HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996/08/14 - Agenda PacketCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
WEDNESDAY AUGUST 14, 1996 7:00 PM
Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center
Council Chamber
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California
I. CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance
Swearing in of Commissioners Bethel, Macias, and Tolstoy
Roll Call
Chairman Barker Vice Chairman McNiel
Commissioner Bethel Commissioner Macias Commissioner Tolstoy __
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
June 26, 1996
July 24, 1996
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial.
They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without discussion. lf anyone has
concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion.
A. VACATION OF A PORTION OF JASPER STREET - A request to
vacate a portion of Jasper Street, located south of Highland Avenue,
approximately 5 feet wide and 130 feet long - Tentative Tract 14072.
Page 1
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. A ll such opinions shall be limited to 5
minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP 15692 - PRUTTING - A subdivision of 4.75 acres of land into 4
parcels in the Very Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per
acre), located on the west side of Hellman Avenue, south of Hillside
Road - APN: 1061-611-02. Staffhas prepared aNegative Declaration
of environmental impacts for consideration.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT
15711 - DIVERSIFIED - A proposed residential subdivision of 283
lots on 80.39 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8
dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, generally
located north of Foothill Boulevard, east of Etiwanda Avenue, south of
the Interstate 15 Freeway and west of East Avenue - APN: 1100-141-01
&02, 1100-171-01 & 13, 1100-181-01 &04, and 1100-201-01. Staff has
prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for
consideration. Related File: Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment
96-01 and Tree Removal Permit 96-08.
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 96-15 - TUTOR TIME CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS
- The proposed development of a 10,220 square foot day care facility
on a 1.29 acre parcel within the Central Park Plaza shopping center,
located at the northwest comer of Terra Vista Parkway East and Ellena
West - APN: 227-182-09. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration
of environmental impacts for consideration.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 96-14 - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY - A request
to construct a 2,796 square foot convenience market/gas station on a
1.1 acre parcel within the Terra Vista Promenade shopping center
within the Comnaunity Commercial District of the Terra Vista
Community Plan, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard west
of Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18. Staff has prepared a
Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
Page 2
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION TO
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 93-15 - CAMPOS - A request to modify
a previously approved project to connect and expand two historic
landmark houses and convert into a restaurant of 2,530 square feet in
the Specialty Commercial District (Subarea 3) of the Foothill
Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 9634 and 9642 Foothill Boulevard -
APN: 208-153-24. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of
environmental impacts for consideration. Related File: Landmark
Alteration Permit 96-02.
G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 96-22 - HERITAGE BAG - A request to construct a 124,040
squa/e foot industrial building on 16.5 acres of land in the General
Industrial District (Subarea 14) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan,
located on the noah side of Fourth Street, east of Santa Anita Avenue -
APN: 229-283-72. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of
environmental impacts for consideration.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time andplace for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be
discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda.
VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS
H. ELECTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICERS
I. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 P.M.
adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent
of the Commission.
1, Gall Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
or my designee, hereby certijS, that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was
posted on August 8, 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
· ' "I::E:EiEEEEEEEE:E:EEE:E::':"""""""' .....
/
I
.,-. ,-,- ~ ~ ~ =; :": j~" ...... : ....... i ....... ' .... 'f' /
- i
--~E"I /' I
'""'.....~'%' ""~' I.........qF"
k
..: ~ ~ ( ,
CITY HALL
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer
BY: Jerry A. Dyer, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: VACATION OF A PORTION OF JASPER STREET - A request to vacate a portion
of Jasper Street, located south of Highland Avenue, approximately 5 feet wide and
130 feet long - Tentative Tract No. 14072
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
On September 12, 1990, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 90-115, and approved
Tentative Tract Map No. 14072. As a result of the plan check process, it was determined that a
portion of Jasper Street will need to be vacated prior to recordation of the final map (Exhibit "B").
The subject street fight-of-way vacation is approximately 5 feet wide and 130 feet long and is
located south of Highland Avenue. The vacation is consistent with the General Plan and the
Development Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding that the street vacation conforms
with the General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for further processing and
final approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Senior Civil Engineer
DJ:JAD:dlw
Attachments: Vicinity Map (Exhibit "A")
Portion of Jasper Street to be vacated (Exhibit "B")
ITEM A
Exhibit "A"
VICINITY MAP
HIGHLAND AVE.
_ ___~ ..........
9 8 ~ 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
~- c~ ~ HUNTER DRIVE
~' ~ 18 22
; 19
~ 13 14 15 16 17 20 21
~ ~ '~': - _
TRACT NO. 14072
AREA OF PROPOSED~
VACATION
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Tract No. 14072
EXHIBIT B
N
E.
"~ HUNTER
,'! DRIVE
, m
- Z 0 ,~' G ')
~ /' ~,2'
Z H:' 7,~ · .~. ~? ,'~. ,~
~:~.~. ~ ,~ .~.. ~.,,.
TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
COMMENT SHEET
MARCH 20, 1996
ACTION AGENDA
I. ROLL CALL:
Barker A PHcher A__
Coleman ~ Senft A__
Hahn X,~ Tolstoy ~
Hazegh __X Lumpp (Alternate) X__
Whitehead (Alternate) _
II. NEW BUSINESS
A. Tentative Parcel Map 15692 - A four-lot subdivision located on the west side of
Hellman Avenue, south of Hillside.
1. As part of the application, the applicant is proposing 15-foot wide local
equestrian trails around the perimeter of the project. In two locations, trees
are located within the proposed equestrian trail easement. One of the trees
is an oak in good condition. Rather than removing the trees, staff
recommends widening the trail at these locations to provide adequate
clearance. Trail fencing should be provided around the trees to prevent
interference with the trees.
2. No Community Trails are required for this area pursuant to the Trails
Implementation Plan. Community Trails are located along Hillside Road,
Wilson Avenue, and Beryl Street.
Staff Planner: Scott Murphy
Attachments: Parcel Map
ACTION: Recommended approval subject to:
1. Widening trail easement to swing fencing around Oak tree.
2. Providing 10' vehicle gate with 5' step through access where trails meet
Hellman Avenue.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Cormnission
FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer
BY: Maria E. Perez, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15692
- PRUTTING - A subdivision of 4.75 acres of land into 4 parcels in the Very Low
Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Hellman
Avenue, south of Hillside Road - APN: 1061-611-02. Staff has prepared a Negative
Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Associated with this
application is Tree Removal Permit No. 96-19.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map as shown on Exhibit "B".
B. Existine Zoninn: Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre).
C. Surroundin~ Land Use and Zonina:
North - Flood Control
South - Vacant
East Single Family
West Flood Control
D. Surrounding General Plan and Developments Code Desienations:
Project Site - Very Low Residential
North Flood Control
South - Very Low Residential
East Very Low Residential
West Flood Control
E. Site Characteristics: The property fronts Hellman Avenue and slopes to the southwest. A drain
is proposed to be installed at the southwest comer of the property to carry storm flows from the
site to the Flood Control easement to the west. There are three mature trees on the site, one of
which is an oak tree.
ITEM B
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORT
PM15692- PRUTTING
August14,1996
Page 2
ANALYSIS: The parcel map will subdivide the property into four lots. The two lots fronting
Hellman will be 22,500 square feet each. The remaining: two lots will be 79,620 square feet each.
The westerly lots can be further subdivided into 3 one-half acre lots each for a total of 8 one-half
acre single family custom lots at build out. This first portion of the subdivision will dedicate the cul-
de-sac for the ultimate condition and build the street fronting the first lots (see Exhibit "C").
Hellman Avenue ffonting the project will be fully improved.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
In completing the Initial Study, staff determined that the project could potentially affect a protected
mature oak tree. Staff has conditioned that the oak tree be preserved in place. Staff finds that the
potential environmental impacts are less than significant, in light of the special condition to preserve
the oak tree allowing issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project.
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 15692. If after such consideration, the Commission deems appropriate, then the
adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval would be in order.
Respectfully submitted,
Senior Civil Engineer
Attachments: Site Plan (Exhibit "A")
Parcel Map/Vicinity Map (Exhibit "B")
Alignment of future cul-de-sac (Exhibit "C")
Environmental Assessment: Part I and Part II (Exhibit "D")
Tree Removal Permit 96-19 (Exhibit "E")
Resolution and Recommended Conditions of Approval
IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA . ..... _,.. .....
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
/,
..................::'., - ·
.........,.,
RANCH0 CUGAMONGA ITEM: Site Plan
ENGINEERING DIVISION TITLE: TPM 15692
EXHIBIT: "A"
CITY OF ITEM: VICINITY MAP
RANCH0 CUCAMONGA TITLE: Tentative Parcel
Map 15692
ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT: "B"
· MASTER PLAN
PATRICIA PRUTTING
Ref: Tena~ive tract map
12710 (2-88)
CITY OF ~
RANCH0 CUCAMONGA ~TEM: Master Plan
ENGINEERING DIVISION TITLE: TPM 15692
EXHIBIT: "C"
'ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION FORM
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 guidelines; the California Environmental Quality
Act; and the City's Rules and Procedures to Implement CEQA. It is important
that the information requested in this application be provided in full;
INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. 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
required to provide missing information.
GENERAL INFOI~MATIOe~
Application Number for the project to which this form pertains:
Tentative Parcel ~4ap ~,~15692
Project Title:
Pat]:icia Prutting
Name & Address of project owner(s):
6453 nuckthorn Ave., Alta Loma, CA 91701
Same
Name & Address of developer or project sponsor:
Contact Person & Address:
Telephone N.mher: (909) 948-9490
Name & Address of person preparing this form (if different from above):
Telephone N~,~er:
C I T Y o f R A N %~_~O C U C A M O N G A
d'?r"/~/,~//"/,~
p~f~ rN'FORMATIO~ & DESCI~IPTION
Information indicated by asterisk (*) is not required of non-construction
CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff.
· 1) 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 photogaphs which show representative views into
the site from ~he 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-
West side of ~lellman Ave.
3) Project Location (describe):
between 1{illside & Wilson Ave., Alta Loma.
4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary):
1061-611-02
.75 AC.
*5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.):
206910
Net Site A/ea (total site size minus area Of public streets & proposed
dedications):
166,165 SF (Lots +- Equest. Easement and Drainage ~ment.
7) Describe any proposed general plan amen~unent Or zone change which would
affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary):
n/a
8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the
City of Pancho Cucamonga and other goverrunental agencies in order to
fully implement the project:
9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the
project including information on topography, soil stability, plants and
animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage 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
information (i-e., geological and/or hy~rologic studies, biotic and
archeological surveys, traffic studies):
n
Site is relatively flat recta gular in shape. Elev.+ 173~
on the North, Elev. ~ 1720 on the South, Elev. ~ 1735 on the East,
Elev. + I lZb on tne ~,~esn. ~'lood connrol debrl and f]ral~,.j~ basin
bounds'the North', vacant flood control property and drainage bounds
the wesn, exlszlng ~ellman ~ve. POUnces ~he Las~, vaca~L ~i.tvate lan
bounds the South.
The site is covered with light brush and wee~s that are ~sced 2-3
times a year as a weed abatement requirement. There are two medium
size trees on the site, one which may nave to De remove~ Ior future
cOhstruction. Of residence. No eXistLing trails are on or around the
property. There areno structures on n~e s~e.
The site soils are stable per sozis reporn Dy Z-i< ~ngzneer~g
dated, 11-2-84.
There is some view to the South. or the valley below anc~ uo the
North,the mountains over].ooking Alta Loma are close and very visih].
10) DeScribe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of .the site. Site
all sources of information (books, published reports and oral history):
The site was usedT. by the ioamosa Uater Company in the ~930's
as a distribution point for irrigation water for the adjacent
citrus groves. The book titled, "The History of Alta Loma"
~efers to irrigation in the 30's and 40's for citrus qroves.
11) Describe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site
(aircraft, roadway noise, etc-) and how they will affect proposed uses:
n/a Porposed uses will not be a noise.source.
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, th~ extent of development to occur with each phase, and
the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional
sheet(s) if necessary:
The TMP proposed use is for subdivision of the site into four lots,
two lots of + 22,500 s.f. and the remaining two lots of equal size.
I propose to build 1-hohse on each of the 22,500 lots (to be complet
in one year). I propose to apply for a tentative tract of six ·
additional lots total on the remaining two parcels, and improving
a cul de sac street into the oroiect within th9 ne~ct ~wn y~.
13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information o~ plants and
animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the
type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use
(one-fam/ly, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale
of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.):
Adjacent to the North is a San Bernardino County flood control
debri basin; adjacent to the west is flat flood control property.
with a drainage channel running through it; adjacent to th~ South
is vacant land with one house to the South of the vacant land.
Adjacent to the East and across the street is single family
residences on + 1/2 ac. sites. Per the City master plan this area
is all residential on L ac. lots. The existing houses have + 30'
setbacks to existing tIellman Avenue and are 1 to 2 story houses.
Rear yards of existings are 1/4 ac. in size to several ac. in size
14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale or character of the
surrounding general area of the project?
NO
15) Indicate the type of short-term &nd long-term noise to be generated,
including source and amount- How will these noise levels affect
adjacent properties and on-site uses- What methods of sound proofing
are proposed?
Then is no appreciable noise to be generated in the ultimate plan
of 8 custom residences. Short term noise will only be generated
by the construction of the intial two houses and this will be very
minimal.
-16) Indicate proposed removals and/or .replacements of n%~ture or scenic
trees:
There are only t~.xo medium trees on the site. The tree on ~roposed
lot ~2 may have to be removed for the construction of a house. ""
several trees will De planted as part o~ the landscaping o~ ~uture
houses.
17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into
which the site drains:
The site does not drain into any existing bodies of water.
The sitedrains to the South-West into an existing flood
Control ditch.
18) Indicate expected amount of water usage- (See Attachment A for usage
estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga
County Water District at 987-2591-
600 1200
a. Residential (gal/day) Peak use (gal/day)
b- Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) Peak use (gal/min/ac)
19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. X Septic Tank
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 987-2591.
a. Residential (gal/day)
b. industrial/Commercial (gal/day/ac)
~SIDENTIAL p~OJECTS
20) N~umber of residential units:
Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum
lot size:
20,300 S.F. to 24,500 S.F.
Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units):
The intial house will be lived in by owner. None of the
residences will be used for rent.
21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents:
n/a houses to be lived in by owner.
sale Price(s) $ to $
Rent (per month) $ to $
22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type:
4 bedrooms per house. (Brothers and myself.)
3 persons
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 shown
in Attachment B:
a. Elementary: -0-
1
b. Junior High:
-0-
c. Senior High:
COMMERCIAL, INDD~-rKIAL ~ INSTIT[rI'IONAL PROJECTS
25) Describe type Of use(s) and major function(s) of commercial, industrial
or institutional uses:
n/a
26) Total floor area Of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by
type:
n/a
n/a
27) Indicate hours of operation:
n/a
28) Number Of employees: Total:
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 C~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.
Yes the have contacted. Yes they can provide service
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 pro.perty, as well as the dates of use,
if known.
n/a
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.
n/a
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached
exhibits present the data and information required for adequate 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 required to
be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
5-10-95
Date: Signature: .
Owner
Title:
ATTACHMENT A
Water Usage
Average use per day
Residential
Single Family 600 gal/day
Apt/Condo 400 gal/day
C~---~rcial/Industrial
General and Regional Commercial 3000 gal/day/ac
Neighborhood Commercial 1500 gal/day/ac
General industrial 1500 gal/day/ac
Industrial Park 3000 gal/day/ac
Peak Usacje
For all uses
Average use X 2-0
Sewer Flows
Residential
Single Family 270 gal/day
Apt/Condos 200 gal/day
Cceercial/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 RANCH0 CUCAMONGA
PART II - INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
BACKGROUND
1. Project File #/Name: Parcel Map 15692
2. Related File(s)
3. Applicant: Ms. Patricia Pruttin~
Address: 6453 Buckthorn Avenue. Rancho Cucamon~a. CA
Telephone #: (909) 864-~050
4. Project Description: A request to subdivide 4.'75 acres into 4 single family lots in the "VL"
Residential District (1-2 dwellin~ units t~er acre] ~enerallv located south of Hillside Road west of
Hellman Avenue.
5. Project Accepted as Complete (date): September 14, 1995
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 on attached sheets. An explanation shall
also be provided in each instance where a potentially significant effect has been determined not to be
significant and is marked "No."
YES MAYBE NO
1. EARTH - Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic
structure? X
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or over covering
of the soil? X
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X
d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique
geologic or physical features? X
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on
or off the site? X
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, 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
Page 2
YES MAYBE NO
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such
as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure,
or similar hazards? X
2. MR - 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
3. WATER - Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water
movements, in either marine or flesh waters? X
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface water runoff?. X
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body? X
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of
surface water quality, including but not limited to
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interceptions
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 property to water related hnTards
such as flooding or tidal waves? X
4. 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 of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered
species of plants? X
c. Introduction of new species of plant into an area, or in a
barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X
Page 3
YES MAYBE NO
5. ANIMAL LIFE - Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species X
of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish, and
shellfish benthie organisms or insects)?
b. Reduction of the number of any unique, rare or endangered
species of animals? X
c. Introduction of new species of animals into mn area, or result
in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X
6. NOISE - Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase in existing noise levels? X
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
7. LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposal:
a. Produce new light and glare? X
8. LAND USE - Will the proposal result in?
a. Substantial alteration of the present or planned land
use of an area? X
9. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X
10. RISK OF UPSET - Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals
or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset condition? X
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or an emergency evacuation plan? X
11. POPULATION - Will the proposal:
a. Alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the
human population of an area? X
Page 4
YES MAYBE NO
12. HOUSING - Will the proposal:
a. Affect existing housing or create a demand
for additional housing? X
13. 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 present patterns of circulation or movement
of people and/or goods? X
e. Alterations to water-bome, rail, or air trifle? X
f. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists
or pedestrians? X
14. PUBLIC SERVICES - Will the proposal have an effect upon, or
result in a need for new or altered governmental services in
any of the following areas?
a. Fire protection? X
b. Police protection? X
c. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X
f. Other governmental services? X
15. 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
16. 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 gas? X
b. Communications systems? X
c. Water? X
d. Sewer or septic tanks? X
e. Waste water facilities? X
Page 5
YES MAYBE NO
f. Solid waste disposal? X
17. 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 baTards? X
18. AESTHETICS - Will the proposal result in:
a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the
public? X
b. Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open
to public view? X
19. 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
20. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal:
a. Result in the alteration of, or the destruction of a prehistoric
or historic archaeological site? X
b. Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric
or historic building, structure, or object? X
c. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values? X
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a. Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory? X
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
Page 6
YES MAYBE NO
occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time.
Long-term impacts will 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 of more separate resources
where the impact on each resource is relatively small,
but where the effect on the total of these 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
22. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
(Attach additional sheets with narrative description of the environmental impacts.)
1 .b. Development is expected to result in disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of
the soil which is an anticipated result of development. The subject project is consistent with the
land use map and no unanticipated impacts will occur.
1.e. The s~i~ type map f~r the site indicates the presence ~fHanf~rd-Green~e~d ass~ciati~n typi~ed by
slopes under 2 percent and slight erosion haTard. While the erosion baTard for this soil type is dust
suppression techniques during grading including but not limited to, water application to suppress
dust during grading and cessation of grading activity when winds cause dust to blow beyond the
construction site.
3.b. Conversion of open field to residential development will concentrate runoff, however no
unanticipated drainage issues are raised by the subject project and a drainage study is not required.
The subject project shall comply with drainage provisions in the Development Code and the
Building and Safety Code.
4.a. Two mature trees will be eliminated by the proposed project. They will be replaced upon
development of the created parcels.
4.b.The mature oak tree,along the southerly property line of Parcel 2, will be preserved in place per the
special condition for Environmental Mitigation.
21 .a. The project has the potential to affect one mature oak tree. The effect will not be significant due
to the special condition for Environmental Mitigation requiring that the tree be preserved in place.
23. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS
(An examination of whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other
applicable land use controls.)
Page 7
The subject 4 lot residential subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and with the zoning for the
district in which it is located.
24. 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 documents(s) pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The
following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that
apply):
X General Plan EIR
__ Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 Update of the General Plan
Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR
Victoria Planned Community EIR
Tetra Vista Planned Community EIR
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan EIR
Etiwanda North Specific Plan EIR
Other:
Other:
25. DETERMINATION - On the basis of this initial evaluation:
(To be completed by the Lead Agency.)
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL
BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find the proposed project CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT per Article 19, Class 1C, Section
15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
S)~nature ~ f~ / ~c
Ci_ty ofRancho Cucamon~a 2~3'17 l- ~,' ~/[
For Date
Page 8
26. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION (to be completed by applicant) -
I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I
have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project
plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or
mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur.
Signature: Date:.
Print Name and Title:
City of Tree Removal Permit
Rancho Cucarnonga DEVELOPMENT
GENERAL. INFORMATION OR ~O~ETHAN 5 T~EES OB 50' LINEAB FEET OF WIND~O
circumference of fifteen (15) inches or more and multi-trunks having a circumference of thirty (30)
inches or more (measured twenty-four (24) inches from ground level), without first obtaining a Tree
Removal Permit from the City.
.
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT~ J
NAME, ADDRESS E~EPHONE OF APPLICANT'~ ~ O~ ] ~ - ~ ~ ~ O
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PROPERTY OWNER (if other than applicant):
" :""'
J
ADDITIONAL FILING REQUIREMENTS
This application shall include a plot plan indicating location of all trees to be removed and retained.
The species, number, and size of the trees to be removed shall be so designated. If a tree is diseased,
then a written statement from a licensed arborlEt sta~ing the nature of the disease shall be required.
ACTION ~ Evaluation of this application is based on the criteria on the reverse side.
~ APPROVED ~ DENIED
By: Reasons:
Date:
Notification of application shall be given to property owners within a three hundred foot radius ts.q days
prior to approval. If no appeals are received, then the permit shall become effective ten (10) days from the
date of action. This approved tree removal permit is valid for 90 days from the date of final map recorda '
expiration of the permit.
Jim Borer BO ,ST -- No. 496 ......
Specimen Tree Relocation, Preservation, Procuremerit
Tree Inspection Report
Location Of Site: T~act Number 15692
Westside Of Hellman Ave. North
· Of Wilson,AVe. & .South Of Retention Basin
"Rancho Cucamonga, Ca .~.~, :':~i,. ":"
·
: , . ' '- -*:z-k; '-:.- ;-.~ ' .
' - ~ ' :: - ' ' '..' _ ' ':; :r--F,. ,'< · ' ' '
· .o ' ' .' - :'," ':
, .: -.._. .
-. - - -. ' -,, ~ -.. ..
Preparec/For: 'Ms~ Pat Pruttin'g: *-"':i:. ~:-" . ~k-'~-~:'!k%-'.~"'i%: ".
