HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000/06/14 - Agenda PacketCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
WEDNESDAY JUNE 14, 2000 7:00 PM
Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center
Council Chamber
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California
I. CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
Chairman McNiel __ Vice Chairman Macias
Com. Mannerino__ Com. Stewart Com. Tolstoy__
I1. ANNOUNCEMENTS
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
May 24, 2000
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. If anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for
discussion.
A. VACATION OF NON-VEHICULAR ACCESS FOR SAVE-ON'R
NEW DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS, V171, located at the southeast
corner of Town Center Drive and Haven Avenue -
APN: 1077-422-06. Related file: Conditional Use Permit 99-26
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODF
AMENDMENT 00-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA- The
addition of Section 17.20.060 - Hillside Overlay District, to
Development Code Chapter 17.20, and revisions to Section
17.24.020, in order to implement the addition of a Hillside Overlay~
District on the Zoning Map. Related file: Development District~
Amendment 00-02. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration ofl
environmental impacts for consideration. ~
I
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT~
DISTRICT AMENDMENT 00-02 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - The addition of a Hillside Overlay District to the
City of Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Map in order to geographically
define the Hillside area, as defined in Development Code Chapter
17.24. Related file: Development Code Amendment 00-02. Staff
has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for
consideration.
D. ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-02 - CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the Etiwanda
Specific Plan to update local street trees to current approved
species, update street tree figures for main streets to reflect
appropriate spacing and successful species, and revise references
within the Specific Plan for size. (Continued from May 10, 2000)
E. MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 16026- AMETHYST
ESTATES UP. - A request to modify a condition of approval
regarding a Community Trail along Amethyst Street for previously
approved Tentative Tract Map 16026, a residential subdivision of
18 single family lots on 11.3 acres of land in the Very Low
Residential District (0-2 dwelling units per acre), located west side
of Amethyst Street, north of Valley View Street- APN: 1061-401-
03.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NO. 15398 - KEYSTONE INVESTMENTS, LLC- A request to
subdivide 2.1 acres into three parcels in the Very-Low Residential
District (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located on the south side of
VVilson Avenue, west of Beryl Street- APN: 1062-121-24 and
1062-051-02. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration
of environmental impacts for consideration.
G. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A proposal to add a Mixed Use zoning district
with accompanying definitions, processing provisions, and
development standards to the Rancho Cucamonga Development
Code. Related files: General Plan Amendment 00-0lA,
Development District Amendment 00-01, and Development
Agreement 00-01.
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 00-0lA - NORTHTOWN HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the General Plan
land use designation from Commercial and Medium-High
Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use for 3.24
Page 2
acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south
of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the
intersection with Lomita Drive. The City will also consider Medium-
High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as
alternatives for the entire site- APN: 202-151-12. Related files:
Development Code Amendment 00-01, Development District
Amendment 00-01, and Development Agreement 00-01. Staff has
prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for
consideration. (Continued from May 24, 2000)
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT AMENDMENT 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the Development
District zoning designation from General Commercial and Medium-
High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use, and
the establishment of a Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD),
including deviation from certain development standards for the
residential portion of the base district, on 3.24 acres of land located
on the east side of Amethyst Street, south of the intersection with
La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive.
The City will also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24
dwelling units per acre) and Office as alternatives for the entire site
- APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code
Amendment 00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, and
Development Agreement 00-01. Staff has prepared a Negative
Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
(Continued from May 24, 2000)
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
CORP. - A Development Agreement between the City of Rancho
Cucamonga and the Northtown Housing Development Corp. for
the purpose of providing a Senior Housing Project per the
requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section
27.020.040 of the Development Code) including deviation from
certain development standards for 80-96 senior apartment units
and one manager unit on a Mixed Use site of 3.24 acres of land
located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the
intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection
with Lomita Drive - APN: 202-151-12. Related files:
Development Code Amendment 00-01, General Plan Amendment
00-0lA, and Development District Amendment 00-01. Staff has
prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for
consideration.
K. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16058 - GRIFFIN HOME BUILDING
GROUP -A request to subdivide an 18.8~acre site into 92 single-
family residential lots, one lot for a private park, one lot for off-site
access, and seven lettered lots for internal roadways in the Low-
Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located
near the southwest corner of Archibald Avenue and 6th Street.
Page 3
APN: 210-062~31. An Environmental Impact Report was
previously certified on November 20, 1996.
L. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT- 00-03-
MCALAN'S PUB AND GRILLE - A request to modify a previously
approved restaurant and bar to permit serving of alcoholic
beverages in the outdoor patio area in the Neighborhood
Commercial District of the Haven Village Center, located at 6321
Haven Avenue (formerly Wdlie & Pies Pizza) - APN: 201-271-69.
M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 00-06 - CABOT - The development of two industrial
buildings in two phases, consisting of a 254,494 square foot
building to be constructed during Phase I and a 61,598 square foot
building to be constructed during Phase II on 17.73 acres of land in
General Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area
Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of Arrow Route and
1-15 - APN: 229-021-29 and 57. Staff has prepared a Negative
Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the commission. Items
to be discussed here are those which do not a/ready appear on this agenda.
VII.COMMISSION BUSINESS
N. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROGRESS - Oral report
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.
I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Division Secretary of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the
foregoing agenda was posted on June 8, 2000, at least 72 hours prior to the
meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive,
Rancho Cucamonga.
Page 4
VICINITY MAP
B, G, and N = CIT~-WIDE
C
Hillside
Banyan ,,
19th/210 D
H, I, 3aseline
Foothill
Arrow
~ M
· -~ 4th
CITY HALL
ET~WA.D^ SPECifiC PL~ City of
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ~
HILLSIDE OVERLAY Rancho Cucamonga N
TH CITY OF
I~AN C I1 0 CtlCA~ONGA
Staff Report
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer
BY: Maria E. Perez, Assistant Engineer
DATE: June 14, 2000
SUBJECT: VACATION OF NON-VEHICULAR ACCESS AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF TOWN CENTER DRIVE AND HAVEN AVENUE FOR SAV-
ON NEW DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS, V171 -APN 1077-422-06, RELATED
FILE CUP 99-28
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Western Land Properties has received approval for the development of a 14,841
square-foot drug store with a drive-thru facility at the southeast corner of Town Center
Drive and Haven Avenue. The two existing driveways approved with the site master
plan will be relocated with the proposed development. The vacation of the vehicular
access restriction allows for relocation of the driveways. The new locations, with
respect to location and number, are consistent with the goals and objectives of the
General Plan. '
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding, through minute
action, that the vacation is in conformance 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:MEP
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map
Exhibit "B" - Vacation Exhibit
ITEM A
CITY OF ITEM: V-171,
TITLE: VICINITY MAP
RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXHIBIT: "A"
ENGINEERING DIVISION
?/t~,...% Ii 'z~,., /i /
PARCEL 12,
AMENDING PARCEL MAP. NO. 11030
P.~B. ~45 ~ 33-39
VACATION
PARCEL 3
Ll' I PARCEL 6
250.83'
V£HICULAll · NO V[HICULAR
ACCL'$S
VACATZON
HA VEN _ AVENUE
CITY OF ITEM: V-1'/1
~/IANI~Ho I~UI~AMONGA TITLE:VACATle# EX#mIT
EXHIBIT: "B"
ENGINEERING DIVISION
th? itY ~f
I~ a n c I~o Cucamong~
DATE: ,June 14, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Debra Meier, AICP, Contract Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT
00-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The addition of Section 17.20.060 -
Hillside Overlay District, to Development Code Chapter 17.20, and revisions to
Section 17.24.020, in order to implement the addition of a Hillside Oveday District on
the Zoning Map.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AMENDMENT 00-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The addition of a
Hillside Oveday Distdct to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Map in order to
geographically define the Hillside area, as defined in the Development Code Chapter
17.24.
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this Development Code and Development Distdct Amendment is to
add a Hillside Oveday District to the zoning map, and Section 17.20.060 to the Development Code
to define the geographic portion of the City that is subject to the Hillside Development Regulations.
BACKGROUND: The Hillside Development Ordinance (No. 416)was adopted in 1990. The basic
purpose of the Hillside Development Ordinance (Development Code Chapter 17.24) is to minimize
the adverse effects of grading while allowing for reasonable development of the land. The
Ordinance applies to "all projects within a hillside area (8 percent slope or greater)." Further, the
Ordinance applies even in situations where natural slopes are 8 percent or greater on onlya portion
of a property.
ANALYSIS: Administration of the Hillside Development Ordinance has been challenging because of
its complexity and limitations. In the past 10 years since the Ordinance was adopted, most
development within hillside areas has been custom home sites that typically involve a family
building their"dream home." Individual applicants proposing custom homes are often not aware of
the Ordinance, and it is fairly common to receive plan submittals that are not in compliance. In most
instances, the individual is inclined to propose a conventional "flat pad" house design with extensive
cut and fill, which is contrary to the goal of minimizing grading.
The determination of whether a property is "hillside" (i.e. 8 percent or greater natural slope) has
been the subject of much debate and challenge, particularly from the individual who may have
already invested time and money in preparing construction plans for a conventional "fiat pad" house
design. Additional confusion adses in situations where the natural landform exceeded 8 percent,
but the odginal tract has been mass graded, resulting in individual lots of less than 8 percent slope.
ITEMS B & C
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DCA 00 - 02 and DDA 00-02
June 14, 2000
Page 2
This has led to confusion where one lot appears to be "hillside," but the lot next dOor does not.
Staff has consistently interpreted the Ordinance to apply to those areas where the natural
topoqraphy was 8 percent or greater.
The "Hillside Oveday District" has been created based upon a City-wide slope analysis to determine
the geographic area(s) of the City that would be subject to the Hillside Development. An oveday
distdct would offer the following benefits:
1. Improve public awareness of the Hillside Development Ordinance because Califomia real
estate disclosure laws require the seller of property to inform the prospective, buyer of the
zoning. Buyers would then have an opportunity to make an informed decision by researching
the requirements of the Hillside Development Ordinance before making a purchase and
designing a home.
2. Shorten the review process by giving the public and their design professionals opportunity to
design a home in conformance with the Ordinance, rather than delaying the review process to
redesign the home and grading. In short, it is faster to "get it right the first time."
3. Lower the costs of design by giving the public and their design professionals the opportunity to
design a home in conformance with the Ordinance, rather than face costly revisions to
redesign the home and grading. Again, it is cheaper to "get it dght the first time."
4. Eliminate the need, in most cases, to calculate slope gradient and perform sloPe analysis.
The City has successfully used the overlay district zoning technique to address the unique
characteristics of certain areas. Examples of other oveday districts include: Haven Avenue Overlay,
Equestrian/Rural Overlay, Master Plan Oveday, Senior Housing Overlay, and Etiwanda Avenue
Oveday.
Exhibit "A" shows the boundary of that area of the City that has an average 8 percent or greater
slope and have been included as the Overlay District. Generally speaking, the Overlay District
incorporates that area north of Hillside and Wilson Avenues and Red Hill and Beryl Hill (east of Red
Hill Park). Properties outside the overlay district with 8 percent or greater natural slope will still be
subject to the Hillside Development Ordinance.
Exhibit "B" includes the revision to Development Code Section 17.24.020- Review Procedures, and
the proposed addition of Section 17.20.060 - Hillside Oveday Districts, of the Development Code, to
establish the authority and applicability of the Hillside Oveday District.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE: The Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Coleman) discussed the
concept at their February 29, 2000, meeting. The Committee supported the creation of a "Hillside
Oveday District."
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DCA 00 - 02 and DDA 00-02
June 14, 2000
Page 3
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff completed the Initial Study to analyze the impact of the
Development Distdct Amendment, which is the establishment of the Hillside Oveday District in order
to geographically define the Hillside Area. As a result of that analysis, it has been determined that
no mitigation measures will be required, and a Negative Declaration is provided for your
consideration.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public headng in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission issue a Negative
Declaration, and adopt the resolution recommending approval to the City Council for Development
Code Amendment 00-02 and Development District Amendment 00-02.
Respectfully submitted,
City Planner
BB:DM~Is
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Hillside Overlay District Boundary
Exhibit "B" - Development Code Section 17.24.060
Exhibit "C" - Initial Study Parts I and II
Resolution of Approval for Development Code Amendment 00-02
Resolution of Approval for Development District Amendment 00-02
~ =Ho, illside Areas
- 8 ~ or greater slope
Section 17.20.060 - Hillside Overlay District
A. Purpose. The Hillside Overlay District is intended to identify the
geographical area of the City which is subject to the regulations of
Section 17.24 - Hillside Development Regulations.
B. District Boundaries. The Hillside Overlay District is generally located
north of Hillside Avenue, with variations, along with the area around Red
Hill and Beryl Hill, as depicted on the Development District Map. There
may be other isolated areas of the City that would be subject to Section
17.24 (i.e. slope greater than or equal to 8%) as identified on a case-by-
case basis as development applications are submitted for review and
processing.
C. Applicability. The area within the Hillside Overlay District shall be subject
to all procedures, standards and guidelines of Section 17.24- Hillside
Development regulations.
Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.24.020
Section 17.24.020 - Review Procedures
All projects within the Hillside Overlay District and all properties with an-e-hiitside-eree~ 8 percent
slope or greater)-, including but not limited to, parcel maps, tentative tract maps, and site plans for
development review, as well as General Plan and Development District Amendments, Shall be subject
to Grading Committee and Design Review Committee review with approval by the City Planner, or
Planning Commission in aCcordance with the provisions contained in Sections 17.06.010 and
19.04.060. Additionally, review by the Grading Committee and Design Review Committee with
approval by the City Planner or Planning Commission will also be required for other types of
development or grading which meet the criteria specified in Sections 17.24.020A, B, ,and C.
A. City Planner Review. The City Planner shall review all site development applications and shall
impose conditions deemed appropriate when one or more of the following activities are
proposed:
1. Natural slopes which are 8 percent or greater but less than 15 percent on all or part of a
subject site, or on less steep land which may be affected by areas of greater slope (e.g,
fiat parcel between or adjacent to steep hillside).
2. For fills or excavations equal to or exceeding 3 feet but less than 5 feet in vertical depth,
at their deepest point measured from the natural ground surface.
3. For excavations or fills, or any combination thereof, equal to or exceeding 100 cubic
yards, but less than 1,500 cubic yards. ,
4. Residential construction involving four or less dwelling units, such as custom homes,
regardless of natural slope or the amount of fill or excavation.
B. Planninq Commission Review. The Planning Commission shall review site development
applications and impose conditions deemed appropriate when one or more of the following
activities are proposed:
1. Natural slopes equal to or greater than 15 percent on all or part of a subject site.
2. For fills or excavations equal to or exceeding 5 feet in vertical depth at their, deepest point
measured from the natural ground surface.
3. For excavations or fills, or any combination thereof, equal to or exceeding 1,500 cubic
yards.
4. Any excavation or fill which will encroach onto or alter a natural drainage channel or
watercourse. (Should be prohibited unless alternate drainage is provided.)
5. Any other proposal referred to the Planning Commission by the Grading Committee or
City Planner. '
C. Exceptions. Projects which are limited in scope (e.g., regrading of yard areas, pool/spa
construction, additions to existing structures, and/or construction of aCcessory structures which
are less than 250 square feet) may be deferred to staff level review and approVal by the City
Planner. However, projects which require grading of large fiat areas, including, but not limited
to, such items as tennis courts or riding rings, shall be reviewed by the City Planner or may be
referred to the Planning Commission if determined necessary by the City Planner.
17.24-2 , 6/99
RESOLUTION NO. 00-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT 00-02, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for the Development Code
Amendment 00-02, as described in this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 14th day of June 2000, 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 and determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on June 14, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together
with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property located in the City; and
b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment.
3. Based on the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of fact set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan
and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General
Plan and with related development; and
b. That the area for which the overlay district designation is proposed has a unique
character, identity and environment by being in excess of 8 percent slope gradient, which is
defined as hillside; and
c. That the unique character, identity and environment of the hillside area, for which
the Hillside Overlay District is proposed, would be preserved and enhanced to the benefit of the
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DCA 00-02 - HILLSIDE OVERLAY DISTRICT
June 14, 2000
Page 2
hillside area and the City as a whole by the provisions set forth by the overlay district, and to
promote the goals of the Development Code.
d. That an overlay district is necessary to protect, preserve or enhance the unique
character and identity of the hillside are for which an overlay district is proposed andto promote
the goals of the General Plan; and
e. That an overlay district is necessary to protect the health, welfare, and safety of
the public.
4. This Commission hereby finds that the Negative Declaration has been prepared and
reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and
the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and further, specifically finds that based upon
substantial evidence, 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 Development Code Amendment.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, :2, 3, and 4
above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Development Code Amendment 00-
02, hereby incorporating Section 17.20.060 into the Development Code as shown in Exhibit "B"
of the staff report.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, Passed, and
adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of
the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the following vote-tO-wit:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DCA 00-02 - HILLSIDE OVERLAY DISTRICT
June 14, 2000
Page 3
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AMENDMENT 00-02, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for the Development
District Amendment 00-02, as described in this Resolution. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Development District Amendment is referred to as "the
application."
2. On the 14th day of June 2000, 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 and determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this commission during the
above-referenced public hearing on June 14, 2000, including written and oral staff'
reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as
follows:
a. The application applies to property located in the City; and
b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant effect on the
environment.
3. Based on the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the
above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of fact set forth in
paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That the area for which the overlay district designation is proposed has a
unique character, identity and environment by being in excess of 8 percent slope
gradient which is defined as hillside; and
b. That the unique character, identity and environment of the hillside area,
for which the Hillside Overlay District is proposed, would be preserved and enhanced to
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DDA 00-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
June 14, 2000
Page 2 .
the benefit of the hillside area and the City as a whole by the provisions set forth by the
overlay district and to promote the goals of the Development Code; and ~
c. That an overlay district is necessary to protect, preserve or enhance the
unique character and identity of the hillside are for which an overlay district is proposed
and to promote the goals of the General Plan; and
d. That an overlay district is necessary to protect the health, weifare, and
safety of the public.
4. This Commission hereby finds that the Negative Declaraion has been
prepared and reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and further, specifically
finds that based upon substantial evidence, that said Negative Declaralon and the Initial
Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgement of the Planning Commission;
and further' this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in
said Negative Declaration with regard to the Development Distrid: Amendment.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,12, 3, and
4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Development District
Amendment 00-02, hereby incorporating the Hillside Overlay District boundary to the
City of Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Map, as shown in Exhibit "A" of the staff report.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoptiofl of this
Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DDA 00-02- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
June 14,2000
Page 3
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced,
passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at
a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the
following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
R a C H O C U C A M O N G a
ENGINEEI~I~G D~:PAI~TFI ENT
DATE: June 14, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer
BY: Maria E. Perez, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMMENDMENT 00-02 - CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the Etiwanda Specific
Plan to update local street trees to current approved species, update
street tree figure for main streets to reflect appropriate spacing and
successful species and revise references within the Specific Plan for size.
Staff has prepared a Notice of Categorical Exemption.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Staff has revised the figures for street trees as follows:
> Figure 5-17 - Local Street Tree Schedule - Rename Figure as Local Street, Front
Yard Tree Palette, remove reference to local street trees from text and add Figure 5-
17 A, titled Local Street Tree Schedule.
~> Figure 5-41 - The third paragraph that reads "An alternate species...." Has been
further modified to read "In isolated instances, an alternate species..."
> Section 5.32.200.205 - Local Street Trees - Revise text to reference Figure 5-17 A.
The revisions are proposed in response to discussion at the May 10, 2000 public
hearing. The previously proposed revisions have not changed from the May 10, 2000
Public hearing and remain as follows:
> Figure 5-25 - Revise note for existing Silk Oaks to read "supplement existing Silk
Oaks with type A planting.
> Figure 5-41 - Street Tree Schedule - Revise species to reflect current
recommendations for public right-of-way, add detail to description and plant spacing
as necessary.
ITEM D
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ESPA 00-02 - CITY
June 14, 2000
Page 2
> Section 5.41.200.201 - Revise text that reads "shall be replaced with 15 gallon size
Eucalyptus Maculata' to read "shall be replaced with maximum 15 gallon size
(unless otherwise noted) Eucalyptus Maculata. This allows the public right-of-way to
be planted with the standard 5 gallon size tree for this species or customization
where necessary.
FACTS FOR FINDING: Based on the facts and conclusions listed above, staff
believes the Planning Commission can make the following findings regarding this
application:
A. The proposed modification is a minor alteration to a planned road and is
categorically exempt per section 15305, class 5 Minor Alterations in Land Use
Limitations of the California Environmental Quality Act.
B. The proposed amendment conforms with the policies and objectives of the General
Plan.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper and notices were posted at key locations.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the
attached Resolution, thereby recommending that the City Council issue a Notice of
Exemption and approve Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 00-02.
Respectfully Submitted,
Senior Civil Engineer
Attachments:
EXHIBIT A - Vicinity Map
EXHIBIT B - Figure 5-17, Proposed Local Street, Front Yard Tree Palette
EXHIBIT C - Figure 5-17 A, Proposed Local Street Tree Schedule
EXHIBIT D - Figure 5-25, Proposed
EXHIBIT E - Figure 5-41, Proposed with revisions underlined
EXHIBIT F - May 10, 2000 Staff Report with attachments
Resolution Recommending Approval of ESPA 00-02
~ITY OF ITEM: ESPA 00-02
TITLE: Vicinity Map
RANCHO CUCAMONGA F. XilIeIT.-
ENGINEEBING DIVISION
SUGGESTED TREE SPECr~-~ COMMMENTS.-
DECIDUOUS:
Bauhinia wriegata o Needs staking and pruning to
Purple Orchid tree achieve form.
Koelreuteria panniculata
Goldenrain tree
Pistacia chinesis o Needs eareful staking and
Chinese Pistaehe pruning to achieve form.
Sapium Sebiferum o Seleet when in fall color for
Chinese Tallow best results. Needs training for
single trunk.
Sopho~a japonica
Japanese Pagoda tree
Zelkova serrato
Sawleaf Zelkova
EVERGREEN:
Angophor~ costata
Gum Myrtle
Brachychiton populneus o Do not plant in a parkway next
Bottle tree to a curb.
Cinnamomum camphora o Needs root space; do not plant
Camphor tree in narrow parkways.
Geijera parvifolia
Australian Willow
Iff. Stypheloides o Best trained with multiple
Black Tea tree trunks.
Tristania conferta Brisbane Box
Planting Guidelines
All trees shall be 15 gallon minimum size~ staked and irrigated.
Trees recommended for planting adjacent to south and west building facades
should be deeidious to provide summer shade and winter solar gain.
~LOCAL STREET ITEM: ESPAO0-~l
FRONT YARD Fig. 5-1'7 TITLE:FIIOF05[DFI65BE5"rr
APPROVED STREET TREES FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA
I Le~end: · denotes evergreen $ denotes deciduous
Cercis occidentalis Brachychiton acarifolius Celfis sinensis
Western Redbud - 20' O.C. $ Australian Flame Tree - 30' O.C, · Chinese Hackbem/- 30' O.C.
Eriobotria deflexa Brachychiton populneus Clnnamomum camphora
BronzeLoquatTree-25'O.C. · BottJeTree-25'O.C. · Camphor Tree - 30' O.C. ·
Lagerstroemia indica Eucalyptus polyanthemos * Eucalyptus camaldulensis *
Crape Myrtle - 20' O.C., · Silver Dollar Gum - 30' O.C. · Red Gum - 30' O.C. ·
Magnolia grandiflora 'St. IVla~ Eucalyptus rudb * Eucalyptus maculata *
NCN - 20' O.C. · Swamp Gum - 35' O.C. · Spotted Eucalyptus - 25' O.C, ·
Prunus blireiana Eucalyptus sideroxylon * Koelreuteria bipinnata
NCN - 20' O.C. · Red Ironbark- 35' O.C. · Chinese Flame Tree - 35' O.C.
Pyrus betulaefolia 'Paradise' Eucalyptus nicholii * Koelreutefia paniculata
Dancer FIowedng Pear- 20' O.C. ~ Nich~sWillo~peppe~int-2EO.C. · GoldenrainTree- 35'O.C.
Pyrus calleryana 'Aristocrat' Geijera parviflora Uquidambar styreclflua
NCN - 20' O.C. $ Australian Willow- 20' O.C. · American Sweet Gum - 25' O.C.
PynJs calleryana 'Bradford' Ginkgo biloba 'Falrmount' Liquidambar styraciflua 'Festival'
Bradford Pear - 20' O.C. · ! Maidenhair Tree - 35' O.C. · NCN - 25' O.C.
Pyres kawakami Pistacis chlnensis Liquidambar styraciflua 'Palo Alto'
Evergreen Pear- 20' O.C. · Chinese Pistache - 30' O.C. $ NCN - 25' O.C.
Quercus ilex Liquidambar styracHlua 'Rotundiloba'
Holly Oak - 40' O.C. · NCN - 25' O.C.
Rhus lancaa Magnolia grendiflora
African Sumac - 20' O.C. · Southem Magnolia - 30' O.C. ·
Sophora japonica Pinus canariensis
Japanese Pagoda Tree - 30' O.C. $ Canary Island Pine - 25' O.C. ·
Platanus acedfolia
London Plane Tree - 30' O.C.
· Note: As of October 1999, due to the severe Psyllid Lerp
infestations in Eucalyptus, use of the species is discouraged Platanus racemosa
unless previously designated or required for windrow replacement california Sycamore - 35' O.C.
Quercus agdfolia
Coast Live Oak - 40' O.C. ·
Quercus suber
Cork Oak - 40' O.C. ·
Quercus virginiana
Southern Uve Oak - 40' O.C, ·
LOCAL STREET FiB. S-17 A ilTEM: ESPA00-02
i TITL ' FI0UBE 5-1 /A
TREE SCHEDULE ~:)~--~ !i PROPOSED
' EXRIBIT:
~x~s-hnq/
-*,~
ETIWANDA AVENUE
North of Baseline / South of SPRR
FIG.' 5-25
ITEM: ESPA 00-02
TITLE: FIGOBE 5-25
PROPOSED
EXHIBIT:
TREE
PLANTING SPECIES DESCRIPTION AND PLANT
TYPE SPACING
A Eucalyptus camaldulensis Large, columnar, ~3~..fee~e~er
Red Gum 30 feet on center minimum spacing
B Lagerstmemia indica "Rubra" Round-headed
Crape Myrtle
On 2-4=~ Wilson Avenue Parkway,
plant according to Figures 5-32 & 5-33
C Platanus acedfolia Broad columnar, ~a~.~,ee~..ee-~-
London Plane Tree 30 feet on center minimum spacing
except as follows:
On Etiwanda Avenue, plant according to
Figure 5-26
On 2.4= ~_t.-cc~. Wilson Avenue parkway,
plant according to Figure 5-33
D P/~'-'c c!der~c~_ ?~cnde!! P!n~_" Columnar conifer, 25' on center
~ minimum spacing except as follows:
Pinus canariensis On Etiwanda Avenue, plant according to
Canary Island Pine Figure 5-26
On .~4=-r,~;eet Wilson Avenue parkway,
plant according to Figure 5-33
F ~ Round-headed, ~ plant 30
~ feet on center
Pistacia chinensis
Chinese Pistache Tree
W Eucalyptus maculata Windrow plantings, See Section 5.41
Spotted Gum
Planting Guidelines:
All trees shall be 15-gallon minimum size, staked and irrigated, unless otherwise
noted.
