% - 15-gallon.
3. 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.
SC * 10198 3
Project No, VT'F 157~6
Completion Date
4. All private slopes in 5 feet or less 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.
5. 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.
6. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible for
the continual maintg'nance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas
within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept flee 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.
7. 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.
8. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering
sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Base Line
Road,
9. 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.
10.All wails shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the
design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
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.
F. Signs
1. 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.
2. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or town homes prior
to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior
to issuance of building permits.
Project No, VTT 15756
Completion Date
G. Environmental
1. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the /
issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation
to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if
appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked
for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report.
H. Other Agencies
1. 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.
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
I. Site Development
1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical
Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact
the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable
handouts.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling 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.
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and
prior to issuance of building permits.
J. Grading
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.
2. 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.
Completion Date
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
K. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from
street centerline):
60 total feet on Base Line Road for Riqht Turn Lane
66 total feet on Hanle¥ Avenue includina cul-de-sac
2. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for
approved openings: Base Line Road.
3. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the
final map.
4. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall
be dedicated to the City.
5. 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 parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided.
L. Street Improvements
1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to:
Curb & A.C. Side- Drive Street S~reet Comm Median Bike Other
Street Name Gutter Pvrnt walk Appr, Lights Trees Trail Island Trail
Base Line Road X X,b X,c X X X X,a X X
Hanley Avenue X X X X X X X
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 STD. 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for
this item. See Special Conditions.
2. Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. 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.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a
construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any
other permits required.
Project No+ VTT 157S6
Completion Date
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street ham.9 signing. traffic signal conduit, and / /
interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with an'./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 Cii~/Engineer.
(2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel
with pull rope or as specified.
e. Handicappe~' access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City /
Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with /
adequate detours dudrig 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.
g. 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 shal~ be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check.
3.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.
4. 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
1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall
be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prier to final map approval or issuance
of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscaped parkways, medians,
paseos. easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance
District: Median island on Base Line Road
2. 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 flnal map approval or issuance of building
permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer.
3.All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the
developer until accepted by the City.
4. Median island and parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of
the respective Beautification Master Plan: Base Line Road.
N. Drainage and Flood Control
1. 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.
O. Utilities
1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sani~:ary 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 ufi[ities as necessary.
3. 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 HeaT~ Department of the County of San Bernardinc. A letter of compliance from
the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first.
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 2,500 gallons per minute.
a.A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department
personnel prior to water plan approval.
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 the fire department 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 operab[e prior to delivery of any combustible buildin. g 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" riser with a 4"
and a 2-1/2" outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the
Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers.
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 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. V'FF 15766
Completion Date
X Other: 1994 Uniform Buildinq Code.
Note: Specia[ 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 sprinkler system is adequate
for proposed operations.
8. 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.
10. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted:
X All roadways.
X Other: See attached Ordinance No. 22 for access/wicith requirements.
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 a minimum of 14'6" from ground
up so as not to impede fire apparatus.
14 A building directory shall be required, as noted below:
X Lighted directory within 20 feet of main entrance(s).
15. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid ~;ntry key system. Contact the Fire
Safety Division for specific details and ordering information.
16. Plan check fees in the amount of $0__ have been paid. An additional S 125.00 shall be paid:
X Prior to final plan approval.
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.
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 FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Q. Security Lighting
1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimu~q maintained 1-foot candle power. /
These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell.
SC - 10/95 9
Project No. V'TT 15756
Completion Date
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. /
R. Security Hardware
1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. /
2. 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.
3. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. /
S. 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.
T. 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.
U. 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 directon/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 1/2" x 11" sheet with the numbering pattern of all multi-tenant /
developments to the Police Department.
so- ~0~s '~01~Z?/
PC ITEM A PC ITEM E PC ITEM F
VACATION OF EASEMENTS 14365 TT 15766 TPM 14972
BETTY M. DAN C. MARIA P.
MARK BERTONE MICHAEL COGHLIN MR. PETER BOWMAN
MADOLE &ASSOCIATES MARK TAYLOR INC. 1 LATIGO LANE
10601 GHURGH ST., #107 6623 NORTH SCOTTSDALE ROAD ROLLING HILLS ESTATES, CA 90274
RANCHO CUGAMONGA, CA 91730 SGOTTSDALE, AZ 85250
STAN MORSE MR. KEVIN KNOX
LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. MDS CONSULTING THE FIFTH DAY
1156 N. MOUNTAIN AVENUE 17320 REDHILL AVE., #350 741 E. BALL ROAD, #202
UPLAND, CA 91786 IRVINE, CA 92714 ANAHEIM, CA 92805
PC ITEMS B-D
ANTENNA ORD. P.C. APPLICANT'S MAILING
DAN C. LIST FOR NOVEMBER 13, 1996
NO MAILING LIST