· '6453 Buckthorn AVe. "-'-' -
· .. _
· ~ Alta Loma, Ca." -
.,=!. , - ,....
' : - -'-.---~; .'b .'
-. .:..._ ....--.. ,.:~:.:~.-..,,!: '.
-. . - -.. :,, ': .f--.
Prepared By: Jim Borer -': ' .
· Certified Arb0rist//496 : '..
P.O. Box 1803 .
Rancho Cucamonga, Ca.
91729-1803
Submitted 7/19/96
P.O. Box !803 ' Rancho CucamoB, ga. CA 91736-9998 · (909) 948-1600
Jim Borer CERTIFIED ARBORIST -- No. 96
SpeCimen Tree Relocation, Preservation, Procur~:ment
Page One
Tree In.spection.Report
Tract 15692
There 'are three existing trees Within the above referenced property in the Alta Loma
area of Rancho Cucamonga. This Report has been prepared as a precedent to
Planning Review for Proposed Development of the site. While the trees are not within
the building structure location this Report is prepared to help evaluate the trees
condition .and compatability with the proposed 'development project.
Tree Number One is the large sljecimen QUercuS'.agrif01ia ( Coast Uve Oak) at the
southern property bo.undary'wit. h t. he nex~ parceL_The Tree has a diameter at breast
heighth of appr0kimately 36" when the multiple trunks are combined.' The overall size
is approximately 35' by 45'. The Tree is in a ,c, cjenerally healthy c6nd t 0n'g Wn its
location in ~h' u~ 'rr gated Setting. It has e~idence'of significaht ~eW:~]~'~h within the
last growing season. This ~ree has' a very ow bianch structur'e~'itb.one b0rizonta mb
laying, on th~ grodnd..The tree !s located ~'ithin a ~!ight depresSi0H.' possibly from the
inadvertant-dumping of soil and spoils over the years. ""--::;!{,.~'~:,~
· ~'~:~-'.:' '-: '-'. :::::~:-E_;~,.;,~'-'-:~' -?'-:'.i":~":"=..-;~:i:":---:.-7_~.~??.~:.'~'~',-:
=Fhe grade ;~'USt ~;0t t~e '~'~;di'~i~d anywhe~;~ =wi~hi~q {~'is f~ee~' ~ot ;;~,dib~ '~Cf gradin~ of-'
the horsetrail mUSt preclude the runoff of water into the Same radius. 'No planting or
irrigating should take place in this ai'ea either. Conditions mu~t closely malch those
under ·which this tree ha~ grown and matured or it could easily die. I recommend that'
the tree have a protective fence set aroundit during constructiOn'at the.drip line an'd
that it not be pruned or cleaned up until after' or near the very end of construction. At
that time no more than twenty percent of the live. f01 age should be removed to keep
from shock'ing the tree. No fertilization is recommended at this time or during
construction. . -' -- , "~
· .,- :-.-..:: ""'::':::-
Tree Numbers Two and Three are both Platanus racemosa ( California Sycamore )
clumps that are made up of many trunks..The trunt~s range in size from six to sixteen
inches in diameter at breast heighth. The clumps are approximately thirty feet by
twenty'feet in width and up to thirty feet in heighth. The existing growth within both
clumps is mostly regrowth from broken and died out stumps. The many fallen limbs
around. the base of the specimen near Hellmanare clear evidence of the state of
declin~ and ?egrowth that these ~vo trees have gone through. Within the context Of the
proposal to develop the site 1 recommend that these two trees be'removed and
replaced with better specimens after construction and placed in positions of
prominence within the new landscape.
P.O. Box 1803 · Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-9998 · (909) 948-1600
Jim Borer ¢ERT~F~ ~BOR ST --,'o. 496
I N
S cim Tree Relocation, Preservation, Procuremerit
Tree Inspection Repo~
Trac~ 1
Nie~her ot ~he ~o clGmps have long ~erm viabili~ and meretore I feel ~ha~ this is ~he
oppo~gnj~ ~o begin wi~h new specimens. No am0um ot pruning or corre~ive
measures ~n ever remove ~he deficiencies obvious by looking imo either clump from
~he immediate edge. The Suckers, splits, end ro~ed ~vi~ies ~ha~ produced ~he fallen
limbs in evidence are riddied ~hroughou~ and ~nno~ be overlooked. I mus~ advise a
word of ~mjon howeve~ as mere are subs~amial Poison Oak s~ands within each ot ~he
Sycamore clumps as well as ~he Oak.
I am prepared ~o help io retain ~he Oak as n~ded during cons~ru~ion however ~he
fencing should provide mos~ ot ~he pro~ec~ion ~ha~ ~e Tr~ would need. Please call me
it any questions arise in ~he review ot ~his Repo~ ~.~,
.r..~:~'.~ '..; ~:::,.~.--:: .'~ .,,.--.... ~.:.-.-:.~.;?~, . . .. _~. ~-:..:~:?
,-~-; :-- .- ' ' · :,' ..... ' c - · ,~.; ' --. '", ,.- . ' ,
:7'.~_TzTT.-_, ,-. /-:-',.-: , .:, L:; ...-.. ,-.- _,-:
": '. '~ ::" --."':. ;:.~.'~: ;-::· i'- ~:~7 ~ ·
.....:.-:-:-, .: ..:..-...-
:',,,- ;:-'. : .,_ ,- -., . ,
· _-. .... ~ ..... ,
· . ._~.~..... -~. ,-, .
P.O. Box tS03 · Rancho Cucnmonga. CA 91730-9998 · (909) 948-1600
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NUMBER 15692, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE
SOUTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -
APN: 1061-611-02
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 15692, submitted by Ms. Patricia Prutting,
applicant, for the purpose of subdividing into 4 parcels, the real preperty situated in the City of
Randno Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, State of California, identified as APN 1061-611-02,
located on the west side of Hellman Avenue south of Hillside Road; and
WHEREAS, on August 14, 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:
1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan.
2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
General Plan.
3. That the site is physically suitable for the preposed development.
4. That the preposed 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 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 Negative Declaration based upon
the findings as follows:
1. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State
CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and
the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the
Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard
to the application.
2. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated
into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will
OCCUr,
3. 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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15692- PRUTTING
August14,1996
Page 2
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.
SECTION 3: Tentative Parcel Map Number 1569;! is hereby approved subject to the attached
Standard Conditions and the following Special Conditions:
Engineering Division
1. The portion of the interior street fronting parcels one and two shall be a fully
dedicated 60-foot local street. The balance of the cul-de-sac street shall be an
irrevocable offer of dedication to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
2. An irrevocable offer of dedication shall be made for a public drainage easement
between the future two southwesterly lots as seen in the applicant's master
plan or previously proposed Lots 5 and 6 of unapproved Tract 12710 and along
the southern property line of the southwest lot fronting San Bernardino County
Flood Control property.
3. The portion of the intedor street fronting Parcels I and 2 shall be fully improved
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, inclu,'4ing barricades per City Standards.
4. A Drainage Acceptance Agreement shall be recorded for Parcels 3 and 4.
5. The existing overhead utilities on the project side of Hellman Avenue shall be
underground along the entire project frontage extending to the first pole off-site
(north and south), prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy,
whichever occurs first. The Developer may request a reimbursement
agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from
future developmenfJredevelopment as it occurs on the opposite side of the
street. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within
six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of
the developer to reimbursement shall terminate.
6. The drainage and equestrian easements shall be reserved as "PRIVATE"
drainage and equestrian easements on the final map.
Plannine Division
1. A 12-foot ddve approach with lO-foot vehicle gate and 5-foot step-thru access
for horses shall be installed where local feeder trails meet Hellman Avenue
upon development of Parcels 1 and 2.
2. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions,
fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall
be submitted for Ci:ty Planner review and approval prior to approval and
recordation of the Final Parcel Map and pdor to approval of street improvement
and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including
fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15692-PRUTTING
August14,1996
Page 3
a. Local Feeder Trails (i.e., private equestrian easements) shall, at a
minimum, be fenced with two-rail, 4-inch lodgepole "peeler" logs to define
both sides of the easement; however, developer may upgrade to an
alternate fence material.
b. Local Feeder Trail entrances shall also provide access for service
vehicles, such as veterinarians or hay deliveries, including a 12-foot
minimum drive approach. Entrance may be gated provided that
equestrian access is maintained through step-thrus.
c. Local Feeder Trail grades shall not exceed 0.5 percent at the
downstream end of a trail for a distance of 25 feet behind the public right-
of-way line to prohibit trail debds from reaching the street. Drainage
devices may be required by the Building Official.
3. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the
keeping the equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said
animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the
option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of
directors of homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs.
4. The CC&Rs are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the
Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.
A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer.
5. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a
construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110,
and so noted on the grading pTans. The tocation of those trees to be preserved
in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed
landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's
recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming
methods.
Environmental Mitiqation Measures
1. The existing oak tree shall be preserved in place in accordance with Municipal
Code Section 19.08.110. The equestrian easement shall be widened to
provide a minimum I O-foot clearance between the tree trunk and trail fencing.
Buildinq and Safety
1. A 6-foot private drainage easement shall be provided between private
equestrian easement and proposed parcels with a 3-foot + improved drainage
swale for cross lot drainage.
2. The drainage swale shall be altered as necessary to accommodate the trees
that are to be preserved.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY Of AUGUST 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15692 - PRUTTING
August 14, 1996
Page 4
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
ATTEST:
Larry J. Henderson, Acting Secretary
I, Larry J. Henderson, Secretary of 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 Cty of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14th day of August, 1996 by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. [_~fl, b cYT/
Those items checked are Conditions of Annroval.
A. Dedications and Vehicular Acces~
1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails,
public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans
and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails,
etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way for the perimeter streets (measured from
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.
V/ 4. Comer 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:
6. Reciprocal access easements ensuring access to all parcels shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with
the final parcel map.
7. Reciprocal access easements ensuring access to all parcels 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 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.
10. Private drainage easements for cross-int drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the
final parcel map.
I __ 11. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet
I measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel
street tree easement shall be provided.
12. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary
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 Se. ction 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 Imorovement~
V I. All public improvements, (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas,
etc. ) shown on the plans andJot tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street
improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches,
sidewalks, street lights, and street trees.
__ 2. A minimum, of 26- foot wide pavement within a 40- foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be
constructed for all half-section streets.
3. Construct the following missing perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to:
Street Name Curb AC Side- Drive Street So'eat Comm. Median Bike Other
& Pvrat walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail [sl~md Trail
Guner
Notes: (a) Median Island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement construction and overlays will be
determined during plan check. (c) Is so marked, sidewalk will be curvilinear per STD, #114, (d) If so marked, an in-lieu
of*construction f*ec shall bc provided for this item,
2
4. improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans including street trees and street lights, prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
b. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction
permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's office in addition to any other permits required.
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic, street name signing, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed on any new construction or reconstruction of major,
secondary or collector streets for future signals. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at
3 feet outside of BCR, ECR or any other locations appruved by the City Engineer.
Notes: (I) All pull boxes shall bc No. 6 unless otherwise specified by the Cit~ Engineer. (2) Conduit shall bc 3-inch galvanized
steel with pullrope.
e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all comers of intersections per City Standards or as
directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring consInaction shall remain open to Waffle at all times with adequate detours
during constraction. A street closure permit may be required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover
the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
g. ConcenWated dsainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City
Standards, cxcept for single family lots.
h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check.
5. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private strects shall 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 CiW Engineers office in addition to any other permits required.
6. Street trees, a minimum of 15 - gallon size or larger shall bc installed per City Standards in accordance
with the City's street tree program.
7. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted
policy. On collector or larger street, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including
driveways.
8. A Permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any work within the following right-of-way.
9. All public improvements on/he following streets shall be operationally complete prior to the issuance of
building permits.
C. Public Maintenance Areas
I. 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 parcel map approval. The following landscaped
parkways, medians, paseos, easements, wails, or other area:; shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance
District:
J__ 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or forrn the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts
shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final 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. Parkway 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 approved by the City Engineer.
__ 2. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from
the project area. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necassary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic
calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA, prior to
occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first.
3. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final parcel
map approval. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
4. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property
from adjacent areas.
V/ 5. A permit from the San Bemardino County Flood Control District is required for work within it's right-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 overflows in the event of blockage in a sump
condition.
4
E. Imnrovement Completion
I. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, an
improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the Developer and the City will be required
for:
improvemere ce~ific~te shall be placed upo~ the Final Map, stafin~ thai lhey will be completed upon
developmenl for:
F. Utilities
I. Provide separate utili~ seaices to each parcel including sanita~ sewerage system, water, gas, elec~ical
power, telephone and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the UtiliW Standards. Easements shall
be provided as required.
2. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and cons~cted to meet requirements of the Cucamonga CounW
Water Dis~ict (CC~), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Diswict, and the Environmental Health
Department of the CounW of San Bemardino.
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 relocation of existing utilities as neeessay.
G. General Requirements and Approvals
1. ~e tentative map approval is valid for the 24 mon~ period following the approval date. Time extensions
may be granted by the Planning Commission, if requested prior to the expiration date.
~ 2. Final grading plans for each parcel shall be as required by the Building and Safe~ Division prior to
issuance of grading pe~its.
3. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Reswictions (C C & R's) approved by the Ci~ Anomey is
required prior ~o approval of the final parcel map.
4. An easement for a joint use driveway shall 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 City covering the estimated cost
of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District , among the newIy 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 finaI parcel map approval.
5
__ 7. Prior to fmalization of any development phase, sufficient imiSrovement plans ihall be completed beyond
the phase boundaries to assure secondary, access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map.
8. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Re,,ional and Master Plan Draina,,e Fees shall
be paid prior to final parcel map approval.
9. Pen'nits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right-of-way.
__ 10. A signed consent and waiver fon'n to join and/or ~'orm the Law Enforcement Community Facilities District
shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final parcel map approval. Formation costs shall be borne by the
developer.
__ 11. Prior to recordatinn of the final parcel map, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the
establishment ofa MelIo-Roos Community Facilities Dis~ict for the consu'uction 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 fmaI p~trcel map. Further, if the affected school district has
not formed a Mello-R. oos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of
the project and prior to the recordation 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~itiesDistrictrequiremen~:sf~rtheRanch~Cuca.m~ngaFirePr~tecti~nDistrict
shall apply to this project.
13. Pursuant to provisions of California Resources Code Section 21089(b), this application shall not be
operative, vested or final, nor will building permits be issued or a map recorded, until (I) 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 Bernardino; and (2) any and all required handling charges, are paid to the
County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino. The applicant shall provide the Engineering Deparunent 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 thereunder, except for payment of any required handling
charge for filing a Certificate of Fee Exemption, this condition shall be deemed null and void.
Re,,'. 8/I/95 6
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA '
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15711
DIVERSIFIED - A proposed residential subdivision of 283 lots on 80.39 acres of
land in the Low-Medium Residential Development District (4-8 dwelling units per
acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, generally located north of Foothill Boulevard,
east of Etiwanda Avenue, south of the Interstate 15 Freeway and west of East Avenue
- APN: 1100-141-01 & 02, 1100-171-01 & 13, 1100-181-01 & 04, and 1100-201-01.
Related Files: Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 96-01 and Tree Removal Permit
96-17.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Pro_iect Density: 3.5 dwelling units per acre
B. Surrounding Land Use and ZoninE:
North - Vacant; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) and Medium
Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre)
South - Vacant; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) and Medium
Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre)
East Single family residential and Vacant; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units
per acre), Open Space, and Office within City of Fontana
West Vacant and Single Family Residential; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling
units per acre) and Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre)
C. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Low-Medium Residential
North - Low-Medium Residential, Medium Residential, Open Space, Proposed School
South - Low-Medium Residential, Commercial and Office
East Low-Medium Residential and Open'Space
West Low-Medium and Medium Residential
ITEM C
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 15711 - DIVERSIFIED
August 14, 1996
Page 2
D. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and slopes ~;enerally from north to south at roughly 3
percent. Several windrows of mature Blue Gum F, ucalyptus trees exist along the perimeter
property lines of the proposed subdivision. Several single family residences exist along both
sides of Church Street and will remain with the future development of this subdivision. No
significant public improvements exist along the perimeter or within the site boundaries.
BACKGROUND: The proposed subdivision is made possible by the recent approval of related
Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 96-01, which createci a subarea (The Etiwanda South Overlay
District) that allows for the smaller lot sizes and reduced lot dimensions for the Low-Medium and
Medium Residential Development Districts when applying the Basic Development Standards of the
Etiwanda Specific Plan. The Specific Plan Amendment was approved by the City Council on
August 7, 1996.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant is proposing to subdivide the,' site into 283 lots, including a lot for the
public park. The proposed subdivision design conforms to the recently adopted development
standards for the Etiwanda South Overlay District. The lots are proposed to range in size from
5,000 to 13,175 square feet with an average lot size of 6,265 square feet. A series of lettered
lots is also included as a part of this subdivision. These lots result primarily along the
undeveloped sides of new streets where the new streets are designed to be curvilinear to create
a greater sense of visual interest. Also, a majority of the cut-de-sac streets, that are adjacent
to the primary collector streets within the subdivision, will have pedestrian and landscaped
paseo connections. All of the new streets have been designed to be less than 600 feet in length
from the point of a secondary access to comply with the City's emergency access policies.
An interim detention basin will be located below the park site at the southern end of the project
site, near Foothill Boulevard. The basin is necessary due to the increased runoffanticipated
by the development of this subdivision and the lack of drainage infrastructure in the area. A
5-acre neighborhood park is proposed as a part of this subdivision per the City's General Plan
(see Exhibit "F").
B. Master Plan: Because of the awkward shape of the proposed subdivision, staff required the
developer to prepare a Master Plan for future development of all contiguous parcels in the area
(see Exhibit "C"). The result is a series of stub streets that will provide future access to these
adjacent parcels. The subdivision will be accessible from the existing perimeter streets of
Etiwanda Avenue, East Avenue, and Church Street. In addition, "A" and a portion of "L"
Streets have been designed to local collector widths to serve as a primary spine for the
southerly portion of the tract.
C. Design Review Committee: On June 18, 1996, the Committee (McNeil, Lumpp, Henderson)
reviewed the project but did not recommend approval,, primarily due to the concerns associated
to the conceptual Grading Plan where a large number of lots had drainage from rear yards
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 15711 - DIVERSIFIED
August 14, 1996
Page 3
going into individual yard drains and out to the major streets. On July 16, 1996, the Committee
(McNeil, Lumpp, Fong) reviewed the revised Grading Plan on a Consent Calendar basis and
recommended approval of the revised Grading Plan in which all lots had been redesigned to
front lot drain to the local streets. With that, the Committee recommended approval of the
project subject to conditions contained in the attached action agendas from these meetings (see
Exhibit "H") and the attached Resolution of Approval.
D. Technical Review Committee and Gradine Committee: On June 19, 1996, the Technical
Review Committee reviewed the project and determined that, with the recommended special
and standard Conditions of Approval, the project is consistent with all applicable standards and
ordinances. The project was originally reviewed by the Grading Committee on June 18, 1996,
where modifications to the design were recommended. The Committee again reviewed the
project on two separate occasions (July 16 and August 6, 1996) where the revised plans and
grading concept consistent with the recommendations of the Design Review Committee were
reviewed and recommended for approval.
E. Parks and Recreation Commission: On June 20, 1996, the Parks and Recreation Commission
reviewed the conceptual layout of the proposed 5-acre park within the boundaries of this
subdivision and recommended approval of the layout as sho~vn in Exhibit 'F."
F. Tree Removal Permit: In conjunction with the subdivision application, the applicant has
submitted Tree Removal Permit 96-17 for the removal of all of the 84 trees that currently exist
on the property. A majority of the trees are of the Blue Gum Eucalyptus variety, which is
recognized in the Etiwanda Specific Plan as to not be the preferred Eucalyptus species adjacent
to residential development. An arborist report was prepared to access the health and
preservation potential of all trees on the property. The arborist recommended that 48 of the
trees on-site were either dead or seriously declining in health and should be removed. All of
the trees that could be preserved are in conflict with recommended public improvements or
positioned as to prevent development of some lots as shown on the Tentative Map. The
Etiwanda Specific Plan provides for the removal of the Blue Gum Eucalyptus windrows
subject to replacement with Spotted Gum Eucalyptus. Therefore, staff has incorporated
Conditions of Approval pertaining to the replacement of a minimum of 84 trees into the
attached Resolution of Approval. In doing so, staff will work closely with the applicant to
provide new Eucalyptus windrows of better species along the perimeter property lines per
Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study (see Exhibit
"G"). Staff determined that the subdivision could have a significant adverse impact on the
environment in several areas (tree removals, drainage, transportation and circulation, noise, public
services) unless proper mitigations are incorporated into the approval of this project. As mitigation,
staff has included Conditions of Approval into the attached Resolution of Approval that will serve
as mitigation measures if the subdivision is approved. If the Planning Commission concurs with
staff recommendations, then issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration would be in order.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 15711 - DIVERSIFIED
August 14, 1996
Page 4
CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public heating in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices were sent to all property owners
within a 300 foot radius of the site as well as an expanded notification area within the Etiwanda
South Overlay District and within 1,000 feet of the subdivision. A neighborhood meeting was held
on April 23, 1996, to discuss the subdivision and related Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment. The
subdivision layout, although not the focus of the meeting, was generally supported by the property
owners in the area. Staff has received one letter objecting to the subdivision (see Exhibit 'T').
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Environmental
Assessment and Tentative Tract 15711 and Tree Removal Permit 96-17 through adoption of the
attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions and issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration.
Respectfully submitted,
City Planner
BB:SH:mlg
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map
Exhibit "B" - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit "C" - Conceptual Master Plan
Exhibit "D" - Conceptual Landscape Plan
Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Grading Plan
Exhibit "F" - Conceptual Park Plan
Exhibit "G" - Initial Study, Part [I
Exhibit "H" - Design Review Committee Action Comments dated June 18, 1996
Exhibit 'T' - Correspondence from Mr. J. Andy Gumey
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
City of Rancho C~can~ga .'
Etiwanda Specific Ran :' :".
/ /2. '- ":
~ . / /
/4 - , - i:. , . '/"'M"
/ !.=', = ' :' ' = ./ L
,..i,-.
~,' ~,, :.'
~, "'j 'M'
i:'
~ ;= PYOP LM2
...~,, . .-. -u~ /,F
, ... ..." 2! !FoothilB~.Sl~ecficRan
..... ,--_'..-'>-~-:-'-'4' ·:'
'--':- ............. :,"'~ 'h .... I' ..3 ".~z~
,~:-. ~ ..... ~.':'i.,.,,..--..:~:,
= _:~- ~:.~. ,.(~' ,-
_~ :~-~.:-~'- /'
+..-, ..--:+.'-,~.?..-'.s :.~ ...........