Trees within the public right-of-way are public street trees and subject to
street tree planting standards as established by the City Engineer.
In isolated instances, an alternate species compatible with the original
design intent, will be selected by the Engineering Division, where them is
inadequate room within the right-of-way for the designated tree species
(such as small planting area, sight distance and/or utility conflicts).
STREET TREE SCHEDULE FIGURE 5-41
ITEM: ESPA 00-02
D7 TITLE: FIGUBE §'41
PBOPOSED
EXHIBIT: "E"
R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
F. NCINEEI~ING DE PAi~T~I~NT
DATE: May 10, 2000
T~, Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer
BY: Maria E. Perez, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMMENDMENT 00-02 - CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the Etiwanda Specific
Plan to update local street trees to current approved species, update
street tree figure for main streets to reflect appropriate spacing and
successful species and revise references within the Specific Plan for size.
Staff has prepared a Notice of Categorical Exemption.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
In light of current development activity throughout the Etiwanda area, staff is seeking to
update street trees and references to reflect the current planting designations. The
Etiwanda Specific Plan was originally adopted in1983. Since that time, the public
landscaping practices have been refined significantly. Subsequent to a review of the
figures and sections, it is proposed that the following be revised to reflect the current
practices:
), Figure 5-17 - Local Street Tree Schedule - delete and reference current street tree
planting list (which is continually evolving based on performance and field
conditions) within the body of the text.
~ Figure 5-25 - Revise note for existing Silk Oaks to read "supplement existing Silk
Oaks with type A planting
~ Section 5.32.200.205 - Local Street Trees - Revise text to reference current street
tree planting list.
)~ Figure 5-41 - Street Tree Schedule - Revise species to reflect current
recommendations for public right-of-way, add detail to description and plant sPacing
as necessary. ITEM: ESPA 00-02
TITLE MAY 10 STAFF
BEPOBT
EXHIBIT:
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ESPA 00-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
May 10, 2000
Page 2
> Section 5.41.200.201 - Revise text that reads "shall be replaced with 15 gallon size
Eucalyptus Maculata" to read "shall be replaced with maximum 15 gallon size
(unless otherwise noted) Eucalyptus Maculata. This allows the public right-of-way to
be planted with the standard 5 gallon size tree for this species or customization
where necessary.
The purpose in recommending these revisions is to update the Etiwanda Specific Plan
to reflect current City Standards and in light of Proposition 218 to introduce successful
species that will reduce repetitive replacement costs.
The changes, proposed for figure 5-41, involve mostly spacing. The recommended
spacing designated on Exhibit D reflect best horticultural practices. Appropriate tree
spacing allows a tree to mature to its greatest potential. VVhile planting the trees in a
dense configuration will provide a quicker result, planting at field proven intervals
relative to species will perpetuate a successful streetscape for the future of the
community. Staff believes the recommended spacing will result in fewer replacements
and a more enduring streetscape. The goal is to still have the trees in 50 years time.
Additionally, the General Plan states:
Pg. III - 86, paragraph 3
"Trees also require care. There is a tredeoff between the number of trees a city can
plant and the amount of care those trees require. If trees that require minimal
maintenance are used, more can be planted and more are likely to survive. Trees
suited to the natural conditions of a place - climate, precipitation and soil - will survive
best."
This indicates that by pairing any given location with a suitable species at an optimum
spacing will result in the most successful enduring streetscape.
Staff is recommending two of the designated species on Figure 5-41 be changed. The
first is type D, current species is a Mondell Pine, staff is proposing the designation be
changed to a Canary Island Pine. Root growth of the Mondell Pine consistently results
in damage to hardscape such as sidewalk, curb and gutter. The arbodsts on staff
indicate the Canary Island Pine is the only suitable variety of pine for streetscape,
exhibiting the least amount of hardscape damage over time and the most tolerance for
smog.
The second tree recommended to be changed is type F, the Holm Oak (indicated for
Victoria Street, a street of east-west orientation). Staff is proposing the designation be
changed to a Chinese Pistache Tree. The current designation, the Holm Oak, is an
evergreen. Being evergreen, the Holm Oak is also not consistent with the City's street
tree program which promotes deciduous trees on east-west streets for solar benefit.
Conversely, the use of evergreen trees is promoted on north-south streets to frame
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ESPA 00-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
May 10, 2000
Page 3
views. These objectives are defined in the General Plan. Except for two recently
installed trees, there are no established specimens of the Holm Oak along the street.
The Etiwanda Specific Plan indirectly suggests the preservation of existing Silk Oak
Trees on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue between Base Line Road and the railroad
right-of-way. The existing trees have been severely topped by utility companies and are
no longer suitable specimens for relocation or preservation. The specific plan
designates the Eucalyptus camaldulensis as the Etiwanda Avenue street tree. Staff is
recommending the designation be extended to include the area where the Silk Oaks
are. Upon development of the site the utilities would be placed underground and the
damaged row of Silk Oaks replaced with the Eucalyptus camaldulensi. The Silk Oak
reference would be removed from Figure 5-17 completely with this amendment.
Staff met with Etiwanda residents Jim Banks and Jim Frost to discuss their feelings with
respect to how the proposed changes might alter the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Their
focus or emphasis was to perpetuate the sense or feeling of Etiwanda as its own place,
in this instance, through identifying suitable tree species. They indicated their
preference to see staff select species and space the trees while keeping in mind the
rural feeling.
Photos reflecting the existing and alternative varieties will be included with the oral
presentation for visual clarity.
FACTS FOR FINDING: Based on the facts and conclusions listed above, staff
believes the Planning Commission can make the following findings regarding this
application:
A. The proposed modification is a minor alteration to a planned road and is
categorically exempt per section 15305, class 5 Minor Alterations in Land Use
Limitations of the Califomia Environmental Quality ACt.
B. The proposed amendment conforms with the policies and objectives of the General
Plan.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper and notices were posted at key locations. Additionally,
staff met with Etiwanda residents Mr. Banks and Mr. Frost to discuss the amendment.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ESPA 00-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
May 10, 2000
Page 4
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the
attached Resolution, thereby recommending that the City Council issue a Notice of
Exemption and approve Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 00-02.
Respectfully Submitted,
Senior Civil Engineer
Attachments:
EXHIBIT "A" - Vicinity Map
EXHIBIT "B" - Figure 5-17, Proposed Deletion
EXHIBIT "C" - Figure 5-25, Proposed
EXHIBIT "D" - Figure 5-41, Proposed
EXHIBIT "E" - Resolution Recommending Approval of ESPA 00-02
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-02, TO UPDATE
STREET TREE REFERENCES AND RELATED FIGURES AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
A. Recitals.
1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for the amendment
described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in the Resolution, the subject Etiwanda
Specific Plan amendment is referred to as "the application."
2. On May 10, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded said hearing on
that date.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above
referenced public hearing on May 10, and June 14, 2000, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to the whole of the area encompassed by the Etiwanda
Specific Plan.
b. Some of the current designations and spacing for street trees are not
consistent with best horticultural practices.
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 amendment is a minor alteration to a planned road.
b. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan.
4. This Commission hereby finds that the project has been prepared and reviewed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended and the
Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and further specifically finds that based upon substantial
evidence, it can be seen with certainty there is no possibility the proposed amendment will have
an effect on the environment and therefore, the proposed amendment is categorically exempt
pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines, Section 15305, class 5, Minor Alteration in Land Use
Limitations.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
ESP 00-02 - CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA
June 14, 2000
Page 2
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4
above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment
00-02 to update street tree references and spacing to current street tree designations and
amend all pertinent exhibits and figures within the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and
adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of
the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the following vote to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
June 1, 2000
Mr. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner/Chairman Trails Advisory Committee
City of Rancho Cucamonga, City Hall
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91729
Dear Mr. Coleman,
The residents on the east side of Amethyst Street would like to address the proposed
change in the location of the horse trail to the east side of the street. We are still as
opposed to this as we were during the meeting on April 4, 2000.
We would also like to address how you misrepresented the residents on the east side of
Amethyst at the Trails Advisory Committee Meeting on May 10, 2000. You stated in
your comments that we came to a consensus not to build the trail on Ms. Parlier's side of
the street. This is not true; we all agreed that since you informed us that the funding
would most likely be unavailable for ten (10) or twenty (20) years that the plan to build
any horse trail be tabled until such time as funding became available. We also did not
agree to relieve the developer of the financial responsibility; we suggested that the money
be placed in a holding account until the city was ready to build the trail.
After reviewing the most recent letters we received in the mail, it is plain to see that you
have a conflict of interest and chose to recommend what was in the best interest of one
resident and not the majority. We are requesting that this is re-addressed and the
proposed horse trail' is lef~ on the West Side of the street as in the original plan for
obvious reasons as stated below:
· Horses will not be doing unsafe mid-block crossings from two bridal trails on the
west side of the street.
· Existing hazard and liability to the city being that the sidewalk on the west side of
Amethyst is pushed up and breaking apart from the tree roots, again between
Valley View and Hillside.
· There is an existing trail entering and exiting on the west side of Amethyst
between Valley View and Hillside, which is apparently not being maintained by
the city (please see notes on attached map).
· If horses use the west side of the street, both intersections at Valley View &
Amethyst and Hillside & Amethyst are already controlled by stop signs.
,, Horses will not be crossing five existing driveways, four of which are dual access
and also Dahler Road.
· Affects five residents instead of one.
· Established landscaping being removed in front of five homes would affect the
appearance of these homes, whereas on the west side, there are no homes affected
except 9494 Valley View, and that is only the side/back of the house, not the
front.
In conclusion, we feel the trail should stay as originally planned - on the west side of the
street where it would only affect one home instead of five. It would minimize the risks of
multiple crossings and changes to the existing landscape on the east side, as well as being
much more cost effective.
The residents of the east side of Amethyst Street would appreciate your prompt response
in addressing our concerns.
Sincerely,
5. .... :. ._._ . .
Ad&ess / ' Dale
~ -~ ~:~ ~iil ~a ~m~-Aiex~ander ~
c: Mayor ·
Mayor Pro-Tem Diane Williams
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager ~-~
Council Member Paul Baine
Council Member Bob Dutton
Council Member James V. Curatalo
Brad Buller, City Planner~v~
Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner~
Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney
Nancy Fong, Senior Planner~-~
Trail Committee Rancho Cucamonga
James Clapton, Commission Svc. ~,~..
Martin Dickey, Commission Svc./'~-x,
John Mannerino, Planning ~
Para Stewart, Planning~
Peter Toistory, Planning~,~
Sue Rabon, c/o Dan Coleman~~'~
Mark Whitehead, Comm. Svc.~,,~ !
Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer
the city of
Rancho Cucamonga
DATE: June 14, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 16026 - AMETHYST ESTATES L.P. - A request to
modify a condition of approval regarding a Community Trail along Amethyst Street for previously
approved Tentative Tract Map 16026, a residential subdivision of 18 single family lots on 11.3
acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (0-2 dwelling units per acre), located west side
of Amethyst Street, north of Valley View Street - APN: 1061-401-03.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Backqround: On July 14, 1999, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract 16026. The Alta Loma
Riding Club testified that riders currently must ride on the street pavement on Valley View Street from
Hellman Avenue, in order to proceed north through this tract. As a condition of approval for the subdivision
map, the developer was required by the Planning Commission to extend the Amethyst Community Trail
south to Valley View Street to improve trail access in this area until the Demens Regional Trail could be
extended to Amethyst Street. Cindy Parlier, 9494 Valley View Street, objected to the construction of the
Amethyst Community Trail in the corner side parkway on her lot (Exhibit E). She feared that her property
would be subject to flooding if her parkway shrubs were removed to construct the trail. However, the
conditions of approval for the Tentative Tract map required that the trail be designed and constructed to
provide proper flood protection.
Dudng the Planning Commission meeting for the Design Review of the homes on January 26, 2000, Mrs.
Parlier requested that the Planning Commission delete the condition requiring the Amethyst Community
Trail to be built within the parkway frontage of her lot. The Commission indicated that it had no authority to
delete the condition on the approved tract because that matter was not on their agenda. The Commission
indicated that Mrs. Parlier could work with the Trails Advisory Committee and staff regarding eliminating
the trail (Exhibit F).
ANALYSIS:
A. General: On Apdl 26, 2000, Amethyst Estates L.P submitted an application, to modify a condition of
approval for previously approved Tentative Tract 16026. The applicant is requesting that the Planning
Commission delete Engineering Division Condition No. 10 of Resolution 99-65, regarding the extension of
the Amethyst Community Trail south from the southeast comer of Tentative Tract 16026 to Valley View
Street (Exhibit C). The developer's request to delete the condition is because of the concerns raised by
Mr. and Mrs. Parlier. The Parlier's fear a potential flood dsk and loss of privacy because of their narrow
side yard. Additionally, the extension of the Regional Trail around the Demens Basin to Amethyst Street is
moving forward, therefore, the need to continue the Community Trail south to Valley View Street is no
ITEM E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
MODIFICATION OF TENTATIVE TRACT 16026-
AMETHYST ESTATES L.P.
June 14, 2000
Page 2
longer a priority. Staff is working closely with the Flood Control District regarding the Demens Trail. The
City is currently working on securing a consultant to work on the design of the trail. Staff has no objection
to removing the condition on the tract because of the future Demens Regional Trail.
B. Trails Committee: The Trails Advisory Committee (Buller, Dickey, Rabone, Stewart) on March 8, 2000, and
on May 10, 2000, considered Mr. and Ms. Parlier's request to delete the construction of the Amethyst
Community Trail in the comer side yard of their lot. The Committee recommended that the developer
(Amethyst Estates L.P) be relieved of constructing the Amethyst Community Trail off-site south to Valley
View Street (Exhibit G).
C. Environmental Assessment: The deletion of Engineering Division Condition of Approval number 10, of
Resolution No. 99-65, will not deviate from the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted with approval of
Tentative Tract 16026.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was adver[ised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of
the project site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the modification to delete
Condition No. 10 of Resolution No. 99-65 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
City Planner
BB:RZ~Is
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location and Trail Map
Exhibit "B" - 'IT 16026 Equestrian Plan
Exhibit "C" - Applicant's letter dated Apdl 5, 2000
Exhibit "D" - Resolution of Approval No. 99-65
Exhibit "E" - Letters from Mr. and Mrs. Padier dated July 13, 1999 and January 25, 2000
Exhibit "F" - Minutes of January 26, 2000, Planning Commission meeting
Exhibit "G" - Trails Advisory Committee Action Agenda dated May 10, 2000.
Resolution of Approval
Location and Trail Map
TT 16026
o o Q Community Trail
~: ~ Extension of Trail
South to Vatley View St.
~,.~x'~'~E)emens Regional Trail
0.2 '0 0.2 Miles
or. ~c,..Cucmo~^
MIGHTY DEVELOPMENT INC.
8316 Red Oak Street, Suite 201
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Telephone: (909) 944-8181 FAX: (909) 944-1325
April 5, 2000
Rudy Zeledon
Planning Department
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. BOX 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
RE: Tentative Tract Map #16026
Dear Rudy:
I request modification of our Tract 16026 Conditions of Approval (Resolution 99-65,
Item 10), regarding extending the community trail along Amethyst street from our
southeast comer to Valley View Street (see attached, Page 5), due to the following
reasons:
1) The concerns of our southside neighbors, Mr. & Mrs. Parlier, regarding
potential flood risk and losing their privacy due to the narrow side yard.
2) This condition was requested by the Trails Committee because the Demens
Basin trail is not through but now that situation has been changed because
the County will allow it to go through.
I would like to request that this item be removed from our Conditions of Approval.
Your assistance will be most appreciated.
Sincerely,
J President
C,
RESOLUTION NO. 99-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 16026, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 18 SINGLE FAMILY
LOTS ON 11.3 ACRES OF LAND IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT (LESS THAN 2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED
WEST OF AMETHYST STREET, NORTH OF VALLEY VIEW STREET -
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1061-401-03.
A. Recitals.
1. Amethyst Estates, L.P. has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map
No. 16026, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as 'the application'.
2. On the 14th day of July, 1999, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing
on that date.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on July 14, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property located on the west side of Amethyst Street,
north of Valley View Street with a street frontage of 666.51 feet and lot depth of 858.33 feet and
is presently unimproved; and
b. The properties to the north and west are vacant and are a part the San
Bernardino Flood Control Channel, the properties to the south and east contain single family
homes; and
c. The proposed subdivision has been reviewed by the Technical and Grading
Committees and approved subject to the conditions contained within this resolution; and
d. The proposed subdivision has a minimum and average lot size of 20, 070 and
23,872 square feet, respectively, consistent with the requirements of the Very Low Residential
District; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99~65
']-]- 16026 - AMETHYST ESTATES, L.P.
July 14, 1999
Page 2
e. The related Variance application, Variance 99-01, was reviewed in conjunction with
the subdivision tract map and approved by the Planning Commission; and;
f. There is adequate space available on all lots for equestrian use.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code,
and any applicable specific plans; and
b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General
Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and
c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and
d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and
e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and
f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by
the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed
subdivision.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment
for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the
project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by. this reference,
based upon the findings as follows:
a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines
promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared
therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this
Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative
Declaration with regard to the application.
' b. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies cerlain significant
environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have been
reduced to an acceptable level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project which are listed
below as conditions of approval.
c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code
of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole,
-=. the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that.the
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-65
TT 16026 - AMETHYST ESTATES, L.P.
July 14, 1999
Page 3
proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat
upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, 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 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.
PlanninR Division
1) Approval of the tract map is contingent on the approval of
Variance 99-01.
2) Final landscaping and irrigation plans for the parkway along Amethyst
Street and for the interior street planting shall be submitted for review
and approval by the City Planner and City Engineer prior to
recordation of the Final Tract Map.
3) All lot grading, whether in conjunction with a total design review or
individual custom lots, shall be subject to the Hillside Development
Ordinance. The project shall utilize grading techniques which
minimize alteration to the natural land form. These techniques shall
include minimal padding for units only, split level foundations, and/or
stem wall construction.
Enqineerinq Division
1) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the
existing overhead utilities (telecommunication and electrical) on 'the
opposite side of Amethyst Street shall be paid to the City prior to
approval of the Final Map. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted
unit amount times the length of the project frontage.
2) Cross lot drainage facility on north side of the private trail along Lots
1-4 shall be designed to handle off-site flows from the north. Drainage
facility shall transition to east side of trail along Lots 4-8. Concentrated
drainage shall not cross the trail. Provide underground facility.
3) On-site drainage to be directed westerly from the site shall be
disposed as follows in order of preference as approved by the City
Engineer, Building Official, and San Bernardino County Flood Control
District where appropriate:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-65
TT 16026 - AMETHYST ESTATES, L.P.
July 14, 1999
Page 4
a) Directed southerly through the vacant lot adjacent to the
southwest corner of the site within an easement to Valley View
Street.
b) Directed westerly within the San Bernardino County Flood
Control District property out-letting into Hellman Avenue, or
c) Directed westerly within the San Bernardino County Flood
Control District property out-letting into the existing earth channel
serving as an outflow from Demens Basin.
4) Trail and lot drainage existing at the southwest corner shall be
conveyed to either:
a) The south through a private easement to a point of discharge to
a public facility by a surface improvement maintained by the
Homeowners Association or;
b) The west to the channel in a surface improvement and
maintained by agreement executed with the San Bemardino
County Flood Control District.
In either case, absolute protection of southerly properties will be
provided with channels, berms, walls, or other acceptable devices as
determined in Plan Check based upon the Q 100 discharge.
5) The private drive shall be curved northerly within Parcel 15 as much
as possible to minimize height of fill slopes.
6) Maintenance of necessary off-site drainage facilities and the private-
drive (Lot A) shall be included within the project CC&Rs.
7) Standard property line adjacent sidewalks shall be installed on at least
one side of the private drive, within easement if less than 60-foot wide
offer of dedication.
8) Provide commercial drive approaches per City Standard 101 Type C
for both project entrances. Trail shall cross drive approach at zero
curb face.
a) Gate median for south entrance shall be set back 75 feet from
street. Provide 20 feet from median curb to driveway edge on
both sides of all medians and 27-foot radius for visitor
turnaround area.
b) North entrance shall no have median.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-65
TT 16026 - AMETHYST ESTATES, L.P.
July 14, 1999
Page 5
9) The equestrian fence on Amethyst Street shall be set back a sufficient
distance to assure adequate sight distance in accordance with the City
Line of Sight criteria at both private street intersections with Amethyst
Street.
110)The Community Trail Street shall be extended
along
Amethyst
southerly to the northwest corner of Amethyst and Valley View Streets.
The existing sidewalk in front of the property adjacent to the southeast
corner of the site shall be removed and the existing drive approach
may be reconstructed to City Standards with appropriate deflector
curbs, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
11) Use a straight grade crossfall of 1.70 percent per City Standard 100-A
for the private streets.
12) Drive approaches shall be constructed per City Standards, 24 feet
wide maximum, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The grade
break at the right-of-way where the drive approach and the driveway
join shall not exceed 14 percent.
13) San Bernardino county Flood Control District has an easement over
the northwest corner of the site. Lot B should be dedicated to the
District in fee.
14) Parkway shall be graded to drain towards the street at 2 percent from
12 feet back of the curb to the top of curb.
15) The driveways shall not exceed 6 percent for the first 6 feet from the
street right-of-way. Show all grade breaks. The maximum slope
allowed is 14 percent. Provide an 18-foot area in front of the garage
which does not exceed 5 percent. The flow line should be at least
.5 feet from the garage and no more than 0.5 feet below the gar'age
floor elevation.
16) Install 'No Parking Anytime" signs on the east side of Amethyst Street
from the projection of the north property line to Hillside Road.
17) The Developer shall acquire the proposed private drainage easement
from the property adjacent to the southwest corner of the site. Said
drainage easement shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Final Map.
Environmental Mitiqated Measures
Air quality impacts may occur during the site preparation including grading
and equipment exhaust as it is used on site. Major sources of emissions
during this phase include exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and
equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of construction vehicles
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-65
'iT 16026 - AMETHYST ESTATES, L.P.
July 14, 1999
Page 6
and equipment traveling over exposed sudaces, as well as soil disturbances
by grading filling. NOx and PM10 levels will be exceeded on a daily basis
during construction. The following mitigation measures will be required to
reduce impacts to a less-than significant level:
1) The Construction Contractor shall select the construction equipment
used on site based on Iow emission factors and high energy efficiency.
The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading
plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned
and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
2) The Construction Contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-powered.
equipment in lieu of gasoline-powered engines where feasible.
3) The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading
plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment
when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the
overall length of the construction period should be extended; thereby,
decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize
vehicles and equipment operating at the same time.
4) The Construction Contractor shall support and encourage ride-sharing
and transit incentives for the construction crew.
5) Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on site
and kept to a minimum by following the dust control measures listed
below.
a) During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or
transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler
systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and
to create a crust after each day's activities cease.
b) During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be
used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to
prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would
include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after
work is completed for the day, and whenever wind exceeds 15
miles per hour.
c) After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is
completed; the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated
immediately by pickup of the soil until the area is paved or
otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur.
d) Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept
moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-65
'I-1'16026-AMETHYST ESTATES, L.P.
July14,1999
Page 7
e) Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials and/or
construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped from the
point of origin.
6) The Construction Contractor shall utilize, as much as possible, pre-
coated natural colored building materials, water-based or Iow-VOC
coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer
efficiency, such as high volume Iow pressure (HVLP) spray method,
or manual coating applications such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel,
spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JULY 1999.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
faxjJy~T. McNioI, Chairman
.~, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14th day of July 1999, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MACiAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: STEt/ART
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
WILLIAM & CYNTHIA PARLIER I'~'
9494 Valley View Street
Alta Loma, California 91737
Home: (909)980-5019 / Work: (909)983-1794 ExL 106
1uly 13, 1999
The Planning Commission
City of Rancho Cucamonga
RE: Amethyst Estates Proposed Development
To the Honorable Planning Commission:
With the utmost respect for your decision making, we hereby request that you consider the
following matters before approving the proposed Amethyst Estates Housing Development on
Amethyst Street in Alta Loma. Some of the issues we wish to raise relate to safety for the local
neighborhood and our family, others relate seriously to our property line and could effect the
usability and value of our property.
Proposed Bridle Trail on Amethyst Side °f9494 Vall~ View Property:
The City has proposed a bridle trail on the west side of our property, on Amethyst Street. ·
Currently we have a sidewalk and a parkway planted with large bushes and trees to slow water
coming down Amethyst onto our property. If the sidewalk and bushes are replaced by a bridle
trslil the flood water coming down Amethyst will have direct access into the back of our house.
Our house was flooded many years ago by rain and mud fi-om the property and street north of our
house and we do not wish to have this exposure again. Over the 22 years we have lived at this
address we have taken steps to prevent the rain and flooding of our property, but proposed
changes by the City and/or new development could jeopardize the safety of our home.' We have
built retaining walls and planted bushes, ground cover and trees to prevent the water fi-om flowing
into our home and prevent soil erosion. John Wang fxom Amethyst Estates has visited our
property and agreed that we could have a flooding problem should our parkway bushes be
removed. Dan James of the Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Office has also visited the property
and sees the problem, he further stated that perhaps we should place a wall around our patio to
prevent water fi-om entering our house should the proposed bridle trail be installed. We wish to
go on record that we do not feel it should be our expense to solve flood problems cteatexl by the
City's change in flood mn off design at~er 22 years, or by the development of the property north
of ours' because the City allows flood mn offto flow directly onto us. We have established
ourselves and will maintain our property accordingly. They City needs to re-evaluate their
situation before they create a liability issue.