..~.: .......~:,.~,_.:..-..:-
Site Utilization Map
Foothill Meadows A
~~,,,. Tentative Tract No. 15711
"'~::,'::'::1.:~i5..~,,:::,'':'';~'~: Rancho Cucamon~ C A.--- :"'
EXHIBIT "A"
o.,,,,,,.,D,,c.,.c Foothill Meadows~-~~'
,~_..e~,J:L Tentative Tract No. 15711 :~:- :'~":~: ......~:
...... ' .................."'Rancho Cucamo~ CA..~ "" :. :: :,. :::.
EXHIBIT "B"
I,/ <
Master Plan of Adjacent Properties ~ L
o.,,.,.,,,o,,o,cFoothill Meadows .....C
~A:~,n'e--~;l,.TentaUve Tract No. 15711
....... '-,--.,-..~.' .........Rancho Cucamo·
EXHIBIT 'C" "
~Z'~ :~5;-2~ "
~%:-,.~ EC Z:':-.'-- ;-".'.',' '"
·"
-,. .
...... , . ~ -;
· ..., i-
~~-,5:: .
"
Conceptual Landscape Plan
D,,..,.,..D..c,.,c Foothill Meadows'
--/~,t-/e-~,,o. Tentative Tract No. 15711
............. , ..............Rancho CucamF_,W,g, CA.
EXHIBIT "D-I"
SHEET 1
SEE SHEET 5
C:2
./,. ) !
S ......... L ........... -· .'
; . ..~ ...... . .......,~-., ..' :; .........
~:~..;,.t
SEE SHEET 8 Conceptual Grading Plan
ITI
SEE SHEET 2
~
SEE SHEET 6 *_~___.~,.,_!.,._~.~_~,~,_,,.~---~,-
Ii hj;
' " //~ Conceptual Grading Pla~
/
/
/ s.~ s
'i L.i"-
~ ..... ,
] - -=-~-~[ ~.~: -~ .:~ ~-'.: ~ ..... ....
.; .... ....
': ..I.I
] .: Conccptual Grading Plan
L-
,
.... ~ SHEET 4
I
Ill
o ~.f-t-
Conceptual Grading 1
SHEET G
~<~'~ ~"'J ~ ......................"~'~' ~" K
___: ..../- ,-, _.-
' ' ' ' ' ' Alternate Grading Plan rio
PARK CONCEPT PLAN
L
-4z'v~e-~-o.Tentanve Tract No. 15 7 11:.,:7~,..~. ':.,.
EXHIBIT "F"
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY - PART II
BACKGROUND
1) Project File #/Name: "F~hf~,m[','~;-, 'T~c-F /_GTII
2) Related File(s): E--Jr, w:...J, Sh,-r/;; f~=.,//-¢f~..~kJr- P~-a
3) Applicant: ~12:),v~rs,(2, u-~ t~,~,*;~..,.
Address: /03c',0 ('2r,,.r.,c-o- C~-,"'k-' ~r,,r~- f,f__.,
Telephone #: (.~df') Lf~/./5'00
4) Project Description: -;'~3 ~,q^./x. ,/-:.r-'/7~-~5,cL-~l~ ) or-~w,j/~,
.- ~ -- y
5) Project Accepted as Complete (date):
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 on attached sheets. An explanation
shall also be provided '/fi each instance where a potentially significant effect has been determined not to
be significant and is marked "No."
Yes Maybe No
I. EARTH. Will the proposal result in:
a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in the geologic structure? QO
b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction or over covering of the
soil? Q E3
c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features?
d) The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic
or physical features? Q Q
e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the
site?
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 orthe bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?QQ
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as
earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards? E3 Q
Yes Maybe No
II. AIR. Will the proposal result in.'
a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? Q
b) The creation of objectionable odors? Q El ~"
c) Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally or regionally? []
III. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in currents, orthe course of direction ofwatermovements,
in either marine or fresh waters? Q []
b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff? Q ~' Q
c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? [] Q
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? [] []
e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface
water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity? [] El 9/''
f) Alteration of the direction or rate of ground waters? [] Q
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 property to water related hazards such as
flooding or tidal pools?
IV. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of
plants(includingtrees, shrubs, grass, crops, andaquaticplants)? []
b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered
species of plants? El []
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 crop? [] []
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)? [] []
b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered
species or animals? [] []
Yes Maybe No
c) Introduction of new species of animals into the area, or result in
a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? Q Q
d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? El El
VI. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels? El
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? El
VII. LIGHT AND GLARE. Wifl the proposal.'
a) Produce new light and glare? El
VIII. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an
area? El E3""' El
IX. ' NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? El El
X. RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve:
a) A risk of an 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 population of an area? El
XII. HOUSING. Will the proposal:
a) Affect existing housing, orcreate a demand for additional housing? El
XIII. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Wifl the proposal result in.'
a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? El
b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? El El
c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? El El
d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of
people and/or goods? El El
e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Q El
f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or
aedestrians?
Yes Maybe No
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. Willtheproposalresult in a need
for new 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?
f) Solid waste disposal?
XVII. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in:
a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (exclud-
ing mental health)?
b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
XVIII. 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?
XIX. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in:
a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational oppodunities?
b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact
area?
Yes Maybe No
XX.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal.'
a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
historic archeologicai site? El El [~/'
b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or
historic building, structure, or object? El Q ~'
c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? El El Ga/
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 the major periods of California
history or prehistory? El El
b) Short-term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to thea:~'dvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A
short-term impact on the environment is one; which occurs in a
relatively brief, definite period of time. Long-term impacts will
endure W.e_ll into the future.) El El
c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A preject 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.) El
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly? El
XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION.
(Attach additional sheets with narrative description of the environmental impacts.)
DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS.
(Attach additional sheets examining whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning,
plans, and other applicable land use controls.)
XXIV. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program El R,
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 thb eaErlier analysis. ' .....
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "less than Significant with Mitigation Incorpo-
rated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier
document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
XXV. DETERMINATION. (To be completed by Lead Agency.)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
a) I find that the proposed project cozzld not have a significant effect on the environment, and
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared .............................. El
b) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the bnvironment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because rniti~atio. nze~szzres described on
an attached sheet have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared .............................. F_iZ'
c) I find the proposed project ~z~y have a significant effect on the environment, and
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required .........................
Date' Pr~p~rer's Signature
XXVI. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION (To be completed by applicant.)
I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have
read this Initial Study and proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or
proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measure old the effects or mitigate
· th . nt her clearly no~~~en occur
Date Signature
Print Name and Title /
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Initial Study - Part II
Discussion of Environmental Evaluation
Project Description: TT 15711 - Diversified Pacific Homes
21~3 single family residences and a 5 acre public park on 80 total acres
Located between Etiwanda and East Avenues. south of the Interstate
Freeway
I. Earth:
a) The site is not within any known unstable earth condition area.
b) The site will be graded to accommodate the lots and streets for the proposed
subdivision. The grading will be conducted under the supervision of licensed
surveyor or registered geologist. The impact is not significant.
c) The topography of the site will be altered slightly to accommodate the building pads
and streets. 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 subdivision should not affect any oceans, bays, rivers, or lakes.
g) The majority of California is susceptible to earthquakes. The project is not within any
known special study zone that will require additional studies or that poses a unique
hazard.
II. Air:
a) The number of vehicles anticipated with this development is consistent with the
information contained in the General Plan EIR. The resultant air emissions will not
have a significant impact on air quality.
b) The proposed residential subdivision will not create any objectionable odors.
c) The proposed subdivision will not result in alteration to the climate or air movement.
IlL Water:
a) The development of residential lots will not affect the currents or course of water
movement.
b) The absorption rate will be altered because of the paving and bardscape proposed.
All waters will be conveyed to approved drainage facilities which have been
designed to handle the flows. A drainage study was prepared for the project and an
on-site detention basin will be constructed until such time that all permanent drainage
facilities area completed in the immediate area in conformance with the Etiwanda
drainage policies. A Master Plan for drainage was considered as part of the Etiwanda
Initial Study Part 2 Response
TT 15711
Page 2
Specific Plan EIR and the mitigation outlined in the Master Plan will be implemented
with the development. The impact is not significant.
c) The project will not alter the course or flow of flood waters.
d) The development of single family lots will. not affect the amount of surface water in
any body.
e) The project will not be discharging into any surface waters.
f) Due to the deep water table in this area, no alteration of groundwater is expected to
occur with this project.
g) No direct additions or withdrawals of ground water are proposed.
h) The project will be tying into existing facilities which have already been sized in
anticipation of this development. The an:tount of water usage is not significant.
I) The project is outside of the established flood plain.
IV. Plant Life:
a) The site consists of grasses with a large number of trees (predominately eucalyptus)
scattered across the site. The diversity of plant life will be altered with the removal
of the grasses and a majority of the trees and the introduction of new plant species.
As a mitigation for the removal of the tree:~, replacement planting per the City' s Tree
Preservation Ordinance will be required. With this mitigation as a condition of
approval for development of the project, the change in plant life is not expected to
be significant.
b) There are known rare, unique, or endangered species on-site.
c) Landscaping introduced to the site will be compatible with existing landscaping
material for development in the immediate area and appropriate for the climactic
conditions of the area. The plant pale~.'te will continue the pattern of existing
development in the area.
d) No agricultural crops exist on-site.
V. Animal Life:
a) There are no known animals that currently occupy the site on a regular basis.
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) In that no animals currently use the site on a regular basis, the development of homes
will have no impact on fish or wildlife habitat.
VI. Noise:
a) The development of residences will increase the noise level by the mere fact that the
property is currently vacant. The level of noise increase, however, is not significant.
b) The noise levels for a portion of this project closest to the Interstate 15 Freeway
could be severe given the close proximity of the Interstate 15 Freeway. A noise
study has been prepared to access the impacts associated with constructing this
development in close proximity to the freeway. The study recommended that a
screen wall be constructed along the freeway and that certain construction elements
Initial Study Part 2 Response
TT 15711
Page 3
(i.e. dual-glazed windows) be provided to mitigate noise to safe levels. With these
mitigations in place, people should not be exposed to severe noise levels.
VII. Light and Glare:
a) New light and glare will be created because the property is currently vacant. The
amount and type of lighting is residential in nature and illuminates the immediate
area. Spillover is not expected.
VIII. Land Use:
a) In conjunction with this application, an amendment to the Eti~vanda Specific Plan is
proposed to reduce the minimum and minimum average lot size for the zoning
category that this proposed project falls under. Despite the smaller proposed lot
sizes, the density of the proposed project is still well within the prescribed range of
4 to 8 dwelling units per acre that is allowed for the LM zoning within the Etiwanda
Specific Plan. The homes are permitted within this area and are consistent with the
Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR. Therefore, no significant land use impacts associated
with this subdivision or the related Specific Plan Amendment are anticipated.
IX. Natural Resources:
a) The number of homes proposed will not significantly increase the rate of natural
resource consumption.
X. Risk of Upset:
a) Single family residences do not typically contain materials of the type of quantities
that could lead to an explosion or the release of hazardous materials.
b) The homes will not interfere with emergency response or create additional concems
related to emergency response in the area.
XI. Ponulation:
a) The project is consistent with the expected population distribution in the area and as
anticipated in the Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR.
XII. Housing:
a) The residential project will not create the need for additional housing.
XIII. Transportation:
a) The project will generate new trips because of the new construction. The number of
trips is consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR and is accommodated by the
existing and required infrastructure. The impact is insignificant.
b) The project will have no effect upon parking facilities.
c) While the project will not generate significant numbers of trips. The number of trips
is consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR and is accommodated by the
existing and required infrastructure. The impact is insignificant.
d) The project will maintain the existing circulation paRems for the movement of goods.
Initial Stud)' Part 2 Response
TT 15711
Page 4
e) The project will not affect air, water, or rail traffic.
f) The application is expected to increase the risk of traffic hazards because of the new
construction. Pedestrian amenities (sidewalks) will be installed as part of the project.
The impact is not significant.
XIV. Public Services:
a) The Fire Department is currently serving the general area, but the increased number
of homes to the area will create a potential strain on existing services for the area.
However, emergency response times should not be effected making the overall
impact insignificant.
b) No substantial new police services are expected with the project.
c) The school districts having jurisdiction have notified the City of the current
impaction problems. School fees for the construction or upgrading of school
facilities will be collected as a mitigation at the time of building permit issuance.
d) The project is in an area where a future neighborhood park is planned. The project
design includes a 5 acre park at the southern end of the site to serve the residents of
this project and immediate areas; therefore, impact has been reduced to a level not
significant.
e) The site will provide new roads as part of the development. The tract will be
annexed into an assessment district and landscape and lighting district to cover the
costs of maintenance. The impact is not significant.
f) No other government services are expected to be affected by this proposal.
XV. Ener~ov
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 facility will not result in the need for power or natural gas systems.
b) The facility will not result in the need for new communication systems.
c) The facility will use water readily available in Etiwanda and East Avenues.
d) The discharge from the site will be handled by the existing and/or planned sewer
facilities.
e) Existing or planned storm drain pipes are provided as well as an interim on-site
detention basin will be constructed per the drainage study for the project to convey
drainage to acceptable locations.
f) No significant solid waste disposal will be necessary to serve the site, for the project
will only generate amounts of solid waste typical of single family residential
development.
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.
Initial Study Part 2 Response
TT 15711
Page 5
XVIII. Aesthetics:
a) The project will not obstruct any view or vista currently available to the public.
b) The project will conform to the strict design guidelines of the City thereby
eliminating any offensive site visible to the public.
XIX. Recreation:
a) The project design includes a future 5 acre neighborhood park in conformance with
the City's General Plan.
b) No known religious or sacred uses are presently conducted on-site.
XX. Cultural Resources:
a) No known prehistoric or historic archaeological site exists within the project
boundaries.
b) No known prehistoric or historic buildings exist within the project boundaries.
c) The project should not impact any unique ethnic cultural values.
XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance:
a) No known animal or wildlife species are expected to be substantially adversely
impacted by the project.
b) There are no known long-term environmental impacts that are expected to occur as
a result of the project.
c) The project is part of the larger Etiwanda Specific Plan area for which an
Environmental Impact was prepared and certified. The application most likely will
contribute to the cumulative impacts within.the Planned Community and the City.
Therefore, the application will be required to comply with the mitigation measures
outlined in the Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR to mitigate any potential cumulative
impacts to a level of insignificance.
d) It is not anticipated that the project will have any adverse impacts on human beings.
EARLIER ANALYSES
The application is part of the Etiwanda Specific Plan for which an EIR was prepared and
certified by the City. This document is available at the Planning Division, City Hall,
10500 Civic Center Drive.
The Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan was also referenced in
evaluating the potential impacts of the application. This document is available for review
at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive.
Specific studies evaluating potential impacts created by this project (i.e. Arborists report,
Drainage Study, Traffic Impact Analysis) are also available for review at the Planning
Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive.
SEE SHEET 5
~:~ U -~ c... ,/ .... '/,_.,~.,) " ~'~
.. . . ,.-'.:~
' " ........'
I.,
*~>0
, , ,., ~.~
...... '
..... . ,
:' ' s~ s.~ ~ Conceptual Oradh~ Plan
SHEET 2
~1
.-.
~,':~r~=:.~:~.:-~. SEE SHEET 2 ~ ~ ~ ~
Gencep~ual Graclin~ ~la~
SHEET 5
EXHIBIT 8
SOUND WALL
LOCATIONS
SCALE: 1" = 525'
~-'~'-"~'-'~'-'~'-'~ - SOUND WALL
;T
6' I,-
I
IZt,(X) 7' I
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
5:00 p.m. Steve Hayes June 18, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15711 - DIVERSIFIED - A
proposed residential subdivision of 283 lots on 80.39 acre:s of land in the Low-Medium Residential
Development District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, generally located
north of Foothill Boulevard, east of Etiwanda Avenue, south of the Interstate 15 Freeway and west
of East Avenue - APN: 227-231-07, 09, 12, 16, 32; 227-191-15; 227-181-24; and 227-261-11.
Related File: Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 96-01.
~meters:
The approximately 80-acre site takes up a majority of the vacant land in the area bounded by the
Interstate 15 Freeway, Etiwanda Avenue, Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue. Church Street
bisects the site in the northern third of the project area. Several windrows of mature Blue Gum
Eucalyptus trees (many of which have been infested by the Eucalyptus Borer Beetle) exist along
perimeter property lines of the site. The applicant plans to retain those trees that are in a healthy and
thriving condition and not interfering with any on-site or required public improvements. Several
residences exist along Church Street and will remain with the development of this subdivision.
Due to the increased runoffanticipated by the development of this subdivision, an interim detention
basin will be located at the south end of the site, adjacent to Foothill Boulevard. Adjacent to and
east of this basin is a 450-foot wide Edison utility. easement. A 5-acre neighborhood park is planned
just north of the detention basin. Given the numerous adjacent undeveloped parcels in the area and
the irregular shape of the project, staff required that a conceptual Master Plan for the future
development of these parcels be prepared. As aresuh, several stub streets are planned within this
subdivision to allow for future access to adjacent parcels.
Street "A" is designed as a local collector street with an expanded fight-of-way width. Also, all lots
will either side or rear on to this street to provide a more efficient traffic flow. Vehicular access to
all of the existing perimeter streets will be available with the current design of the subdivision. The
site is void of any structures and slopes gently from north to south at roughly 3 percent.
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. Develooment Standards: The Planning Commission considered the related Etiwanda Specific
Plan Amendment 96-01 on Jane I2, 1996. At the time of the writing of these comments, the
Planning Commission had not yet considered the Amendment application. If the Commission
does not recommend approval of the Amendment, then the Committee should direct the
applicant to revise the subdivision map to be in conformance with the existing development
regulations or have the matter continued until after the Amendment is considered by the City
Council.
EXHIBIT "H"
DRC COMMENTS
TT 15711- DIVERSIFIED
June 18, 1996
Page 2
2. Park: The Parks and Recreation Commission will be considering the design of the proposed
park at its June 20, 1996 meeting. Any corranents relative to the location and access to the
park will be forwarded to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Staff feels the proposed
location and access and the conceptuai are acceptable to serve the area.
3. Master Plan: The Committee should consider whether the proposed conceptual Master Plan
allows for sufficient opportunities for adjacent parcels to develop and have an acceptable
means of vehicular access. In staffs opinion, the design of the subdivision does allow
sufficient opportunities for vehicular access and development within the parameters of the
Etiwanda Specific Plan.
4. ProtOwpical Elevations: Although house designs were not included with this application, the
developer has provided prototypical elevations and a plot plan for a typical street to illustrate
their design intent. The Committee should consider whether the prototypical elevations reflect
the desired design quality and character for the Etiwanda community.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Monument Theme Wall: Should the same or similar treatment that is shown at the project
entrance from Etiwanda at "A" Street be repeated at any other project entries?
2. The future street connections to adjacent parcels in the Master Planned area should remain as
stub streets and not have a temporary substandard bulb installed as shown on Grading Plan.
3. The four lots that side-on to Etiwanda Avenue should be widened to allo~v for special house
designs consistent with the requirements of the Etiwanda Specific Plan to be plotted on these
lots.
4. A fairly significant and healthy Eucalyptus windrow exists along the north property line of
Lots 5, 6, and 15 through 19. It appears that this windrow can be saved. If the ~vindrow is
saved, then the buildable area for these lots (especially Lots 6, 15 and 19) becomes quite
limited. Recommend that these three lots be enlarged accordingly.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. A minimum of 5 feet should be provided between the back of sidewalks and block ~valls along
the streets to allow sufficient room for landscaping.'
DRC COMMENTS
TT 15711 - DIVERSIFIED
June 18, 1996
Page 3
2. Provide 5-foot offset in wall setback along East Avenue per Etiwanda Specific Plan Figure 5-
28A (Grading Plan shows consistent 10-foot setback). This will increase usable rear yard area
for Lots 1-5.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that, if the related Specific Plan Amendment is recommended for approval by the
Planning Commission, then the project be recommended for approval by the Committee with any
outstanding items included as Conditions of Approval for the Subdivision Map. However, if the
related Specific Plan Amendment is recommended to be ctenied by the Planning Commission, then
the Corm'nitlee should either recommend denial of the Subdivision Map or reconsider the map after
a final decision has been made by the City Council.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Heinz Lumpp, Larry Henderson
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
The Committee recommended that the item return on a consent calendar basis prior to scheduling
for the Planning Commission addressing the follo~ving i'Iems:
1. An alternative Grading Plan should be prepared that has all drainage for lots on the south side
of local streets to drain northward back to the local streets, as opposed to providing a yard
drain in rear yards and draining it southward to the, street.
2. Eliminate the "sawtooth" lot lines on the rear of Lots 84 through 93.
3. The "O" Street cul-de-sac should be pulled back away from "I" Street to allow for a paseo
connection of greater depth to be provided.
4. The map should be designed as to not have more than three 50-foot wide lots in a row
together.
5. A plan with a heirarchy of wall types should be prepared for review of the Planning
Commission. The Etiwanda and "A" Street intersection should have the most elaborate entry
statement.
6. Special attention should be given to the plotting on homes for the four lots adjacent to
Etiwanda Avenue at such time a design review submittal is reviewed by the Committee. It
was suggested that the lots should be large enough to accommodate the largest footprint
planned for the project.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
CONSENT CALENDAR
ACTION COMMENTS
JULY 16, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15711 - DIVERSIFIED - A
proposed residential subdivision of 283 lots on 80.39 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential
Development District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, generally located
north of Foothill Boulevard, east of Etiwanda Avenue, south of the Interstate 15 Free~vay and west
of East Avenue - APN: 227-231-07, 09, 12, 16, 32; 227-191-15; 227-181-24; and 227-261-11.
Related File: Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 96-01.
The Committee (McNiel, Lumpp, Fong) recommended that the entire gading concept for the project
be revised to that all lots front lot drain to the local streets. Once revised to the satisfaction of the
Grading Committee and staff, the project can be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review
and approval.
J,Andy Gurney
Hunter Safety Instructor
HEI 0748
12924 Chestnut Ave.
Cucamonga'Oal. 91739-9602
(909) 899-773] 8 0 996
Ci i Flancho Cucarno~
..... -" Plannin~ Division
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 15711, A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 283 LOTS
ON 80.39 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE
ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, EAST OF ETIWANDA AVENUE, SOUTH OF THE
INTERSTATE 15 FREEWAY AND WEST OF EAST AVENUE AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 1100-141-01 & 02, 1100-171-01
& 13, 1100-181-01 & 04, AND 1100-201-01.
A. Recitals.
1. Diversified Pacific Homes, Ud. has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract
Map No. 15711, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafier in this Resolution, the subject
Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 14th day of August 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.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This CommissiOn hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public headng on August 14, 1996, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to 80.39 acres of property generally located north of Foothill
Boulevard, east of Etiwanda Avenue, south of the Interstate 15 Freeway and west of East Avenue
and is presently unimproved; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is vacant, the property to the south
consists of vacant land, the property to the east is vacant, and the property to the west is single
family residential and vacant; and
c. The application contemplates the subdivision of 80.39 acres of land into 282 single
family residential lots that have an average lot size of 6,265 square feet plus one lot for a 5-acre
neighborhood park and 13.28 acres for an interim drainage detention basin; and
d. The applicetion contemplates the removal of all 84 Eucalyptus Blue Gum trees that
currently exist on the property; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TT 15711 - DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES
August 14, 1996
Page 2
e. The site is within the Etiwanda South Overlay District and is zoned Low Medium
Residential by the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
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 I 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
any applicable specific plans; and
b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General
Plan. Development Code. and any applicable specific plans; and
c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and
d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and
e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and
f. The design of the tentative tract will not oon~ict with any easement acquired by the
public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the properly within the proposed
subdivision.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration,
together with all written and oral repods 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, further, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application.
b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into
the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur.
c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the
Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project
will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife
depends. 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 forth in
Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below
and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TT 15711 - DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES
August 14, 1996
Page 3
Planninq Division
1 ) The final map shall be redesigned with no more than three lots in a row
at the minimum width of 50 feet to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
Environmental Mitiqation Measures
1 ) Tree Removal Permit 96-17 is hereby approved subject 1o the following
Conditions:
a) The approval is for the removal of all 84 trees that currently exist
on the property.
b) The removed trees shall be replaced at a minimum one-to-one
ratio with minimum 15-gallon size trees. These trees shall be of
the Spotted Gum Eucalyptus vadety and provided in windrows
along perimeter properly lines, in accordance with Etiwanda
Specific Plan requirements, to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
c) Any wood infested with longhorn borer beetles shaft be chipped,
removed, and buried at a dump site.
d) This approval shall be effective following a 10-day appeal period
and shall be valid for a period of 90 days, which shall star from
the date of issuance of a grading permit, subject to extension.
2) Screen walls shall be constructed along the Interstate 15 Freeway, and
other locations around the project perimeter, to mitigate noise levels as
recommended in the preliminary noise study. Also, cedain construction
elements (i.e., dual-glazed windows) shall be provided at such time
houses are contemplated within the subdivision. These elements shall
be provided as recommended in the preliminary noise study, and a final
noise study, which will be required for review and approval of the City
Planner prior to the issuance of any building permits.
3) A 5-acre neighborhood park shall be constructed in accordance with the
recommendations of the Parks and Recreation Commission within the
boundaries of the subdivision. in lieu of payment of park fees. The Park
shall be completed upon completion of Phase One of development as
shown of the proposed subdivision map.
4) Construct those portions of the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area master
plan of storm drains necessary to serve and protect the development.
The current master plan is in the process of being revised by the City.
The developer shall receive credit for the cost of permanent master
plan facilities up to the amount of the related drainage fees in effect at
the time reimbursement is requested and shall be reimbursed for
excess costs from future fee collection in accordance with City policy.
5) Construct an interim detention basin as follows, or as modified per an
adopted modification to the current master plan of storm drains justified
by a final drainage report approved by the City Engineer:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TT15711- DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES
August14,1996
Page 4
a) Provide an ultimate design for the basin to serve the entire
developed tributary area.
b) Install sufficient capacity to mitigate the increased runoff from this
development, with an outlet system capable of handling the
ultimate basin design (entire developed tributary area) with a
minimum amount of modification as incremental development
occurs.
c) Provide an easement to the (::::ity for the portion of Lot 284
containing the initial basin and an irrevocable offer of dedication
for the remainder of the ultimate basin design.
d) An assessment district shall be formed for maintenance of the
detention basin or a maintenance agreement shall be executed
to the satisfaction of the City E;.ngineer and the City Attorney
guaranteeing pdvate maintenance of the facility, but providing the
City with the right of access to maintain the facility if private
maintenance is insufficient and allowing the City to assess those
costs to the developeddeveloper'. Agreement shall be recorded
to run with the properly.
e) The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to
recover the proportionate cost of the land and ultimate basin
related facilities (outlet, etc.) frorn future development using the
basin.
Enqineerino Division
1) Restripe the existing Etiwanda/Church intersection to provide left turn
lanes southbound on the north leg of Etiwanda Avenue and westbound
on the east leg of Church Street. Widen the pavement on the west side
of Etiwanda Avenue, south of the int~;rsection, to accommodate the
southbound through-lane Iransition, ~o the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
2) A good faith effort shall be made to acquire right-of-way and install
ultimate intersection improvements at lhe nodhwest corner of Foothill
Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue, to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. If eftotis to acquire full right-of-way fail, interim
improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer,
which may include condemnation of a portion of the ultimate right-of-
way.
3) Etiwanda Avenue shall be improved a.'; follows:
a) Install full east side improvements along the project frontage and
install a right turn lane, per Standard 119, south of Street A.
Off-site street improvements shall be limited to AC pavement and
berm; cobble curb, gutter, street lights, and parkway
improvements may be deferred until development of the adjacent
property.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
'R'15711- DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES
August14,1996
Page 5
b) Reconstruct the north leg of the Foothill Boulevard/Etiwanda
Avenue intersection. Widen both sides to 35 feet, measured from
the Etiwanda Avenue centerline, for 500 feet north of the
intersection, with 100-foot transitions to existing pavement
thereafter. Widen an additional 12 feet on the west side along the
frontage of the northwest comer parcel, for a right turn lane with
a 60-foot transition beginning at that paroel's north property line
(or equivalent design within available right-of-way, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer). Install the curb return for the
northwest comer in its ultimate location, relocate the intersection
drainage facility, and upgrade the existing traffic signal. Install AC
berm in lieu of cobble curb and gutter nodh of the intersection
curb returns on both sides of Etiwanda Avenue.
c) Reconstruct existing pavement, as determined necessary during
plan check, to provide an ultimate street section along the project
frontage and related transitions, extending 22 feet west of the
street centerline.
d) The developer shall receive credit against, and reimbursement of
costs in excess of, the Transportation Development Fee for
permanent backbone improvements, including reconstruction of
the middle 38 feet of pavement and traffic signal upgrades, in
conformance with City policy. The developer may request a
reimbursement agreement to recover the cost of permanent
off-site improvements other than the backbone portion from future
development of the adjacent property. If the developer fails to
submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the
public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the
developer to reimbursement shall terminate.
4) Church Street shall be improved, from East Avenue to Etiwanda
Avenue, as follows:
a) Full improvements along all project frontages, including the out
piece frontage on the nodh side. Out piece parkway
improvements may be deferred, as approved by the City
Engineer. if that property owner does not agree to dedicate
additional right-of-way.
b) Widen the north side west of the west tract boundary in a straight
line from the end of frontage improvements to the existing curb
east of Etiwanda Avenue. Instaft AC berm where curb and gutter
is lacking and reconnect existing drive approaches.
c) Widen the south side by 12 feet west of the west !ract boundary
to meet existing pavement east of Etiwanda Avenue. Install AC
berm where curb and gutter is lacking.
d) Reconstruct the existing pavement as determined necessary
during plan check so that an ultimate street section is provided.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TT 15711 - DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES
August 14, 1996
Page 6
e) Widen the pavement on the west leg of the Church Street/East
Avenue intersection sufficient te stripe an eastbound left turn
lane.
0 The developer shall receive credit against, and reimbursement of
costs in excess of, the Transportation Development Fee for
permanent backbone improvements, including reconstruction of
the middle 38 feet of pavement, in conformance with City policy.
The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to
recover the cost of permanent off-site improvements other than
the backbone portion from future development of the adjacent
property. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement
agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being
accepted by the City, all dghts of the developer to reimbursement
shall terminate.
5) Traffic signal warrant studies shall be performed for the intersections
of East Avenue/Foothill Boulevard and Church StreetJEtiwanda Avenue.
If either of these signals are warranted they shall be installed with
Transportation Development Fee credits for the City's portion.
6) Streets "A", "L," and "l" shall be constructed full width, including street
lights, with Phase I development. Off-site parkway improvements may
be deferred until development of the adjacent properly. The developer
may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the cost of
improvements south of the centerline on "A" and "1" Streets and east of
the centerline on "L" Street from future development of the adjacent
property. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement
agreement within 6 months of the public; improvements being accepted
by the City, all fights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate.
7) Construct "R" Street full width along the out piece, including sidewalk
and street lights. Install street trees :and parkway landscaping if the
property owner agrees to maintain them. The developer may request
a reimbursement agreement to recover ~he cost of improvements south
of the centerline from future redevelopment of the adjacent property.
If the developer fails to submit for said rsimbursement agreement within
6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all
rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate.
8) The existing overhead utilities (telecornmunications and etectrical) on
the east side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first
pole south of the south tract boundary to the end-of-line pole south of
Church Street. prior to public improvernent acceptance or occupancy,
whichever occurs first. Any services crossing Etiwanda Avenue shall
be undergrounded at the same tirne. Poles along the Foothill
Boulevard/Etiwanda Avenue intersectior~ widening and off-site right turn
lane may be relocated. The developer may request a reimbursement
agreement to recover one-half the City ~ldopted cost for undergrounding
from future development as it occurs across the street from the project
frontage and to recover full costs off site. If the developer fails to
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TT15711- DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES
August14,1996
Page 7
submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public
improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to
reimbursement shall terminate.
9) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on
the north side of Church Street shall be undergrounded from the first
pole east of the east tract boundary to the end-of-line pole east of
Etiwanda Avenue, prior to public improvement acceptance or
occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing Church Street
shall be undergrounded at the same time. The developer may request
a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost
for undergrounding from future development as it occurs across the
street from the project frontage and to recover the full costs off site. If
the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within
6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all
rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate.
10) Landscape Maintenance District plans shall incorporate cost efficient,
low maintenance designs (drought resistant species, rockscape, etc.),
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The maximum slope within
publicly maintained landscape areas shall be 3:1.
11 ) Use a single lot for the basin and MWD/SCE/So. Cal. Gas easements.
12) Lots A, G, and H are unbuildable lots. They shall either be merged with
adjacent properties or granted to the City in fee for future merging upon
development of the adjacent properties.
13) An improvement certificate shall be placed on the Final Map stating that
required public improvements fronting Lot 284 will be completed upon
development of that parcel, once the interim detention basin has been
determined to be no longer necessary:
a) Foothill Boulevard shall be improved to Caltrans standards, along
the entire parcel frontage, with parkway improvements per the
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. A contribution in lieu of
construction will be required for the future median island.
b) The existing overhead utilities (less than 66 Kv) on the project
side of Foothill Boulevard shall be undergrounded along the entire
parcel frontage, consistent with City policy.
14) The Interstate 15 Freeway right-of-way adjacent to the project shall be
landscaped in accordance with a Master Plan for the entire segment of
the freeway within the City as approved by Caltrans. the City Planner
and City Engineer. However, if Caltrans will not allow the incremental
construction of this freeway landscaping with this project, a cash
payment in lieu of construction as a contribution to a future
comprehensive project shall be made to the City prior to the issuance
of building permits. The developers responsibility shall be limited to
the area east of the east edge of the first travel lane.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
'F1'15711- DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES
August14,1996
Page 8
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
ATTEST:
Lany J. Henderson, Acting Secretary
I, Larry J. Henderson, Acting Secretary of 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 14th day of August 1996, by the following vote-to-
wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT#: Tentative Tract 15711
SUBJECT: 283 Lot Single Family Residential Subdivision
APPLICANT: Diversified Pacific Homes, Ltd.
LOCATION: S/o I-15 Freeway, E/o Etiwanda Avenue, W/o East Avenue, N/o Foothill Boulevard
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 comi)letion 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. Approval of Tentative Tract No. 15711 is granted subject to the approval of Etiwanda Specific
Plan Amendment 96-01.
3. The developer shah commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced,
participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire
station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all
specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the District's
property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in accordance with
its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all applicable laws and
regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation
of the final map occurs.
4. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first,
the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District for the 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.
Completion Date
5. 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 herein, Development Code
regulations, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
: 5. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the
adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map.
6. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner.
including proper illumination.
7. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property
owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape
maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to
the issuance of building permits.
8. Six (6) foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double
wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining
property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail. all contiguous property
owner at least thirty (30) days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project's
perimeter.
C. 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. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in
accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The
location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be
shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's
recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods.
Project No. TT 15711
Completion Date
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigations shall be continuously
maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold
and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be
conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition.
6. 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.
7. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering
sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Etiwanda
Avenue. East Avenue. Church Street. and Foothill Boulevard.
8.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.
9. All wails shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the
design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
D. 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.
E. 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, verity the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked
for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report.
2. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of
implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to
post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the
amount of $ to be determinec!, prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory
performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City
to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation
measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents
shalr be considered grounds for forfeit.
Project No. 11' 15711
Completion Date
in those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the
applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the City Planner prior to
issuance of building permits. Said program shall identity the reporter as an individual qualified
to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented,
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
F. Site Development
1. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tractJparcel map recordation and
prior to issuance of building permits.
G. 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.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
H. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets,
community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment
and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be
reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
2. Dedication shall be made of the following fights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from
street centerline):
44 total feet on Church Street
44 total feet on East Avenue
50 total feet on Etiwanda AvE;nue
65 .total feet on Foothill Boulsvard
3. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards.
4. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for
approved openings: East Avenue, Church Street. and Etiwanda Avenue.
5.Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or
noted on the final map.
6. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the
final map.
4
Project No, TT 15711
Completion Date
7.Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall
be dedicated to the City.
8. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests
necessary 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 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 appreved by the City prior
to commencement of the appraisal.
I. Street Improvements
1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped
areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards.
Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement.
drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees.
2. Construct the following perimeter street imprevements including, but not limited to:
Street Name
Foothill Boulevard
Etiwanda Avenue
Church Street
Eas~ Avenue
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. (e) cobble curb. (f) as necessary to serve existing residences. (g) installation of traffic
striping and signage, including R26 "no parking any time" signs.
3. 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 Engineers Office in addition to any
other permits required.
Project No ~'15711
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 ~ny new construction or reconstruction
project along maior or secondary streets and at inter'sections for future traffic signals and
intemonnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside
of BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer.
Notes:
(1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200
feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer.
(2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel
with pull rope or as specified.
e. Handicapped 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 during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash
deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded
upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
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 prior to submittal for first plan check.
4. 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.
5. 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 stl'eet intersections and commercial or
industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as recluired.
6. A permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any work within the following right-of-way: Foothill
Boulevard and the I-15 Freeway.
J. 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 following landscaped parkways, medians,
paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance
District: East Avenue, Church Street, north side of "A" Street. north side of "1" Street. and both
sides of "L" Street south of Church Street (except west side only south of "1" Street).
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.
Project NO, Tr 15711
completion Date
4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective __/__
Beautification Master Plan: Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan; Etiwanda and East Avenues per the
Etiwanda Specific Plan.
K. Drainage and Flood Control
1. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map __/__ w
approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall
be installed as required by the City Engineer.
2. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured __I
from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk.
3. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in /
a sump catch basin on the public street.
L. Utilities
1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, /
electric power, telephone, and cable 'IV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility
Standards. Easements shall be provided as required.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. /
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 Health Department of the County of San Bemardino. A letter of compliance from
the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits. whichever occurs first.
M. General Requirements and Approvals
1. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan Drainage
Fees shall be paid prior to final map approval, in conformance with City ordinances.
2. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right-of-way:
Metrooolitan Water District. Southern California Edison, and Southern California Gas.
3. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all
new street lights for the first six (6) months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to
building permit issuance if no map is involved.
4. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be completed
beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the
approved tentative map.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730,
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
N. General Fire Protection Conditions
1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project.
2. Fire flow requirement shall be 1,500 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.
Project No, TF15711
Completion Date
b. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional tim 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-sita 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 t~re 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. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final
inspection.
6. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted:
X All roadways.
X Other: See RCFD Ordinance No. 22
7. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trirnmed a minimum of 14'6" from ground
up so as not to impede fire apparatus.
8. Plan check fees in the amount of $0 have been paid. An additional $125.00 shall be paid:
X Prior to water 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.
9. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC.
UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22, 15.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIVIONGA '
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-15 -
TUTOR TIME CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS - The proposed development
of a 10,220 square foot day care facility on a 1.29 acre parcel within the Central Park
Plaza shopping center, located at the northwest comer of Terra Vista Parkway East
and Ellena West - APN: 227-182-09.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Existing commercial shopping center; Neighborhood Cormmercial
South - Vacant; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
East - Vacant; Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre)
West - Existing commercial shopping center; Neighborhood Commercial
B. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Neighborhood Commercial
North - Neighborhood Commercial
South - Medium-High Residential
East . - Medium-High Residential
West Neighborhood Commercial
C. Site Characteristics: The site is a vacant parcel which was master planned for a pre-school as
part of the Central Park Plaza Shopping Center. All public improvements (sidewalk, curb,
gutter, street trees) have been installed within the public right-of-way across the frontage of
the parcel. Two driveway approaches exist to serve the parcel; however, the driveway along
Terra Vista Parkway is proposed to be removed so that the only vehicular access to the site will
be off of Ellena West. The site has been rough graded previously and slopes gently from
northwest to southeast.
ITEM D
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 96-15 - TUTOR TIME CHILD DEV. CENTERS
August 14, 1996
Page 2
E. Parking:
Number of Number of
Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces
of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided
Child Care Facility 10,220 1/staff member 63 51 *
1/5 children
* Refer to Analysis section regarding parking.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: This pad was originally master planned to have a day care facility at the time the
shopping center master plan was considered by the :Planning Commission. The overall layout
is essentially identical to that shown on the Master Plan. The applicant anticipates an
enrollment of up to 197 children and 24 staff members when the facility is completed. Hours
of operation are proposed to be from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. The site
has 15,000 square feet of usable outdoor area, including areas with play equipment, to meet
the minimum State requirement of 75 square feet of outdoor space per child. The outdoor play
area will have open decorative metal fencing with integrated pilasters and emergency
pedestrian gates around the perimeter of the area.
B. Parking: The site is deficient 12 parking spaces from that required by the City's Development
Code. A parking study was prepared by a traffic engineer that analyzed the parking situation
at facilities of similar size and similar neighborhood settings around Southem California. The
peak parking for a Tutor Time facility of similar size in Irvine was 26 cars. The study
concluded that a total of 37 parking spaces should be provided at a minimum for this site. The
current site plan has 51 spaces, well in excess of the recommendation of the engineer. In order
to resolve the technical concern of the parking deficiency, staff is requiring that a Minor
Exception application be submitted for review and approval of the City Planner as a Condition
of Approval. Minor Exceptions for parking may be granted by the City Planner for up to a 25
percent deficiency in the required parking, on a case-by-case basis. Staff supports the
conclusions of the parking study that the demand for parking on-site will not exceed the
amount of available parking, and that the granting of a Minor Exception in this situation will
be warranted.
C. Design Review Committee: On July 16, 1996, the Committee (McNeil, Lumpp, Fong)
recommended approval of the project subject to conditions of approval that are contained in
the attached Action Agenda (Exhibit "H") and the Resolution of Approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 96-15 - TUTOR TIME CHILD DEV. CENTERS
August 14, 1996
Page 3
D. Technical Review Committee: On August 7, 1996, the Technical Review Committee reviewed
the project and determined that, with the recommended special and standard Conditions of
Approval, the project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances. The project
was reviewed and conceptually approved by the Grading Committee on August 6, 1996.
E. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study (Exhibit "G").
Staff determined that the project could not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment. Further, staff finds that the shopping center (Conditional Use Permit 92-18)
Initial Study already addressed the potential impacts of such a facility. If the Planning
Commission concurs with staff recommendations, then issuance of a Negative Declaration
would be in order.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as apublic hearing in the Inland Valley Dally
Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices were sent to all property owners
within a 300 foot radius of the site. No response has been received to date.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval through adoption of the attached Resolution
of Approval with Conditions and issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Brad Buller
City Planner
BB:SH:mlg
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Landscape Plan
Exhibit "D" - Grading Plan
Exhibit "E" - Building Elevations and Perspective
Exhibit "F" - Floor and Roof Plan
Exhibit "G" - Initial Study Part II
Exhibit"H"- Design Review Committee Action Comments dated July 16, 1996
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
SITE UTILIZATION MAP
TUTOR TIME. RANCHO CUCAMONGA
IN TH~ CI~Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CAL~FORNZA
1.29 AC. HAY. lgg5
~ -,, / \
/ .......
{ ~ . /
t---' 'l_J ~ cup
.~ ,___J ,
CENTRAL PARK PLAZA ~/~
SHOPPING CENTER /. ~,.
~'\ * ~"'"" '~'; NORTH
ELLENA
" "~"~ '~' TUTOR TIME IT' pitking
DAY CARE CENTER
AREA (~o ,~ BUILDING INFORMATION
TERRA VISTA WAY
Conceptual Site Plan Developed by, Glenwood Development Company
T U T O R T I M E. c.,,d D..,op,-.., Ce.,.r ....
Ranoho Cucemonga
~ CENTRAL PARK PLAZA
'~ SHOPPING CENTER
'~ NORTH
ELLENA
...... :.j~L ....
Conceptual Landscape Plan []
T U T O R T I M E ch,,,, o..,o,,..., o.,. ~,..,.~ ,--~,..=~
Rancho Cucemong8 E~
:~"i'°* ""'(~ CENTRAL PARK PLAZA
~ SHOPPING CENTER
--i~-~.Z.· ,,..
LLENA
' / :: ~'~
. %% ,,*~, ,
Conceptual Grading Plan Developed by, Glenwood Development Compeny
T U T 0 R T I M E c.,d oe.,opme., C..ter .... ~ ....
Rancho Cucemonge
East / Garner Elevation North / Parking Elevation
West Elevation South / Street Elevation
Conceptual Exterior Elevations Developed by. Glenwood Development Company []
C
anC 0 (zCBrnOnEle
Building Cross Section
-
L,,.j 'J' t,,,,,,i 'j'
Conceptual Details Developed by, Glenwood Development Company[]
T U T O R T I M E c.,,d o..,o,,,.,..t c..,.r .;,,0,,,,
Rencho Cucemonga
Roof Plan ~,*.l-o, Floor Plan "'~"'*'°'
Floor Plan / Roof Plan Developed by, Glenwood Development Company []
T U T O R T I M E ~,,,~.,,.~o,o,,~.o., o..,.r ~,..,,-
8nc o ucemonga
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1 ) Project File #/Name: Conditional Use Permit 96-15 (Tutor Time Day Care Centers)
2) Related Files: Conditional Use Permit 90-18
3) Applicant: Glenwood Development
Address: P.O. Box 1590, Glendale CA 91209-1590
Telephone #:
4) Project Description: 10,220 square foot day care facility
5) Project Accepted as Complete (date): June 24, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for
all "Yes" and "Mayben answers on attached sheets, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects
identified.