Page 1 of 3
Secondly, in respect to the proposed bridle trail we wish to strongly protest. There are no other
bridle trails on Amethyst Street, why are we being made the example. We are in receipt ora
bridle trail plan showing a 12' trail. Tract Drawing No. 461 Dated 6/9/67 with sidewalk per
Standard No. 109 shows the plot plan for our property set in 1967 showing an 11 foot property
dedication on the east side of our property for sidewalk and parkway. Currently there is
dedication of 10'6" fi.om the outside edge of the curb to the inside edge of the sidewalk on our
property. We believe this was accepted by the inspectors at the time, would be considered
grandfathered and everything from that point west would be considered our property. No claim
to additional property along the sidewalk has ever been made by the City. If the City wishes to
pursue a 12' trail, we will look to the City for legal responsibility to pay for the additional footage
on our property and the replacement of our sprinklers, bushes and fences along the bridle trail line
under eminent domain. Additionally, since a dirt bridle trail will not slow down the flood water
which is planned to come from Amethyst Estates down our westerly side of the street, we will
look to the City to construct some type of retaining wall along our property to prevent water from
flowing into our home.
Amethyst Street - Street Width Issue:
The City Engineer's office is not requiring the widening of Amethyst on the East Side. All rain
flow will be channeled from the new development down the West Side of Amethyst (beside our
home) since there are no current plans to widen Amethyst to the full width as shown on the tract
plans in 1967. The flood water should not be channeled down such a narrow street, confined to
the westerly side, since the rate of flow will be extremely high.
Amethyst Street is not wide enough above I-Yfllside to accommodate the additional traflle flow of
40-50 cars. The addition of 18 new homes will conceivably add 2-3 cars per home and Amethyst
cannot handle this traffic flow, especially in the rainy season with the water flow and rocks
coming down.' From I-rfllside north on Amethyst the street is 24'7" fi-om temporary blacktop curb
on the east to permanent curb on the West. From a point near the northside of our property line
Amethyst narrows to 21' with no curb on either side. Again, referring to the Tract Drawing No.
461 dated 6/9/67 Amethyst was to be 44' wide from curb to curb. When the homes on the east
side of Amethyst were developed the developer, Miller and Sons, placed the funds into escrow for
the widening of the street. The street was to be completed when the property on the west side
was developed. The dedication on the east side still remains as evidenced by the expanse of
property east of the temporary blacktop curb which remains dirt and unimproved. Why is the City
choosing to ignore this traffic problem, and flood problem. If the east side of the street was
developed at the same time runoffwater could travel down both sides. We feel if this
development is approved without the widening of the east side of the street at this time, the City
will forever loose the money that was put into escrow for this development. This is unfair to the
residents in the surrounding area, it puts a hardship on us for traffic and flooding because the City
possibly chooses to use the money elsewhere.
In addition to traffic and flood problems on Amethyst, should the City choose not to widen and
bring the street to standard per the Tract Map, please take notice you will be creating a potential
Page 2 of 3
fire baTard. As the street now stands at 24'7" if cars aze parked on the east and west sides of
Amethyst no fire truck will be able to get thru. Taking into consideration the parked cars, we
believe there is ~ 9'8" for traffic to flow north and south on Amethyst. As Amethyst stands now,
cars traveling north often wait at Valley View for traffic coming south to pass, before proceeding
north as a courtesy due to the narrowness of the street. Several times we have had fires on the
north end of Amethyst and because of the pedestrian traffic and flow of cars comln$ to look at the
fires the fire trucks were unable to proceed north in the street and had to drive over the dedication
on the east side to proceed north. Shouldn't the City prevent future problems by widening the
street with the money already in account, at the same time the new housing development is
In closing, please consider seriously the gravity of these issues. We are extremely concerned
about the possibility of flooding to our home, the increase of traffic on Amethyst as an existing
narrow street, and the loss of additional property to the City for bridle trail use. Any
considerations will be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
W-flliam Parlier/0 .
CC: Dan James, Rancho Cucamonga Engine~ing Department
Rudy Zeledon, Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department
Allen Brock, Rancho Cucamonga Building & SafeoJ Department
lohn Wang, Amethyst Estates
Page 3 of 3
WILLIAM & CYNTHIA PARLIER
9494 Valley View Street
Alta Loma, California 91737
Home: (909)980-5019 / Work: (909)983-1794 Ext. 106
January 25, 2000
The Planning Commission
City of Rancho Cucamonga
RE: Amethyst Estates Proposed Development
2~o the Honorable Planning Commission:
We hereby request for consideration on a flooding threat to our home. For 22 years we have
lived at the above address. Twice before our home was flooded, to help prevent flooding we
planted low growing, dense bushes in the parkway in order to stop the water when it jumps the
curb on Amethyst.
Due to the lack of connection from Heritage Park to the mountain, the City put a contingency
requiring Amethyst Estates as the developer to extend the community equestrian Wail through
our property to Valley View Street. Since this requirement was made of the developer, as we all
know now, through the efforts of the Alta Loma riding Club and the City, the County agreed and
the funds are ready to finish the Demens Creek Primary Loop Trail. Based on the City Trail
Implemenetation Plan, Page 10, Item #3 (see attached copy), on Amethyst Street from
Manzanita Drive north (one block south of Wilson) there is no trail available to connect to.
What would the value of tearing out our landscape, causing us to face the bare ground o£the
community trail?
We hope the Commissioners will consider that this is our home. We hope to keep the landscape,
our privacy, and prevent the threat of flooding as long as we can. Please consider removing the
condition requiring the developer to improve the community Wail through our property.
Sincerely,,
William Parlier-
Cynthia Parlier'
CC: Dan James, Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Department
Rudy Zeledon, Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department
Allen Brock, Rancho Cucamonga Building & Safety Depat hnent
John Wang, Amethyst Estates
of Hillside ). The east side of the street, north of Hillside Road, is less developed and offers ~reater opportunity
for a trail.
-~Manzamta Drive north, all pedestrians and equestrians must use the st~et. ~t' ' -
4. Alta Loma Channel - This trail orlglnates at the confluence of several small streams northwest of Hermoss and
Almond, passes throu§h a large Eucalyptus grove ( Tract 12902 ) and links with the channel service until it reaches
the Alta Loma Storm Drain Basin, just norlh of Banyan. The County Flood Control District has fenced in the
channel fight-of-way which will require negotiation of a joint-use agreement for recreational purlx)ses and
construction of appropriate vehicle barriers in several locations that will allow pedestrian and equestrian access.
5. Wilson - From Amethyst to Alta Loma Channel, a Community Trail exists. From Hermosa east to Deer Creek
Channel, a Community Trail will be inslalled as development occurs. A prlva te trail exists in the parkway on the
north side of Wilson east of Haven, which is maintained by the Deer Creek Estates Homeowner's Association.
A bridge across Deer Creek Channel will ultimately be construcl~l to extend Wilson to the east which should be
designed to accommodate the hail.
6. Hillslde - East of Haven, most of the land has been developed with provision for trail access in "frontyard"
trails. Unfortunately, the majority of Hillside was developed prior to incorporation without provision for trail
access, and the proposed hail route would run through the frontyards of many homes. Hillside is becoming an
ever-increasing traffic and trail corridor, due In large part to the recent completion of Heritage Park on the
southwest comer of Hillside and Beryl. To convert existing road fights-of-way into a usable parkway trail will
be an involved but rewarding task.
7. Banyan -This trail forms the southerly boundary of the Equestrian/Rural area in Alta [,oma. Short segments
of the Banyan Trail are improved; however, the portion between Sapphire and Amethyst is developed without
trail access. Like Hillside, the conversion of frontyards and corner side yards into a Community Trail will be a
major effort.
8. Beechwood - The Beechwood Trail, which becomes the Wilson Trail east of Beryl, is the first east-west
Community Trail north of Banyan; hence, is a cross-town linkage from the Cucamonga Creek Channel Regional
Trail to the Deer Creek Channel Regional Trail. This trail presently consists of a continuous stretch of private
equestrian easements, except for one lot ( Lot 26 of Tract 9015 ) on the west side of Jasper below the Floyd Stork
Elementary School.
9. Turquoise - See comments under Primary Loop Trail.
10. Beryl - This existing Community Trail follows the east side of Beryl from Hillside north to Almond and
provides an important linkage from the equesklen center at Heritage Park k) the Front Line Trail ( via the
Community Trail through Tract ! ! 626). Portions of the parkway are too narrow (7 feet ) or have been over~rown
with vegetation which forces horsemen out onto the street.
11. Archibald - North of Banyan, theCommunity Trail exists on the west side up to Wilson where it will continue
northerly until Hillside Road. From Hillside north to Cinch Ring L~ne, there is an 6xisting priva~ hall that could
potentially be acquired for public trail use. As an alternate route, the hall could (xoss over to the west side just
below Whirlaway Street and continue up to the Front Line Trail. The City is preparing a beau U ficatiou study for
Archibald which may result in expanded parkways and a potential trailhead at the City limit.
12. Hermosa - From the Alta [.oma Storm Drain Basins to Wilson, there is an existing parkway trail following
a Eucalyptus windrow. The trail will be extended along the west side until it joins the Almond Trail. A short,
scenic segment meanders along th~.lntermittent creekbed through the Eucalyptus grove at the top of Hermosa
( part of Tract 12902 ).
13. Haven - North of Haven, an expansive parkway includes a riding trail built as part of the Deer Creek
Subdivisions up to.the Hillside Channel Regional Trail. To provide a safe and convenient trail system, there will
be a trail on bolh s,des of Haven, north of Wilson. ~ 7
!~1
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
January 26, 2000
Chairman McNiel celled the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho
Cucemonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman
McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, John Mannerino, Larry McNiel, Para Stewart,
Peter Tolstoy
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner;, Dan Coleman, Principal Planner;, Kevin Ennis,
Assistant City Attorney; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner;, Dan James, Senior Civil
Engineer, Lisa Kuschel, Planning Aide; Brent Le Count, Associate Planner;,
Warren M°relion, Assistant Planner;, Gall Sanchez, Planning Commission
Secretary;, Associate Planner, Emily Wimer, Assistant Planner;, Rudy Zeledon,
Assistant Planner
ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were no announcements.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-51 - AMETHYST
ESTATES L.P.- The Design Review of building elevations and detailed site plan for Tentati~;
Tract map 16026 consisting of 18 single family lots on 11.3 acres of land in the Very-Low
Residential District (0-:2 dwelling units per acre), Ioceted on the west side of Amethyst Avenue,
north of Valley View Street - APN: 1061-401-03. Related files: Tentative Tract 160:26,
Variance g9-01, and Pre-Application Review 99-01.
Chairman McNiel asked if anyone would like Item A pulled from the Consent Calendar.
Cindy Pariier, 9494 Valley View Street, Rancho Cucamonga, requested that the item be pulled.
Chairman McNiel invited public comment.
Ms. Parlier stated that she lives to the south of the tract and the developer has been working with
her to arrive at an agreement regarding the placement of the trail. She submitted a letter requesting
removal of a tract map condition requiring construction of a trail on her property. She said that the
plan for the community trail had been revised since the project began and she asked that the trail
not be put in on her parkway as she feared her property would be subject to flooding if the
landscaping she installed is removed. She thought it should not be necessary to build this trail
because it was her understanding there was money available to finish the Demens Trail. She asked
that the Commission remove the condition.
Brad Buller, City Planner, reported that the trail is a conditioned to be installed in connection with the
tract approval and tonight's action was merely to consider design review of the houses. He said
tonight's meeting was not the proper forum for revaluation of the trail.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, indicated the City's Master Plan of Trails has not changed since
it was adopted and had always planned to have a trail on the West side of Amethyst Avenue north
of Hillside Avenue. He commented that City staff is working closely with the Flood Control District
regarding the Demens Trail. He noted that Supervisor Mikels supports the trail and the City is in the
process of securing a consultant to work on the design of the trail. He recalled that when the tract
was originally approved, the Planning Commission asked that the developer continue the trail on the
west side of Amethyst Avenue along Ms. Parlier's property on an interim basis but that the Demens
Trail would be the ultimate solution. He indicated staff would not object to removing the condition
on the tract because of the proposed Demens Trail. He noted that riders have to exit onto Valley
View Street to go south of the site.
Mr. Buller asked if deletion of the trail at Ms. Partiefs property would require an amendment to the
tract map or if the condition was written in such a way that staff could administratively delete the
requirement at this time.
Dan James, Deputy City Engineer, did not recall that the tract map conditions allow for administrative
ability to eliminate the trail.
commissioner Mann~dno did not feel the Commission could remove that condition with approval of
the Design Review for the tract map.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if equestrian riders will go along the channel and then dump onto
Amethyst Avenue. He noted that some of the trail is completed along Hillside Road.
Commissioner Mannerino did not believe the Commission could make a decision regarding the trail
this evening because thatwas not on the agenda but he suggested that staff meet with Ms. Parlier
to address her concerns.
Mr. Buller observed that the Trails Ma~ter Plan still shows the trail along the west side of Amethyst
Avenue. He acknowledged that the property owner does not want the trail and the developer would
prefer not to construct it but felt the Master Plan would need to be changed.
Commissioner Tolstoy felt the Trails Committee should look at the situation again.
Mr. Coleman indicated it was the Commission's desire to provide the trail on an interim basis until
the Demens Trail is constructed.
Commissioner Mannerino questioned what the Riding Club would like.
Mr. Buller indicated they would have to be asked.
Commissioner Tolstoy observed that the trail along Hillside Road is blocked by several existing
houses at Hellman Avenue.
Mr. Coleman acknowledged that there are gaps throughout the system..
KevJn Enni$, Assistant City Attorney suggested it may be appropriate to refer the trail question to
staff or the Trails Committee.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- Janua~ 26, 2000
Chairman McNiel asked the risk to the City if it agrees to Ms. Pariier's request to eliminate the trail
on her properly.
Mr. Bullet noted that the trail will stop either north or south of her property and in both cases the trail
user may move onto the City street.
It was the consensus of the Commission that staff should work with Ms. Padier and the developer
to determine Jf the trail could be eliminated.
Motion: Moved by Manne~no, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the
resolution approving Development Review gg-51. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: MAGIAS, MANNERINO, MGNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE - carried
4GS
B. ,JMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-30 -
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - The development of a 5,672 sql
. ' center facility on a 0.5-acre parcel of land in the Low Residenlial (2-4
dwelling per acre), located on the south side of Feron ' 150 feet
west of :a Avenue- APN: 209-085-04. Related File: Variance
C. VARIANCE ,IORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ,~est Io reduce the
required parking to 14 where the Developmenl Cod .~ires 76 for a proposed
community center 3nsisting of 5,672 square feet acre parcel of land in the
Low Residential District, on the south side of Fer pproximately 150 feet
west of Hermosa Avenue 209-085-04.
Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner, the sial 3orl.
Chairman McNiel Opened the I:
Peter Pitassi, AIA, Architect, 8439 White Suite 105, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that
he was representing Nacho o1' Northtown Housing Development
Corporation. He indicated that the Iheater ~ely dilapidated. He reported they plan
to salvage the Irusses for use ~n He said worked closely with staff to address
the parking issues. He be sm~ a typical community center and is
for neighborhood ional ones. He said it ~ used as a facility for people to
hold neighborhood , had come up with a )le solution. He believed the
Northtown Board demonstrated their compliance bility to perform. He said
they reviewed the and believed they are reasonable. He
Chairman Mci' asked if parking is restricted on Feron Boulevard.
Mr. Pitas.' parking is permitted on both sides of the street.
Chai~ cNiel asked'if the spaces are heavily used by the people who live there.
~itassi did not believe Ihat lo be the case.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 26. 2000
TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
COMMENT SHEET
MAY 10, 2000
II. OLD BUSI.NESS
A. Amethyst Community Trail
Background: Dudng the Planning Commission meetings regarding Tentative Tract
16026, located on the west side of Amethyst Street, north of Valley View Street, a
resident expressed concern with the Amethyst Community Trail. Cindy Partier, 9494
Valley View Street, objected to the construction of the Amethyst Community Trail in the
comer side parkway on her lot. She feared that her property would be subject to flooding
if her parkway shrubs were removed to construct the trail. The conditions of approval
require that the trail be designed and constructed to provide proper flood protection.
As a condition of approval for the subdivision map, the developer was required by the
Planning Commission to extend the Amethyst Community Trail south to Valley View
Street to improve trail access in this area until the Demens Regional Trail could be
extended to Amethyst Street. The Trails Advisory Committee reviewed Tentative Tract
16026. During the design review of the homes, Ms. Partier requested that the Planning
Commission delete the condition requiring the Amethyst Community Trail to be built
within the parkway frontage of her lot. The Commission indicated that it had no authority
to delete the condition. The Commission indicated that Ms. Parlier could work with the
Trails Advisory Committee. The Commission discussed the possibility of shifting trail to
the east side of Amethyst Street.
On March 8, 2000, the Trails Advisory Committee considered Ms. Padier's request. In
addition, the Committee discussed the possibility of shifting the trail to the east side of
Amethyst Street. The Committee recommended realigning the trail to the east side.
Analysis: On April 4, 2000, an open house was held with the residents along Amethyst
Street to obtain their input. The meeting was attended by about ten residents. The
residents identified the following advantages to west side versus east side of Amethyst
Street:
Advantages of Community Trail on West side of Amethyst Street:
· Consistent with adopted Trails Master Plan
· No mid-block crossing
· Only 1 driveway crossing
· Affects fewer property owners
Advantages of Community Trail on East side of Amethyst Street:
· Street is unimproved; hence may be easier/cheaper to build trail
· Houses have deep front yard setbacks (horses further from homes)
· More horse riders coming from the east side
At the conclusion of the meeting, the residents agreed that their preferred course of
action was to not construct the trail across Ms. Padier's frontage. Although there was
~ no agreement on trail alignment, there was consensus that it is premature to amend the
TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA
May 10, 2000
Page 2
trail alignment. The residents felt that the issue could be considered when the City has
funds available to complete the trail segment from Hillside Road to Tract 16026.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the developer be relieved of constructing the
Amethyst Community Trail off-site south to Valley View Street and the issue of a new trail
alignment be deferred until such time as City has funds to build trail.
Staff Planner: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
Attachments: Exhibit "A"- Trail Map
Exhibit "B" - Minutes of January 26, 2000 Planning Commission
Exhibit "C" - Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Partier
Exhibit "D" - Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Bliss
ACTION: The Committee recommends that the developer (Amethyst Estate LP.) be
relieved of constructing the Amethyst Community Trail off-site south to Valley View
Street. In addition, the Committee recommends that the issue of a new trail alignment
be deferred.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-65A
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DELETING A CONDITION OF
APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 16026, LOCATED WEST SIDE OF
AMETHYST STREET, NORTH OF VALLEY VIEW STREET -AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 1061-401-03.
A. Recitals.
1. On July 14, 1999, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 99-65, thereby
approving, subject to specified conditions, Tentative Tract No. 16026, which provides for the
development of 18 single family lots on 11.3 acres of land within the Very Low. Residential District.
2. On April 26, 2000, a request was filed by Mighty Development Inc. to modify the condition
of approval requiring the construction of the Community Trail along Amethyst Street from the
southeast comer of the tract south to Valley View Street.
3. On June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng on that date.
4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on June 14, 2000, 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 west side of Amethyst Street, nor[h of
Valley View Street with a street frontage of 666.51 feet and lot depth of 858.33 feet and is presently
unimproved; and
b. The propedies to the north and west are vacant and are a part the San Bemardino
Flood Control Channel, the properties to the south and east consists of single family homes; and
c. The Tentative Tract was approved by the Planning Commission on July 14, 2000,
for the subdivision of 18 single family lots; and
d. The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission delete Engineering
Division Condition of Approval no. 10 of Resolution 99-65, regarding the extension of the Amethyst
Community Trail south from the southeast corner of Tentative Tract 16026 to Valley View Street;
and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-65A
MOD. TO TT 16026 -AMETHYST ESTATES, L.P.
June 14, 2000
Page 2
e. The developer's request to delete the condition of approval is due to the concerns
raised by Mr. and Mrs. Parlier, regarding the potential flood risk and loss of privacy due to their
narrow side yard. In addition, with the extension of the Regional Trail, around the Demens Basin to
Amethyst Street set to go forward, the need to continue the Community Trail south to Valley View
Street is no longer a priority; and
f. The Trails Advisory Committee (Buller, Dickey, Rabone, Stewart) on March 8, 2000
and on May 10, 2000, reviewed the request to delete the construction of the Amethyst Community
Trail south form the southeast corner of Tentative Tract 16026 to Valley View Street and
recommended that the developer (Amethyst Estates L.P) be relieved of constructing the Amethyst
Community Trail off-site south to Valley View Street.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That the tentative tract modification is consistent with the General Plan,
Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and
b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract modification 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 tentative tract modification is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage and avoidable injury to humans or wildlife or their habitat; and
e. The tentative tract modification is not likely to cause sedous public health problems;
and
f. The modification of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired
by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed
subdivision.
4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and
considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and
that a Mitigated Negative Declaration was issued on July 14, 1999.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby modifies Resolution No. 99-65 by deleting Condition No. 10 in its entirety
under the Engineering Division.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-65A
MOD. TOTT16026 - AMETHYST ESTATES, L.P.
June 14, 2000
Page 3
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted bythe
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: ' COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSlQI~IERS:
the city of
Rancho Cucamonga'
DATE: June 14, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Bullet, City Planner
BY: Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15398 -
KEYSTONE INVESTMENTS LLC. - A request subdivide 2.1 acres into three parcels in
the Very-Low Residential Distdct (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located on the south side
of Wilson Avenue, approximately 770 feet west of Beryl Street - APN: 1062-121-24 and
1062-051-02. Related File: Tree Removal Permit 00-17.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoning:
North Single Family Residential - Very-Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per
acre).
South - Single Family Residentia - Very,Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per
acre).
East - Single Family Residential - Very-Low Residential Distdct (1-2 dwelling units per
acre).
West - Single Family Residential - Very-Low Residential Distdct (1-2 dwelling units per
acre).
B. General Plan Desiqnations:
Project Site - Very-Low Residential Distdct (1-2 dwelling units per acre).
North - Very-Low Residential Distdct (1-2 dwelling units per acre).
South - Very-Low Residential Distdct (1-2 dwelling units per acre).
East Very-Low Residential Distdct (1-2 dwelling units per acre).
West - Very-Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre).
C. Site Characteristics: The property is currently undeveloped. Vegetation on the site consists of
approximately 31 heritage trees. The site has a natural slope of approximately 8 percent from
northwest to southeast. A natural ravine, which was filled upstream with the development of
Concordia Homes (Tract 14207, which bounds the site to the north and east), runs north and
south along the east boundary of the site. A master drain storm facility was installed with the
construction of Tract 14207. The existing ravine is no longer needed for drainage, and
therefore will be filled. The Street frontage along Wilson Avenue is improved with curb and
gutter only.
ITEM F
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PARCEL MAP 15398
Keystone Investments LLC.
Page 2
D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 20,848 Square Feet.
Parcel 2 20,137 Square Feet.
Parcel 3 48,281 Square Feet.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: Keystone Investments LLC. is proposing to subdivide 2.1 acres of land into three
parcels. The parcels will range in size from 20,284 square feet to 48,281 square feet, with an
average parcel size of 29,755 square feet. The project will be subject to Hillside Development
Standards. Grading techniques will be used (i.e., split level foundations and/or stem wall
construction) to work with existing contours and minimize grading alterations.
B. Trails Advisory Committee: The Trails Advisory Committee is scheduled to review this project
on June 14 and staff will provide an oral update to the Commission on their recommendations.
The proposal is for a 10-foot local feeder trail between Parcels 1 and 2. This meets the
General Plan goal to provide horse trail access to the rear of all lots; however, the trail
alignment requires crossing the driveway of Parcel 1, which creates potential conflicts with
moving vehicles and cars blocking the trail access. For these reasons, staff finds the proposal
unacceptable. There are no trails to connect to on the pedmetar of this project. The
Community Trail is located on the north side of Wilson Avenue. Staff will be presenting three
alternatives to the Trails Advisory Committee. The first alternative would be to shift the local
feeder trail to the east and south sides of Parcel 2 to avoid driveway crossing, and reconstruct
a parkway easterly to Buckthorne Avenue as a 12' Community Trail to prevent riding in the
street. The second alternative is to have Parcels 1 and 2 as "front loaded" (i.e., no horse trail
access to rear yard) with direct access to a Community Trail to be built along the south side of
Wilson Avenue. The third alternative would be to record a deed restriction prohibiting the
keeping of homes on these three parcels.
C. Gradinq Committee: The Grading Committee (Fong, James, Brock) reviewed the project on
April 4, 2000, and on May 2, 2000, and recommend approval with conditions which have been
incorporated into the attached Resolution of Approval.
D. Environmental Assessment: The applicant prepared Part I of the Initial Study and staff
completed Part II of the Environmental Checklist. Staff determined that the project will have a
significant adverse environmental impact by removing 31mature trees. An arbodst report was
prepared (Jim Borer, November 1, 1999) for the project site to determine the significance of
the trees and the feasibility of relocating them to areas, which are not in conflict with the
proposed project. Based upon the proposed grading scheme and the existing locations of the
trees, all of the specimen trees will be impacted. The California Pepper and Olive trees that
exist on site are considered fruit bearing, which are exempt from protection by the City's Tree
Preservation Ordinance (RCMC Section 19.08.040), and removal is recommended. The
remaining Eucalyptus trees on site are considered "Heritage Trees" subject to the City's
Preservation Ordinance No. 276 and mitigation measures will be required for the replacement
of the Eucalyptus trees to be removed. If the Planning Commission concurs, then the
issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be in order.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a
300-foot radius of the project site.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PARCEL MAP 15398
Keystone Investments LLC.
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission issue a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and adopt the Resolution of Approval for Parcel Map 15398 subject to all conditions of
approval.
.
City Planner
BB:RZ~Is
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit"B" - Parcel Map 15398
Exhibit "C' - Trail Alternative 1
Exhibit "D" - Trail Alternative 2
Environmental Initial Study Parts I and II
Resolution of Approval for Parcel Map 15398
Location Map
TPM 15398
-Il
ect Site
DO' %Jl, i ~ '" ~,~ ..~-' ~' ~. 2~ .
N 89' 38' 19' E 153.76' "=~' ....
.07' - ~ ~.~_.~s.~ PR(~PO~
15' EQUESTRIAN . ~
E
__ p~, ! P~RCEL 2
J
20, 848S.'F. ~0, 137 S.F.
62. 5 pAD 60. 4 PAD
/-- I~OPOSED DRAIN P'iPE
~. SLOPE
LAND
J
12.~, ~ · PROPOSED~i ~RAIN P
~ N 83' 4~
54. 0 PAD N~TURAL
4'.
48, 281 S.F. ~
· ~J ~[N. ' SLOPJ
.~ . ,1' ~ ' 1' LANI
' /N 89' 39' 28' E 330.06'
B C CONSTRUCT ~OUTED
" J ~IP~AP AT '~NER
t ~ ~LLO~DRA NAOL
DRAINAGE C~RS[ ' "
LOT ~'~ .. -:. ~
- ~,~ 1gtC) ' M (59.4 F F.)