Yes Maybe N_9o
I. EARTH - Will the proposal result in:
a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in the geologic structure? ( ) ( (:X)
b) Disruptions, displacement. compaction, or over cow.=ring 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)
e) 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)
I1o AIR - Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) The creation of objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) (X)
1
rF
c) Alteration of air movement moisture, or temperature, or any change in
climate, either locally or regionally? ( ) [ ) [X)
III. 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 or 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 flow 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 properly to water related hazards such as flooding
or tidal waves? ( (X)
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 ( (X)
plants?
c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing species? ( ) ( (X)
d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ( ) (X)
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? ( ) (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)
2
VI. NOISE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) (X)
VII. LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposal.'
a) Produce new light and glare? ( ) ( ) (X)
VIII. LAND USE - Will the proposal result in.'
a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? ( ) ( ) (X)
IX. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ( ) ( ) (X)
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? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan? ( ) ) (X)
XI. POPULATION - Will the proposal:
a) Alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human
population of an area? ( ) ) (X)
Xll. HOUSING - Will the proposah
a) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? ( ) ) (X)
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 nsw parking? ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? ( ) ( ) (X)
d) Alterations to the present patterns 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. bicyclisl:s, or pedestrians? ( ) ( ) (X)
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? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) (X)
d) Parks and other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) (X)
e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) (X)
f) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) (X)
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)
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 gas? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Communications systems? ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Water? ( ) ( ) (X)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) (X)
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (X)
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) (X)
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)
XVIII. AESTHETICS - Will the proposal result in:
a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? ( ) ( (X)
b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ( ) (X)
XIX. RECREATION - Will the proposal result in:
a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreat onal opportunities? ( ) (X)
b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) (X)
4
XX. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposah
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? ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( ) (X)
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-
susta ning levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangE;red p ant or animal, or
eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or ( ( ) (X)
prehistory?
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to
the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact
on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period
of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the: future.) ( ( ) (X)
c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,
but cumulativety 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 ( ( ) (X)
significant.)
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly? ) ( ) (X)
XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) -
XIII. Transportation/Circulation:
b) The site does not meet the minimum parking requirements for a day care facility of this size.
However, a parking study has been prepared by a registered engineer and staff has accepted
the conclusions contained therein, whereby the site will have more than sufficient parking based
on studies of similar facilities in the area.
XXIII. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS (Examine whether the project would be consistent with existing
zoning, plans. and other applicable land use controls) o Consistent with neighborhood commercial zoning
designation.
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 Sect on 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):
5
X General Plan EIR
X Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 Update of the General Plan
Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR
Victoria Planned Community EIR
X Terra Vista Planned Community EIR
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan EIR
__ Etiwanda North Specific Plan EIR
m Other: CUP 92-18 Environmental Assessment
Other:
The application is part of the Terra Vista Planned Community for which an EIR was prepared and certified
by the City. This document is available at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive.
The Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan was also referenced in evaluating the potential
Impacts of the application. This document is available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500
Civic Center Drive.
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 ...........................................................................(X)
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 be prepared ..........................................................................( )
c) I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment.
AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required ...............................................................( )
Prepa~r~re
Steve Haves, AICP. Associate Planner
Print Name and Title
June 24, 1996
Date
6
XXVI. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION (To be completed by applicant) -
I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this
Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or
hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where
~r I eft cts would occur
' Date!: J:/?/9 ~
· ,· ~4/ ~f~:::~ ' /
Print Name and Title: ' ~ - U gC~ ~ t~%~
7
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:10 p.m. Steve Hayes July 16, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-15 - TUTOR TIME
CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS - The proposed development of a 10,220 square foot day care
facility on a 1.29 acre parcel within the Central Park Plaza shopping center, located at the northwest
comer of Terra Vista Parkway East and Ellena West - APN: 227-182-09.
Design Parameters:
The site is a vacant parcel that was master planned for a preschool as part of the Central Park Plaza
shopping center. All public improvements (sidewalk, curb, gutter, street trees) have been installed
within the public right-of-way across the frontage of the parcel. Two drive approaches exist to serve
the parcel; however, the driveway along Terra Vista Parkway is proposed to be removed so that the
only vehicular access to the site will be off of Ellena West. The site had been rough graded
previously and slopes gently from northwest to southeast.
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:
I. The proposed architectural concept used for the building is generally consistent with other
existing buildings within the Central Park Plaza shopping center in terms of building
materials, massing, colors, etc. The proposed pilasters should be upgraded in size and have
a decorative cap treatment.
2. The proposed layout on the Site Plan is generally consistent with that shown on the Master
Plan for development of this parcel at the time the overall shopping center conceptual plans
were being considered. Staff still supports the general site plan concept, provided that
elements mentioned in the secondary and policy design issues section of this report are
incorporated into the design of the project.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Additional landscaping should be provided around the perimeter of the building in key public
viewing areas.
2. Windows on the building should either be recessed or have a stuccoed over wood frame
surround built up around each window.
tT
DRC AGENDA
CUP 96-15 - TUTOR TIME CHILE DEV. CENTERS
July 16, 1996
Page 2
Policy Issues: .The following items are a matter of Plmming Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Special paving consistent with that used within the balance of the shopping center should be
used at the vehicular entrance to the site and in key pedestrian activity areas.
2. Parapet roof elements should be significant enough to screen any roof-mounted mechanical
equipment from public view.
3. The parking lot should be completely screened from public view through the use of shrub and
landscape berms.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the project be recommended for approval to the Planning Commission with
the items mentioned in this report incorporated into the design of the project.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Heinz Lumpp, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the following
conditions:
1. The design of the pilasters and cap should be consistent with others used throughout the
Central Park plaTa shopping center.
2. Additional landscaping should' be provided around the building, but beyond the walkway
around the perimeter of the building, to the satisfaction of staff. In addition, the landscape
statement near the intersection of Terra Vista Parkway and Ellena West should be upgraded
to the satisfaction of staff.
3. Windows should be recessed further and/or stucco over wood frames provided around each
window so that there is a minimum 6-inch recess of the window from the surrounding building
plane.
4. A significant landscape statement should be provided in the parking area near the main
building entrance, to the satisfaction of staff. It was suggested that two specimen palms within
tree grates and special paving in this area could be provided to mitigate this concern.
5. Policy issues 1, 2, and 3 were recommended to be incorporated into the project design by the
Committee.
'bsc,
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 96-15 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 10,220 SQUARE
FOOT DAY CARE FACILITY ON A 1.29 ACRE PARCEL WITHIN THE
CENTRAL PARK PLAZA 8HOPPING CENTER, LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER QF TERRA VISTA PARKWAY EAST AND ELLENA
WEST, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
APN: 227-182-09.
A. Recitals.
1. Tutor Time Child Development Centers has filed an application for the issuance of
Conditional Use Permit No. 96-15, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereina~er in this
Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 14th day of August 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.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined. and resolved by the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public headng on August 14, 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 at the northwest corner of Terra Vista
Parkway East and Ellena West with a street frontage of approximately 587.25 feet and lot depth of
approximately 210 feet at its deepest point and is presently improved with curb, gutter, sidewalk, and
streetside landscaping; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is a commercial shopping center, the
properly to the south consists of vacant land, the property to the east is vacant, and the property to
the west is a commercial shopping center; and
c. The application contemplates the construction of a day care facility on a rough
graded pad within the Central Park Plaza shopping center, which was originally Master Planned for
a day care facility; and
d. The proposed hours of operation of the facility are from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday; and
e. The applicant anticipates having up to 24 employees and 197 children at the facility
when completed; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 96-15 - TUTOR TIME CHILD DEV. CENTERS
August 14, 1996
Page 2
f. The independent traffic engineers report indicates a peak demand of 37 parking
spaces for this fadlib/, which is less than the 63 spaces normally required by the Development Code.
The project has been designed with 51 parking spaces which will provide a 38 percent parking buffer
during peak hour demand.
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 I and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the
Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located.
b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto. will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code and Tetra Vista Community Plan.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration,
together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the
application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant'effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the
findings as follows:
a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated
thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the
independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Negative [::)eclaration with regard to the application.
b. Based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the
proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur.
c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the
Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project
will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife
depends. 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 forth in
Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below
and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Planninq Division
1) The design of the pilasters and cap shall be consistent with others used
throughout the Central Park Plaza shopping center, to the satisfaction
of the City Planner.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 96-15- TUTOR TIME CHILD DEV. CENTERS
August14,1996
Page 3
2) Additional landscaping shall be provided around the building. but
beyond the walkway around the perimeter of the building, to the
satisfaction of the City Planner. In addition, the landscape statement
near the main intersection of Terra Vista Parkway and Ellena West
shall be upgraded, to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
3) Windows shall be recessed furlher and/or stucco over wood trim
provided around each window so that there is a minimum 6-inch recess
of the window from the surrounding building window plane. Details of
this item shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner, prior to
the issuance of building permits.
4) A significant landscape/special paving statement, such as specimen
palms within tree grates and special paving carried into parking areas,
shall be provided in the parking area near the main building entrance,
to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
5) Special paving consistent with that used within the balance of the
shopping center shall be used at the vehicular entrance to the site and
in key pedestrian activity areas, to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
6) The parking lot shall be completely screened from public view through
the use of shrub hedges and landscape berms. Details of how the
parking lot will be screened shall be shown on the detailed
Landscape/Irrigation Plans, which shall be reviewed and approved by
the City Planner, prior to the issuance of building permits.
7) Approval is granted subject to approval of a Minor Exception for
parking. A Minor Exception application shall be submitted for review
and approval of the City Planner, prior to issuance of building permits.
8) There shall be provisions for the following design features in the trash
enclosures, to the satisfaction of the City Planner:
a) Architecturally integrated into the design of this project and the
Central Park Plaza shopping center.
b) Separate pedestrian access that does not require opening the
main doors.
c) Large enough to accommodate two trash bins.
d) Trash bins with counter weighted lids.
e) Architecturally treated overhead shade trellis.
f) Chain link screen on top to prevent trash from blowing out of the
enclosure. The screen shall be designed to be hidden from view.
9) Trash collection shall occur between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and
10:00 p.m. only.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 96-15 - TUTOR TIME CHILD DEV. CENTERS
August 14, 1996
Page 4
10) The final design and location of all play equipment shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Planner, pdor to installation of the equipment.
11) The business shall be conducted to comply with the following
standards:
a) Noise Levels: All activities shall not create any noise that would
exceed an extedor noise level of 60 dBA during the hours of
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and 65 dBA during the hours of 7:00 a.m.
to 10:00 p.m.
12) The facility shall be limited to a maximum of 197 children.
13) The operation of this facility shall comply with all laws and regulations
of the State of California related to licensing and operation. The
applicant shall submit copies of all State licenses to operate this facility
to the Planning Division, prior to final occupancy.
14) If the operation of this use is inconsistent with any of the conditions of
approval or causes adverse effects upon adjacent propedies or public
rights-of-way, including, but not limited to, excessive noise, glare,
vibration. odors, or traffic safety problems, the Conditional Use Permit
shall be brought back to the Planning Commission for their
consideration and possible revocation of the Conditional Use Permit
and termination of use.
15) Expansion of this use beyond 197 children, major changes to the
development plans or phasing, or expansion of the use beyond that
approved by this permit, shall require approval of a modification to this
Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission.
Engineering Division
1) Vacate the existing tree easements outside the public right-of-way. The
developer shall file an "application for wacation." pay a fee. and submit
proper exhibits and legal descriptions prepared by a licensed engineer
or surveyor. The vacation shall be approved prior to the issuance of
building permits.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 96-15- TUTOR TIME CHILD DEV. CENTERS
August14,1996
Page 5
ATTEST:
Larry J. Henderson, Acting Secretary
I, Larry J. Henderson, Acting 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 14th day of August 1996, by the following vote-to-
wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENTell
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT#: Conditional Use Permit 96-15
SUBJECT: 10,220 Square Foot Day Care Facil~
APPLICANT: Tutor Time Child Development Centers
LOCATION: NWC Terra Vista Parkway East and EIlena West
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 C~ommission, if building permits are not
issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval.
2. Approval of Conditional Use Permit 96-15 is granted subjeot to the approval of a Minor Exceetion.
3. Prier 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
facili~es 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 herein, Development Code
regulations, and the Tetra Vista Community Plan.
2. Pdor to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions
of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
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.
1
Projecl No, CUP 96-15
Completion Date
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 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. Trash receptacle(s) are requi~'ed and shall meet Cit,/standards. The final design, locations, and
the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the
issuance of building permits.
9. 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 wails, berming. and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
10.All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner,
including proper illumination.
11. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property
owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape
maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to
the issuance of building permits.
C. Building Design
1. 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 D~sion. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with
the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be
included in building plans.
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. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances,
and exits shall be striped per City standards.
3. Handicap accessible stalls shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more
parking stalls. Designate two percent or one stall, whichever is greater, of the total number of
stalls for use by the handicapped.
4. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily
residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required
automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first
50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the
required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage
spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a
3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100.
Project No. CUP 96-15
Completion Date
Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher
whole number.
5. Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking closE, to the building shall be provided for __
commercial. office, and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area. If
covered. the vertical clearance shall be no less than 9 feet.
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 30 % of trees planted within the project shal~ be specimen size trees - 24-inch box __ __/__
or larger.
3. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of on 15-gallon tree for every three parking __ __/__
stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21.
4. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree __ __
per 30 linear feet of building.
5. All private slopes 5 feet or less in ve~cal height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 __ __/__
slope, shall be, at minimum, irdgated 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.
6. 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 ,s~ze 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.
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. 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.
9.All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the
design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
10. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape
as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga rvlunicipal 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.
Project No, CUP 96-15
Completion Date
G. 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:
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 commercial or industrial development or addition
to an ex~sfing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such
fees may include, but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School
Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees.
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and
prior to issuance of building permits.
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.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
J. Street Improvements
1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to:
Curb & A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Other
Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr, Lights Trees Trail Island Trail
ElJena West X
Term Vista parkv, ray X X X e
Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement
reconstruction and oredays 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. (e) Remove existing drive approach and replace with curb and gutter, sidewalk, and
street trees.
Project No. COP 96-15
Completion Date
2. Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, end 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 satEsfaction of the City Engineer and the Gi~
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
constructjon permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other
permits required.
o. Pavement striping. marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and
interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satjsfaofion of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with ',any new construction or reconstrucfion
project along major or secondarT 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, ECI:? or any other locations approved by the Gity Engineer.
Notes:
(1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. S along streets, a maximum of 200
feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the Ci~ Engineer.
(2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel
with pull rope or as specified.
e. Handicapped 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 during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash
deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded
upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of fhe City Engineer.
g. Concentrated drainage flow~ shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be
installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots.
h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check.
3. Street trees, a minimum of 1S-gallon size or larger, sh, all be installed per City Standards in
accordance with the City's street tree program.
K. Public Maintenance Areas
1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighfing
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.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730,
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
L. General Fire Protection Conditions
1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project.
2. Fire flow requirement shall be 3,000 gallons per minute,.
Project No. CUP 96-15
Completion Date
a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department /
personnel prior to water plan approval.
3. 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.
4. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted /
to the Fire District that an appmved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending
completion of required fire protection system.
5. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below:
X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as
woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, fiammable liquids storage, high piled
stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if sprinkler system is adequate for
proposed operations.
6. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of
sprinkler system.
7. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below:
X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
X California Code Regulations Title 24.
8. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall be
submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for spe, cific details
and ordedng information.
9. Cared/restricted entW(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire
Safety Division for specific details and ordering information.
10. Plancheckfeesintheamountof$ 0 have been paid. An additional $645.00 shall be paid:
Prior to water plan approval.
X Pdor 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.
11. 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:
M. 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. CUP 96-15
Completion Date
2. All buildings shall have minimal securi~ lighting to eliminatE; dark areas around the buildings, with __/'
direct lighting to be provided by all entn/ways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire
development.
3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures.
N. Security Hardware
1. 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.
O. 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.
P. Building Numbering
1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime
visibility.
Alarm Systems
1. Install a burglar alarm system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and
employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of false alarms and in turn
save dollars and lives.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA/vIONGA ' ~
STAFF REPORT
DATEr August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96o14 -
ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CORPORATION - A request to construct a 2,796 square
foot convenience market/gas station on a 1.1 acre parcel within the Terra Vista
Promenade shopping center within the Community Commercial District of the Terra
Vista Community Plan, located on the nodh side of Foothill Boulevard, west of
Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq:
North Home Improvement Center (under construction); Community Commercial
South - Retail/Recreational Center (under construction); Industrial Park (Industrial Area
Specific Plan Subarea 7);
East - Vacant; Community Commercial
West - Vacant; Community Commercial
B. General Plan Desionations:
Project Site - Community Commercial
North Community Commercial
South - Recreational Commercial
East Community Commercial
West Community Commercial
C. Site Characteristics: The site is a rough-graded and hydroseeded vacant pad within the Terra
Vista Promenade shopping center. Landscape improvements within the public right of way
adjacent to the site have mostly been completed. The site slopes gently from north to south.
D. Parkinq Calculations:
Number of Number of
Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces
of Use Footaqe Ratio Required Provided
Service Station .... 3 + 2/bay 3 3
Retail 2.796 1/250 1._~2 1__2
TOTAL 15 15
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,796 square foot service station with
convenience store on a vacant pad within the Terra Vista Promenade shopping center. This
is the first pad building to be processed within the project; the only other building in the center
ITEM E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 96-14 - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CO.
August 14, 1996
Page 2
is Home Depot, which is nearing completion at this time. The pump island area will have 6
two-sided pumps, typical of the newer Arco gas stations. The building has been oriented to
screen a majority of the pump island area from view from Foothill Boulevard, and additional
shrub massing along the street in front of the parking area will screen the parking lot and
pump area to an even greater extent. The general architectural concept (i.e., winery theme
tower element, enhanced entry statement, trellises and colonnades, and material use) is
consistent with the Terra Vista Promenade Design Guidelines for satellite buildings.
B. Desiqn Review Committee: On July 2, 1996, the Design Review Committee (McNeil, Lumpp,
Fong) recommended revisions to the site plan and architecture. The revised plans were
reviewed on a Consent Calendar basis on July 16, 1996, and the Committee recommended
approval of the project subject to conditions, which are contained in the attached Resolution
of Approval. The Design Review Committee Action Comments have also been attached for
your convenience (Exhibit "G").
C. Technical Review Committee: On July 3, 1996, the, Technical Review Committee reviewed
the project and determined that, together with the recommended special and standard
Conditions of Approval, the project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances.
The project was conceptually approved by the Grading Committee on July 2, 1996.
D. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study (Exhibit "H"). Staff
determined that the project could not have any additional adverse negative impacts on the
environment than were already considered with the Master Plan development of the Terra
Vista Promenade shopping center, where this pad was specifically shown as a service
station. If the Planning Commission concurs with staffs recommendations, then issuance of
a negative declaration would be in order.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices sent to atl properly owners within
a 300-foot radius of the site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Environmental
Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 96-14 through adoption of the attached Resolution of
Approval with Conditions and issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Respe sub ' ~
Attachments: Exhibit "A"- Vicinity Map
Exhibit "B" - Master Plan
Exhibit "C" - Site Plan
Exhibit "D" - Landscape Plan
Exhibit "E" - Grading Plan
Exhibit "F" - Building Elevations
Exhibit "G" - Design Review Committee Action Comments
Exhibit "H" - Initial Study, Part II
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
/ / \ .~ TENTAT I VE PARCEL HAP NO. 14022
IN TIlE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA**tONOA, CALIFORNIA
/ ~ \ ..... \ \ .~ '~'.~;'~:"'~ ~. ,'~"?.'~.'~.F,' :.,~'~,...~ ,.-"~.-,..
\'. \. ' ..........;;;,,,,-;,;..
/ ~ 't~::',,:-',.-
......... ' ......' ........"h~i~
Z z: ---
D ...................... i .......... ~'~=:~ ..........
,ZZ':Z% :':'. :.. ,, Z ::::Z
.............
, ........ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ':Y
, ............Foolhifi Boulevard ~ -
i' " u == .......... ='= .......
~1 ......... '~"
" ~ ~,,,~Z~ ~} .........
~1 '~'~~' ...........
--- m, ~ -- .,,~__..~... ~ ...... ~:,,. "--
~ ~ ...... --
seC Permit 8lie Plan" ~ '~ '~ .................................
~ ............. FooJhill Eoulev~r~
z~ ~ ~l nditional Use Permit Landscape Plan ~ "r ~"":'~: ::::::::::::::::::::: "v%'.,
J
'
TRASH ENCLOSURE FRO~ ELEVA~ON ~ASH ENCLOSURE REAR ELEVA~ON ~ASH ENCLOSURE SlOE ELEVA~ON i~ ,/,/ ..................... YDKi
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
5:50 p.m. Steve Hayes July 2, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-14 - ATLANTIC
RICHFIELD COMPANY - A request to construct a 2,796 square foot convenience market/gas
station on a 1.1 acre parcel within the Terra Vista Promenade shopping center within the Community
Commercial District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located on the north side of Foothill
Boulevard and west of Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18 and 24.
Design Parameters:
The 1.1 acre parcel is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, adjacent to and just east of the
main driveway entrance into the Terra Vista Promenade shopping center, which aligns with the
signal at Masi Drive and Foothill Boulevard. The Home Depot is currently under construction in
this center. The site has been rough graded and trees have already been removed across the Foothill
Boulevard project frontage. The site slopes gently from northwest to southeast. The site will take
access from two cuts off the main intemal driveway for the shopping center. Sidewalk, curb and
gutter currently exist along the sites Foothill Boulevard and main drive aisle frontage.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion
regarding this project:
1. The general layout of the site plan is consistent with the "reverse bay" orientation required for
new service stations within the City. However, the pump island and parking areas ~vill be
visible from public view unless additional screening (berming, low walls, shrub hedges are
introduced into the project. Staff would recommend that these elements be provided for
additional screening.
2. The exterior elevations have been revised from the initial submittal to be more consistent with
the design guidelines adopted for the Tenca Vista Promenade shopping center. Materials such
as pre-cast columns, medallions and exposed rafter tails are now included in the architectural
program. However, staff would suggest that a more enhanced entrance be provided, as well
as additional architectural elements, such as wood arbors over walkways, wood lattice within
the tower elements, etc. be provided.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
I. Additional amenities, such as trellis structures with seating of similar design and materials to
those used on other trellis structures in the center, should be provided within the pedestrian
connections between the public sidewalk and the mini-market.
DRC COMMENTS
CUP 96-14 - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY
July 2, 1996
Page 2
2. The trash enclosure should be relocated to be adjacent to the building with an overhead trellis
structure compatible in design with other trellises in the project.
3. The special paving used around the pump island canopy area should be consistent in design
with the special paving used throughout the center.
4. Special paving and/or landscape planters should be introduced on the front sides of the
building. In addition, vining should be used on the proposed trellis structures and against the
building to prevent graffiti.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Plsaming Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. The monument sign near the vehicular entrance to the service station should be removed, or
a maximum of three signs are allowed for the business.
2. The proposed transformer should be completely screened by landscaping and/or walls.
3. The size of the members used on the trellis structures should be consistent with those used
throughout the shopping center, as discussed bet-,veen staff and the developer.
4. The sign on the tower should be moved to another location on the building.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of the project and direct
staff to work with the applicant to revise the plans accordingly prior to scheduling the project for
Planning Commission consideration.
Attachment
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
The Design Review Committee requested that the project be returned for further review (Consent
Calendar) with the following revisions:
1. Restudy the overall building design to be more consistent with the Promenade Shopping
Center Design Guidelines.
DRC COMMENTS
CUP 96-14 - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY
July 2, 1996
Page 3
2. Use scored grid pattern and textured decorative concrete pavement around the pump island
canopy area, on the front sides of the building and at the vehicle entrance.
3. Enhance building enlx,'y and provide additional architectural elements such as wood arbors over
walkways, wood lattices within tower elements, etc.
4. Provide trellises or other structures at northwest and southeast comers of building to create a
more substantial appearance and to de-emphasize the canopy/pump island.
5. Specify heavy trellis members.
6. Provide a landscape planter adjacent to parking space at the northeast comer of building.
7. Provide enough roof tile overhang to shed water axvay from building ~valls.
8. Provide tiles all the way up to the parapet wall of the pump-islands canopy.
9. Use light fixtures that complement the design theme of the shopping center. Submit design
of the light fixtures to the City Planner for review and approval.
10. Provide shrub hedges, etc., to screen the pump area and parking from public view.
11. Provide substantial size to the columns that provide the proper proportion.
I2. Relocate trash enclosure and provide an overhead trellis consistent with the design guidelines
of the center.
13. Remove the monument sign near the vehicle entrance to station. A maximum of three signs
are allowed.
14. Screen the transformer with landscaping.
CONSENT CALENDAR
ACTION COMMENTS
JULY 16, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PEI~.MIT 96-14 - ATLANTIC
RICHFIELD COMPANY - A request to construct a 2,796 square foot convenience market/gas
station on a 1.1 acre parcel within the Tetra Vista Promenade shopping center within the Community
Commercial District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located on the north side of Foothill
Boulevard and west of Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-t51-18 and 24.
The Committee (McNiel, Lumpp, Fong) recommended the follo~ving revisions to the revised
architectural scheme:
1 .. The number of corbels and braces on the tower element should be reduced by one per side to
reduce the "busy" appearance of the tower.
2. Lighting of the pedestrian walkway under the tower should be carefully considered by staff
during the plan check process.
3. Additional reveal lines, similar to the number use, d on the front elevations of the building,
should be provided on the south and west side of the building.
4. All other site planning issues from the July 2, 1996 Action Comments not yet addressed shall
be addressed to the satisfaction of staff, prior to the Planning Commission hearing or become
Conditions of ApprovaI for the project.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
NVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NIITIAL STUDY PART II FORM
BACKGROUND
1) Project File #/Name: Conditional Use Permit 96-14 (ARCO)
2) Related Files: Conditional Use Permit 95-11
3) Applicant: Atlantic Richfield Company
Address: 4 Centerpointe Drive, Suite 300, La Palma, CA 92000
Telephone #:
4) Project Description: 2796 seuare foot convenience store/c~as station
5) Project Accepted as Complete (date): 5/28/96
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.
Yes Maybe N__o
EARTH - Will the proposal 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)
e) 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)
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)
III. 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 or 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 flow 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 property to water related ha;;ards such as flooding
or tidal waves? ( ) ( ) (X)
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 ( ) ( (X)
plants?
c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing species? ( ) ( (X)
d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ( ) ( (X)
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? ( ) (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)
VI. NOISE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels? ( ) (X)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ) (X)
2
LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposal.'
a) Produce new light and glare? ( ) ( ) (X)
VIII. LAND USE - Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? ( ) ( ) (X)
IX. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ( ) ( ) (X)
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? ( ) (X) ( )
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) (X)
il. POPULATION - Will the proposal:
a) Alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human
population of an area? ( ) (X)
XII. HOUSING - Will the proposal:
a) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? ( ) (X)
XII I. 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 patterns 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)
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? ( ) ( ) (X)
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) (X)
d) Parks and other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) (X)
e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) (X)
f) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) (X)
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)
XVI. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS - tA~ll the proposal ngsult in a need for new
systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( ( ) (x)
b) Communications systems? ( ( ) (X)
c) Water? ( ) ( ) (X)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) (X)
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (X)
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( (X)
XVII. HUMAN HEALTH - Will the proposal result in:
a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health ha;;ard (excluding mental
health)? ( ) ( (X)
b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ( ) ( (X)
XVIII. AESTHETICS - Will the proposal result in.'
a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? ( ) ( (X)
b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ( ( (X)
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)
4
CULTURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposah
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? ( ) ( ) (X)
c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( ) (X)
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 ( ) ( ) (X)
prehistory?
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to
the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact
on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief. definitive period
of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) (X)
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 ( ) ( ) (X)
significant.)
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly? ( ) ( ) (X)
XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) -
X. Risk of Upset:
a) Given that the site will house and sell potentially hazardous materials (gasoline, o ,etc.),
there is a potential for explosion or the release of hazardous substances However aH
Uniform Building and all other applicable codes shall be app ed to the constructio~q' of,
and the continued operation of this facility thereby m t gat ng as much as possible any
possib e r sk of explosion or re ease of potentially hazardous materials.
XXIll. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS (Examine whether the project would be consistent with existing
zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls) - Project is consistent with Community Commercial
zoning designation.
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
5
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 Centsr Drive (check all that apply):
X General Plan EIR
X Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 Update of the General Plan
__ Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR
__ Victoria Planned Community EIR
XTerra Vista Planned Community EIR
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan EIR
m Etiwanda North Specific Plan EIR
X Other: Initial Study for Terra Vista Promenade Shopping Center
The application is part of the Terra Vista Planned Community for which an EIR was prepared and certified
by the City. This document is available at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive.
The Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan was also referenced in evaluating the potential
impacts of the application. This document is available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500
Civic Center Drive.
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 ....................................................................(X)
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 be prepared ...................................................................( )
c) I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment.
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required .........................................................( )
Pre are '
Print Name and Title
Date /
6
XXVI. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION (To be completed by applicant) -
ertify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this
qi~reby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where
itial Study and proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or
clearly no significant environmental effects would occur.
Signature: Date:
Print Name and Title:
7
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 96-14, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 2,796 SQUARE FOOT
CONVENIENCE MARKET/GAS STATION ON A 1.1 ACRE PARCEL WITHIN
THE TERRA VISTA PROMENADE SHOPPING CENTER WITHIN THE
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OF THE TERRA VISTA
COMMUNITY PLAN, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL
BOULEVARD, WEST OF ROCHESTER AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS
IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-151-18.
A. Recitals.
1. Atlantic Richfield Company has filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use
Permit No. 96-14, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafier in this Resolution, the
subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 14th day of August 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.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set fodh in the Recitals,
Pad A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public headng on August 14, 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 at the northeast corner of Foothill
Boulevard and Masi Drive with a Foothill Boulevard street frontage of approximately 200 feet and
maximum lot depth of approximately 238 feet and is presently improved with curb, gutter, sidewalk,
and streetside landscaping; and
b. The properly to the north of the subject site is being developed with a home
improvement center, the property to the south is being developed with a retail/recreational center,
and the property to the east and west is vacant; and
c. The application contemplates the construction of a combination 2,796 square foot
convenience market and gas station with six two-sided pump islands; and
d. The site is designated Community Commercial by the Terra Vista Community Plan;
and
e. The site is a part of the Terra Vista Promenade shopping center, for which a Master
Plan for development was prepared in conjunction with phase one development. A service
station/convenience market was shown on this parcel on the conceptually approved Master Plan.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 96-14 - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CO.
August14,1996
Page 2
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the
Development Code and Terra Vista Community Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the
site is located.
b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code and Terra Vista Community Plan.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration,
together with all written' and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the
application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the
findings as follows:
a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated
thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the
independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application.
b. Based upon the changes and alterafior~s which have been incorporated into the
proposed project, no significant adverse environmental ~;ffects will occur.
c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the
Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there! is no evidence that the proposed project
will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife
depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff
reports and exhibits. and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public
hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in
Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below
and in the Standard Conditions. attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Planning Division
1) The number of corbels and braces on the tower element shall be
reduced by one per side and adjusted to be equidistant, to the
satisfaction of the City Planner.
2) The lighting for the pedestdan walkway under the tower element and
the location of the light fixtures on the tower shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Planner, prior to the; issuance of building permits.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 96-14 - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CO.
August 14, 1996
Page 3
3) Additional reveal lines, similar to those used on the front elevations of
the building, shall be provided on the south and west sides of the
building, to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
4) Heavy trellis members, consistent with those used throughout the rest
of the Terra Vista Promenade shopping center, shall be provided on the
trellises in this project.
5) Landscaping shall be provided in the area near the northeast comer of
the building, to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
6) The design and location of all light fixtures shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Planner, prior to the issuance of building permits.
7) Additional shrub hedges shall be provided to screen the pump area and
parking from public view, to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
8) The trash enclosure shall be designed consistent with the design
guidelines of the Terra Vista Promenade shopping center, to the
satisfaction of the City Planner, including the following amenities:
a) An overhead wood trellis consistent in design with other trellises
in the Terra Vista Promenade shopping center;
b) An overhead roll-up door painted to match the walls of the
enclosure;
c) Trash bins with counter weighted lids;
d) Separate pedestrian access; and
e) Chain link fencing between the top of the enclosure walls and the
trellis to prevent trash from blowing out of the enclosure.
9) A secudty camera shall be installed of a type and number approved by
the City Manager of his designee, prior to occupancy of the facility.
Said camera must be capable of producing a retrievable image on film
or tape the can be made a permanent record and that can be enlarged
through projection or other means. The camera(s) shall be maintained
in proper working order at all times and shall be subject to periodic
inspection by the City Manager or his designee.
10) All pertinent conditions from City Council Resolution No. 95-140 shall
apply to this project.
Enqineering Division
1) The traffic signal at Rochester Avenue and Chervil Street shall be
installed with the development of any parcel beyond Parcel 1 (Home
Depot). Signal plans shall be approved by the City Engineer, security
shall be posted, and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer and City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public
improvements, prior to the issuance of building permits. The signal
shall be operational prior to~.?~,~y.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 96-14- ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CO.
August14,1996
Page 4
2) Foothill Boulevard frontage parkway improvements shall be completed
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Street trees shall be installed
within the public right-of-way per the recently approved activity center
and median landscape plans for Tetra Vista Promenade (Drawing
No. 1555-L).
3) Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of the existing
84-inch storm drain on the north side of Foothill Boulevard (Drawing
No. 1555-D), measured from the outer ,,'dge of a mature tree trunk. A
copy of the on-site landscaping plan, with the storm drain plotted, shall
be provided for the City Engineer to verify this condition is being met.
Fire Prevention District
1) Separate plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention New
Construction Unit for underground tank installation.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certil~ to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
A']'FEST:
Larry J. Henderson, Acting Secretary
I, Larry J. Henderson, Acting 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 14th day of August 1996, by the following vote-to-
wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT#: Conditional Use Permit 96-14
SUBJECT: 2,796 square foot convenience marketJgas station
APPLICANT: Atlantic Richfield Company
LOCATION: North of Foothill Boulevard, west of Rochester Avenue
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. 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 herein, Development Code
regulations, and the Terra Vista Community Plan.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
Project No.. CUP 96-14
Completion Date
5. A detailed on-site lighting plan 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.
6. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and
the number of trash receptacles shalr be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the
issuance of building permits.
7. 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.
8.All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner,
including proper illumination.
9. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property
owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape
maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to
the issuance of building permits.
C. Building Design
1. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or
projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound bLiffered from adjacent properties and
streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated
with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be
included in building plans.
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.
E. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping
in this case of rasidential development, shall be prepared b'./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. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in
accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The
location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be
shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's
recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods.
Project NO. CUP 96o14
Completion Date
3. A minimum of 30% of trees planted within the project shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box __ __/__
or larger.
4. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of on 15-gallon tree for every three parking __ __/__
stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21.
5. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one __
tree per 30 linear feet of building.
6. 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.
7. 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
dusters 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.
8. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering /
sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping. is required along Foothill
Boulevard.
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.
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
G, 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.
Project NO. CUP 96-14
Cornpretion Date
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or addition
to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate.
Such fees may include. but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee,
School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees.
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and
prior to issuance of building permits.
H. 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 shal~ 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.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730,
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
I. General Fire Protection Conditions
1. Fire flow requirement shall be 3,000 gallons per minute.
a. A previous fire flow conducted revealed _~. gpm available at 20 psi.
b. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department
personnel prior to water plan approval.
c. 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.
2. 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.
3. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below:
X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
Note: Special sprinkler densities are required fi}r such hazardous operations as
woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, fiammable liquids storage, high piled
stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to deterrnine if sprinkler system is adequate
for proposed operations.
4. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of
sprinkler system.
4
Pro~ect No, CUP 96-14
Cornpietion Date
5. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below:
X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
6. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall
be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safeb/Division for specific
details and ordering information.
7. Plan check fees in the amount of $0 have been paid. An additional $645.00 shall be paid:
__ Prior to water plan approval.
~ 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.
8. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC,
UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22, 15.
sc - 3~9s 5
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA2vIONGA '
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 93-15 - CAMPOS - A request to modify a previously approved project
to connect and expand two historic landmark houses and convert into a restaurant
of 2.530 square feet in the Specialty Commercial District (Subarea 3) of the Foothill
Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 9634 and 9642 Foothill Boulevard -
APN: 208-153-24. Related File: Landmark Alteration Permit 96-02.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zonino:
North - Single family residential; Specialty Commercial FBSP (Subarea 3)
South - Fast Food restaurant; Specialty Commercial FBSP (Subarea 3)
East Abandoned gas station; Specialty Commercial FBSP (Subarea 3)
West Single family residential; Specialty Commercial FBSP (Subarea 3)
B. General Plan Desiqnations:
Project Site - Commercial
North- Commercial
South- Commercial
East Commercial
West Commercial
C. Site Characteristics: The site is currently developed with four single family residences, which
are designated as local Historic Landmarks, and an abandoned diner. All of the structures
are in various states of deterioration. A number of mature trees exist throughout the parcels.
D. Parkinq Calculations:
Number of Number of
Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces
of Use Footaqe Ratio Required Provided
Restaurant 2,530 sq. ~. I space/ 25 21
100 sq. ft.
Commercial 2,895 sq. ft. 1 space/ 11 11
250 sq. ~.
TOTAL 36 32 *
The Planning Commission approved Variance 94-04 to reduce the number of parking
spaces by 12 stalls under the original site plan scheme. The current proposal is consistent
with this Variance because the number of parking spaces would only be reduced by 4 stalls.
ITEM F
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 93-15 - CAMPOS
August 14, 1996
Page 2
BACKGROUND: On October 5, 1994, the City Council approved the local landmark designation
for the four residences located at 9618, 9626, 9634, and 9642 Foothill Boulevard. While
individually the structures are not significant architecturally, the Council determined the homes
derive their significance from the setting and context in which they are located. This block
represents one of the last remaining tracts of housing frorn the 1910s and 1920s that has not been
demolished and are a remnant of "Old Cucamonga." In addition, this area was within the Sphere
of Influence of John Klusman, a prominent local businessman.
On January 11, 1995, the Planning Commission approved construction of a 1,600 square foot
restaurant and conversion of four houses into commercial uses. During plan check, the applicant
discovered that the lender and the restaurant operator required additional parking to proceed with
a construction loan. The applicant was denied a modification to create more parking by removing
these two houses. Since then, staff has worked with the applicant to develop an innovative scheme
which will preserve these landmarks by converting them into the desired restaurant space.
In a related request, the Historic Preservation Commission approved Landmark Alteration Permit
94-04 to the four houses in order to convert them to commercial use. The alterations included
handicap access ramps, removal of fireplaces and chimneys. hardscape changes, and parking
areas. The house at 9642 Foothill Boulevard was approved to remove the chimney. and remove
a window and replacement with a door on the north elevation. The originally approved elevations,
site plan, and photographs for these two houses have been attached, (Exhibits "C" and "D").
ANALYSIS
A. General: The applicant proposes to construct an addition connecting the two houses to
expand the floor area forthe restaurant. The existing deteriorating roofs will be removed and
replaced with a new roof which preserves their side-gabled form. Other minor alterations
include changing the pattern of windows and doors. The front elevations facing Foothill
Boulevard remain unchanged except for replacing of the sidelights with non-mullioned
windows. The front elevations are being used to create an atrium between the dining room
and the building front. The existing diner would be demolished to construct additional
parking. Because the houses are local landmarks, the applicant is pursuing a Landmark
Alteration Permit 96-02 (see related item on Historic Preservation Commission agenda).
B. Desiqn Review Committee: The Committee (Lumpp, McNiel, Fong) reviewed the project on
July 16, 1996 and recommended the following revisions (Exhibit "1"):
1. Delete new double door, within new addition, facing Foothill Boulevard in order to
preserve the appearance of two separate residences as viewed from the street. Utilize
one of the existing doors as an "EXIT' to satisfy UBC and UFC requirements.
2. Delete proposed clay tile roof material and use architectural grade (i.e., thick butt)
asphalt shingle to maintain California bungalow architectural style.
3. Delete proposed truss and retain existing siding underneath gable over front door of
9642 Foothill Boulevard.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 93-15 - CAMPOS
August 14, 1996
Page 3
4. Provide trash enclosure near service door to kitchen.
5. Preserve or duplicate existing architectural details, such as window trim shapes, window
mullions, and gable brackets.
6. Preserve existing sidelight window mullions flanking both entry doors facing Foothill
Boulevard.
7. Provide outdoor dining on existing front porches.
C. Environmental Assessment: In completing Part II of the Initial Study, staff identified the loss
of the mature trees and the impact to historic/cultural resources as potential environmental
impacts. An Arborist Report was prepared to assess tree health and preservation potential.
A total of 18 trees exist on the site (Exhibit "F" for locations). Some of the trees will be
removed due to conflicts with proposed improvements or because of poor health or growth
characteristics. Several trees will be relocated because of their excellent condition. Where
removal is necessary, the conditions of approval will require replacement planting as
mitigation. The proposed alterations will not have an adverse effect upon the two landmark
houses, and will ensure their preservation through adaptive reuse as a restaurant.
Conditions of approval will require that the alteration be sensitive to matching materials and
design of these landmarks.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval through adoption ofthe attached
Resolution and issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration.
Respe submitte
BB:DC:mlg
Attachments:Exhibit "A" - Approved Master Plan
Exhibit "B" - Approved Elevations
Exhibit "C" - Building Photographs
Exhibit "D" - Proposed Site Plan
Exhibit "E" - Proposed Elevations
Exhibit "F" - Arborist Repor~
Exhibit "G" - Location Map
Exhibit "H" - Initial Study Part II
Exhibit "1" DRC Minutes
Resolution of Approval
LUCAS AND WARD SUBDIVISION
.... ~. ........................ FOOTHIL,L._~Q.U~.Ey~.q ..........................
~'~ ~
~ EXIST~G. EAST ELEVATION '~',~ EXIST'G. NORTH ELEVATION.
EXIST'G. SOUTH ELEVATION, "~' "' HOUSE fl 1 FLOOR PLAN ij~:") 'A-.2,
· ,. ~7~,~.-~/.//,,-//
~,X]ST'G. NORTH ELEVATION "' :.
· \
~ EX~St'G. SOUTH eueyat~oN '..~,.T
:. ' "' ' ~ ~'~'~ i
EXIST'G, SOUTEH ELEVATION: EX S.T'G. SOUTH ELEVATION
f ~ ~4~ y~f~'~ ~ ~ ~i/ ' .
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION LANDMARK SURVEY
View Looking 5~9~7"/"/~'/q~.Tf'Date of Photo
,,
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION LANDMARK SURVEY
ViewLookin~ ~/r~ rH . l)amorPhom
ViewLookinS ~U}'/'/ . Da~orPho~o
LEGEND
LUCAS AND WARD SUBDIVISION
I ,.'~ ":-.-...-.-.,
.........~ ,.;:?~ ,...!.,, :--' , .-.-, :_...~,:: ,: ~,~..E~ ~ ...'.~__~ _ __ .;:,. .......~..... ~
............ ~-, d ~ ~- '~' ~ ~ ,, ,::'""'> '
;~ '~ ,~:~ .. ~,: : ~;: :~ :, ;:L ,; ,. -. , _ · ..... .. ', ~ ~ ....
../' '. . jlLDJN~~N
EAST ELEVATION
NORTH ELEVATION
~QUTH ELEVATION
Steven's Tree Experts
APRIL 13, 1994
PATRICK MORA
MORA ARCHITECTS
3221 20TH STREET
SAN FPJuNCISCO, CA 94110
(415)824-9602
(415)824-0243 AFX
PROJECT LOCATION:
NORTH SIDE FOOTHILL BLVD. WEST OF ARCHIBALD AVE.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA.
CONTENTS:
IDENTIFY EXISTING TREES AND INDICATE TREES SCHEDULED FOR REMOVAL.
REPORT ON TREE CONDITION AND POSSIBLE RELOCATION.
SUGGESTED SPECIES FOR PLANTING PER PARKING STALLS.