~" ~ hOT 28 '~ (58.9 PAO)
%
N 89' 38' 19' 6 153. 76'
30. OT ¢~%¢:%~ q' ~'NOPOSEB ~FTMN]NC '? SPLASH WALL
IPARC~ I P~CEL 2
20, B4B S. F 20, 1373. F.
62. 5 PAD 60. 4 PAD ~ ~ ',',,,
~ '~ ~ LANDSCAPED
, PROPOSED, ORAIN PIPE
~ LOT ~ ~ \ ..~ . v' \ : .~~'~ :~ '~," ~' ~ ¢ ' '
. . ~...-'"
___-~ ~'~CT NO. ~2~ ~ .-<"7/ ?~' ', '.~~'~ u:.:'~ ~"
~ ~,~3,2~-~ ~ ,. ~, ,, ~~~.::- .....~
~ .._--:::::-- ~ ~-'~ ~ LOT 28
"~¢. L 273.,' 35 ' 37
(6~. ~, .,. ,.
-i i~ ~ POSED
OR IVE~A~
15' EQUESTRIAN ~ "' '""
~ I-~ .... NO.
"
I
~ PARC~ I P~CEL 2 ~ j
62. 5 PAD 60. 4 PAD ~ i
~0' EOUESTR[AN ~RA[L'~ DRAIN
~ - PROPOSED )RAIN PIPE
LOT !5
~ ,. T~ACT NO.
' ' ~iTS OF , ~. 82 ! 87 - G8
~ '"~: ~ 54. 0 PAD ~TU~L ~o' --.
48.~81 5. F.
iJ UiN. SLOPES TOBE ........
LANOSCAPED
~ ~ tl5 ~l~ il) ~t~ '.
ENVIRONMENTAL
" ..... INFORMATION FORM
C~o, Ra.c~oO~c. mono..,~.n,n~O~.,o~ (Part I - Initial Study)
(909) 477-2750
The purpose of this form iS:to inform the C ty of th~ basic .clomp0nents::0f.the p~oposed
pr0ject'so:~h~t the Ci~ may'review.the' P~oject p't~rsu~nt to City p01icie$i. ~'rdinances, and
gu!delines; th'e CalifOrnia EnvirOnmental Quality Act; ahd the'ci:t~s RUi~; and Procedures
to Implement CEQA: It is important that'the information.requested in thi~' app Cat on be
providedin full.
INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure
- th~-ltheapp~icati~nisc~mp~eteatthe~ime~fsubmit~a~;Cit~sta~wil~n~tbeavai~ab~et~pe~tmw~t~requiredt~pr~videmissing
information.
Project Title:
~J
Name & Address of developer or preject sponsor: %""~ VVX~_ ~ S ~ ~
I
Telephone Number:
Name & Add~s~ of pe~on preparing this fo~ (if different f~m above);
Telephone Numbe~'
INITSTDI.WPD - 4/96 Page 1 of 10
Information indicated by astensk (*) 's 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 photographs which show representative views into the site from the north, south, east and west;
views into and fro.__~_m the site from the pdmary access points which serve the site; and representative views of significant
features fron! the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph.
4) Assessor's Parcel'Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary):
Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications):
7) Descdbe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet
if necessary:
8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucarnonga and other govemreental
agencies in order to fully implement the project:
Page 2 of 10
g) 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. Descdbe any existing structures on site
(including age and condition) and the use of fhe structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition,
site all sources of infon~ation (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, treffic studies):
· ~ [ .
· ~. II · ,
10) Descdbe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the s//e. Site all sources of information (books, published reports and
oral histoq/):
11) De$cribe any n~iae s~urces ~nd their ~eve~s that n~w a~ect the site (aircra~f~ r~adway n~ise~ etc~) and h~w they wi~~ a~ect
proposed uses:
. · , ,.
INITSTDI.WPD - 4/96 Page 3 of 10
'12) Descfibe the pmposed preject in detail. This should provide an adequate descdption of the site in terms of uitimate use which
will result from the prosed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur
with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each incre~nent. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary:
13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects.
Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops,
department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.):
14) Will the proposed project change the patfero, scale or character of the surrounding general area of the project?
INIT,RTOl .WPD - 4~96 Page 4 of 10
15) Indicate the type of short-term and Iong-lerm noise to be generated, including aoume and amount. How will these noise levels
affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What methods of sound proofing are proposed?
%
17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supp/ies) into which the site drains:
18) Indicate expected amount of water usage, (See Attachment A for usage estimates), For further c/afification, please contact
the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at 987-2591.
b. Commercial//nd, (gal/day/ac) Peak use (gal/min/ac),
19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. --. Septic Tank. ~, Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach
percolation tests. /f discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See
Atfachment A for usage estimates). For further c/adfication, please contact the Cucarnonga County Water D, istfict at g87-2591.
a. Residential (gal/day)
b. Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac)
RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS;
20) Numbero~'esidentialunlts:
Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size:
t o:84%
INITSTD1 .WPD - 4/96
Page 5 of 10
A~ached (indicate whether units am rental or fo~s): '
21) Anticipated range of sale pfices and/or rents:
Sale Price(s)
Rent (per month) $ to $
22) Specify number of bedrooms 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:
b. Junior High: __
c. Senior High _
COMMERCIAL. INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS
25) Describe type of use(s) and major function(s) of commercial, industrial or institutional uses:
/
26) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type:
/
II,,IIT'~TR't ~'VPI-). 4/96 Page 6 of 10
27) Indicate hours of operation:
28) Number of emp/oyee$: Total: //
Maximum Shift:
Time of Maximum Shift:
29) Pr~vide breakd~Wn ~f an~cipated j~b c/assi~cati~n$~ inc~uding wage and sa~ary ranges~ as we// a~ an indicati~n ~f the rate
of hire for each classification (a~ach additional sheet i~l~/cessary):
30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City:
'31) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate th~$ourse, type and amount of air pofiution emissions. (Data should be
vedfied through the South Coast Air Quality MaTment Disifict, at (818) 572-6283):
/
/
/
ALL PROJECTS
32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to deten'nine their ability to provide
adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response.
INITSTDI.WPD - 4/96 Page 7 of 10
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; fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. A/so note underground storage of any of the above.
Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as we# as the dates of use, if
known.
34) W~II the proposed project involve the temporary or long-tern1 use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic
mate[leis, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes, provide an inventory of all such matedals fo 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.
I hereby cer#fy that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for
adequate evaluation of this project to the be~t of my ability, that the facts, statements, end information presented ara true and
correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additiohal information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
,~,,~-~'n~ ~^~n _ z/aR Page 8 of 10
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1. Project File: Tentative Parcel Map 15398
2. Related Files:
3. Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NO. 15398 KEYSTONE INVESTMENTS, LLC- A residential subdivision of 3 single
family lots on 2.04 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per
acre), located on the south side of Wilson Avenue, approximately 770 feet west of Beryl
Street - APN: 1062-121-24 and 1062-051-02.
4.
4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Keystone Investments, LLC
424 Westbourne Drive
West Hollywood, CA 90048
5. General Plan Designation: Very Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units per acre)
6. Zoning: Very Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units per acre)
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
North - Existing Single Family; Very Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units per acre)
South - Existing Single Family; Very Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units per acre)
East Existing Single Family; Very Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units per acre)
West Existing Single Family; Very Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units per acre)
8. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
9. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Rudy Zeledon
(909) 477-2750
10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project. They
each involve at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant
Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact," as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
( ) Transportation/Circulation
) Land Use and Planning ( ) Public Services
) Population and Housing (¢') Biologicel Resources ( ) Utilities and Service Systems
) Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Aesthetics
) Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Cultural Resources
) Air Quality ( ) Noise ( ) Recreation
( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
(,,') I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to,
by the~a~licant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
S igned:Ru~'~l/~
Assistant Planner
May 22, 2000
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an
explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a
discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposah
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) (v')
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or ( ) ( ) (v')
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project?
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the ( ) ( ) (v')
vicinity?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 3
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
established community?
Comments:
a-d) The proposed project was designed in accordance Development Code Standards.
The project site is located on the south side of Wilson Avenue west of Beryl Street,
which has a general plan designation of Very Low Density Residential. No increase
in density or plan amendment is proposed and therefore no impacts will result from
the project.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposah
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local ( ) ( )
population projections?
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either ( ) ( ) (,,')
directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable ( ) ( ) (v')
housing?
Comments:
a~b) Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new
employees to the area. The proposed project will result in the subdivision of 2.04
acres of land into 3 single family lots, in the Very Low Density Residential District (1-
2 du/ac). No increase in density is proposed. The proposed project is consistent
with the General Plan land use density for the site, and will not result in a significant
increase in population not otherwise planned by the City in its forecasts.
c) There are no structures on site.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: ~mpac~ Le~s
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢')
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 4
Significant
Impact Less
Issues and Suppoding Information Sources: PotentiallyUnless Than
d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~')
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) ( )
f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil ( ) ( ) ( ) (/)
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) ( )
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( )
Comments:
a-c) No known faults pass through the site, it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in
the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault.
b) The site is not located near a body of water; however, there is a natural ravine,
which was filled upstream with the development of Tract 14702, which bounds the
site to the north and east, that runs north and south along the east boundary of the
site. A master drain storm facility was installed with the construction of Tract 14207,
the existing ravine no longer is needed for drainage; therefore, will be filled.
e-f) The site has a natural slope of approximately 8 percent from northwest to
southeast, and it is not near any slopes vulnerable to mass-wasting events. Grading
of the site will be subject to Hillside Development Standards. Necessary slope
gradients to allow proper site drainage and avoid erosion will be required. In
addition, the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of building permits will
require a soils report. New structures are required to meet current earthquake
standards as required by the Uniform Building Code. The impact is not considered
significant.
i) The site contains natural ravine, which was filled upstream with the development
of Concordia Homes (Tract 14702, which bounds the site to the north and east),
that runs north and south along the east boundary of the site. A master drain
storm facility was installed with the construction of Tract 14207, the existing ravine
no longer is needed for drainage, therefore will be filled.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: potentially Unless ~n
4. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, ( ) ( ) ( ) (~')
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 5
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
b) Exposure of people or property to water related ( ) ( ) (v')
hazards such as flooding?
c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration ( ) ( )
of surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any ( ) ( ) (v')
water body?
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
of water movements?
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations, or through substantial loss of
groundwater recharge capability?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ( ) ( ) ( ) (,")
groundwater otherwise available for public water
supplies?
Comments:
a) The project is expected to result in incremental changes in absorption rates and
drainage patterns due to an increase of paved surface area. The City Engineer
must review and approve site and drainage plans that show that all runoff will be
conveyed to existing and proposed drainage facilities, which are designed to handle
the subject water flows.
b) The site is located within a special flood hazard area inundated by 100-year flood
plain (Zone A); however, with the development of tract 14207(located north and
east of the project site), a master drain storm facility was constructed and provides
adequate flood protection to the project site.
c-e) The project site is not located near a body of water. Storm-water runoff will be
conveyed to the existing public storm drain system as approved by the City
Engineer.
f-i) The project will not interfere with groundwater management practices in the area
because the site is not used for groundwater recharging.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 6
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to ( ) (,")
an existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) (v')
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or ( ) (,")
cause any change in climate?
d) Create objectionable odors? ( )
Comments:
a-b) Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-
Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is
the possibility of fugitive dust being emitted during site grading. However, the
project, at 2.04 developed acres, is below the AQMD Threshold of Potential
Significance for Air Quality Impacts. Any impact to air quality is thus considered
less than significant
c-d) The proposed project is a 3 single family lot subdivision on 2.04 acres and will not
generate emissions that could cause climatic changes or objectionable odors.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ( ) (v')
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., ( ) ( ) (v')
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to ( ) ( ) (v')
nearby uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) (v')
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) (,,')
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) ) (v')
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 7
Comments:
a) The parcel map subdivision will not result in increased vehicle trips compared to the
current vacant land. However, when the parcels are developed the project will
generate new trips because of the new construction. The number of trips is not
consider significant, therefore the project does not warrant a Traffic Study Analysis.
The proposal is consistent with the General Plan for which the street widths were
evaluated at a build-out condition.
b-c) The site has adequate access for emergency vehicles. In addition, Wilson Avenue
is fully improved (64-feet from curb to curb) which provides the site adequate
access for emergency vehicles.
d) The project design meets the parking standards of the Development Code.
e-g) The site is not close enough to any airport to need noise or hazard abatement
measures.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pote~lially unless Thgn
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their ( (,,')
habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds)?
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, ( ) (~')
eucalyptus windrow, etc.)?
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., (¢') ( )
eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and ( ) (,/)
vernal pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) (¢')
Comments:
a) The project is not within any known endangered or habitat areas.
b-c) There are 31 existing specimen trees on the project site that meet the City's criteda
for "Heritage Trees." These trees are very mature specimens of Eucalyptus
globulous (6), California Pepper (24), and Olive (1). The applicant has submitted a
· Tree Removal application, requesting to remove the 31 trees. An arbodst report
was prepared (Jim Borer, November 1, 1999) for the project site to determine the
significance of the trees and the feasibility of relocating them to areas, which are not
in conflict with the proposed project. Based upon the proposed grading scheme
and the existing locations of the trees, all of the specimen trees will be impacted.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 8
The grading of the site will have a major impact upon the condition and viability of
each tree. The only tree of the 31 that has any reasonable viability for
transplantation and relocation is the Olive tree (tree #1). However, the California
Pepper and Olive trees are considered fruit bearing which are exempt from
protection by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance (RCMC Section 19.08.040).
Because of the weak structural condition (Pepper trees) and extreme size
(Eucalyptus trees) and woody nature of their root system, the remaining 30 trees
would not be viable candidates for relocation. Therefore, removal is recommended.
In conclusion, the Eucalyptus trees are considered "Heritage Trees" subject to the
City's Preservation Ordinance No. 276. Therefore, the following mitigated
measure will be required:
1. The Eucalyptus trees shall be replaced with Eucalyptus Maculata
(Spotted Gum) in 15 gallon size.
d) There is no riparian or wetland habitat on-site.
e) The project site is cut off from healthy, undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage
Scrub by development and bands of non-native vegetation. It is not in a migration
corridor.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pm~,t~,y unless ~l~an
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposak
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢')
plans?
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
inefficient manner?.
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/)
mineral resource that would be of future value to
the region and the residents of the State?
Comments:
a-b) The project will not conflict with any energy conservation plans nor be wasteful.
c) There are no known resources that would be a future value to the region and the
residents of the State.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 9
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Poten0allyUnless Than
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of (,")
hazardous substances (including, but not limited
to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency (v')
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?.
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential (,")
health hazard?
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of ( ("')
potential health hazards?
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable ( (,")
brush, grass, or trees?
Comments:
a/c-d) There is no evidence of prior commercial or industrial uses. No evidence of
discarded drums, containers, hazardous wastes or discolored soils have been
observed. There was no indication of underground storage tanks or illegal dumping
of refuse on-site.
b) The parcel map subdivision has been designed to accommodate emergency
vehicles and is accessible from two access points on Wilson Avenue.
e) The site is not located in a fire hazard area.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: potentially Unless Than
10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 10
Comments:
a,b) The parcel map subdivision will not increase existing noise levels because the site
is currently vacant. However, existing noise levels will increase at time of
development. The increase in noise levels will not be in excess of that anticipated
by planned land uses. The relatively small size of the development ensures the
increase will be to less than significant levels. The project is consistent with other
residential uses nearby.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless '~heeSSn
11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
Comments:
a-e) Fire protection - The site is located on the south side of Wilson Avenue,
approximately 700 feet west of Beryl Street and is served by the fire station on the
east side of Amethyst Street, north of 19th street, approximately 2 miles from the
project site. Standard conditions from the Fire and Safety Division will be placed on
the project so no additional impacts to fire service will occur.
Police Protection - Additional police protection is not required. The parcel map
subdivision of 2.04 acres will not increase the need for additional police protection in
the area.
Schools - The proposed parcel map subdivision will not generate a substantial
number of new job opportunities or induce people to move to the project area.
Therefore, the development of the project site would not adversely impact local
schools. However, consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan
and Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council the developer
will pay all appropriate development impact fees.
Parks - The proposed parcel map subdivision will not generate a substantial number
of new job opportunities or induce people to move to the project area. Therefore,
the development of the project site would not adversely impact local schools.
However, consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and
Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council the developer will
pay all appropriate development impact fees.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 11
Public facilities -The proposed project will not greatly increase traffic on adjacent
streets. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and
Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council the developer will
pay all appropriate development impac~ fees.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PolentJall). Unless l~an
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) ( (,/)
b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) (,/)
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution ( ) ( ) (v')
facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) (,/)
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (,")
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) (,/)
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) (,/)
Comments:
a-g) The proposed parcel map subdivision will extend as necessary existing systems and
utilities available in the immediate ama. The proposed project will not require major
modifications or alterations to the existing utility systems.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/)
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢')
Comments:
a-b) The surrounding area is developed and includes other residential neighborhoods.
The proposed housing development will blend with existing surroundings.
c) The proposed parcel map subdivision will not create new light and glare as the site
is currently vacant.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 12
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially unless Tna,
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ) ( ) (v')
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ) ( ) (,/)
c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ) ( ) (~')
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change, ) ( ) (,,')
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within ) ( ) ) (,,')
the potential impact area?
Comments:
a-e) As the site is relatively small, vacant, and has been previously disturbed, the
likelihood of affecting historical or cultural resources is minimal and impacts are not
considered significant.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Po[enlially Unless
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
regional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreati~)nal opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
Comments:
a) An increase demand for neighborhood or regional parks is unlikely, as the site is
relatively small.
b) There is no impact to existing recreational opportunities as the site. The site is
surrounded by residential development.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 13
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially UnleSs Than
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of
a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or
eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential ( ) ( ) (*)
to achieve shod-term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental goals? (A shod-term
impact on the environment is one which occurs
in a relatively brief, definitive period of time.
Long-term impacts will endure well into the
future.)
c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that ( ) ( ) (v')
are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have ( ) ( ) (v')
environmental effects, which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Comments;
a) The project site does not contain Natural Resources as identified on Figure V-3 of
the General Plan. Additionally, the site does not contain any Coastal Sage Scrub,
Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, or Delhi-Sands flowering-loving fly habitat.
b) Dudng construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be emitted from grading
the site. Nonetheless, dust emissions could be sufficient to warrant the use of water or
other dust palliatives at this site. Sources of emissions during this phase include
exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust
generated as a result of construction vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed
surfaces. NOx and PM~o levels may be exceeded during this phase. However, the
project, at 2.04 developed acres, is below the AQMD Threshold of Potential
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Parcel Map No. 15398 Page 14
Significance for Air Quality Impacts. Any impact to air quality is thus considered less
than significant.
c) The cumulative effects of the parcel map subdivision may include incremental
increased traffic within the immediate vicinity. However, the impacts are not
considered significant. The applicant will be required to pay appropriate
transportation fees at time of development. Fees are used to make roadway
improvements within the area to keep the circulation system at acceptable levels of
service.
d) The proposed project on 2.04 acres would not cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly. The site is located in a residential area
along Wilson Street.
EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative
Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within
the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on
the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study
and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500
Civic Center Drive (check all that apply):
(x) General Plan EIR
(Certified April 6, 1981)
(x) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
(x) CEQA Air Quality Handbook, South Coast Air Quality Management District,
November 29, 1993
APPLICANT CERTIFICATION
I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I
have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the
project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid
the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects
would occur.
Signature: Date:
Print Name and Title:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code.
Project File No.: Tentative Parcel Map 15398 Public Review Period Closes: June 14, 2000
Project Name: Project Applicant: Keystone Investments, LLC
Project Location (also see attached map): Located on the south side of Wilson Avenue, west of Beryl
Street -APN: 1062-121-24 and 1062-051-02.
Project Description: A residential subdivision of 3 single family lots on 2.04 acres of land in the Very Low
Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre.
FINDING
This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an
Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is
proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding:
[] The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant
effect on the environment.
[] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but:
(1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this
proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or
mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and
(2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a
significant effect on the environment.
If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required.
Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all
related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at
10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2780 or Fax (909) 477-2847.
NOTICE
The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period.
June 14, 2000
Date of Determination Adopted By
City of Rancho Cucamonga
MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM
Project File No.: Tentative Parcel Map 15398
This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation
measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program
has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are
implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code).
Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements:
1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and
the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval
are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project.
2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This
procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom
and when compliance will be reported.
3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring
progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon
recommendations by those responsible for the program.
Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project
planner, assigned by the City Planner, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project
planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly
and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the
mitigation that relate to that department.
Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in
· performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant.
2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its
corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached
hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and
to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will
be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the
project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency
Planning/Engineering Division
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Page 2
3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed,
as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific
mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner.
4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the
completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each
measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of
development.
5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off
as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP
Reporting Form.
6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation
measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions.
An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department
and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel.
· 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of
construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after wdtten
notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the
authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached
hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to
hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented.
8. Any mitigation that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department. The Department shall
require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City.
These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to
monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time.
9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with
a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring
results to the City. Said plan shall identi~ the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether
the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall
conform to the Cites MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director pdor
to the issuance of building permits.
MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III)
Project File No.: Tentative Parcel Map 15398 Applicant: Keystone Investments LLC.
Initial Study Prepared by: Rud¥ Zeledon Date: May25t 2000
· The removal of the Eucalyptus trees onsite shall be CP D As Necessary A 3
replaced pursuant to the City's Preservation
Ordinance No. 276.The Eucalyptus trees shall be
replaced with Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum)
in 15 gallon size.
~ eyto Checklist Abbreviations
',Respop~ blePerson ,;: · :,MonitorlngF, requency ~ : ,. M~thod:ofVerlficatlon . ,, · , - - ' Sanc~!ons , ~.. ~ . -
CDD - Community Development Director A - With Each New Development A - On-sita Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map
CP - City Planner or designee B - Pdor To ConstnJction B - Other Agency Permit / Approval 2 - Withhord Grading or Building Permit
CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Construction C - Plan Check 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy
BO - Building Offictal or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports / Studies / Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order
PO - Potice Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds
FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\CEQA\MMCHKLST,WPD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15398, LOCATED SOUTH SIDE OF WILSON
AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 770 FEET WEST OF BERYL STREET AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 1062-121-24 and
1062-051-02.
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 15398, submitted by Keystone Investments LLC.,
applicants, for the purpose of subdividing into 3 parcels, the real property situated in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, identified as APN: 1062-121-24
and 1062-051 02, located south side of Wilson Avenue, approximately 770 feet west of Beryl Street;
and
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2000, 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 Tentative Parcel Map is consistent the General Plan, and Development
Code, and;
2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent the General Plan,
and Development Code, and;
3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development.
4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage or public health problems or have
adverse effects on abutting properties.
SECTION 2: Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental
assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence
that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference,
based upon the findings as follows:
1. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder;
that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared
therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning
Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative
Declaration with regard to the application.
2. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies certain
significant environmental effects that will result if the project is
approved, all significant effects have been reduced to an acceptable
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PM 15398 - KEYSTONE INVESTMENTS, LLC
June 14, 2000
Page 2
level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project which are
listed below as conditions of approval.
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
Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that
the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon
wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further,
based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information
provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the
Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption 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 15398 is hereby approved subject to the following
Special Conditions:
Planning Division
1. All lot grading, whether in conjunction with a total design review or
individual custom lots shall be subject to the Hillside Development
Ordinance. The project shall utilize grading techniques, which
minimize the alteration to the natural landform. These techniques shall
include minimal padding for units only, split level foundations, and/or
stem wall construction.
2. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer of each parcel
written notice that the parcel will be subject to the Hillside Development
Review Process in a standard format as determined by the City
Planner, prior to the accepting a cash deposit on each parcel.
3. The driveway on Parcel 3 shall be reduced to a width of 12 feet; in
order to eliminate the 2:1 slopes, along the east boundary of the project
site, as much as possible.
4.Upon development of any parcel, all three parcels shall be rough
graded per the approved conceptual grading plan.
5. Upon development of either Parcel 1 or 2, the shared driveNay shall be
installed full width.
Fire Safety Division
1. Current plans do not comply with the minimum standards for fire and
life safety for Fire Department access. Maximum slope allowed id 12
percent and a turn-around is required since the access roadway
exceeds 150 feet. Therefore, the installation of an automatic fire
sprinkler system for the future residence on Parcel 3 will be required.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PM 15398 - Keystones Investments LLC
June 14, 2000
Page 2
Mitigation Measures
1. The removal of the Eucalyptus trees onsite shall be replaced pursuant
to the City's Preservation Ordinance No. 276. Therefore, the following
mitigated measure will be required:
a) The Eucalyptus trees shall be replaced with Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted
Gum) in 15 gallon size, planted 8 feet on center in a windrow, at the project
perimeter.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
?
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #: TPM t5398
SUBJECT: Subdivide 2.1 acres into 3 parcels
APPLICANT: Keystone Investments, LLC.
LOCATION: sis of Wilson Avenue, west of Beryl
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. General Requirements Completion Date
1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, /
its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the
alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents,
officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents,
officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City
may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but
such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition.
B, Time Limits
1. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning I
Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the City Engineer within 3 years from
the date of the approval.
C, 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, and the
Development Code regulations..
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all I I
Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
SC -2-00
Project NO. TPM 15398
(;0repletion Date
3. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for I
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 I
Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in
effect at the time of building permit issuance.
5. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property I
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.
D: Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home
landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed
randscape 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. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than
2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for
erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation
system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or
greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their
appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-
gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover.
In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall
also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and
shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting
required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the
developer prior to occupancy.
4. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation 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.
5. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, i
the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
E, Environmental
1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of I
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 $ 719.00 _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.
2
ProJect No. TPM 15398
Completion Date
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
F. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for I I
approved openings: Wilson Avenue.
2. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or I I
by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of building
permits, where no map is involved. (Specifically see V.2).
3. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated I I
or noted on the final map.
4. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on I
the final map.
G. Street Improvements
1. Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety I
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, I
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 comers of intersections per City I
Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with I
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 / I
be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots.
SC -2-00
Project No. TPM 15398
Completion Date
h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan
check.
2. 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.
3. 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.
H. 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.
I. Drainage and Flood Control
1. The project (or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, flood I
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 _A designation I
removed from the project area. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports,
plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR)
shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits,
whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to
occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first.
J. Utilities
1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, I /
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. I I
3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the I I
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and
the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of
compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits,
whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days
prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the
case of all other residential projects.