Steven's Tree Experts
TREE LIST (EXISTING):
TREE SPECIE DBH HEIGHT-SPREAD CONDITION DEVELOPMENT
# ( IN. ) (APPROX. FT. ) REQUIREMENT
1 CEDRUS 21 40 X 20 MATURE UNDISTURBED
DEODARA POOR
2 CEDRUS 16 50 X 35 MATLrRE UNDISTURBED
DEODARA GOOD
3 FRAXINUS 36 55 X 45 MATURE DISTURBED
UHDE I GOOD
4 FRAXINUS MULTI (5) 50 X 33 MATURE DISTURBED
UHDEI (12,12, GOOD
11,11,8)
5 JUGLAS MULTI(3) 20 X 20 MATURE UNDISTURBED
REGIA (8,8,7) FAIR
6 PLATANUS 14 25 X 25 MATURE DISTURBED
ACERIFOLIA GOOD
7 PERSEA 16 24 X 24 MATURE UNDISTURBED
AME R I CANA GOOD
8 FRAXiNUS 4.5 16 X 10 YOUNG L~NDISTURBED
UHDEI GOOD
9 PERSEA MULTI(2) 25 X 18 MATURE UNDISTURBED
AMERICANA (12,9) POOR
10 DIOSPYROS MULTI(2) 25 X 25 MATURE DISTURBED
KAKI ( 9,8 ) EXCELLENT
11 FICUS 10 12 X 14 MATURE DISTURBED
EDULIS POOR
Steven's Tree Experts
12 CITRUS 6 12 X 10 MATURE DISTURBED
ORANGE POOR
13 PERSEA 20 26 X 24 MATURE DISTURBED
AMER I CANA FA I R
14 PERSEA 16 23 X 26 MATURE DISTURBED
AMERICANA FAIR/POOR
15 PERSEA 1! 25 X 16 MATURE DISTURBED
AMERICANA GOOD
16 FRAXINUS 6 16 X 8 YOUNG DISTURBED
UNDEI FAIR
17 FRAXINUS 10 20 X 12 YOUNG DISTURBED
UNDEI FAIR
18 FRAXINUS 12 20 X 12 YOUNG DISTURBED
UHDEI FAIR
19 FRAXINUS 9 20 X 12 YOUNG UNDISTURBED
UHDE I GOOD
20 FRAXINUS MULTI(2) 16 X 12 YOUNG UNDISTURBED
UHDEI (5,5) GOOD
21 FRAXINUS 19 20 X 25 YOUNG UNDISTURBED
LrHDEI POOR
22 FRAXINUS MULTI(3) 20 X 20 YOUNG UNDISTURBED
URDEI (8,7,7) GOOD
Steven's Tree Experts
COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
TREE #
1 CEDAR - EVEN THOUGH THIS TREE WILL NOT BE IMPACTED BY
CONSTRUCTION, IT SHOULD BE REMOVED DUE TO ITS
EXTREMELY POOR CONDITION. THE TOP TWELVE FEET IS
DEAD. IT HAS BEEN SEVERELY TOPPED.
2 CED~R - PROTECT IN PLACE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
3 ASH - THIS HUGE ASH IS SCHEDULE FOR REMOVAL. IT IS POSSIBLE TO RELOCATE IT ON SITE. BEST TO REMAIN
IN THE FRONTYARD CLOSE TO EXISTING LOCATION.
4 ASH - SAME AS #3.
5 WALNUT - PROTECT IN PLACE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
6 SYCAMORE - THIS TREE IS SCHEDULE FOR REMOVAL FOR NEW ACCESS
ROAD AND CAN BE RELOCATED ON SITE.
7 AVOCADO - PROTECT IN PLACE DURING CONSTRUCTION. GOOD, HEALTHY
TREE.
8 ASH - PROTECT IN PLACE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
PROPER PRUNING TO CONTAIN SIZE AND PROMOTE STRUCTURE.
9 AVOCADO - LIKE TREE #1 THIS TREE IS NOT SCHEDULED FOR REMOVAL
DUE TO THE NEW CONSTRUCTION. HOWEVER, IT IS IN
EXTREMELY POOR CONDITION (NEAR DEATH) AND SHOULD BE
REMOVED.
10 PERSIMMON - THIS IS AN EXCELLENT SPECIMEN AND SHOULD BE
RELOCATED ON SITE. TREE #9'S LOCATION WOULD BE A
GOOD SPOT FOR IT.
11 FIG - THIS TREE IS TO BE REMOVED A~ID IS NOT WORTH
TRAi~SPLANTING.
Steven's Tree Experts
12 ORANGE - SAME AS #11.
13,14,15 AVOCADO - THIS TREE IS SCHEDULED FOR REMOVAL. MATURE
AVOCADOS HAVE A LOW SURVIVABILITY P~ATE
DURING TRANSPLANTING. WE DO NOT RECOMMEND
TRANSPLANTING.
16,17,18 ASH - THESE YOUNG TREES ARE iN THE WAY AND ARE NOT
WORTH TR/kNSPLANTING.
19,20 ASH - THESE YOUNG TREES MAY BE ON THE WEST SIDE NEIGHBORS
PROPERTY. THEY CAN BE PROTECTED IN PLACE DURING
CONSTRUCTION.
21 ASH - THIS SHOULD BE REMOVED. IT HAS A SPLIT TRUNK, IS
UNSOUND STRUCTURALLY AND IS A POTENTIAL HAZARD.
OWNERSHIP IS UNCLEAR.
22 ASH - SAME AS ~19,20.
Steven's Tree Experts
SUGGESTED SPECIES FOR PLANTING PER P~KING STAIJ.g.
I HAVE SELECTED THE FOLLOWING TREES FOR THEIR SMALL TO MEDIUM
SIZE AS GROWING AREAS ARE FAIRLY LIMITTED. THEIR MAJOR FEATURES
/~RE INCLUDED.
E~:
TABEBUIA AVELLANEDAE - PINK FLOWERING, PROFUSE IN SPRING.
PINK TRUMPET TREE.
TABEBUIA CHRYSOTRICHA - YELLOW FLOWERING, PROFUSE IN SPRING.
GOLDEN TRUMPET TREE.
PISTACIA CHINENSIS - ORANGE-RED IN F/iLL, SPREADING FORM.
CHINESE PISTACHE.
GINKGO BILOBA - YELLOW IN FALL, UPRIGHT FORM, USE MALES ONLY.
GINKGO
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
NVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
NITIAL STUDY - PART II
BACKGROUND
2) Related File(s):
3) Applicant:/dTY'/~ C___---4-/~) 5
Telephone #: ~t ) ) '~ ~'~0 ~ J
4) Project Description: ~Af't,/~,'r' ~ ,,,/--/~/JE,(~-'~
5) Project Accepted as Complete (date):
!NVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
~ursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, explanation of the
potential impacts identified as "Yes" or "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. An explanation
shall also be provided in each instance where a potentially significant effect has been determined not to
be significant and is marked "No."
Yes Maybe No
I. EARTH. Will the proposal result in:
a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in the geologic structure?
b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction or over covering of the
soil? In In
c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features? Q Q ~"
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? in In /.~
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?
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as
earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
Yes Maybe
II. AIR. Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?Q Q
b) The creation of objectionable odors? Q Q
c) Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally or regionally? Q
III. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in currents, orthe course of direction of watermovements,
in either marine or fresh waters? Q Q
b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and
amount of sudace runoff? Q Q
c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? Q Q
e) Discharge into Surface waters, or in any alteration of surface
water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity? Q Q
f) Alteration of the direction or rate of ground waters? Q [::3
g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by
cuts or excavations? Q Q
h) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available
for public water supplies? Q Q
i) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as
flooding or tidal pools? Q
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)?Q[~
b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered
species of plants? Q ~
c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier
to the normal replenishment of existing species? Q Q
d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Q
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)? Q Q
b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered
species or animals?
Yes Maybe No
c) Introduction of new species of animals into the area, or result in
a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? El El
d) Deterioration to existing fish or wi~dlife habitat? Q
VI. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels? Q El d""
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? El
VII. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal:
a) Produce new light and glare? Q
VIII. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an
area? Q Q
IX, ' NATURAL RESOURCES. Willtheproposalresultin:
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? Q Q /
X. RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve:
a) A risk of an 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? Q Q
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an
emergency evacuation plan? El Q
XI. POPULATION. Will the proposal:
a) Alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the
human population of an area? El El
XII. HOUSING. Will the proposal:
a) Affectexistinghousing, orcreateademandforadditionalhousing? Q Q
XIII. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in:
a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? El El
b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking?ElQ
c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Q Q
d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of
people and/or goods? Q Q
e) Alterations to waterbome, rail or air traffic? El Q /J2~/
f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or
Yes Maybe No
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an eff~;ct upon, or result in
a need for new or altered government services in ,any of the following
areas:
a) Fire protection? Q Q
b) Police protection? Q Q
c) Schools? Q Q
· d) Parks and other recreational facilities? Q
e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? Q Q ,~/
f) Other governmental services? Q E3
XV. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in:
a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy'? Q Q
- b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new sources of energy?
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 gas? Q Q
b) Communications systems? O Q
c) Water?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? Q
e) Storm water drainage? Q Q
f) Solid waste disposal? Q Q
XVII. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in:
a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (exclud-
ing mental health)? Q Q
b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
XVIII. 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 op~;n to public view?Q Q
XlX. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in:
a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational opportunities?Q Q ,,~
b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact
area? Q Q
Yes Maybe No
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal:
a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
historic archeological site? Q
b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or
historic building, structure, or object? Q Q
c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? Q Q
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 the major periods of Califomia
history or prehistory? Q Q
b) Short-term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A
short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definite period of time. Long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.) Q
c) Cumulative:DoestheprojecthaveimpactswhichareindividuallY
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.) Q Q
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly? Q Q
XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION.
(Attach additional sheets with narrative description of the environmental impacts.)
XXIII. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS.
(Attach additional sheets examining whether the project would be consistent with existing zonin
plans, and other applicable land use controls.)
XXIV. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, prog ram El R,
or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier El R 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 legat
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 Incorpo-
rated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier
document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
XXV. DETERMINATION. (7'o be completed by Lead Ag~:ncy.)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
a) I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and
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 ca:se because rnitig~ztiotz nzez~szzres described on
an attached sheet have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared ............................. Y
c) I find the proposed project rn~zy have a significant effect on the environment, and
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REP~ required ........................ Q
Date Preparer's Signature
XXVlo APPLICANT CERTIFICATION ('To b~ cemp!ctcd by appllcanL)
I ~Mlly that I ~m th~ .~ppligan~ ~or the projw~ described In thle Initial Study. I aoknowlwd~]~ that I have
read this Initial Study and proposed mkt~fion me,,~ur~. Fudh~r, I h~y~ revised ~hc projcct pl~.n~. of
propo3111s and/or hereby ,,g~ee to the proposed m~tlgallon measures to avoid the effect~ or mitig.',te
the effects ~o a 'point where clesrly no eignificant environmental effects woulcl occur.
DIre , Stgmature /
ANA )t~RIA CAMPOS
Print Name and Title
""""""
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKI,IST
Initial Study - Part II
Environmental Evaluation and Discussion
Project Description: Modification to Development Review 93-'15 and Landmark Alteration
Permit 96-02 - Campos. Addition to, and conversion of, two historic
landmark houses into a restaurant.
IN/. Plant Life:
a) The site contains a total of 18 trees of differing varieties (see attached Exhibit). An
arborist report has been prepared which indicates that 28 percent are in poor
condition. The project design anticipates the removal of all but five of the trees due
to conflicts with improvements. Three of the trees, which are located along the
Foothill frontage, will be preserved in-place. Two of the trees will be transplanted
elsewhere within the project. The impact is not considered significant because
a) many of the trees are in poor condition and are not suitable for preservation, and
b) replacement planting with the largest nursery grown stock is required by the Tree
Preservation Ordinance and conditions of approval. A copy of the arborist report is
available in the Planning Division.
b) There are no known rare, unique, or endangered species on-site.
VI. Noise:
a) The development of the site with a restaarant will increase the noise level by the
mere fact that the property consists of abandoned houses. The project design
includes construction of a 6-foot high solid masonry wall along the perimeter;
therefore, noise level increases on adjoining properties will not be significant.
b) The noise levels will not exceed the allowable noise levels for this zone.
VII. Light and Glare:
a) New light and glare will be created because the property is currently vacant. 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.
XX. Cultural Resources:
a) No known prehistoric or historic site exists within the project boundaries.
b) The project will construct a small addition between the two historic landmark
residences for the purpose of expanding the floor area to accommodate their adaptive
reuse as a restaurant. Also, a new roof will be constructed to join both houses. The
new roof line will maintain the side gable form of the existing houses. Such a
landmark alteration will benefit the con~tmunity by preserving these landmarks
consistent with the existing architectural style and details. As mitigation, the
conditions of approval will require an arehitectural grade asphalt shingle roof
material, and preserving or duplicating architectural details, such as window trim
shapes, window mullions, and gable brackets. Landmark Alteration Permit 96-02 is
being processed concurrently with this development application.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:40 p.m. Dan Coleman July 16, 1996
MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 93-15 - CAMPOS - A request to modify a
previously approved project to connect and expand two historic landmark houses and convert into
a restaurant of 2,530 square feet in the Specialty Commercial District (Subarea 3) of the Foothill
Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 9634 and 9642 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 208-153-24. Related
File: Landmark Alteration Permit 96-02.
Background:
On January 1 I, 1995, the Planning Commission approved construction of a 1,600 square foot
restaurant and conversion of four houses into commercial uses. The lender and the restaurant
operator require additional par'king to proceed with a construction loan. The applicant was denied
a modification to create more parking by removing these two houses. Since then, staff has worked
with the applicant to develop an innovative scheme which will preserve these landmarks by
converting them into the desired restaurant space.
In a related request, the Historic Preservation Commission approved landmark alterations to the four
houses in order to convert them to commemial use. The alterations included handicap access ramps,
removal of fireplaces and chimneys, hardscape changes,. and parking areas. The house at 9642
Foothill Boulevard was approved to remove a window and replacement with a door on the noah
elevation. The originally approved elevations, site plan, and photographs for these two houses have
been attached.
Design Parameters:
The two houses were designated as historic landmarks on October 5, 1994. To the west are two
other historic landmark houses. The Historic Preservation Commission determined that the four
houses derived their historic significance from the setting in one of the last remaining tracts of
housing from the 1910s and 1920s in "Old Cucamonga." ,~ny alterations to these houses and their
setting potentially affects their historic significance and should be reviewed carefully.
The primary alteration is a new roof to connect the two houses, which preserves their side-gabled
form, and expand the floor area to accommodate the restaurant use. The secondary alteration is the
addition of a gabled entry (customer entrance) on north ele:vation. Other minor alterations include
changing the pattem of windows and doors. The front elevations facing Foothill Boulevard remain
unchanged except for replacing side light windows with non-mullioned side lights.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
DRC AGENDA
DR 93-15 - CAMPOS
July 16, 1996
Page 2
Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion
regarding this project:
1. Delete new double door in center of south elevation and use one of the existing doors as an
exit.
2. Delete proposed clay tile roof material and use architectural grade (i.e., thick butt) asphalt
shingle to maintain California bungalow architectural style.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Delete proposed truss and retain existing siding underneath gable over front door of 9642
Foothill.
2. Preserve or duplicate existing architectural details, such as window trim shapes, window
mullions, and gable brackets.
3. Existing fireplace chimney at 9642 Foothill Boulevard shall be reconstructed with brick or
removed.
4. Preserve side light window mullions flanking both existing doors facing Foothill Boulevard
(south elevation).
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval with the changes described above.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Dan Coleman
The Committee recommended approval subject to the following changes:
1. Provide outdoor dining on existing porches.
2. Modify new double door with simpler design or remove if allowed by code.
DRC AGENDA
DR 93-15 - CAMPOS
July 16, 1996
Page 3
3. Delete proposed clay tile roof material and use architectural grade (i.e., thick butt) asphalt
shingle to maintain California bungalow architectural style.
4. Delete proposed truss and retain existing siding underneath gable over front door of 9642
Foothill Boulevard.
5. Preserve or duplicate existing architectural details, such as window trim shapes, window
mullions, and gable brackets.
6. Existing fireplace chimney at 9642 Foothill Boulevard shall be reconstructed with brick.
7. Preserve side light window mullions flanking both existing doors facing Foothill Boulevard
(south elevation).
RESOLUTION NO. 95-01A
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MODIFICATION TO
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 93-15, LOCATED AT 9634 AND 9642
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD IN THE SPECIALTY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT,
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 206-153-24.
A. Recitals.
1. Ana Campos has filed an application for the approval of a Modification to Development
Review No. 93-15, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereina~er in this Resolution, the
subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 14th day of August 1996, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission.during the above-
referenced meeting on August 14, 1996, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission
hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property located at 9634 and 9642 Foothill Boulevard with
a street frontage of 300 feet and lot depth of 130 feet and is presently improved with four single
family residences, which are local historic landmarks, and an abandoned diner; and
b. The properly to the north of the subject site is designated for commercial uses and
is developed with single family residences, the property to the south consists of a fast food
restaurant and is designated for commercial use, the property to the east is designated for
commercial use and contains an abandoned, po~'entially historic gas station, and the property to the
west is designated for commercial use and contains a single family residence; and
c. The application contemplates the construction of an addition to connect two of the
histodc houses and their conversion into a restaurant use consistent with the Specialty Commercial
designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan; and
d. On August 10, 1994, the Planning Commission approved Variance 94-04, allowing
a reduction in the required number of parking spaces by 12 stalls. The proposed modification would
reduce the number of parking spaces by 4 stalls consistent with the previous Variance 94-04; and
e. The Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan encourages the retention and reuse of
cultural/historic resources and their incorporation in development proposals; and
f. The application, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will comply with
each of the requirements of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and the Development Code.
F'-3
MOD. TO DR 93-15- CAMPOS
August14,1996
Page 2
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of fa,:ts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above,
this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That the proposed project is consistent ~4th the objectives of the General Plan; and
b. That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code
and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and
c. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of
the Development Code; and
d. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration,
together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the
application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a 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, fLirther, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application.
b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into
the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur.
c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 75:3.5(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 Califomia Code of Regulations.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set fodh in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below
and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Planninq Division
1)Approval is granted contingent upon approval of Landmark Alteration
Permit 96-02.
2) Install decorative paving within driveway throat, behind public right-of-
way line, Paving material and color shall be approved by the Planning
Division prior to issuance of building permits.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 95-01A
MOD. TO DR 93-15 - CAMPOS
August 14, 1996
Page 3
3) Delete new double door facing Foothill Boulevard, if allowed by code,
or simplify design.
4) Roof material shall be architectural grade (i.e., thick butt) asphalt
shingle to maintain California bungalow architectural style.
5) Delete proposed truss within gable over front door at 9642 Foothill
Boulevard and retain as is.
6) Preserve or duplicate existing architectural details, such as window trim
shapes, window mullions, and gable brackets.
7) Preserve existing sidelight window mullions flanking both front entry
doors facing Foothill Boulevard.
8) Provide outdoor dining within existing front entry porches with furniture
consistent with architectural style.
9) All new light fixtures, including parking lot lighting. shall be consistent
with architectural style.
10) Foothill Boulevard improvements shall be installed across the property
frontage consistent with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan
requirements. The final design of the improvements shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Planner and City Engineer prior to building
permit issuance.
11) Street furniture shall be provided across the Foothill Boulevard
frontage. The amenities shall be consistent with the Foothill Boulevard
Specific Plan and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner
and City Engineer prior to building permit issuance.
12) The applicant shall post a cash deposit or other surety to cover the cost
of reconstructing the east-west drive aisle at the nodh side of the site
upon redevelopment of the property to the nodh.
13) A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted for
City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
The houses at 9618 and 9626 Foothill Boulevard shall be considered
as a single complex with one monument sign allowed for business
identification. The restaurant building shall be allowed a separate
monument sign.
Enqineering Division
1) All pertinent conditions of approval contained in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 95-01 shall apply.
2) Install R17 "No Left Turn" sign at the driveway on Foothill Boulevard
and R26 "No Parking Any Time" signs along the Foothill Boulevard
frontage.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 95-01A
MOD. TO DR 93-15- CAMPOS
August14,1996
Page 4
Environmental Mitigation
1) Tree Removal Permit is approved subject to the following:
a) Trees No. 2, 4, and 5 shall be preserved in place and their
locations integrated into the public improvement plans for the
Activity Center, as approved by the City Engineer and City
Planner.
b) Trees No. 6 and 10 shall be transplanted elsewhere on site
behind the public right-of-way line.
c) Trees No. 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, and 11-18 shall be removed and replaced
with the largest nursery grown stock available. The location of the
replacement trees shall be shown on the landscape construction
plan.
2) All conditions of approval for Landmark Alteration Permit 96-02 shall
apply, as contained in Resolution No. 96-06.
3) All lighting shall be shielded and directed away from adjoining
residences. A detailed lighting plan sh.~ll be submitted for review and
approval by the City Planner and Police Department prior to the
issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination,
location, height, and method of shielding.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
ATTEST:
Larry J. Henderson, Acting Secretary
I, Larry J. Henderson, Acting 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 14th day of August 1996, by the following vote-to-
wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT#: Modification to DR 93-15
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT: Ana Campos
LOCATION: 9634 and 9642 Foothill Boulevard (APN: 208-153-24)
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
Site Development
1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include
site plans, architectural elevations, extedor materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and
grading on file in the Planning Division. the conditions contained herein, Development Code
regulations, and the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan.
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions
of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
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.
sc -~s~ I
Project No, DR 93-15 Modification
Completion Date
7. A detailed on-site lighting plan 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. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations. and
the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the
issuance of building permits.
9. 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.
10. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, /
including proper illumination.
11. Six (6) foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double __/__ __
wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining
property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property
owner at least thirty (30) days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project's
perimeter.
C. Building Design
1. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or __/___
projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and
streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated
with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be
included in building plans.
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. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, __/__
and exits shall be striped per City standards.
3. Handicap accessible stalts shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more __/__ __
parking stalls. Designate two pement or one stall, whichever is greater. of the total number of
stalls for use by the handicapped.
4. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office. industrial, and multifamily __/__ __
residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required
automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first
50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the
required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage
spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a
3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. L
Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher
whole number.
sc- $~s 2
project No. DR 93-15 Modffication
Completion Date
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. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in
accordance with the Municipai Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The
location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shale be
shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's
recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods.
3. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of on 15-gallon tree for ever,/three parking
stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21.
4. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shalI 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.
5. Special landscape features consistent with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan are required along
Foothill Boulevard.
6. 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.
7.All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the
design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
8. 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.
G. Environmental
1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of
implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to
post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the
amount of 9' , prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory
performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City
to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation
measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents
shall be considered grounds for forfeit.
In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the
applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the City Planner prior to
Project No. DR 93-15 Modi~catien
Completion Date
issuance of building permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified
to know whether the particular mitigation measure has be~;n implemented.
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Ho 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. Pdor to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or addition
to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate.
Such fees may include, but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee,
School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees.
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and
prior to issuance of building permits.
I. Existing Structures
1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the properly line clearances considering
use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings.
2.Existing buildings shall be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations for the
intended use or the building shall be demolished.
3. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans submitted for building
permit application.