K. General Requirements and Approvals
1. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance I I
of building permits, whichever occurs first, for: Parcels 1 and 2.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT,
(909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
General Fire Protection Conditions
1. Mello RoDs Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. The I I
developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced
SC -2-00
Project No. TPM 15398
Completion Dat~
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 CFD shall be formed by the District and the
developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs.
2. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted:
X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 32.
3. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus.
4. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet,
6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus.
5. Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District as follows:
X $132 for Single Family Residential Tract (per phase).
**Note: Separate plan check fees for Tenant Improvement work, fire protection systems
(sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon
submittal of plans.
6. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1997 UBC,
UFC, UPC, UMC, and RCFD Standards 32 and 15 and 1996 NEC.
SC -2-00
'[HE CITY OF
I~AN CHO CO CAMO N GA
DATE: June 14, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Bullet, City Planner
BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDEMENT 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
- A proposal to add a Mixed Use zoning district with accompanying definitions,
processing previsions, and development standards to the Rancho Cucamonga
Development Code.
BACKGROUND: This item was continued from the May 24, 2000, meeting along with associated
General Plan Amendment 00-0lA and Development District Amendment 00-01 applications.
Please refer to the attached Planning Commission report of May 24, 2000, for discussion of the
proposed code amendments.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a
recommendation of approval to the City Council for Development Code Amendment 00-01 by the
adoption of the Resolution and accompanying draft Ordinance attached to Planning Commission
report of May 24, 2000.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
City Planner
BB:AVV~ma
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Planning Commission Staff Report, May 24, 2000
Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Draft Minutes dated May 24, 2000
Exhibit "C" - Draft Ordinance for Development Code Amendment 00-01
Resolution Approving Development Code Amendment 00-01
ITEM G
THE CITY OF
~AN CHO CIICAI~ION CA
DATE: May 24, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDEMENT 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A proposal to add a Mixed Use zoning distdct with accompanying
definitions, processing provisions, and development standards to the Rancho
Cucamonga Development Code.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This proposal to add a Mixed Use district to the Development Code is a direct result of the current
request to change the land use designations on the old packinghouse site at Amethyst Avenue
(General Plan Amendment 00-O1A and Development Code Amendment 00-01). In order to provide
sections in the Development Code for the requested Mixed Use district, it was necessary for City
staff to request authorization to proceed with a Development Code Amendment. On April 12, 2000,
the Planning Commission authorized City staff to initiate a Development Code Amendment for this
purpose.
The City's General Plan has a Mixed Use category which has zoning implementation for a few sites
throughout the Terra Vista Community Plan and the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The Amethyst
Avenue site's zoning regulation is through the Development Code, which does not have a Mixed
Use category.
Of additional interest, the General Plan Update consultants have recommended the expanded use
of Mixed Use districts at selective areas of importance in the overall General Plan land use patterns.
In this Development Code Amendment, staff has incorporated some of the proposed outline form
of the consultant's General Plan Update drafts.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The specific wording of the proposed amendment is contained in the accompanying
Exhibit ("A") and Resolution of Approval. Briefly, the amendment provides the following text
additions:
1. Establishes Planning Commission review for all Mixed Use projects (Section
17.06.010.C.l.h). Staff believes that all Mixed Use districts must be under Planning
Commission review in order to ensure the appropriate application of the varying
development standards of each use and activity.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DCA 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
May 24, 2000
Page 2
2. Definition of the Mixed Use land use activity (Section 17.08.020.G). This provision sets
the intent of the Mixed Use category.
3. Provides a section for each Mixed Use district's description (Section 17.08.030.F).
Because each Mixed Use property will be tailored to have a different mix of uses, each
area that is so designated must have a detailed description of the permitted pementages
of each use. The individual site description shall be adopted with each individual
Development District Amendment.
4. Establishes a basis for Mixed Use district development standards (Section
17.08.040.A.3). This section provides the basis for applying the varying development
standards existing within the Development Code for each use and activity.
B. Environmental: The Development District Amendment is exempt from environmental
assessment by Section 15061 (b) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public headng in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper with a 1/8 page legal advertisement.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a
recommendation of approval to the City Council for Development Code Amendment 00-01 by the
adoption of the attached Resolution and accompanying Exhibit.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
City Planner
BB:AW\ma
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Development Code Mixed Use Standards
Resolution of Approval
DEVELOPMENT CODE MIXED USE STANDARDS
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 00-01: All recommended text additions are shown in bold
print. The existing text is included with regular print to show the context in which the new
provisions are to be placed.
· The following, shown in bold print, shall be added as Section 17.06.010.C.l.h to the Land
Development section of the Development Code:
C. Authority
1. Plannin.q Commission Review. Development/Design Review applications
which meet any of the following criteria shall require review and
consideration by the Planning Commission:
a. Any project being proposed along a Special Boulevard as defined by
the General Plan, except for structures within projects with an
approved master plan as provided for in subsection b below.
b. All projects which are master planned. Once the master plan, including
architectural guidelines, has been approved by the Planning
Commission, individual structures may be approved by the City
Planner.
c. All residential subdivisions.
d. All shopping centers, except individual structures may be approved by
the City Planner where a master plan, including architectural
guidelines, has been approved by the Planning Commission.
e. Any project requiring an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or
Environmental Impact Statement (ELS).
f. All projects of more than ten acres of land.
g. Certain projects within a hillside area are subject to review pursuant to
Section 17.24.020-B.
h. All projects within Mixed Used Districts.
· The following, shown in bold print, shall be added as Section 17.08.020.G to the Residential
section of the Development Code:
These districts have been created to implement the goals, objectives and land use
designations of the General Plan. In addition, each district is designed to implement the
density limits of each district.
A. Very Low Residential District (VL). This district is intended as an area for very Iow
density single family residential use, with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet
and a maximum residential density of up to 2 units per gross acre.
B. Low Residential District (L). This district is intended as an area for single family
residential use, with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet and a maximum
residential density of 4 units per gross acre.
DEVELOPMENT CODE MIXED USE STANDARDS
-2-
C. Low-Medium Residential District (LM). This district is intended as an area for Iow-
medium density single family or multiple family use with site development
regulations that assure development compatible with nearby single family
detached neighborhoods. Residential densities are expected to range from 4 to 8
units per gross acre maximum.
D. Medium Residential District (M). This district is intended as an area for medium
density multiple family use, with site development regulations that assure
development compatible with nearby lower density residential development.
Residential densities are expected to range from 8-14 units per gross acre
maximum.
E. Medium-High District (MH). This district is intended as an area for medium-high
density multiple family use, with site development regulations that assure
development compatible with nearby lower density residential development.
' Residential densities are expected to range from 14 to 24 units per gross acre
maximum.
F. Hi(Ih Residential District (H). This district is intended as an area for high density
multiple family use, with site development regulations that assure development
compatible with nearby lower density residential development. Residential
densities are expected to range from 24 to 30 units per gross acre.
G. Mixed Use (MU). This district is intended as an area for a mix of residential
and non-residential uses, with site development regulations that assure
development compatible with nearby lower density residential development,
as well as internal compatibility among the varying uses. Each location of
this district is identified in Section 17.08.030F with percent ranges for each
permitted use that is identified. Each use that is so identified is identical to
the use definition listed elsewhere in the Development Code.
· The following, shown in bold print, shall be added as Section 17.08.030.F to the residential
section of the Development Code:
F. Mixed Use Districts. These districts have been created to implement the
goals, objectives, and land use designations of the General Plan. Each
location where a Mixed Use District is established will have the specific land
uses that may be authorized for development listed in this section.
· The following, shown in bold print, shall be added as Section 17.08.040.A.3 to the
residential section of the Development Code:
A. Development Standards The development standards for residential development
are arranged into two categories: (1) basic development standards, and (2)
optional development standards. These standards are used in conjunction with
the Absolute Policies and Design Guidelines during the residential land
development/design review process as discussed in Chapter 17.06. Each
residential development must conform to either the basic standards or the optional
standards.
DEVELOPMENT CODE MIXED USE STANDARDS
1. Basic Development Standards. These standards are intended to provide
basic standards which will ensure good quality and compatible projects. A
residential development over four units per acre is generally limited to the
mid-point of the density range for which it is designated. These standards,
as well es the density limitation, are intended to create a development which
will be compatible and provide for proper transitions from more sensitive or
less intense residential development.
2. Optional Development Standards, These standards are intended to provide
high standards for the development of projects of superior quality and
compatibility. The optional standards allow development at the higher end of
the designated density range. However, the standards and development
expectations have been increased above and beyond the basic standards in
order to ensure proper transitions and buffers from lower intense residential
uses.
The ultimate density allowed in any residential district shall be determined
through the residential land development design review process and public
hearings as described in Chapter 17.06. The Planning Commission shall
have the authority to reasonably condition any residential development to
ensure proper transition and compatibility to adjacent residential
developments; existing or proposed.
3. Mixed Use Development Standards. For the purposes of establishing
guidance for the application of individual land use regulations and
development standards, all Mixed Use District development proposals
are subject to master planning procedures as outlined in Section
17.20.030. Existing development standards for each land use category,
as provided in Sections 17.08 through 17.24, shall be the basis of
standards for each category within a mixed use development plan, but
they may be modified by the City during the Master Plan review
process. Development agreements between the property owners and
the City may be used as implementation measures for any amended
standards or review procedures.
correspondence which the City has. He noted that the materials and files have been open to public
review since the application was submitted.
Commissioner Mannedno noted that the specified use will require a conditional use permit.
Chairman McNiel stated the use would be conditioned, not automatically permitted and the City
would still have those oversight options as well as denial available if the Industrial Area Specific Plan
is amended. He said he understood the need for automobile service stations, but the Haven
Avenue Oveday Distdct was established because the City did not want a lot of retail except for retail
which is ancillary to office uses along Haven Avenue. He noted that service stations were not
permitted other than the Haven Car Wash, which is very well hidden. He acknowledged that times
change and said he understood why the Commission was considering this application.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he had been on the Commission when the Haven Avenue Oveday
District was approved and at that time the City did not want service stations there. However, he felt
the City has established a track record of obtaining attractive stations and he felt the City wold have
control on this because the station must be part of a master planned development.
Commissioner Stewart concurred that the City would have a lot of control. She noted that the letters
placed before them were not an overwhelming call for denial but rather included one in favor, one
asking that proper conditions be included, and one from the applicant in response to another letter.
Commissioner Tolstoy commented that service stations are ancillary uses to office uses.
Commissioner Mannedno believed it has been proven that service stations can be attractive and he
felt they are useful.
Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Mannerino, to adopt the resolution recommending
approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 99-05. Motion carded bythe following vote:
AYES: MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: MACIAS - carried
Chairman McNiel said he hoped he is on the Design Review Committee when the project comes
through because it should be the best service station that has ever been built.
C. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA- A proposal
to add a Mixed Use zoning district with accompanying definitions, processing provisions, and
development standards to the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. Related files: General
Plan Amendment 00-0lA, Development District Amendment 00-01, and Development
Agreement 00-01.
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-0lA
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the General Plan
land use designation from Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per
acre) to Mixed Use for 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of
the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive. The City
will also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as
for the entire site - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code
Amendment 00-01, Development District Amendment 00-01, and Development Agreement
00-01.
1~ Planning Commission Minutes ~--~7-7- '~~'~ ~ May 24, 2000
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 00-01 -
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the Development
District zoning designation from Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units
per acre) to Mixed Use, and the establishment of a Senior Housing Overlay Distdct (SHOD),
including deviation from certain development standards for the residential portion of the base
district, for 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the
intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Ddve. The City will
also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as altematives
for the entire site - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment 00-01,
General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, and Development Agreement 00-01.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 00-01
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A Development Agreement between the
City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Northtown Housing Development Corp. for the purpose of
providing a Senior Housing Project per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay Distdct
(Section 27.020.040 of the Development Code) including deviation from certain development
standards for 80 senior apartment units and one manager unit on a Mixed Use site of 3.24 acres
of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande
Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Ddve - APN: 202-151-12. Related files:
Development Code Amendment 00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, and Development
District Amendment 00-01.
Alan Warren, Associate .Planner, presented the staff report.
Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing.
Peter Pitassi, AIA, 8439 White Oak Avenue, #105, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was representing
the applicant and they wished to continuing the matter to the next meeting because they were still
working on the Development Agreement. He indicated staff had requested, and the applicant had
agreed to, a Mixed Use designation. He reported that Northtown intends to develop the property
with a senior apartment project and does not intend to integrate retail or office uses into the project.
He observed there will be a design review application for the senior housing project. He said
construction will depend upon certain tax credits which they will apply for.
Chairman McNiel said he would be in favor of mixed use tied to this owner but he did not think that
was legal.
Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, confirmed that it is not legal to tie a use to a specific property
owner.
Mr. Pitassi stated the City Council was in favor of the Development District Amendment and they
were moving toward agreement regarding the Development Agreement.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Mannerino stated that the packing house is an interesting building and it was
unfortunate that it cannot be used. He thought it appropriate to continue the projects until the next
meeting so the Commission could see the Development Agreement at the same time.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated the project is greatly needed in the community and this would be a
good place for it.
Commissioner Stewart agreed.
Chairman McNiel reopened the public headng.
Planning Commission Minutes ~-~<~'-8- - May 24, 2000
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT 00-01, TO ESTABLISH MIXED USE DISTRICTS, WITH
ACCOMPANYING DEFINITIONS, PROCESSING PROVISIONS, AND
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BY AMENDING SECTIONS
17.06.010.C.1, 17.08.020, 17.08.030 AND 17.08.040.A OF THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
1. On May 24, 2000, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly-noticed public hearing with respect to the above-
referenced Development Code Amendment and, following the conclusion thereof, adopted its
Resolution No. , recommending that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
adopt said amendment.
2. On ,2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted
and concluded a duly-noticed public headng concerning the subject amendment to the
Development Code.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B. Ordinance.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct.
SECTION 2: This City Council hereby finds and determines that the subject amendment
identified in this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to
Section 15061 (b)(3) of Chapter 3 of Division 6 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
SECTION 3: The following sections hereby are amended to read, in words and figures, as
written below:
1. The following shall be added as Section 17.06.010.C.1.h to the Land Development
section of the Development Code:
"h. All projects within Mixed Used Districts."
2. The following shall be added as Section 17.08.020.G to the Residential section of the
Development Code:
"G. Mixed Use {MU). This district is intended as an area for a mix of residential and
non-residential uses, with site development regulations that assure development compatible
ii~_,_ _~ _~ith nearby lower density residential development, as well as internal compatibility among the
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.
DCA 00-01- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
June 14, 2000
Page 2
varying uses. Each location of this district is identified in Section 17.08.030F with percent
ranges for each permitted use that is identified. Each use that is so identified is identical to the
use definition listed elsewhere in the Development Code."
3. The following shall be added as Section 17.08.030.F to the residential section of the
Development Code:
"F. Mixed Use Districts - These districts have been created to implement the goals,
objectives, and land use designations of the General Plan. Each location where a Mixed Use
District is established will have the specific land uses that may be authorized for development
listed in this section."
4. The following shall be added as Section 17.08.040.A.3 to the residential section of
the Development Code:
"3. Mixed Use Development Standards. For the purposes of establishing guidance
for the application of individual land use regulations and development standards, all Mixed Use
District development proposals are subject to master planning procedures as outlined in Section
17.20.030. Existing development standards for each land use category, as provided in Sections
17.08 through 17.24, shall be the basis of standards for each category within a mixed use
development plan, but they may be modified by the City during the Master Plan review process.
Development agreements between the property owners and the City may be used as
implementation measures for any amended standards or review procedures."
SECTION 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this
Ordinance is, for any reason, deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of
any court of competent jurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision or
legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City
Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this
Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or work thereof, regardless
of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or words
might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent
legislation.
SECTION 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the .adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause
the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley
Daily Bulletin a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and
circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CiTY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 00-01, TO ESTABLISH A MIXED
USE DISTRICT, WITH ACCOMPANYING DEFINITIONS, PROCESSING
PROVISIONS, AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, BY AMENDING
SECTIONS 17.06.010.C.1, 17.08.020, 17.08.030 AND 17.08.040.A OF THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND MAKING FINDINGS
IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for Development Code
Amendment 00-01, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application."
2. On May 24, 2000, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded
said hearing on that date.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
'NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on May 24, 2000, and June 14, 2000, including written and oral staff
reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property located within the City; and
b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment.
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. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan
and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan
and with related development by permitting joint development of varying uses already listed in the
General Plan; and
b. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code
by allowing the innovative use of existing development standards to expand the range of uses within
a development project; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
DCA 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
June 14, 2000
Page 2
c. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity by mandating the
continued use of existing development procedures and standards for Mixed Use districts; and
d. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and is
consistent with the objectives the Development Code by continuing a policy of encouraging quality
development through the innovative application of existing design standards.
4. This Commission hereby finds that the project has been prepared and reviewed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines
promulgated thereunder, and further, specifically finds that based upon substantial evidence, it can
be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendment will have a significant
effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed amendment is exempt pursuant to State
CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b) (3).
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby recommends approval of Development Code Amendment 00-01 by the
adoption of the attached City Council Ordinance.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
THE CITY OF
I~ANCHO CIJCAH ONGA
Staff Report
DA'rE: June 14, 2000
TO.' Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
00-0lA - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to
change the General Plan land use designation from Commercial and Medium-
High Residential (14-24 dwelling unit.s per acre) to Mixed Use for 3.24 acres of
land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection
with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive. The City
will also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and
Office as alternatives for the entire site- APN: 202-151-12. Related files:
Development Code Amendment 00-01, Development District Amendment 00-
01, and Development Agreement 00-01.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AMENDMENT 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP.- A
request to change the Development District zoning designation from General _ _...,-.--.
Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to
Mixed Use, and the establishment of a Senior Housing Overlay District
(SHOD), including deviation from certain development standards for the
residential portion of the base district, on 3.24 acres of land located on the east
side of Amethyst Street, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and
north of the intersection with Lomita Drive. The Citywill also consider Medium-
High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as alternatives for
the entire site - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code
Amendment 00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, and Development
Agreement 00-01.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 00-
01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP.- A Development
Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Northtown
Housing Development Corp. for the purpose of providing a Senior Housing
Project per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section
27.020.040 of the Development Code) including deviation from certain
development standards for 80-96 senior apartment units and one manager unit
on a Mixed Use site of 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst
Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the
intersection with Lomita Drive - APN: 202-151-12. Related files:
ITEMS H, I, J
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 00-0lA, DCA 00-01, DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
June 14, 2000
Page 2
Development Code Amendment 00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, and
Development District Amendment 00-01.
BACKGROUND: The public hearings on these items are continued from the May 24, 2000,
Planning Commission meeting. At the meeting, staff presented the analysis of the land use
issues along with explanations of the proposed Development Code provisions to enact the
Mixed Use District. The Commissioners present at the last meeting were inclined to favor the
Mixed Use designation with a Medium-High Residential component as long as it was proposed
as part of a senior residence project. Because the Development Agreement for the Senior
Overlay Housing District was not ready for consideration, the items were continued to this
meeting. No public comments were received at or prior to the May 24, 2000, meeting.
Please note the following items were incorrectly listed in the May 24, 2000, report:
In the third sentence of the Project Density section, it should read," .... be applied to the
Medium-High Residential component to permit the development of senior apartments and one
manager unit to occupy the entire site." In the end of the last paragraph, it should read, ".., the
unit count could be as high as .8~ 9_~7 units.
In the third and fourth sentences of the General section underANALYSIS, it should read, "As
stated above, the maximum residential units count for the site under the proposed land use is
77 and 8~ 9'/with a SHOD. The current amount of multiple family land within the site would
allow for 13 to 23 units under the base designation and 4-~ up to 29 units with a SHOD."
Since all the items were continued, the May 24, 2000, report is attached for the Commissioners'
reference. Because an adjustment was made in the amount of density bonus units, from a
preliminary concept amount of 80 to the full 25 percent bonus, a new Environmental
Assessment was circulated and the Development Agreement application was re-adver[ised,
with an amended description, for this meeting. This report will focus on the Development
.._... Agreement for the Senior Housing Overlay District.
ANALYSIS:
A. Senior Housing Overlay District and Development Agreement: It is the applicant's intent
to fully develop the property with a 100 percent senior housing project. The Development
Agreement has been drafted to satisfying minimum income levels of 80 percent of the
median annual income of the SHOD provisions. In a separate Regulatory Agreement with
the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, the property owner has agreed to Iow
cost housing levels that exceed (providing 30, 45 and 50 percent of the Annual Median
Income levels) the housing provisions of the Development Code. Reference to this
Regulatory Agreement is included in the SHOD Development Agreement.
With this proposal, the Office option would not be a part of the development. With this
intent, a request for a Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD) has been included in order
for the future development to benefit from revised standards that are appropriate for senior
housing projects.
The applicant's initial plan called for 81 total units, well below the 25 percent density bonus
that can be authorized under SHOD provisions. Because the plan has not been submitted
for Design Review, the applicant has requested that the agreement provide for the full 25
percent bonus to provide flexibility in the design process. At this percentage, the site
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 00-0lA, DCA 00-01, DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
June 14, 2000
Page 3
could be permitted 97 units. The Agreement calls for the minimum of .7 parking spaces
per senior unit (as authorized in SHOD code provisions), and one (1) space for the
manager's unit, ith the eventual parking count subject the Development Review process.
Staff is recommending between .7 and one (1) parking space per senior units, and two (2)
spaces for the manager's unit. The .7 spaces are expected to be sufficient, but staff would
like to be able to consider up to one (1) space per unit if, in the final design, significant two
bedroom units are proposed. Reductions in open space, setbacks from drive aisles, etc.,
are in keeping with previous SHOD agreements, and can be considered in the
Development Review process. The application of SHOD standards will only affect the
residential portion of the Mixed Use category. Refer to the Development Agreement
Resolution and its attachments to review the specifics of the agreement.
The site satisfies the location requirements of the SHOD by having, within walking
distance, various services such as food shopping, drug stores, banks, medical and dental
facilities, and public transit. These facilities are located at intersections of Base Line Road
and Amethyst Street, and Archibald Avenue and Base Line Road.
B. Environmental Assessment: Parts I and II of the initial Study have been completed and
the Notice of Intent re-cimulated for all the applications. Staff has determined that no
significant impacts would result from changing the land use designations as requested in
the application. Environmental issues will need to be analyzed when formal development
proposals are submitted in the future. When specific development projects are proposed,
existing environmental review requirements will be initiated to ensure adequate analysis of
impacts. Any significant impacts noted will be mitigated through the City's development
review process.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners
within a 300-foot radius, and including an expanded area beyond the 300-foot radius, of the
project site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the
City Council issue a Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment 00-0lA,
Development District Amendment 00-01, and Development Agreement 00-01 by adoption of the
attached Resolutions.
Brad Buller
City Planner
BB:AVV~ma
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Planning Commission Staff Report, May 24, 2000
Exhibit "B" - Draft Minutes for Planning Commission Meeting, May 24, 2000
Resolution Recommending Approval of General Plan Amendment 00-01A
Resolution Recommending Adoption of Development District Amendment
00-01
THE CITY OF
I~AN C ~I 0 ClICAMONGA
Sti ffRe rt
DATE: May 24, 2000
TO:. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
00-0lA - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to
change the General Plan land use designation from Commemial and Medium-
High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use for 3.24 acres of
land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with
La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive. The City will
also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office
as alternatives for the entire site - APN: 202-151-12. Related files:
Development Code Amendment 00-01, Development District Amendment 00-01,
and Development Agreement 00-01.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AMENDMENT 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A
request to change the Development District zoning designation from General
Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to
Mixed Use, and the establishment of a Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD),
including deviation from certain development standards for the residential portion
of the base district, on 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst
Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the
intersection with Lomita Drive. The City will also consider Medium-High
Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as alternatives for the
entire site- APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment
00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-01A, and Development Agreement 00-01.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 00-01
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A Development
Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Northtown Housing
Development Corp. for the purpose of providing a Senior Housing Project per the
requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 27.020.040 of the
~ Development Code) including deviation from certain development standards for
· ~ 80 senior apartment units and one manager unit on a Mixed Use site of 3.24
acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the
1B intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive
- APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment 00-01,
General Plan Amendment 00-01A, and Development District Amendment 00-01.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 00-0lA, DCA 00-01, DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
May 24, 2000
Page 2
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Project Density: The applications are a request to change the land use General Plan and'
Development District designations to Mixed Use categories that would permit the
development of the subject site to all Medium-High Residential, all Office, or a mix of the
two. The site is presently divided between Medium-High Residential (.95 acres -
29.3 percent) and Commercial (2.29 acres - 70.7 percent) designations. With the
amended land use designations, the applicant is also requesting a Senior Housing Overlay
District (SHOD) be applied to the Medium Residential component to permit the
development of senior apartments and one manager unit to occupy the entire site. Under
the Medium-High component (100 percent of the site), 45 to 77 multiple family units could
be permitted. With a density bonus (up to 25 percent) that can be authorized with a
SHOD, the unit count could be as high as 96 units.
B. Surroundinq Land Use and Zonin.q:
North Alta Loma Elementary School - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units
per acre)
South & East - Small commercial shops, unused railroad corridor, water storage facility
and multiple family residential complex - General Commercial and
Medium High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre)
West Small commercial shops and a single-family residential neighborhood -
General Commercial and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre)
C. General Plan Designations:
Project Site Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per
acre)
North Elementary school
South Railroad and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre)
East Railroad and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre)
West Commercial and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre)
D. Site Characteristics: The site is mostly level, slopping gently to the south, and it has
several trees in the northeast and southeast corners of the site. The site has been cleared
under a previous demolition permit of an old citrus packinghouse.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The request proposes to change a 3.24 acres parcel that is roughly divided
between Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to
Mixed Use. The Mixed Use designation for this property is drafted to permit 0-100 percent
Commercial and 0-100 percent Medium-High Residential. As stated above, the maximum
residential units count for the site under the proposed land use is 77 and 95 with a SHOD.
The current amount of multiple family land within the site would allow for 13 units under
the base designation and 16 units with a SHOD. The current designations do not permit
the development of the entire site for multiple family uses.
B. Appropriateness of Existinq Land Use Desiqnations: The front two-third's of the site is
designated Commercial, which is complementary with existing commercial sites along
both sides of Amethyst Street. Expansion of this portion with retail shops would enhance
the historic downtown Alta Loma with new commercial growth. The commercial portion,
however, blocks the Medium-High Residential portion from any street frontage. This
arrangement could make the development of the easterly portion difficult with no inherent
development standards to work with the two dissimilar uses.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 00-0lA, DCA 00-01, DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
May 24, 2000
Page 3
C. Appropriateness of Proposed Designation: The division of the proposed Mixed Use
District is 0-100 percent Office and 0-100 percent Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per
acre). From the non-residential standpoint, the Office portion offers a reduction in land
use intensity with most retail uses permitted being only in support of office activities. The
multiple family portion will expand significantly in area and, as a result, in the number of
potential units. The intensity of residential development (units per acre) will not be
affected. The application of development standards will be guided by those amendments
enacted by the accompanying Development Code Amendment 00-01.
D. Senior Housing Overlay District and Development Agreement: It is the applicant's intent to
fully develop the property with a 100 percent senior housing project. The Development
Agreement has be drafted to satisfying minimum income levels of 80 percent of the
median annual income, of the SHOD provisions. In a separate Regulatory Agreement with
the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, the property owner has agreed to Iow
cost housing levels that exceed (providing 30, 45, and 50 percent of the Annual Median
Income levels) the housing provisions of the Development Code. Reference to this
Regulatory Agreement will be included in the SHOD Development Agreement.
With this proposal, the Office option would not be a part of the development. With this
intent, a request for a Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD) has been included in order
for the future development to benefit from revised standards that are appropriate for senior
housing projects.
The senior housing project will exceed the density limits but will be within the SHOD's
25 percent bonus limit. Staff is recommending between .7 and I parking space per senior
units and 2 spaces for the manager's unit. Reductions in open space, setbacks from drive
aisles, etc., are in keeping with previous SHOD agreements, as well as providing for
retention of the affordable housing features. The application of SHOD standards will only
affect the residential portion of the Mixed Use category. Refer to the Development
Agreement Resolution and its attachments to review the specifics of the agreement.
The site satisfies the location requirements of the SHOD by having, within walking
distance, various services such as food shopping, drug stores, banks, medical and dental
facilities, and public transit. These facilities are located at intersections of Base Line Road
and Amethyst Street, and Archibald Avenue and Base Line Road.
The Development Agreement is still being revised and the applicant has requested that it
be reviewed on June 14, 2000. Because of proposed changes, the item will be
re-advertised for the June 14 meeting.
E. Alternatives: The alternatives listed for review are the two land uses, Medium-High
Residential and Office, that being considered in the Mixed Use scenario. With only
Medium-High Residential (minimum lot size of 3 acres), the site could be developed as a
senior housing project as outlined in Item's "A" and "D" and with a SHOD. A total Office
designation could result in a development of approximately 35,000 square feet of floor
area without the possibility of any residential component. With the site a significant
distance off Base Line Road it does not seem likely that this amount of office space will be
possible without a great deal more commercial activity in the area. In addition, with a large
part of the site tucked some 700 feet off Amethyst Street, the site's viability for this amount
of office development is questionable.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 00-0lA, DCA 00-01, DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
May 24, 2000
Page 4
The main benefits for the Mixed Use designation are as follows:
1. The "hard dividing line" between a multiple family project and office project is not
required in the Mixed Use. Architects will be required to design internal compatibility
between the two uses and associated site facilities, which can make the concerns of
multiple uses more acceptable.
2. The mix of varying uses would allow the developer to provide the most viable blend
of activities on the site.
F. Environmental Assessment: Parts I and II of the Initial Study have been completed. Staff
has determined that no significant impacts would result from changing the land use
designations as requested in the application. Environmental issues will need to be
analyzed when formal development proposals are submitted in the future for the senior
housing project. When specific development projects are proposed, existing
environmental review requirements will be initiated to ensure adequate analysis of
impacts. Any significant impacts noted will be mitigated through the City's development
review process.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners
within a 300-foot radius, and including an expanded area beyond the 300-foot radius, of the
project site.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: A neighborhood meeting was held on the evening of May 16,
2000, at the Lions West Community Center. The applicant invited those property owners listed
for the public hearing notice. Three area property owners were in attendance along with the
project architect, applicant representative, RDA and Planning staff members, and Mayor Pro
Tern Diane Williams. Questions that where raised regarded the cost of the property and project,
rental rates, who would manage the senior project, and whether the City will make any money
from the project. RDA staff addressed these questions. No one spoke against the project
concept. Concerns were brought up regarding potential increase in traffic congestion near the
elementary school. The architect stated that special design considerations will be studied for
the project's access points when the precise site plan is proposed through the City's design
review process.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive testimony and
discuss General Plan Amendment 00-0lA and Development District Amendment 00-0lA and
continue those items to June 14, 2000, for action in conjunction with the Development
Agreement. Staff also recommends that the Commission continue Development Agreement
00-01 to be re-advertised for June 14, 2000.
City Planner
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - General Plan Land Use Map
Exhibit "B" - Development District Map
Exhibit "C" - Initial Study
Resolution Recommending of Approval General Plan Amendment 00-01A
Resolution Recommending Approval of Development District Amendment 00-01
GPA 00-0lA- Existing General Plan Land Use
~'~'~ ~::::::::~ ~: ....... ~ ~
GPA 00-0lA
RDA Senior Housing Site
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::.:::.::. Low Residential :::::
::::::::::l I:::: :~tttttttttt~tttt
' Lomita Dr. ~ EOA site
::::::::::::::::: ......... : ..... ~= GP ~nd Use Designations
:;:;;::::;:::;:;:~[~[[~[~:~[~; Commercial ~ COMMERCI~
::~::~[::~::::~::~[~::~[~::~ ~{~{{{{{* ~ ELEMENT~YSCHOOL
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ttttttt** ~HIGH
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: =tit ~ MEDIUM
~ ~ ~~ ~[[~ ~NEIGHBORHOODCOMMERCI~
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~
Baseline
m
x= DDA00-01 - Existing Development District Map
L~e St.
'~ Lomita Dr.
GP Land Use Designations
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ,**o*o**o~o ~COMMERCIALGENERAL
................................. ~°** ~ MEDIUM
Baseline Rd.
no scale
N
NVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION FORM
(Part I - Initial Study)
(909) 477-2750
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 CEQAo 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 perfom3 work required to provide missing
information.
Application Numberforthe project to which this form pertains: ~ ~ C)O -~) I t~/ D D ~ oc~-oI ~ ~t{ o0-o ~
Project Title: Senior Apartraent Pro.~ect
Name&Addressofprejectowner(s): Redevelopment ~genc¥~ City of Rancho Cucamonqa¢
MS. Linda Daniels, 10500 Civic Center Driver Rancho Cucamonga.
CA 91730
Nanle & Address of developer or project sponsoc Northtown Housing Development Corp.,
Mr. Nacho Gracia, 9999 Feron Blvd., Ste. A, Rancho Cucamonqa,
CA 91730
Contact Person & Address: Peter J. Pitassi, AIA, Architect
8439 White Oak Ave., Ste. 105
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Telephone Numbe~' ( 9 0 9 ) 9 8 O- 1 3 6 1
Name & Address of person prepadng this form (if different from above): Same as above
Telephone Number:.
INITSTD1.WPD-4196 //~/ 4 3m Page1
Information indicated by astedsk (') 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 photographs which show representative views into the site from the north, south, east and west;
views into and from the site from the priraary access points which serve the site; and representative views of significant
features frern the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph.
3) Project Location (descdbe): East side of Amethyst Street, north of
Baseline Road
4) AssessoWs Parcel Nurnbera (attach additional sheet if necessary): 202 - ! 4 ! - 12
'5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. fl.): 3.24 acres
· 6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications): 3.24 a c r e s
Desc~eanypreposedgeneralp~naraendmentorzonechangewh~hwoulda~ct~epreje~s~ ~chadditionalsheet
~necessa~
This application will remove the existing "GC" and "MH"
designations from the site and establish a Mixed Use land use and
zoning category, permittinq a potential mix of multiple family
(0 to 100% land ratio) and office (0 to !00% land ratio) uses over the
entire site. A "SHOD" will also be requested for any residential portio~
Include a desc~tion of all perroits wh~h wifl be necessary frere ~e Ci~ of Rancho Cucareonga and °ther g°vemreenta~ ?~ e~ ~
agencies~o~erto~iropleraenttheproject:
Design Review Approval, Grading Plan, Building Permits,
STreet Improvement Permits.
g) Descdbe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including infonwation on topography, soil stability, plants
and anireals, reature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Descdbe 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 hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies):
The site has been cleared under previous permit for demol~t~nn
of the old packing house. There are several trees in the northeast
and southwest corners of the site. These will be retained if
possible.
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 home to the Alta Loma Citrus Heights Packing House
which provided sorting, packing, and shipping of citrus from
local growers.
11) Describe any n~ise s~urces and their ~eve~s that n~w a~ect the site (aircratt~ raadway n~ise~ etc~) and h~w they wi~~ a~ect
proposed uses:
None ·
Desc~emepmposedproject~ ~shou~pmvideana~qua~sc~tionofmes~soful#ma~usewhich
will ~s~t f~m me p~sed p~jecL ~dicate ~ mem a~ p~posed phases ~r ~velopmen~ me extent of ~velopment ~ occur
WRh each phase, and me anticipa~d complan of each ~c~men~ A~ additional sheet~ · necessa~
With ~his application it is the applicant's intention to
eventually develop senior apartments. The General Plan Amendment
and Development District Amendment will allow this type of
development for the entire site, or any portion thereof. The
combined applications include a request for a "Senior Housing
Overlay District" for any residential portion of the site.
The Mixed Use cateQories, as presently drafted (0-100% mule{pie
family and 0-100% office), will also permit the use of the
property for office development.
De sc~e me sun.~unding pr~pe~ies~ ~duding ~a~n ~n p~ants and an~a~ and a~ c~tu~ h~t~a~ ~r scen~ a~ec~.
Ind~ate me type of ~nd use ~siden~ comme~ia~ e~.), ~tens~ of ~nd use ~ne-~m~ apadment houses, shes,
d~adment s~ms, e~.) and sca~ of development ~e~h~ ~n~ge, setba~ mar ya~ e~.):
This site is in the historic "downtown" of old Alta Loma. It is
a mixed use area with single family homes, small businesses,
and Alta Loma Elementary School.
14) ~mepmp~sedp~ectchang~thepa~em~sca~e~rcha~cter~fthesurr~undinggene~ama~fthepmject?
NO, the pattern w~ll be enhanced. Senior citizens will be
located in an established area with access to transportation,
local retail sites, and services.
co~merclal character by following'the Czty's development ~eview
n?arby developed areas. An office development on this site ~ould
still has retail shops and offices in use.
15) Indicate the type of sho~-terrn and long-term noise/o be generated, including source and amount, How will these noise levels
affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What methods of sound proofing ara proposed?
No significant noise sources will be created with this proposal.
'16) Indicate proposed removals and/or rap/acements of mature or scenic trees:
None.
17) Indicateanybodiesofwater(inc/udingdomesticwatersupplies) intowhichthesitedrains:
Drainage will be accommoda%ed by local storm drains.
18) Indicate expecled amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please conlact
the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at 987-2591.
a. Residential(gal/day) 32,400 Peak use (gal/Day) 64,800 ~ 100%
or b. Commercial/Ind.(gal/day/ac) 9720 gal/day Peakuse(gal/min/ac)lg,440 gal/day 8 100%
19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. __ Septic Tank x Sewer. If septic tanks aro proposed, attach
percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage syslem is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See
AttachmentA forusage estimates). Forfurtherclafification, p/ease contact the Cucamonga County WaterDist~ctatg$7-2591.
a. Residential(gal/day) 16,200 gal/day
b. Commercial/Tnd. (gal/day/ac) 6,480 ga 1/day
RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS:
20) Numberofresidenlialunits:
Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size:
A~ached ~dicatewhetherunitsam rontalor~rsaleunit~:
80 rental senior apartments with
1 manager's apartment
21) Anticipated range of sale pdces and/or rents:
Sale Pdce(s) $ to $.
Rent (per month) $ 220.00 to $. 476.00
22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type:
72 1 bedroom, ! bath units
8 2 bedroom, 2 bath units
23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type:
We assume 1.5 persons/bedroom
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: N · A ·
b. Junior High:
c. Senior High
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS
25) Descrfbe type ~f use(s) and rnaj~r functi~n(s) ~f c~mmercia~~ industria~ ~r instituti~na~ uses:
The s~te couZd be developed as an off~ce use with on site
parkinq.
~talflooraroaofcommeroial, industda~or~stitu§onalusesbytype:
Approximately 50,000-60,000 sq. ft. of office space could
possibly be accommodated with on site parking.
INITSTDI.WPD - 4/96 ,,~ /~, j /,~ Page6
27) Indicate hours of operation: Normal Business Hours of 8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. would be anticipated.
28) Number of employees: Total'. Office use could support 125-140 occupants
Maximum Shift:
Time of Maximum Shift:
29) Pr~vide breakd~wn ~f anticipatedj~b c~assi~cati~ns~ inc~uding wage and sa~at7 ranges~ as we~~ as an indicati~n ~f the rate
of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary):
Unknown at this time.
30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City:
Unknown at this time.
'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 Dist#ct, at (818) 572-6283):
No s~an~ficant ~our~e.
.ALL PROJECTS
32) Have the water~ sewer~ ~re~ and ~~~d c~ntrc~ agencies sen/ing the pr~ject been c~ntacted t~ deterrnine their abi~ity t~ pr~vide
adequate sen/ice to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response.
Al! services are avaiZable and able to serve the site.
,NITSTDl.WPD-4196 ~ % J-/~ Page?
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 am not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and
herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above.
Please list the reatedals and descdbe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if
known.
None which we are aware of at this time.
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 matedals 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.
NO
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above ~~its present the data and information required for
adequate evaluation of this project to the best of~'~ ability, t/bel/l'h~ rac~ statements, and infonwation presented are true and
correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief.~ fu~her u~e~fa~ that/~dd,~ional infon'nation may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaluation can be ma~y the Ci~o~
INITSTD1.WPD-4196 ~/ ~ J /7 Page8
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1. Project Files: General Plan Amendment 00-01A, Development District Amendment 00-01,
Development Agreement 00-01
2. Related Files: Development Code Amendment 00-01
3. Description of Project: A request to change the General Plan and Development District
land use designations from Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Commercial
to Mixed Use with allowances for 0-100 pement Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre)
0-100 percent Office land use development with a Senior Housing Overlay District for 3.24
acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La
Grande Street and north of Lomita Drive and accompanying Development Agreement -
APN: 202-151-12.
4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Northtown Housing Development Corp.
9999 Feron Boulevard, #A
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
5. General Plan Designation: Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Commercial
6. Zoning: Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Commemial
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: On the north side there is an existing elementary
school, on the east there is multiple family housing, and an unused rail line, on the south
there is an unused rail line, commercial shops and water storage facilities, and to the west
there is a old single family neighborhood and commercial shops.
8. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
9. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Alan Warren, AICP
(909) 477-2750
10. Other agencies whose approval is required:
None
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 2
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is "Potentially Significant impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless
Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
(x) Land Use and Planning (x) Transporlation/Cimulation (x) Public Services
(x) Population and Housing (x) Biological Resoumes ( ) Utilities and Service Systems
(x) Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources (x)Aesthetics
(x).Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Cultural Resources
(x) Air Quality (x) Noise (x) Recreation
( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
(x) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon
the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant
Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation incorporated." An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects
1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and
2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Signed: ~~
AlarVWarren; AI~P~'-~',-----'''''~
Associate Planner
April 27, 2000
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 3
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation
is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation
Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to
mitigate the significant effects identified.
Significant
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposah
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) (x) ( )
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project? ( ( ) (x)
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the
vicinity? ( ( ) (x)
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community? ( (x) ( )
Comments:
a-d) The application is requesting land use changes for a 3.24 acre parcel that is
presently designated with a split land use and zoning designations of Medium High
and Commemial. The GPA and DDA actions will permit these uses to be developed
on the property, but without a hard line delineating the potential separation of the
uses. The applicant's intent is to develop 100 pement of the site as a senior housing
project with 80 senior units and one manager unit. The Mixed Use designation is
new to the immediate area; however, the allowance for Medium-High Residential
uses and Office uses is not too much different from the nearby single-family, multiple
family, and historic Alta Loma commercial activities.
The potential mix of multiple family and office uses on the same site can present
inherent design difficulties when t~ing to provide compatible land use relationships.
The City's design review process will provide the avenue to ensure that appropriate
design criteria is used in the approved project plan. If developed at 100 percent
senior housing, then the compatibility concerns will be significantly reduced.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 4
Significant
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either
directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)? ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
a-b) No construction approval will result from this application. The application has been
made in anticipation of the owner's submitting a senior housing project. Construction
activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area.
The proposed project will result in 80 senior housing units and one manager's unit
in the Medium-High Density Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per acre). The
proposed project expands the potential residential use of the site to the full
3.24 acres. Through the GPA process and the residential nature of the nearby area,
this project will not result in a significant increase in population not otherwise planned
by the City in its forecasts.
c) The site is currently void of any structures. No existing housing is located on-site.
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in
or expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 5
Comments:
a-c) No known faults pass through the site, it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it
in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault. The Red
Hill Fault, or Etiwanda Avenue Fault, passes within 4 miles east of the site, and the
Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 3 miles north. These faults are both capable
of producing Mw 6.0 - 7.0 earthquakes, respectively. Also, the San Jacinto Fault,
capable of producing up to Mw7.5 earthquakes is 7 miles northeast of the site and the
San Andreas Fault, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 12.5 miles northeast of the
site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering to the Uniform
Building Code will ensure that geologic impacts are less than significant.
d) The site is not located near a large body of water.
e) The site is relatively flat, and it is not near any slopes vulnerable to mass-wasting
events.
f-h) The site is relatively flat so grading will be minimal. Grading will even out the site and
create the necessary slope gradient to allow proper site drainage and avoid erosion.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the Building and Safety Division will require a
soils report. New structures are required to meet current earthquake standards as
required by the Uniform Building Code. The impact is not considered significant.
i) The site contains no unique geologic or physical features. It was once the site of a
major packinghouse that was built during the expansion of the area's citrus growing
industry..
Significant
4. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
b) Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration
of surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations, or through substantial loss of
groundwater recharge c.apability? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 6
Significartt
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of
groundwater otherwise available for public water
supplies? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
a) Development with impervious surfaces will affect the rate and amount of surface
water runoff. This land use amendment should not significantly affect the amount
of change anticipated in previous environmental analysis of the existing land use
plans.
b) The site is not located within any 100-year flood plain. A 100-year flood area is about
a Y2 mile north of the site that is partially contained within an under ground drain and
surface drainage channel. The 100-year flood area does not extend to the site.
c-e) The project site is not located near a body of water. Storm-water runoff will be
conveyed to the existing public storm drain system as approved by the City Engineer.
f-i) The project will not interfere with groundwater management practices in the
area because the site is not used for groundwater recharging.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposah
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to
an existing or projected air quality violation? (x) ( )
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) (x)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate? ( ) (x)
d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) (x)
Comments:
a-b) Development will affect the amount of air pollution in the general area. This land use
amendment should not significantly affect the amount of change anticipated in
previous environmental analysis of the existing land use plans.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 7
c-d) After the land use amendment is approved, it is the applicant's intent to propose a
project to construct 80 senior residences and one manager unit on 3.24 acres. This
will not generate emissions that could cause climatic changes or objectionable
odors.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ( (x) ( )
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ( ) (x)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to
nearby uses? ( ) ( ( ) (x)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) (x)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? ( ) ) ( ) (x)
g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ) (x) ( )
Comments:
a) As a result of development, additional vehicle and pedestrian traffic will occur
because the site is presently vacant. Similar increases would also occur if the
property were to develop under the existing land use categories. No significant
increase in traffic is anticipated from development under the amended land use
categories. Similar increases would also occur if the property were to develop under
the existing land use categories. No significant increase in traffic is anticipated from
development under the amended land use categories. Since vehicle traffic is
generally less for a senior housing project, the new traffic levels should actually be
less than under any multiple family/commercial development authorized under the
present land use categories.
b-f) The future senior housing development proposal will be required to meet the City's
existing street development policies and no significant impacts are anticipated.
g) No rail impacts are anticipated. The site is, however, adjacent to a former rail line
that is owned by SANBAG, the local council of governments. This land is being held
by SANBAG as a potential light rail transit route if such a transportation service is
warranted in the future. If the rail line is revitalized, the City will work with SANBAG
to ensure that design features are incorporated in to the transit system that mitigates
significant impacts to the adjoining properties.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Pac, le 8
I In'°actP°teatiallySigrfifica~llmpact Less I
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their
habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees,
eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.,
eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and
vernal pool)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
a) The site is not identified on the City's special habitat areas map for special
environmental analysis.
b-c) The site is an abandoned citrus packinghouse site with some mature trees along the
northern boundary to the east. During the Design Review process for the proposed
senior housing project the health of the trees should be investigated and efforts
should be made to retain them within the ultimate project design
d) There is no riparian or wetland habitat on-site.
e) The project site is cut off from healthy, undisturbed native habitats and bands of non-
native vegetation. It is not in a migration corridor.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of future value to
the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 9
Comments:
a-b) The project will not conflict with any energy conservation plans nor be wasteful.
c) The project site is not located near any known mineral resource.
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited
to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of
potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
a,c-d) An environmental closure report was generated for the site when the citrus packing
house was demolished. The analysis of the soil samples "indicated that no local,
State or Federal hazardous waste levels were encountered on the soil during the
(consultants) investigation."
b) Any future development will be required to be designed to accommodate emergency
vehicles.
e) The site is not located in a fire hazard area.
10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( (x) ( )
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( (x) ( )
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 10
Comments:
a) The site is presently vacant and generates no noise levels. After development with
a housing project, noises associated with single family housing projects is expected.
This level is expected to be less than significant to the surrounding area's ambient
noise levels.
b) Any future residential project could be affected by noise generated from a roused rail
road right-of-way that borders the south property line. Through the City's Design
Review process, mitigation measures will be required of any multiple-family project
developed under the Medium-High Residential standards.
11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
a-e) The project site is in an area originally zoned Medium-High Residential and
Commercial. The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan for services was based
on the assumption this parcel would have 14-24 dwellings per acro for about half of
the site and commercial on the remaining portion. The project site, if changed as
proposed, will result in 100 percent of the site as an 81 unit senior housing project
that should not significantly affect public service needs. Standard conditions of
approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project. No
mitigation is required.
Fire and Police protection - Additional protection will be required for the increased
population and number of homes. However, as the project requires fewer resoumes
than are accommodated within the General Plan, the impact is less than significant.
Schools - Most any multiple family projects will generate additional students. The
number of students generated by a senior project of 81 total units, however, should
be significantly less, if not zero than the amount generated by a multiple family
development under the existing land use categories. The eventual senior housing
project will incrementally decrease the need for schools while still providing for
increased population growth. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga
General Plan and Development Impact Fees established by the school district, the
developer will pay all appropriate development impact fees.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 11
Parks - The proposed project will incrementally increase the need for park and
recreation services through the potential for increased population growth. Consistent
with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development impact Fee
Schedules adopted by the City Council, the developer will pay all appropriate
development impact fees.
Public facilities -The proposed project will incrementally increase traffic on adjacent
streets. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and
Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council, the developer will
pay all appropriate development impact fees.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ) (x)
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
.Comments:
a-g) The residential'development.anticipated to be built after the land use change will
include the construction of 80 senior units and one manager's unit. The proposed
development will extend as necessary existing systems and utilities available in the
immediate area. The proposed project will not require major modifications or
alterations to the existing utility systems.
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 12
Comments;
a-b) The surrounding area is developed and includes other residential neighborhoods.
Any future housing development will blend with existing surroundings.
c) Any future project will create new light and glare, as the site is currently vacant. Low
pressure sodium vapor lights should be used to minimize excess glare while creating
safe lighting conditions. Landscaping will be in accordance with City landscaping
requirements for residential neighborhoods and will buffer the site. The impact is not
considered significant.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Disturb amhaeological resoumes? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Affect historical or cultural resoumes? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within
the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
a-e) The site is on an alluvial fan, an environment not generally associated with fossils.
An archeological survey performed for the Victoria Community Plan showed very
little likelihood that any archeological sites are in the area. As the site is relatively
small and vacant, and has been previously disturbed, the likelihood of affecting
historical or cultural resources is minimal and impacts are not considered significant.
15. RECREATION. Would the proposah
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
a) Any proposed residential project will incrementally increase the need for park and
recreation services through population growth. The developer of any residential
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 13
project will pay the appropriate fees in accordance with Development Impact Fee
Schedules adopted by the City Council.
b) There is no impact to existing recreational opportunities as the site and property
surrounding the project area is designated for residential development.
16; MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the
potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of
a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or
eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) ( ) ( (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 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 that
are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable
future projects.) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have
environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
a) The project site does not contain Natural Resources as identified on Figure V-3 of
the General Plan. Additionally, the site does not contain any Coastal Sage Scrub,
Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, or Delhi-Sands flowering-loving fly habitat. No
sensitive species were detected on-site and it is unlikely any will move onto the site
due to the lack of natural habitat.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Pacje 14
b) During construction of any future development, there is the possibility of fugitive dust
to be emitted from grading the site. Nonetheless, dust emissions could be sufficient
to warrant the use of water or other dust palliatives at this site. Soumes of emissions
during this phase include exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and
equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of construction vehicles and
equipment traveling over exposed surfaces. NOxand PM~0 levels may be exceeded
during this phase. Possible mitigation measures will be investigated during the
environmental review of the Development Review process.
c) The developer of any residential project will be required to pay development impact
fees established by the City Council, the rates of which have been set to mitigate the
potential impacts to fire protection service, police protection services, parks and
recreational facilities, and other governmental services to less than significant. To
the extent that a project may impact utility resources provided by private utility
companies, potential impacts upon such services will be mitigated by payment of
rates and fees set by each utility agency. The project will also pay transportation
impact fees to mitigate incremental impacts to the traffic system.
d) Any proposed multiple family project on the 3.24 acres would not cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Therefore impacts are
less than significant.
EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,
one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following
earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and ara available for review in the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check ali that apply):
(x) General Plan EIR
(Certified April 6, 1981 )
(x)Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
(x) Environmental Closure Report Former Alta Loma Packing House, 7125 Amethyst
Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California, October 5, 1999
correspondence which the City has. He noted that the materials and files have been open to public
review since the application was submitted.
Commissioner Mannedno noted that the specified use will require a conditional use permit.
Chairman McNiel stated the use would be conditioned, not automatically permitted and the City
would still have those oversight options as well as denial available if the Industrial Area Spedfic Plan
is amended. He said he understood the need for automobile service stations, but the Haven
Avenue Oveday Distdct was established because the City did not want a lot of retail except for retail
which is ancillary to office uses along Haven Avenue. He noted that service stations were not
permitted other than the Haven Car Wash, which is very well hidden. He acknowledged that times
change and said he understood why the Commission was considering this application.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he had been on the Commission when the Haven Avenue Overlay
Distdct was approved and at that time the City did not want service stations there. However, he felt
the City has established a track record of obtaining attractive stations and he felt the City wold have
control on this because the station must be par[ of a master planned development.