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.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
K. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&R's or by i i /
deeds and shall be recorded prior to the issuance of building permits, in favor of the entire block
bounded by Foothill Boulevard, Archibald Avenue. Estacia (;our't, and Klusman Avenue.
Project No. DR 93-15 Modificatio~
Completion Date
2. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided.
3. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall
be dedicated to the City.
L. Street Improvements
1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to:
Curb & A,C. Side- Ddve Street St~et Comm Median Bike Other
Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail
FOOthill Boulevard X X e f X e d
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. (e) per Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan Activity Center. (f~ see Special Condition No. 6
of Planning Commission Resolution No. 95-01.
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 appreved 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 shah be obtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any
other permits required.
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and
interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
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 shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside
of BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer.
Notes:
(1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200
feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer.
(2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel
with pull rope or as specified.
e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City
Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
Project No OR 93-15 Modification
Completion Date
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 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 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.
5. A permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any work within the following right-of-way: Foothill
BoUlevard.
M. Public Maintenance Areas
1. 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.
2. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective
Beautification Master Plan: Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan.
N. Utilities
1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas,
electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility
Standards. Easements shall be provided as required.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary.
3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District, and the
Environmental Health 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.
O. General Requirements and Approvals
1. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to issuance of building permits for:
Foothill Boulevard driveway, both interim and ultimate, in favor of entire block bounded bv Foothill
Boulevard, Archibald Avenue, Estacia Court, and Klusman Avenue.
2. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, coverin!;] the estimated operating costs for all
new street lights for the first six (6) months of operation prior to building permit issuance.
project No. DR 93-15 Modi~cation
Completion Date
I~_PPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
P. General Fire Protection Conditions
1. Fire flow requirement shall be 3.000 gallons per minute.
a.A fire flow shall be conducted by the buildeddeveloper 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.
2. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed
and operahie 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,
3. 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.
4. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final
inspection.
5. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below:
X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as
woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, ~ammable liquids storage, high piled
stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if sprinkler system is adequate
for proposed operations.
6. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of
sprinkler system.
7. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below:
X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
X Other: 1994 Uniform Fire and Bulldine Code.
8. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted:
X All roadways.
X Other: Per Ordinance No. 22.
9. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus.
sc - 3/96 7
Proiect No. DR 93-15 Modification
Completion Date
10. 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.
11. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall
be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific
details and ordering information.
12. Plan check fees in the amount of $0 have been paid. An additional $645.00 shall be paid:
__ Prior to water plan approval.
__ 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.
13. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC,
UPC, UMC, NEC. and RCFD Standards 22 and 15.
Q. Special Permits
1. Special permits may be required, depending on intended ~Jse, as noted below:
a. Places of assembly (except churches, schools, and other non-profit organizations).
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
R. 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 sensated cell.
2. All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with
direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting ,,;hall be consistent around the entire
development.
3. Lighting in exterior areas shali be in vandal-resistant fixtures.
S. Security Hardware
1.One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all antrance doom. If windows are within
40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used.
2. All roof openings giving access to the building shall be secu red with either iron bars, metal gates,
or be alarmed.
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.
Project NO. DR 93-t5 Modification
Completion Date
~1. Building Numbering
1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime __/ /
visibility.
V. Alarm Systems
1. Install a burglar alarm system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and / /__
employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of false alarms and in
turn save dollars and lives.
SC - 3/96 9
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer/_/O~
SUBJECT: DRAINAGE OF THE HERITAGE BAG PROPERTY
Staff has prepared a revised resolution of approval for your consideration which
eliminates Engineering Special Condition Number 1. The drainage concerns will be
addressed by Standard Condition Number L. 1.
City staff has been in contact with the City of Ontario. They have indicated they will
review the drainage study when it is ready. At this time the City of Ontario has
expressed no objection or concerns regarding the proposed drainage facility.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 96-22 - HERITAGE BAG
August 14, 1996
Page 2
c. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of
the Development Code; and
d. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration,
together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the
application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the
findings as follows:
a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated
thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the
independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application.
b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into
the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur.
c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the
Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project
will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife
depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff
reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public
hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set fodh in
Section 753.5(c-1-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.
Engineering Division
1) An access for emergency purposes, benefitring both APN 229-283-72
and 229-283-71, shall be provided through the proposed site and the
site to the north to Sixth Street, to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal
and the City Engineer.
2) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical,
except for the 66Kv electrical) on the project side of Fourth Street shall
be undergrounded along the entire project frontage extending to the
first pole off-site (east and west) prior to public improvement
acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing
Fourth Street shall be undergrounded at the same time.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 96-22- HERITAGE BAG
August14,1996
Page 3
3) Privately maintained landscaping along Fourth Street shall be
coordinated with the City's design policy for Fourth Street, currently
being developed.
4)The Fourth Street frontage shall be posted with R26 "No Parking Any
Time" signs.
5) Existing traffic striping and legends to be repainted.
6. The Secretar,j to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14th DAY OF AUGUST 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
ATTEST:
Larry J. Henderson, Acting Secretary
I, Larry J. Henderson, Acting 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 14th day of August 1996, by the following vote-to-
wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA '
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-22 -
HERITAGE BAG - A request to construct a 124,040 square foot industrial building
on 16.5 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14) of the Industrial
Area Specific Plan, located on the north side of Fourth Street, east of Santa Anita
Avenue - APN: 229-283-72.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Surroundino Land Use and Zoninq:
North - Vacant; Heavy Industrial (Subarea 15)
South - Industrial; City of Ontario
East - Industrial; General Industrial (Subarea 14)
West - Industrial; General Industrial (Subarea 14)
B. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - General Industrial
North - Heavy Industrial
South - City of Ontario
East - General Industrial
West - General Industrial
C. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and consists primarily of a vineyard. A rail spur and
power lines exist along the westerly property line. There are no significant trees or other
natural features on the site. The property is a narrow, deep parcel located between existing
large warehouse distribution buildings to the east and west. Curb and gutter, and a drive
approach at the east property line, are existing. There are extensive overhead utilities along
Fourth Street and the west property line.
D. Parkinq Calculations:
Number of Number of
Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces
of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided
Office 5,830 I space/250 sq.~. 23.32 24
Manufacturing 13,360 I space/500 sq.~. 26.72 34
Warehouse 103,840 1 space/I,000 sq.~. 103.84 134
TOTAL 123,030 153.88 192
ITEM G
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 96-22 - HERITAGE BAG
August 14, 1996
Page 2
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant is proposing to develop a single plant for manufacturing and
distribution of plastic bags. The building is being sited at the rear of the property in order to
preserve the vineyard in the front portion of the site for future development. New rail service
will be constructed on the west side. The building is designed as a painted concrete tilt-up
construction. Design emphasis is placed at the raised building entry through the use of
sandblasted concrete and metal roofing, Four 60-foot high silos will be located at the north
end of the building to maximize screening from public streets.
B. Desian Review Committee: The Committee (Lumpp, McNiel, Fong) reviewed the project on
July 16, 1996, and recommended approval subject to the revisions listed in the attached
action comments, see Exhibit "F."
C. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee and Grading Committees
have reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to the conditions contained
in the attached Resolution. The project has been designed to provide emergency secondary
access for the adjoining project to the north (Development Review 96-18 - Meeder
Equipment).
D. Environmental Assessment: In completing the Initial Study, staff determined that there would
not be a significant adverse impact upon the environment from this project. Issuance of a
Negative Declaration is recommended.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval through adoption of the attached
Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration.
BB:DC:mlg
Attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map
Exhibit "B" Site Plan
Exhibit "C" Landscape Plan
Exhibit "D" Grading Plan
Exhibit "E" Elevations
Exhibit "F'" Design Review Committee Minutes
Exhibit "G" Initial Study Part II
Resolution of Approval
\1
......
,:~,"L.'L...._,;; .; ..... . .
....... ~ .... L
PFIOJEC;T DATA , SITE PLAN NOTES .r_( SANTA ^N~TA AVENUE
'.: ............. SITE PLAN
LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN L - l
::I:t:L:L:_I:i:kL,:jj:Lt:xL~:~:Iz:J-tk~:zL l:-~ ::~' 't :! JzLLuzLI ttsEL~jd H-t
EAST ELEVATION
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:10 p.m. Dan Coleman July 16, 1996
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-22 - HERITAGE BAG - A request to construct a 124.040 square
foot industrial building on 16.5 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14) of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Santa Anita Avenue -
APN: 229-283-72.
Design Parameters:
The property is surplus Southern California Edison land sandwiched between the Pic N'Sav
distribution facility to the east and various large warehouse industrial buildings to the west. The
parcel's narrowness and an existing rail easement down the entire west property line are significant
constraints to development. The site comains no significant features or vegetation.
The applicant intends to leave the front portion of the site undeveloped with minimal disturbance
of the existing vineyard. Full improvements along 4th Street, including the 45-foot deep landscape
setback area, will be installed with Phase I.
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. Applicant has strengthened office portion by pushing walls out at least 10 feet to the east and
raising parapet height per staffs recommendation.
2. Applicant has provided at least two primary building materials. Sandblasted concrete is
featured in office portion per staffs recommendations.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Applicant has included a shade cover and a 6-foot to 8-foot high screen ~vatl between
employee outdoor eating area and loading docks per staffs recommendations.
2. Applicant has provided tree wells along entire east property line at 30-foot on center with
Phase I per staffs recommendation.
3. Roof screen material should match the main building walls as closely as possible, in terms of
texture, color, and reveal pattem.
4. Applicant has included landscape 'area between two-way access drive aisle and east property
line with Phase I per staffs recommendation.
DRC AGENDA
DR 96-22 - HERITAGE BAG
July 16, 1996
Page 2
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval.
Desjan Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Dan Coleman
The Committee recommended approval as proposed.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM %, '
of
INITIAL STUDY - PART II
BACKGROUND
1) Project File #/Name: P~'~ '~7~' '
2) Related File(s):
S) Applicant: /L//F:::~/~'/ff"~
Address:/~ 'f~' P,?~/0,~,~v7~' ,~r,'z,'~,- ~_~trra//;4m
Telephone #: (~tP'~)5"~'7"
4) Project Description: ~---~A/57'~C-J~---'7""//Z--Z/',~,'~ S.
5) Project Accepted as Complete (date):
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, explanation of
potential impacts identified as "Yes" or "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. An explanation
shall also be provided in each instance where a potentially significant effect has been determined not to
be significant and is marked "No."
Yes Maybe No "".,.
I. EARTH. Will the proposal result in:
a) Unstableearlhconditionsorinchangesinthegeologicstructure?
b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction or over covering of the
soil?
c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features?
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?
f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sand, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of
ariverorstreamorthebedoftheoceanoranybay, inletorlake? Q Q
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as
earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
Yes Maybe No
.11. AIR. Will the proposal result in:
a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? Q
b) The creation of objectionable odors? ra
c) Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally or regionally? D D
IlL WATER. Will the proposal result in.'
a) Changesincurrents, orthecourseofdirectionofwatermovements,
in either marine or fresh waters? El El
b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff? El El
c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? Q El ,~,
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? El El
e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface
waterquality including, but not lim ted to, temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity? El El
f) Alteration of the direction or rate of ground waters? El Q .,~
g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by
cuts or excavations? El El
h) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available
for public water supplies?
i) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as
flooding or tidal pools? El E3
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)? El Q z2f/
b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered
species of plants? n
c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier
to the normal replenishment of existing species? El El
d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? El El
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)? El Q
b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered .,~
species or animals? El El
Yes Maybe No
c) Introduction of new species of animals into the area, or result in
a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? Q
d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? El Q Q/"
VI. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels?
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Q Q
VII. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposaL'
a) Produce new light and glare? El Q
VIII. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in.'
a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an
area? Q Q
IX. ' NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? Q
X. RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve.'
a) A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limitedto: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)
in the event of an accident or upset conditions? Q Q
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an
emergency evacuation plan? Q
XI. POPULATION. Will the proposal:
a) Alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the
human population of an area? Q Q
XII. HOUSING. Will the proposal.'
a) Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Q El
XIII. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in:
a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? Q El
b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? El El
c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Q Q
d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of
people and/or goods? Q E3 ,O/
e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? E3 El E~'
f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or
~edestrians?
Yes Maybe No
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect upon, orresultin
a need for new or altered government services in any of the following
areas:
a) Fire protection? Q Q
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks and other recreational facilities? Q Q
e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? Q El
f) Other governmental services? El Q
XV. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in.'
a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? El El
b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new sources of energy? El El
XVI. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS. Wifl the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural .gas? El El
b) Communications systems? El El
c) Water? El El
d) Sewer or septic tanks? Q El
e) Storm water drainage? El
f) Solid waste disposal? El El
XVII. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in.'
a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (exclud-
ing mental health)? El
b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? El El
XVIII. AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in:
a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? El
b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? El El
XIX. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in:
a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational opportunities? El El ,D'/
b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact
area? El El
Yes Maybe No
XX. ' CULTURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal:
a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
historic archeological site? Q Q ,d/'
b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or EZj/-
historic building, structure, or object? Q Q
c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? Q Q Q/'
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 the major periods of California
history or prehistory? E3 Q E!/'
b) Shod-term: Does the project have the potential to achieve shod-
term, to the advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A
shod-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definite period of time. Long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.) CI Q ~"
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.) Q Q Gi/
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly? Q Q C3</
XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION.
(Attach additional sheets with narrative description of the environmental impacts.)
×XIII. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS.
(Attach additional sheets examining whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning,
plans, and other applicable land use controls.)
XXIV. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program E IR,
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
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 Incorpo-
rated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier
document and the extent to which they address site*specific conditions for the project.
XXV. DETERMINATION. (To be completed by Lead Agency.)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
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 rnitioe~tion mg~sz~res described on
an attached sheet have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared .............................. Q
c) I find the proposed project r~g~j have a significant effect on the environment, and
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RE is re uire ......................... El
Date Preparer's Signature
XXVI. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION (To be completed by app~cant.)
I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have
read this Initial Study and proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or
proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate
the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur.
Date Signatur~ (/'/'
Print Name and Title
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW NO. 96-22, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 124,040 SQUARE
FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING ON 16.5 ACRES OF LAND IN THE GENERAL
INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (SUBAREA 14) OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA
SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOURTH STREET,
EAST OF SANTA ANITA AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF - APN: 229-283-72.
A. Recitals.
1. Hedtage Bag has filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. 96-22,
as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development
Review request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 14th day of August 1996, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set fodh in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced meeting on August 14, 1996, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission
hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to properly located within a utility corridor on the north side
of Fourth Street, east of Santa Anita Avenue, with a street frontage of 355 feet and lot depth of 1,797
feet and is presently unimproved and contains an abandoned vineyard; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is presently unimproved with an
abandoned vineyard, the properties to the south and west consist of industrial buildings, and the
property to the east is developed with an industrial building and a retail building; and
c. The application contemplates construction of a plant to manufacture and distribute
plastic bags.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presei~ted to this Commission during the above-
referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above,
this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and
b. That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code
and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 96-22- HERITAGE BAG
August14.1996
Page 2
c. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of
the Development Code; and
d. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properlies or
improvements in the vicinity.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration,
together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the
application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the
findings as follows:
a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated
thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the
independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, furlher, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application.
b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into
the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects wilt 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 forth in
Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set fodh in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 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 this reference.
Enqineering Division
1) The final drainage study indicated in Standard Condition No. L-1 shall
receive approval from the City of Ontario or a letter of acceptance shall
be provided by the City of Ontario.
2) An access for emergency purposes, benefitring both APN 229-283-72
and 229-283-71, shall be provided through the proposed site and the
site to the north to Sixth Street, to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal
and the City Engineer.
3) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical,
except forthe 66Kv electrical) on the project side of Fourth Street shall
be undergrounded along the entire project frontage extending to the
first pole off-site (east and west) prior to public improvement
acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing
Fourth Street shall be undergrounded at the same time.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 96-22 - HERITAGE BAG
August 14, 1996
Page 3
4) Privately maintained landscaping along Fourth Street shall be
coordinated with the City's design policy for Fourth Street, currently
being developed.
5) The Fourth Street frontage shall be posted with R26 "No Parking Any
Time" signs.
6) Existing traffic striping and legends to be repainted.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14th DAY OF AUGUST 1996.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, Chairman
ATTEST:
Larry J. Henderson, Acting Secretary
I, Larry J. Henderson, Acting 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 14th day of August 1996, by the following vote-to-
wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT#: Development Review 96-22
SUBJECT: Construction of a 124,040 square foot industrial building
APPLICANT: Heritage Bag
LOCATION: North side of Fourth Street, east of Santa Anita Avenue
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.
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 Industrial Area Specific Plan.
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions
of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
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.
Project No DR 96-22
Completion Date
7. A detailed on-site lighting plan 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. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shaft meet City standards. The final design, locations, and
the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the
issuance of building permits.
9. 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.
10. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner.
including proper illumination.
C. Building Design
1. All roof appurtenances. including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or
projections. shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and
streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated
with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be
included in building plans.
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. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances,
and exits shali be striped per City standards.
3. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
4. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily
residentiar projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required
automobile parking spaces or three bicyc[e storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first
50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the
required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage
spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a
3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100.
Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher
whole number.
5. Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for
commercial, office, and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area. If
covered. the vertical clearance shall be no less than 9 feet.
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
Project NO DR 96-22
Completion Date
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 20% of trees planted within the project shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box
or larger.
3. Within parking lots. trees shall be planted at a rate of on 15-gallon tree for every three parking
stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21.
4. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one
tree per 30 linear feet of building.
5. 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.
6. 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 landscapedand 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.
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 approva~ 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 Fourth Street.
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, 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.
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
G. 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,
Project NO. DR 96-22
Completion Date
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 commercial or industrial development or addition
to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate.
Such fees may include. but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee,
School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees.
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and
prior to issuance of building permits.
H. 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.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
I. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1.Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or
noted on the final map.
2. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall
be dedicated to the City.
J. Street Improvements
1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to:
J Cure & A.C, Bide- Ddve Street Street Comm Median Bike Other
Street Name Gutter PvmL walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail
Fourth Street b c X X X d e
Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement
reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall
be curvilinear per STD. 114. (d) If so marked. an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for
this item. (e) Class II bike lane.
2. Improvement Plans and Construction:
sc- ~ 4
Project NO DR 96-22
Completion Date
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.
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 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 apa~, 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. Handicapped 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 during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash
deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded
upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
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 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.
K. Public Maintenance Areas
1. 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.
Proiect No DR 96-22
Completion Date
L. Drainage and Flood Control
1. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to the __/__
issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as
required by the City Engineer.
2. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured m m/__
from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk.
M. Utilities
1. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. /
2. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the
Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardinc. A letter of compliance from
the CCVVD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first.
N. General Requirements and Approvals
1. Prior to approval of the final map a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated
cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District 84-1 among the newly created
parcels.
2. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all
new street lights for the first six (6) months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to
building permit issuance if no map is involved.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730,
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
O. General Fire Protection Conditions
1. Fire flow requirement shall be 3.500 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.
2. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed /
and operahie 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.
3. 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.
4. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final ~/__ __
inspection.
Project No, DR 96-22
Completion Date
5. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below:
__Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
Other: 1994 UBC and NFPA 13 (1991 Edition)
Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as
woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled
stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if sprinkler system is adequate
for proposed operations.
6. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of
sprinkler system.
7. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted:
X All roadways.
X Other: Per Ordinance No. 22.
8. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept tdmmed a minimum of 14'6" from ground
up so as not to impede fire apparatus.
9. A building directory shall be required, as noted below:
X Other: Per Ordinance No. 22
10. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall
be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific
details and ordering information.
11. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire /
Safety Division for specific details and ordering information.
12. A tenant use letter shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety __ /
Division for the proper form letter.
13. Plan check fees in the amount of $0 have been paid. An additional $645 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,
14. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, /
UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22, 15.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Project No. DR 96-22
Completion Date
P. 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 ceil.
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. __
Q. Security Hardware
1. 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.
R. 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.
S. 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.
T. Building Numbering
1.Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime
visibility.
2. Developer shall paint roof top numbers on one or more roofs of this development. They shall be
a minimum of three feet in length and two feet in width and of contrasting color to background.
The stencils for this purpose are on loan at the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department.
U. Alarm Systems
1. Install a burglar alarm system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and
employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of false alarms and in
turn save dollars and lives.
8
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIVIONGA '
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
BY: Gall Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary
SUBJECT: ELECTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICERS
BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission Administrative Regulations provide for election of
Chairman and Vice Chairman at the first regular meeting in July of each year. Because of the
imminent appointment of new Commissioners, the election was postponed until the new
Commissioners were seated.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should elect a Chairman and Vice Chairman to
serve until the next regularly scheduled election at the first meeting in July 1997.
Respectfully submitted,
B~~
City Planner
BB/GS/gs
ITEM H
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' ~
STAFF I EPORT
DATE: August 14, 1996
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary
SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
BACKGROUND: With the change in Commissioners, it is necessary to revise the appointments
to the Design Review Committee.
The current membership is as follows:
COMMITTEE ALTERNATES (in order)
Heinz Lurnpp Peter Tolstoy
Larry McNiel Dave Barker
John Melcher
A history of Design Review Committee membership since January 1993 is attached as Exhibit "A."
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should determine appropriate membership for
the Design Review Committee.
Respectfully submitted,
City Planner
BB:GS/gs
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Design Review Committee Membership History
ITEN I
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
January 1993 to Present
ALTERNATES
COMMITTEE (in order/
July 1992 - October 1992: Larry McNiel Peter Tolstoy
Wendy Vallette Suzanne Chitlea
John Melcher
October 1992 - January 1993: Larry McNiel Peter Tolstoy
John Melcher Wendy Vallette
Suzanne Chitlea
january_ 1993 - October 1993: John Melcher Peter Tolstoy
Wendy Vallette Suzanne Chitiea
Larry McNiel
October 1993 - December 1993: Larry McNiel Peter Tolstoy
John Melcher Suzanne Chitiea
Wendy Vallette
December 1993 -June 1994: Larry McNiel Peter Tolstoy
John Melcher Heinz Lumpp
Dave Barker
June 1994 - December 1994: Heinz Lumpp Peter Tolstoy
John Melcher Larry McNiel
Dave Barker
December 1994 - Auaust 1995: Heinz Lumpp Peter Tolstoy
Larry McNiel Dave Barker
John Melcher
August 1995 to January_ 1996: Heinz Lumpp Dave Barker
John Melcher Peter Tolstoy
Larry McNiel
January 1996 to present: Heinz Lumpp Peter Tolstoy
Larry McNiel Dave Barker
John Melcher