Commissioner Stewad concurred that the City would have a lot of control. She noted that the letters
placed before them were not an overwhelming call for denial but rather included one in favor, one
asking that proper conditions be included, and one from the applicant in response to another letter.
Commissioner Tolstoy commented that service stations are ancillary uses to office uses.
Commissioner Mannedno believed it has been proven that service stations can be attractive and he
felt they are useful.
Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Mannedno, to adopt the resolution recommending
approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 99-05. Motion carded bythe following vote:
AYES: MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: MACIAS - carded
Chairman McNiel said he hoped he is on the Design Review Committee when the project comes
through because it should be the best service station that has ever been built.
C. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA-A proposal
to add a Mixed Use zoning district with accompanying definitions, processing provisions, and
development standards to the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. Related files: General
Plan Amendment 00-0lA, Development District Amendment 00-01, and Development
Agreement 00-01.
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-0lA -
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the General Plan
land use designation from Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per
acre) to Mixed Use for 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of
the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Ddve. The City
will also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as
alternatives for the entire site - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code
Amendment 00-01, Development District Amendment 00-01, and Development Agreement
00-01.
Planning Commission Minutes -7- /~--~ ~ ,_J'~'"'-3,~ May 24, 2000
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 00-01 -
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the Development
District zoning designation from Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units
per acre) to Mixed Use, and the establishment of a Senior Housing Oveday Distdct (SHOD),
including deviation from certain development standards for the residential portion of the base
district, for 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the
intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive. The Citywill
also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as alternatives
for the entire site - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment 00-01,
General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, and Development Agreement 00-01.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 00-01
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A Development Agreement between the
City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Northtown Housing Development Corp. for the purpose of
providing a Senior Housing Project per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District
(Section 27.020.040 of the Development Code) including deviation from certain development
standards for 80 senior apartment units and one manager unit on a Mixed Use site of 3.24 acres
of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande
Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive - APN: 202-151-12. Related files:
Development Code Amenriment 00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, and Development
Distdct Amendment 00-01.
Alan Warren, Associate .Planner, presented the staff report.
Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing.
Peter Pitassi, AIA, 8439 White Oak Avenue, #105, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was representing
the applicant and they wished to continuing the matter to the next meeting because they were still
working on the Development Agreement. He indicated staff had requested, and the applicant had
agreed to, a Mixed Use designation. He reported that Northtown intends to develop the property
with a senior apartment project and does not intend to integrate retail or office uses into the project.
He observed there will be a design review application for the senior housing project. He said
construction will depend upon certain tax credits which they will apply for.
Chairman McNiel said he would be in favor of mixed use tied to this owner but he did not think that
was legal.
Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, confirmed that it is not legal to tie a use to a specific property
owner.
Mr. Pitassi stated the City Council was in favor of the Development Distdct Amendment and they
were moving toward agreement regarding the Development Agreement.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public headng.
Commissioner Mannerino stated that the packing house is an interesting building and it was
unfortunate that it cannot be used. He thought it appropriate to continue the projects until the next
meeting so the Commission could see the Development Agreement at the same time.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated the project is greatly needed in the community and this would be a
good place for it.
Commissioner Stewart agreed.
Chairman McNiel reopened the public headng. _//
/
Planning Commission Minutes -8-,,,z'~! /! (../ ~._.._~ May 24, 2000
City Cucamonga
of
Rancho
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code.
Project File No.: General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, Development District Amendment 00-01, and
Development Agreement 00-01
Public Review Period Closes: May 24, 2000
' Project Name: Project Applicant: Charles Joseph Associates
Project Location (also see attached map): Located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the
intersection with La Grande Street and north of Lomita Drive and accompanying Development Agreement -
APN: 202-151-12.
Project Description: A request to change the General Plan and Development District land use designations
from Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Commercial to Mixed Use with allowances for 0-100
pement Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) 0-100 percent Office land use development with a Senior
Housing Overlay District for 3.24 acres of land.
FINDING
This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an
Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is
proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding:
[] The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant
effect on the environment.
[] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but:
(1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this
proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate
the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and
(2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a
significant effect on the environment.
If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required.
Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related
documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic
Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847.
NOTICE
The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period.
Date of Determination Adopted By
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-0lA, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT AND MAP PROVISIONS FROM
MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND
COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE WITH LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR
MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND
OFFICE USES FOR 3.24 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE EAST
SIDE OF AMETHYST STREET, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LA
GRANDE STREET AND NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LOMITA
DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -
APN: 202-151-12.
A. Recitals.
1. Northtown Housing Development Corporation has filed an application for General Plan
Amendment 00-0lA as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application."
2. On May 24, 2000, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on May 24, 2000, and June 14, 2000, including written and oral staff
reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. · The application applies to approximately 3.24 acres of land, basically a triangular
configuration, located on the east side of Amethyst Street, south of the intersection with La Grande
Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive, which is presently vacant. Said property is
currently designated as Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre);
and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated elementary school and is
developed with the Alta Loma Elementary School. The properties to the west are designated
Commercial and are developed with small retail shops. The properties to the east and south are
designated railroad and Medium-High Residential and are vacant and developed with an apartment
complexe; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
GPA 00-0lA - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
June 14, 2000
Page 4
I, Brad Bullerl 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 June 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
rTl
_-z. GPA 00-0lA- General Plan Land Use Map
:::::::::~ Change to Mixed Use
I LOW Residential ~
................................ tt!!tt!t!ttt!t RDAsite
L°mita Dr. ~i ~P Land Use Designations
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: --,iiii~i~ ~ COMMERCIAL
iiiiiiiiiiiii!!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Gomme~ia, ~ ELEMENTARY$CHOOL
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: tit° ~ MEDIUM
~ MEDIUM HIGH
· ~ MIXED USE
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~
================================================= ~ ~*~
Baseline Rd. .., ......... ,, ,~,~-,, &
no scale N
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
AN ORDINANCE TO ENACT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT
00-01, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP
AND DEVELOPMENT CODE FROM MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL (14-24
DWELLING UN ITS PER ACRE) AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MIXED
USE WITH A SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR 3.24 ACRES
OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF AMETHYST STREET,
SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LA GRANDE STREET AND
NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LOMITA DRIVE, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 202-151-12.
A. Recitals.
1. The Northtown Housing Development Corporation has filed an application for
Development District Amendment 00-01, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in
this Resolution, the subject Development District Amendment is referred to as "the application."
2. On May 24, 2000, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the associated General Plan
Amendment application and issued Resolution 00- , recommending to the City Council that
General Plan Amendment No. 00-0lA be approved.
3. On May 24, 2000, and June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng
on that date.
4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds 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 dudng the above-
referenced public hearing on May 24, 2000, and June 14, 2000, including wdtten and oral staff
reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to approximately 3.24 acres of land, basically a triangular
configuration, located on the east side of Amethyst Street, south of the intersection with La Grande
Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Ddve, which is presently vacant. Said properly is
currently designated as General Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per
acre); and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Medium Residential (8-14
dwelling units per acre) and is developed with the Alta Loma Elementary School. The properties to
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DDA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
June 14, 2000
Page 2
the west are designated General Commercial and are developed with small retail shops. The
properties to the east and south are designated Medium-High Residential and are vacant and
developed with apartment complexes; and
c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan
and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and
with related development; and
d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element;
and
e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent
properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding
properties.
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 subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district
in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area as
evidenced by its frontage on a public street, its size exceeding minimum size requirements for the
land use designation, and the evidence of conveniently located commercial facilities for a senior
population in the immediate area; and
b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the
environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the existing multiple-family and small
commercial activities in the immediate area; and
c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan which
contains provisions for Mixed Use land use designations.
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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DDA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
June 14, 2000
Page 3
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
headng, 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 recommends approval of Development District Amendment 00-01 to
establish a Mixed Use District at the site described in this Resolution, and as described in the wdtten
text of and shown in Exhibit "A" of the attached draft City Council ordinance.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AMENDMENT 00-01, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICTS MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE FROM MEDIUM-HIGH
RESIDENTIAL (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND GENERAL
COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE WITH A SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY
DISTRICT FOR 3.24 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
AMETHYST STREET, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LA
GRANDE STREET AND NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LOMITA
DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF~ APN: 202-151-
12.
A. Recitals.
1. The Nor[htown Housing Development Corporation has filed an application for
Development District Amendment No. 00-01, as described in the title ofthis Resolution. Hereinafter
in this Resolution, the subject Development District Amendment is referred to as "the application."
2. On May 24, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on an associated General Plan
Amendment application and issued Resolution No. 00- , recommending to the City Council that
General Plan Amendment No. 00-0lA be approved.
3. On May 24, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and recommended
approval of the application by the adoption of Resolution No. 00-
4. On June 21,2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly
noticed public headng on the associated General Plan Amendment application and issued
Resolution No. 00- , approving the associated General Plan Amendment No. 00-0lA.
5. On June 21,2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted as duly
noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng on that date.
6. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B. Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find,
determine, and ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Par[ A, of this Ordinance are true and correct.
SECTION 2: Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the
above-referenced public hearing on June 21,2000, including written and oral staff repods, together
with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
a) The application applies to approximately 3.24 acres of land, basically a triangular
configuration, located on the east side of Amethyst Street, south of the intersection with La Grande
?/
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.
DDA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
June 21,2000
Page 2
Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive, which is presently vacant. Said property is
currently designated as General Commercial General and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling
units per acre); and
b) The property to the north of the subject site is designated Medium Residential (8-14
dwelling units per acre) and is developed with the Alta Loma Elementary School. The properties to
the west are designated General Commercial and are developed with small retail shops. The
properties to the east and south are designated Medium-High Residential and are vacant and
developed with apartment complexes; and
c) This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan
and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and
with related development; and
d) This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element;
and
e) This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent
properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding
propedies.
SECTION 3: Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the
above-referenced public headng and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1
and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a) That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed distdct
in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area as
evidenced by its frontage on a public street, its size exceeding minimum size requirements for the
land use designation, and the evidence of conveniently located commercial facilities for a senior
population in the immediate area; and
b) That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the
environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the existing multiple family and small
commercial activities in the immediate area; and
c) That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan which
contains provisions for Mixed Use land use designations.
SECTION 4: Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative
Declaration, together with all wdtten and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for
the application, the City Council 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 City Council; and further, this Council has reviewed and considered the
information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application.
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.
DDA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
June 21,2000
Page 3
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 City Council 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 wildlifedepends.
Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports
and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public headng, the City
Council 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 5: Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and
4 above, this Council hereby approves Development District Amendment No. 00-01 to establish a
Mixed Use District at the site described in this Ordinance, as shown in Exhibit"A" of this Ordinance,
and described with the following text to be added to the Development Code as Section
17.08.030.F.1:
"I. Historic AIta Loma- Amethyst Site: This 3.24 acre site is located on the
east side of Amethyst Street, generally between the "T" intersections
extensions of Lomita Ddve and La Grande Street, in the odginal Alta Loma
downtown. The following table specifies the uses and range of development
that may be permitted on the site:
Percent Acreage
Land Use Mix Range Ranqe
Medium-High Residential ~ . 0% - 100% 0 - 3.24 acres
(14-24 dwelling units per acre)
Office 0% - 100% 0 - 3.24 acres
The land use categories within the mixed use area shall be of the character
and intensity as defined in Development Code Chapters17.08 and17.10. All
uses that may be authorized under the Office designation are subject to
Conditional Use Permit approval. The corresponding development standards,
as listed in Chapters 17.08 and 17.10, for each permitted land use shall be
applicable to development within the Mixed Use District."
SECTION 6: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance.
m
-~ DDA 00-01 - Development District Map
~ ~RDAsite
(,~ Lomita Dr. ~ GP Land Use Designations
...... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::1' ~LOW
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :2 ~MIXEDUSE
Baseline Rd.
no scale
N
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
TO ENTER INTO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 00-01, FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF 80-96 SENIOR APARTMENTS AND ONE MANAGER
UNIT IN THE MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (14-24
DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
AMETHYST STREET, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LA
GRANDE STREET AND NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LOMITA ' '
DRIVE, AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 65864 OF THE CALIFORNIA
GOVERNMENT CODE, FOR REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN,
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 202-151-12.
A. Recitals.
1. Northtown Housing Development Corporation has filed an application for Development
Agreement 00-01, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Development Agreement is referred to as "the application."
2. On 24th day of May 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted and concluded a duly noticed public headng on an associated General Plan Amendment
application and recommended to the City Council the adoption of General Plan Amendment 00-01A.
3. On May 24, 2000, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga conducted and concluded a duly noticed public headng on an associated
Development Distdct Amendment application and recommended to the City Council the adoption of
Development Distdct Amendment 00-01.
4. On May 24, 2000, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application and concluded
said headng on that date.
5. The subject property of the Development Agreement is legally described herein.
6. A true and correct copy of the proposed Development Agreement is attached as Exhibit
"A" to the attached Draft Ordinance.
7. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the associated Environmental
Assessment prepared for said project.
8. 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.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
June 14,2000
Page2
2. This Commission hereby specifically finds that the Development Agreement and each
and every term and provision contained herein conforms to the General Plan of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
3. 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:
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 Califomia 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 dudng 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.
4. This Commission hereby recommends approval of ~he Development Agreement attached
as Exhibit "A" of the attached draft Ordinance.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
June 14,2000
Page 3
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 00-01,
A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETVVEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA AND NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING A SENIOR
HOUSING PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SENIOR HOUSING
OVERLAY DISTRICT (SHOD), INCLUDING DEVIATING FROM
CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR 80 SENIOR
APARTMENT UNITS AND ONE MANAGER UNIT LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF AMETHYST STREET, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION
WITH LA GRANDE STREET AND NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION
WITH LOMITA DRIVE -APN: 202-151-12.
A. Recitals.
(i) California Government Code Section 65864 now provides, in pertinent part, as
follows:
"The Legislature finds and declares that:
a) The lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in a
waste of resources, escalate the cost of housing and other developments to the consumer, and
discourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning which would make
maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public.
b) Assurance to the applicant for a development project that upon approval of the
project, the applicant may proceed with the project in accordance with existing policies, rules
and regulations, and subject to conditions of approval, will strengthen the public planning
process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic
costs of development."
(ii) California Government Code Section 65865 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
"Any city...may enter into a Development Agreement with any person having a
legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such property as provided in
this article..."
(iii) California Government Code Section 65865.2 provides, in part, as follows:
"A Development Agreement shall specify the duration of the Agreement, the
permitted uses of the property, the density of intensity of use, the maximum height and size of
proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes.
The Development Agreement may include conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for
subsequent discretionary actions, provided that such conditions, terms, restrictions, and
requirements for discretionary actions shall not prevent development of the land for the uses
and to the density of intensity of development set forth in the Agreement..."
CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ORDINANCE
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
June 14, 2000
Page 2
(iv) "Attached to this Ordinance, marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this.
reference is proposed Development Agreement 00-01, concerning that property located on the
east side of Amethyst Street, south of the intersection with La Grande Street, and as legally
described in the attached Development Agreement. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the
Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is referred to as the "Development
Agreement."
(v) On May 24, and continued to June 14, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga held a duly noticed hearing concerning the Development Agreement and
concluded said hearing on that date and recommended approval through adoption of its
Resolution.
(vi) On , 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing concerning the Development Agreement.
(vii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B. Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find,
determine, and ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Pad A, of this Ordinance am true. and correct.
SECTION 2: Prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, this Council has reviewed the Initial
Study, Pads I and II, and the Development Agreement, and cedified the Negative Declaration,
in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the
Guidelines promulgated thereunder.
SECTION 3: Based upon substantial evidence presented during the above-reference
public hearings on May 24, and June 14, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together
with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
a) The location, design, and proposes uses set forth in this Development Agreement
are compatible with the character of existing development in the vicinity.
b) The Development Agreement conforms to the General Plan of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
SECTION 4: It is expressly found that the public necessity, general welfare, and good
zoning practice require the approval of the Development Agreement.
SECTION 5: This Council hereby approves Development Agreement 00-01, attached
hereto as Exhibit "A".
SECTION 6: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same
to be published with 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a
newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, Califomia, and circulated in
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California..
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 00-01
SENIOR CITIZENS' HOUSING
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of the "Effective Date" set forth herein by and between
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a California NON PROFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT
CORPORATION ("Developer") and the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the State of California ("City").
WlTNESSETH:
A. Recitals.
1. California Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. Authorizes cities to enter into Binding
development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for
the development of such property.
2. California Government Code Section 65915 provides that a City may, by agreement with a
developer, grant a density bonus over that allowed by the maximum density established in
the Development Code and Land Use Element of the General Plan when a developer agrees
to construct housing for Iow income senior households.
3. The Developer has requested City to consider the approval of a development agreement, with
a density bonus, pertaining to that real property located entirely within City, the common and
legal description of which is set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference.
4. The site is now zoned Mixed Use with a Senior Housing Overlay District pursuant to the
provisions of City's Development Code, as amended to date hereof. Developer and City
desire to provide through this Development Agreement more specific development controls
on the site which, will provide for maximum efficient utilization of the site in accordance with
sound planning principles.
5. The Developer proposes to construct a senior housing residential project, including Iow-
income units, within the City. Said project contemplated by Developer will require an
increase in the maximum density as currently provided in the Mixed Use Distdct with a Senior
Housing Overlay District.
6. It is the desire of City to encourage developments designed to provide affordable rental units
for senior residents of the City. In furtherance of that desire, the City is hereby willing to grant
a density bonus to Developer as provided by the terms of this Agreement.
7. That any housing project developed pursuant to this agreement, and any subsequent land
use approvals required by City ordinances, shall comply with all appropriate provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act.
8. On July 5, 2000, City adopted its Ordinance No. , thereby approving this
Development Agreement with Developer and said action was effective on August 5,. 2000.
B. Aqreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the padies hereto agree as follows:
1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms
shall have the following meaning:
a. "City" is the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
b. "Project" is the development approved by City cempdsed of approximately eighty (80)
to ninety-six (96) senior apartment units, one manager unit, recreational and
common area facilities, parking spaces, and other amenities on the Site.
c. "Qualified Project Period" means the first day on which the residential units in the
development are first available for occupancy by Qualified Tenants and continuing
for thirty years, except that the limitation that all tenants, occupants and residents by
Qualified Tenants shall continue in perpetuity.
d. "Qualified Tenants" shall mean persons or households who are at least fifty-five
years or older and are senior citizens as defined in Section 51.3 of the California Civil
Code as amended from time to time.
(i) "Very Low Income Qualified Tenants" shall mean Qualified Tenants who
possess an income equal to or less than the amounts as specified in
California Health and Safety Code Section 50105, as amended.
(ii) "Ninety Percent Income Qualified Tenants" means a household whose
annual income does not exceed ninety percent (90%) of the Area Median
Income.
(iii) "Area Median Income" as may be used in determining income status or rent
rate herein, shall mean that determined median for the County of San
Bernardino, as set forth in California Health and Safety Code Section 50093,
as amended.
e. "Affordable Rents" shall mean the total charges for rent, and utilities, to a Very Low
Income Qualified Tenant shall not exceed one-twelfth of thirty percent (30%) of Very
Low Income, adjusted for household size. The total charges for rent, and utilities to
a Ninety Percent Income Qualified Tenant shall not exceed one-twelfth of thirty
percent (30%) of ninety percent (90%) of the Area Median Income, adjusted for
household size. Initial rents for each unit shall be set by the Developer at the time
of initial occupancy of the Development. Rents may be adjusted annually by the
same percentage that income has increased, if any, for a Very Low Income Qualified
Tenant or a Ninety Percent Income Qualified Tenant, based on changes in the Area
Median Income. At least sixty calendar days prior to increasing rents on any unit
restricted by this Agreement, the Developer shall submit to the City the Developer's
calculation of such increase. Tenants occupying units restricted by this Agreement
shall be given at least thirty days written notice prior to any rent increase.
f. "Effective Date" shall mean the 31st calendar day following adoption of the ordinance
approving this Agreement by City's City Council.
2. Recitals. The recitals are part of the agreement between the parties and shall be enforced
and enforceable as any other provision of this Agreement.
3. Interest of Property Owner. Developer warrants and represents that it has entered into an
escrow or an agreement by which it is to acquire full legal title to the real property of the site
and that it has full legal right to enter into this Agreement.
4. Binding Effect of A,qreement. The Developer hereby subjects the development and the land
described in Exhibit "A" hereto to the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth in
this Agreement. The City and the Developer hereby declare their specific intent that the
covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants
running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon the Developer's successors and
assigns in title or interest to the Development. Each and every contract, deed, Regulatory
Agreements with the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency or other instrument
hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the development or any portion thereof shall
conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the
covenants, reservations and restrictions expressed in this Agreement, regardless of whether
such covenants, reservations and restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other
instrument.
City and Developer hereby declare their understanding and intent that the burden of the
covenants, reservations and restrictions set fodh herein touch and concern the land in that
the Developer's legal interest in the development is rendered less valuable thereby. The City
and Developer hereby further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such
covenants touch and concern the land by enhancing and increasing the enjoyment and use
of the Development by Qualified Tenants, the intended beneficiaries of such covenants,
reservations and restrictions, and by furthering the public purposes for which this Agreement
is adopted. Further, the parties hereto agree that such covenants, reservations and
restrictions benefit all other real property located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
5. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between City and
Developer is such that Developer is an independent party and is not the agent of City for any
purpose whatsoever and shall not be considered to be the agent of City for any purpose
whatsoever.
6. Re,qulatory ARreement: In addition to the requirements of this Agreement, the Developer
shall comply with all the terms and conditions of the Regulatory Agreement with the
Redevelopment Agency.
7. Term of Aqreement. The term of the Agreement shall commence on the effective date and
shall expire thirty years after the commencement of the Qualified Project Period, so long as
Developer remains in material compliance with this Agreement, as from time to time
amended. This Agreement shall be deemed to be terminated automatically if Developer
does not obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the entirety of the Project within five (5) years
of the effective date.
8. Restrictions on Rental Units. During the term of this Agreement, all tenants, occupants and
residents shall be Qualified Tenants except for one resident manager. However, it is
expressly understood by the parties hereto that the Project has been specifically designed
to meet the unique needs of senior tenants. Accordingly, even after the expiration of the
to meet the unique needs of senior tenants. Accordingly, even after the expiration of the
term, the limitation that all tenants, occupants and residents of apartment units in the Project
shall be Qualified Tenants shall remain in perpetuity, unless the Project is made to conform
with all then applicable Development Code provisions pertaining to multi-family dwellings.
Said apartment units shall not be rented, occupied, leased or subleased to occupants who
are not Qualified Tenants except as provided as follows:
a. A person or persons who is not a Qualified Tenant, but is a "Qualified Permanent
Resident as defined in Civil Code Section 51.3;
b. A person or persons under fifty-five years of age may occupy apartment units as
temporary tenants for a period of time not to exceed three months during any
calendar year.
9. Rental Requirements. During the Qualified Project Period at least forty percent (40%) of the
units in the Project, shall be rented, leased or held available for Very Low Income Qualified
Tenants at affordable rents. All remaining units shall be rented, leased or held available for
Ninety Percent Income Qualified Tenants at affordable rents.
10. Maintenance of Apartments as Rental~ During the term hereof, all apartment units in the
Project shall remain rental units. No apartment unit in the Project shall be eligible for
conversion from rental units to condominiums, townhomes or any other common interest
subdivision without consent of the City Council.
1 1. On-site Manager. A full-fime resident manager shall be provided on the Project site.
12. Tenant Committee. Residents shall have the right to establish a committee composed of
tenants for the purpose of organizing social activities and providing comments and
suggestions to the Developer regarding the operation and facilities of the Project. Nothing
in this section shall be deemed to restrict the rights of individuals to organize activities and
provide comments to the Developer.
13. Submission of Materials and Annual Review Prior to occupancy, the Developer shall submit
to City tenant selection procedures which shall detail the methods which Developer shall use
to advertise the availability of apartments in the Project and screening mechanisms which
Developer intends to use to limit the occupancy of the apartments to Qualified Tenants and
Low Income Qualified Tenants.
On or before March 15 of each year following the commencement of the Qualified Project
Period, the Developer, or its representative, shall file a certificate of continuing program
compliance with the City. Each such report shall contain such information as City may
require including, but not limited to, the following:
a. Rent schedules then in effect, including utility charges (if any);
b. A project occupancy profile;
c. A description of the physical condition and maintenance procedures for the Project,
including apartment units, landscaping, walkways, and recreational areas.
The report may be combined with, or form a part of, the Annual Report required by the
Redevelopment Agency's Regulatory Agreement as long as it contains the above listed
items.
City shall be allowed to conduct physical inspections of the Project as it shall deem
necessary, provided that said inspections do not unreasonably interfere with the normal
operations of the Project and reasonable notice is provided. The City shall further be allowed
to conduct an annual survey of residents in the Project in order to assess senior needs.
14. Tenant Selection, Contracts and Rules and Requlations. On receipt of an application for Iow-
income occupancy, Developer shall determine the eligibility of the occupancy under the terms
of this Development Agreement. Verification of tenant eligibility shall include one or more of
the following factors:
a. Obtain an income verification form from the Social Security Administration and/or the
Califomia Department of Social Services, if the applicant receives income from either
or both agencies;
b. Obtain an income tax return for the most recent tax year;
c. Conduct a TRW or similar financial search;
d. Obtain an income verification from all current employers; and
e. If the applicant is unemployed and has no tax return, obtain another form of
independent verification.
Developer shall be entitled to rely on the information contained in the application sworn to by
the applicant. All agreements for rental of all apartment units in the Project shall be in writing.
The form of proposed rent or lease agreement shall be reviewed and approved by City prior
to the commencement of the Qualified Project Period. Such agreement shall include all rules
and regulations governing tenancy within the Project. The rules and regulations shall include
regulations which specifically authorize the keeping of small pets within all apartment units.
15. Termination and Eviction of Tenants. A tenancy may be terminated without the termination
being deemed an eviction under the following circumstances;
a. The death of the sole tenant of the unit;
b. By the tenant at the expiration of the term of occupancy or other wise upon thirty
days' written notice;
c. By abandonment of the premises by the tenant; or
d. By failure of a tenant to execute or renew a lease.
Any termination of a tenancy other than those listed above in this paragraph 14 shall
constitute an eviction. Developer shall only evict in compliance with the provision of
California law and then only for material noncompliance with the terms of the rental
agreement.
16. Local Residency. Residency preference shall be given where possible and to the extent
permitted by law to applicants to the Project who have been residents of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. However, that factor shall not be given priority over the other elements of
Qualified Tenant selection as stated herein.
17. Hazard Insurance. Developer shall keep the Project and all improvements thereon insured
at all times against loss or damage endorsement and such other risks, perils or coverage as
Developer may determine. During the term hereof, the Project shall be insured as provided
in the Disposition and Development Agreement of the City's Redevelopment Agency.
18. Maintenance Guarantee. Developer shall comply with all City maintenance standards
enacted from time to time.
19. Standards and Restriction Pertainin,q to Development of the Real Property. The following
specific restrictions shall apply to the use of the Site pursuant to this Development
Agreement:
a. Only residential uses of the real property, including provisions of services needed or
desired by the residents, shall be permitted in the Project; and
b. The final Site Ptan and development design shall be subject to a City approved
development review procedure, to be applied for by the owner; and
c. The maximum density of residential dwelling units in the Project shall never be
greater than 30 dwelling units per acre; and
d. The maximum height for the highest proposed building in the Project shall be forty-
two (42) feet; and
e. The maximum size for all the buildings and the proposed square footage for each
of the apartment types located in the Project shall be as set forth in a City approved
development review application; and
f. The provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes shall be
established through the development review process.
g. The maximum number of required parking off-street parking spaces shall be subject
to the Development Review process, but shall be no less than .7 parking space per
unit and no less that 1 space for the manager's unit, and
h. The minimum private open space requirement for ground floor units shall be subject
to the Development Review process, and
i. The minimum private open space requirement for upper floor units shall be subject
to the Development Review process; and
j. The minimum number of washer/dryer facilities shall be modified from the
Development Code and subject to the Development Review process, but not less
than one washeddryer for every 14 units; and
k. The minimum building setback from the drive aisle shall be reduced to an amount
not less than 9 feet; and
I. Recreational amenities may be duplicated in order to fulfill the total number of
recreational amenities required for the project; and
m. A perimeter wall, if any, shall be subject to the Development Review process.
20. Project Desiqn Amenities for Senior Citizens. The Project open space, buildings and
individual apartments shall be designed with physical amenities catering to the needs and
desires of the senior citizen residents. In addition to those conditions set forth in the
development review process, following physical amenities shall be substantially included in
the Project, but may be modified by the City during the Development Review process:
a. Elevator service shall be provided to all upper story apartments;
b. Units shall be designed to comply with the State requirements for disabled access
for multiple family housing;
c. Handrails shall be provided in all hallways;
d. Building space shall be devoted for tenant group meetings; and
e. Recreational amenities shall be oriented towards senior needs and may include, but
not limited to, lawn bowling, gazebos, and barbecue areas and be subject to the
Development Review process.
21. Indemnification. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold City and its elected officials,
officers, agents, and employees free and harmless from liability for damage or claims for
damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage which may
arise from the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of its contractor,
subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on its behalf 'which relate to the
Project. Developer agrees to indemnify and shall defend City and it s elected officials,
officers, agents, and employees with respect to actions for damages caused or alleged to
have been caused by reason of Developer's activities in connection with the Project with a
counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City. This indemnification provision applies to all
damages and cl.aims the operations referred to in this Development Agreement regardless
of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications or other
documents for the Project. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this provision shall not apply to
any such claims which arise out of, or by reason of, the gross negligence or willful
misconduct of the City, its elected officials, agents and employees.
22. Non-Liability of Agency Officials, Employees, and Agents. No member, official, employee,
or agent of the City shall be personally liable to the Developer or any permitted successor-in-
interest of the Developer in the event of default or breach by the City or the Rancho
Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency under this agreement or for any amount which may
become due to the Developer, its successors or under any obligation under the terms of this
Agreement.
23. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or canceled, in whole or in part, only by
mutual written consent of the parties and then in the manner provided for in California
Government Code Section 65868 et seq.
24. Federal, State Preemption: As provided in State Government Code Section 65869.5, where
state or federal laws or regulations enacted after this Development Agreement has been
entered into prevent or preclude compliance with the provisions of the Development
Agreement, such provisions shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply
with such State or federal laws or regulations.
25. Administrative Modifications: Minor conflicts resulting from the strict interpretation of this
Agreement with the application of the City's development regulations may be modified
administratively by the City Planner.
26. Enforcement. In the event of a default under the provisions of this Agreement by Developer,
City shall give written notice to Developer (or its successor) at the address of the Project, and
by registered or certified mail addressed to the address stated in this Agreement, and if such
violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of City within thirty days after such
notice is given, or if not corrected within such reasonable time as may be required to cure the
breach or default if said breach or default cannot be cured within thirty days (provided that
acts to cure the breach er default must be commenced within said thirty days and must
thereafter be diligently pursued by Developer), then City may, without further notice, declare
a default under this Agreement and, upon any such declaration of default, City may bring any
action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of Developer growing out of the
operation of this Development Agreement, apply to any court, state or federal, for injunctive
relief against any violation by Developer of any provision of this Agreement or apply for such
other relief as may be appropriate.
After completion of the Project pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, any default may
alternatively be enforced as any normal violation of the standards and provisions of the
Rancho Cucemonga Municipal Code. Accordingly, the following penalty is specifically
included as part of this Agreement:
"It shall be unlawful for any person, firm., partnership, or corporation to
violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this
Agreement. Any person, firm, partnership, or corporation violating any
provision of this Agreement by failing to comply with any of its requirements
shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall
be punished by a fine not exceeding One Thousand Dollars or by
imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and
imprisonment. Each such person, firm, partnership or corporation shall be
deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or any portion
thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this Agreement
is committed, continued or permitted by such person, firm, partnership or
corporation, and shall be punishable therefore as herein."
27. Event of Default. Developer is in default under this Agreement upon the happening of one
or more of the following events or conditions:
a. If a material warranty, representation or statement is made or fumished by Developer
to City and is false or proved to have been knowingly false in any material respect
when it was made;
b. If a finding and determination is made by City following an annual review pursuant
to paragraph 13 herein above, upon the basis of substantial evidence that Developer
has not complied in good faith with any material terms and conditions of this
Agreement, after notice and opportunity to cure as described in paragraph 34 herein
above; or
c. A breach by Developer of any of the provisions or terms of this Agreement, after
notice and opportunity to cure as provided in paragraph 34 herein above.
28. No Waiver of Remedies. City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by
Developer if on periodic review City does. not enforce or terminate this Agreement.
Nonperformance by Developer shall not be excused because performance by Developer of
the obligations herein contained would be unprofitable, difficult or expensive or because of
/¥',/,, f¢o
a failure of any third party or entity, other than City. All other remedies at law or in equity
which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City's regulations g~)verning
development agreements are available to the parties to pursue in the event that there is a
breach of this Development Agreement. No waiver by City of any breach or default under this
Development Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach
thereof or default hereunder.
29. Rights of Lenders Under this Agreement. Should Developer place or cause to be placed any
encumbrance or lien on the project, or any part thereof, the beneficiary ("Lender") of said
encumbrance or lien, including, but not limited to, mortgages, shall have the right at any time
during the term of this Agreement and the existence of said encumbrance or lien to:
a. Do any act or thing required of Developer under this Agreement, and any such act
or thing done or performed by Lender shall be as effective as if done by Developer
itself;
b. Realize on the security afforded by the encumbrance or lien by exercising foreclosure
proceedings or power of sale or other remedy afforded in law or in equity or by the
security document evidencing the encumbrance or lien (hereinafter referred to as
"the trust deed");
c. Transfer, convey or assign the title of Developer to the Project to any purchaser at
any foreclosure sale, whether the foreclosure sale be conducted pursuant to court
order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed; and
d. Acquire and succeed to the interest of Developer'by virtue of any foreclosure sale,
whether the foreclosure sale be conducted pursuant to a court order or pursuant to
a power of sale contained in a trust deed.
The City agrees that the terms of this Agreement are subordinate to any such financing
instrument and shall execute from time to time any and all documentation reasonably
requested by Developer or Lender to effect such subordination.
30. Notice to Lender. City shall give written notice of any default or breach under this Agreement
by Developer to Lender and afford Lender the opportunity after service of the notice to:
a. Cure the breach or default within sixty days after service of said notice, where the
default can be cured by the payment of money;
b. Cure the breach or default within sixty days after service of said notice, where the
breach or default can be cured by something other than the payment of money and
can be cured within that time; or
c. Cure the breach or default in such reasonable time as may be required where
something other than payment of money is required to cure the breach or default and
cannot be performed within sixty days after said notice, provided that acts to cure the
breach or default are commenced within a sixty day period after service of said
notice of default on Lender by City and are thereafter diligently continued by Lender.
31. Action by Lender. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, a Lender may
forestall any action by City for a breach or default under the terms of this Agreement by
Developer by commencing proceedings to foreclose its encumbrance or lien on the Project.
The proceedings so commenced may be for foreclosure of the encumbrance by order of
coud or for foreclosure of the encumbrance under a power of sale contained in the
instrument creating the encumbrance or lien. The proceedings shall not, however, forestall
any such action by the City for the default or breach by Developer unless:
a. They are commenced within sixty days after service on Lender of the notice
described herein above;
b. They are, after having been commenced, diligently pursued in the manner required
by law to completion; and
c. Lender keeps and performs all of the terms, covenants and conditions of this
Agreement requiring the payment or expenditure of money by Developer until the
foreclosure proceedings are complete or are discharged by redemption, satisfaction
or payment.
32. Rent Control. In consideration for the limitations herein provided, City agrees that it shall not,
during the term of this Agreement, take any action, the effect of which will be to control,
determine or affect the rents for those Iow income rental units located in the Project, except
as otherwise provided in this Agreement.
33. Notice. Any notice required to be given by the terms of this Agreement shall be provided by
certified mail, return receipt requested, at the address of the respective parties as specified
below or at any other such address as may be later specified by the parties hereto.
Developer: Nacho Gracia, Executive Director
Northtown Housing Development Corporation
9999 Feron Boulevard #A
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
City: CityofRancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
34. Attorneys Fees. In any proceedings arising from the enforcement of this Development
Agreement or because of an alleged breach or default hereunder, the prevailing party shall
be entitled to recover its costs and its reasonable attorneys' fees incurred during the
proceeding as may be fixed within the discretion of the court.
35. Bindinq Effect. This agreement shall bind, and the benefits and burdens hereof shall inure
to, the respective parties hereto and their legal representatives, executors, administrators,
successors, and assigns, wherever the context requires or admits.
36. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the
laws of the State of California.
37. Partial Invalidity. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be ihvalid, illegal or
unenforceable, the validity, legality or enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof shall
not in any way be affected or impaired thereby.
38. Recordation. This Agreement shall, at the expense of Developer, be recorded in the Official
Records of the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties and shall be
effective on the effective date set forth herein above.
CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Dated: By
William J. Alexander, Mayor
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP.
Dated: By.
Nacho Gracia, Executive Director
I:~PLANNING'C, LAN~GPAs\Senior Housing Agrmnt,00-01 fTiIdraft alanB.doc
Carla Florance
9580 Meadow Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(909) 989-3262
June 14, 2000
Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commissioners
Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center
Council Chambers
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
RE: Tentative Tract Map 16058 Griffin Home Building Group
(E.I.R. July 1996, Vol. 1 of 2, Appendix G,
Cultural Resources Information, Appendix B:
Lucas Ranch House Complex Report, pp 1-6)
Dear Planning C6mmissioners:
As an interested party, I would like to comment on the ~ffects the Griffin
residential property will have when developed in such close proximity to the
Lucas Ranch House Complex.
As for now, the Lucas Complex is occupied as a personal residence. However,
in the event zoning or occupancy changes occur, safeguards should be incorpor-
ated into the Tract Map 16058 that are designed to avoid any future noise or
parking problems to area residents°
Residential spillover parking and noise problems could be avoided when the
Lucas Complex becomes a tourist attraction by providing generous setbacks and
street and landscape designs compatible with future historical use.
In conclusion, the Lucas Ranch Complex holds historical significance for its
community connection i.e. historical buildings, lives of persons in our past,
family business, mature landscaping, and as a city landmark. You have an
opportunity to develop a residential tract map compatible with the uses of a
site of historic interest.
Thank you for considering my comments.
Sincerely,
Carla Florance
Attachment: Appendix B: Lucas Ranch House Complex Report, pp 1-6
EoI.R. July 1996
Appendix B: Lucas Ranch House Complex Report
Lucas Ranch House Complex
9524 Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
San Bernadino County
The Lucas Ranch House Complex consists of four historic buildings set in a garden of mature
landscaping which includes grape v/nes and citrus trees. The four historic buildings (1929
Sanborn Map) include: the main house, a small outbuilding, a garage and a bunkhouse. Two
other non-historic buildings, a recent house and garage, are set on the parcel. The historic
buildings on the complex were built around 1910 by Fermin A.' Lucas, a prominent Rancho
Cucamonga rancher~ vintner, land developer and entrepreneur.
Description
The two-story Queen Anne style main ranch house (Building A on the plan) is of wood frame
construction, asymmetrical in massing, and sheathed in clapboard. The steeply pitched roof
features cross gables. A dormer punctuates the front wing to the south. A central hipped roofed
element appears to be a tower which was truncated. A chimney With chimney pet is lOCated in
front of the truncated tower. , '
The front and side gables are defined by large carved wood arches featuring a spindle row with
vent above. Teardrop pendants hang down at the ends of the spindle row. Two tall, narrow
double-hung wood windows are set in each gable which are sheathed with fishscale shingles.
The rear (west) gable end is more simply detailed with a boxed eave. The first floor of the house
has been altered. The original front porch (east elevation) has been enclosed with wide barge
board and a window row.
The ranch grounds feature a variety of mature trees. Along the Archibald Avenue expanse are a
row of fan palms. Elm, olive, cedar, pepper, camphor, persimmon, walnut, and a variety of
eucalyptus trees grow on the ranch. Grape vines and numerous citrus trees are also present.
A small, simple, wood frame building (Building B on the plan) is located to the south of the
main house. The one-story building features a broad gable roof with boxed eaves, a brick
chimney on the east, and a lean built onto the west. The structure is sheathed in clapboard and
has several double hung windows with wood surrounds.
Originally built as a garage (Building C on the plan) this one-story building features a gabled
roof with boxed eaves and clapboard s/ding The bunkhouse (Building D on the plan) is a
simple rectangular building of wood frame construction with clapboard siding. The gable roof
eatures a deep overhang vath exposed rafter ends. Double hung wood sash windows w th wood
Mellon and Associates I December 1995
Lucas Ranch House Complex
surrounds are located along the eave end of the building. A series of stepped back, lean-to
additions were built on the bunkhouse to the east.
Two other non-historic buildings are located on the grounds: a stucco house (identified as 9510
Archibald) and a rectangular garage-like building.
Significance
Firman A. Lucas and his sons (Firman, Vincent, John, Leon and Henry) left an indelible mark on
Rancho Cucamonga throughout the twentieth century. Firman Lucas settled in the Rancho
'~-:-a:~"~:~"q2ucaff'rOnga:~e;aar°~n~d~1890 ~d~as~ fii~J6'/q~n~Foq~n~i~'~'~t~l~:~,i'' '~:r)'fi't~ Rah~lic~:'-~ : .""'~:::
Cucamonga and Ontario area. In the first decade of the twentieth century he owned and
operated a small winery and cannery on East Eight Street near Turner Avenue in Rancho
Cucamonga. The winery was used to process the grapes that were grown on the Lucas Ranch;
located south of Sixth Street on Archibald Avenue. Several processing buildings were located
on the East side of Archibald (between Fourth and Sixth Streets). The family ranch house was
located across Archibald to the West. In 1911; the winery was !eased to the Cucamonga ~.
Vintage Compar~y, one of the first mutual associgtions, of growers. The association helped the' -- '"
"individual grape growers work cooperatively to process and market their products. (Hofer, pp. -
48-5~).
In his oral history, David Maxwell notedthat .... the Lucas Ranch-qt was a btg company out here
in [those] days, they had deciduous trees: peaches, apricots and all those things. They hired all
kinds of people...almost everybody sometime worked at the Lucas Ranch."
After his death in 1911, Lucas' son Firman, followed in his footsteps. The-Lucas Ranching
Company continued its diversified endeavors from grape growing and winemaking to processing
and selling deciduous fruits to buying and selling real estate, water rights and stocks and bonds.
This diversification helped the Lucas Ranching Company weather the changes in markets that
took place duringthe 1920s when Prohibition eliminated the vintner profession. City
Directories show Firman A. Lucas residing in the house on Archibald Avenue in 1928. Family
members continued to reside in the house until the Lucas Ranching Company was dissolved in
1952. (Hofer, pp. 54-55; City Directories, 1928, 1945, 1950)
Eligibility
The Lucas Ranch Complex appears eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion B ("associated with the lives of persons significant in our past") for its association with
Firman Lucas I and his son, Firman Lucas II, as well as with the family business. (National
Mellon and Associates 2 December 1995
Lucas Ranch House Complex
Register Bulletin 15 : How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, 1991). The
house was the home of the Lucas family who operated the Lucas Ranching operation. The
complex of buildings and their relationship to each other as well as the mature landscaping
which features a variety of plant species represent a good example of a Cucamonga early 20th
century ranch.
The Lucas Ranch House Complex also meets eligibility criteria as a City of Rancho Cucamonga
Landmark. It serves as an example of an early 20th century ranch complex that is "particularly
representative of an historical period, type, style, region, or way of life." In addition, it is
"connected with someone renowned, important or a local personality", and with "a business or
use which was once common but is now rare" based on its ownership and development by
:~..:.~.~,Firmah~L~c~/~rid~hiS famil~:l~=rifi~-il~ first'halfOfthe-2Otl~en(-ury~'d~'ho-Cucatn-oh~a~ · .:
Historic Preservation Commission Ordinance, 1988).
Mellon and Associates 3 December 1995
X
X 1034.3
I
X 10.34.4 IX
Sketch Plan of Lucas Ranch
9524 Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California
Lucas Ranch House Complex
East and South elevations of Main House and grounds from 3a-¢hibald Avenue
South elevation of Main House, Outbuilding B, and ~ounds
Mellon and Associales 4 Deccmbcr 199_:,
Lucas Ranch House Complex
South elevation of:Main House and ~6unds ~ "'
West elevation of Main House, Outbuilding C and gTounds
Mellon and Associates 5 December 1995
Lucas Ranch House Complex
North and West elevations of Outbuilding D
Mellon and Associales 6 Dcccmber 1995
the city of
l~ancho CucamonMa
Staff Report
DATE: June 14, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Bulier, City Planner
BY: Sal Salazar, AICP, Associate Planner
Duane Morita, Contract Planner
SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16058 - GRIFFIN HOMES BUILDING GROUP- A
request to subdivide an 18.8-acre site into 92 single-family residential lots, one
lot for a private park, one lot for off-site access, and seven lettered lots for
internal roadways in the Low-Medium Residential District (4 to 8 dwelling units
per acre), located near the southwest corner of Archibald Avenue and 6th Street
- APN: 210-062-31. An Environmental Impact Report was previously certified on
November 20, 1996.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Proiect Density: 4.9 dwelling units per acre.
B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Project Site - Vacant land; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
North - Vacant land and Single-Family Residential; Industrial Park in Industrial Area
Specific Plan (Subarea 16) and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per
acre)
South - Single-Family Residential (TT 15727) and other Single-Family Residential; Low-
Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
East Industrial uses; General Industrial in Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subareas 4
and 5)
West Single-Family Residential (TT 15727); Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling
units per acre)
C. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
North - Industrial Park (Industrial Area Specific Plan, Subarea 16) and Low-Medium
Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
South - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
ITEM K
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TTM 16058 - GRIFFIN HOMES BUILDING GROUP
June 14, 2000
Page 2
East - General Industrial (Industrial Area Specific Plan, Subarea 4 and 5)
West Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
D. Site Characteristics: The project site is located near the southwest corner of Archibald
Avenue and 6th Street and is vacant. The site gently slopes in the southern direction and
is neighbored by existing single-family residences to the south and west. No sensitive
plants or animals exist on-site. Remnants of a Eucalyptus windrow exist along the
nor[herly boundary.
ANALYSIS:
A. Background: In November 1996, the City Council approved Cucamonga Cornerpointe, an
85-acre residential development. In November 3, 1999, the City Council approved a
General Plan Amendment, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment, and Development
District Amendment from Industrial Park to Low-Medium Residential for areas neighboring
the Cucamonga Cornerpointe site, which included the 18.8-acre Tentative Tract 16058,
and three adjacent parcels (see Exhibit "A")
B. - General: The project proposes to subdivide the 18.8-acre site into 92 single-family
residential lots, one 20,354 square foot (0.47-acre) lot for a privatepark, one lot (Lot I) for
off-site access to the two northern parcels, and seven lettered lots for internal roadways.
The residential lots range in size from 5,231 to 11,902 square feet; average lot size is
6,515 square feet. A 60-foot wide access easement is proposed to extend from Lot F in
the southerly direction to provide access to the existing 1.6 acre off-site (see Exhibit "B").
Tentative Tract Map 16058 will be an extension of the existing residential development.
To provide a physical connection between the adjoining residential development and the
proposed subdivision, Lots A and E of Tentative Tract Map 16058, will extend and connect
with Sunglow Court and Cedar Glen CourL The applicant indicates that the residents
living along Sunglow Court and Cedar Glen Court have been notified of the proposed
subdivision and the impending traffic to be expected along their roadways.
The project is a subdivision map only; building plans and elevations are not being
proposed at this time. The applicant intends to submit building and plotting plans for City
review and approval in the future. The project will be conditioned to comply with the
existing Optional Development standards, which will require barbecues for all the
residential lots and multiple play equipment for the 0.47-acre park.
C. Issues: The following are issues relating to the proposed project.
1. Access to Three Off-site Parcels: In order to eliminate driveways onto Archibald
Avenue, Tentative Tract Map 16058 is designed to provide access to three off-site
parcels to the northeast and southeast should they ever be redeveloped. Lot I will
provide access to the two parcels located to the northeast. Currently, these two
parcels are developed with residences and other structures. Access to these two
parcels is currently provided via driveways along Archibald Avenue.
A 60-foot wide easement (Lot F) will provide access to the 1.6 acre parcel located on
the southeast section of the project. The Lucas Ranch home has a potential local
landmark designation, and other structures are located within the parcel. Access to
this parcel is currently provided via a driveway along Archibald Avenue.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TTM 16058- GRIFFIN HOMES BUILDING GROUP
June 14, 2000
Page 3
The applicant has submitted Alternative Concept Development Plans, which present
potential development schemes for these three off-site parcels (Please refer to
Exhibit "C").
Though the Tentative Tract Map is presently designed to provide access to each of
the off-site parcels, the applicant has concerns that the access point is unnecessary
for the following reasons:
· The Assanelli family, who owns the southeast parcel, does not believe an
access extending from the proposed Tentative Tract is beneficial or warranted.
Please refer to Exhibit "D," which is a letter from the Assanelli family
expressing their objection to the access easement.
· One of the structures is potentially historically significant and it is unlikely that
alternative development will be permitted in the future.
City staff is aware of these issues; however, in order to ensure that an adequate and
safe access point exists, it is recommended that the site be approved as
recommended by the Design Review Committee with an access point to the
property.
2. Re-design of Knuckle for Transition of Lots F and G. As presently designed, Lot G
does not provide sufficient turning radius based on City Engineering standards. As a
solution, it is recommended that a knuckle be provided at the transition of Lots F and
G, similar to the knuckle being provided at the transition of Lots D and G. Refer to
Exhibit "E" that requires the knuckle, which presents the transition location. The
project is conditioned to re-design the knuckle during plan check of the final map.
D. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (McNeil, Coleman) reviewed
the project on April 18, 2000 (Exhibit "F"), and was generally satisfied with the subdivision
layout and design. Issues discussed at the meeting related to extension of Lot F to
provide access to off-site parcels; provision of knuckle at transition of Lots F and G; and
project compliance with the Development Code which requires that residences be setback
45 feet from Archibald Avenue. The Committee directed the applicant to redesign the
Tentative Tract Map to provide access to the three off-site parcels. The Tentative Tract
Map presently reflects extension of Lot F to the southern property line as required.
Regarding the proposed knuckle at the transition of Lots F and G, the project is
conditioned to provide for the knuckle prior to plan check approval of the Final Map.
Regarding compliance with the Archibald Avenue 45-foot setback, a preliminary plotting
plan'has been prepared and submitted (Exhibit "G"). As required, the plotting plan shows
that residences along Archibald Avenue will be sufficiently setback from Archibald Avenue.
The Committee recommended approval of the project, subject to conditions.
E. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Committee reviewed the project and
recommended approval with the conditions listed in the attached Resolution of Approval.
F. Grading Committee: The Grading Committee reviewed the project and recommended
approval with the conditions listed in the attached Resolution of Approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TTM 16058 - GRIFFIN HOMES BUILDING GROUP
June 14, 2000
Page 4
G. Environmental Assessment: An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the
Cucamonga Cornerpointe project which was certified by the City Council on November 20,
1996. The EIR analyzed the conversion of the area bordered by Archibald Avenue, and
6th and 4th Street from Industrial Park to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per
acre). The area encompassing the proposed Tentative Tract 16058 was included in the
analysis. In their subsequent action on the General Plan Amendment, Industrial Area
Specific Plan, and Development District Amendment for the project site to allow Low-
Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) from Industrial Park, the City Council
approved a Negative Declaration, which concluded that environmental impacts will not
result with the aforementioned requested applications. The proposed subdivision,
therefore, with the mitigation measures in place, will not result in any significant
environmental impact.
FACTS FOR FINDING:
A. The Tentative Tract Map and its improvements are consistent with the General Plan
and Development Code; and
B. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and
C. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and
D. The Tentative Tract Map is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and
E. The design of the Tentative Tract Map will not conflict with any easement acquired
for access and/or service utilities within the proposed subdivision.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners
within a 300-foot radius of the project site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative
Tract 16058 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions.
City Planner
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location of Tentative Tract 16058 and Surrounding Areas
Exhibit "B" ~ Tentative Tract Map 16058
Exhibit "C" ~ Alternative Concept Development Plans
Exhibit "D" - Letter from Assanelli Family
Exhibit "E" ~ Location of Proposed Knuckle
Exhibit "F" - Design Review Comments for April 18, 2000
Exhibit "G" ~ Preliminary Plotting Plan
Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract 16058
APN 210-062-10
· , TYPICAL SECTInN ~M TYPICAL S~CTIDN -
~.~3 CANTY ~'N~ZN"~'mN~. GROUp, ZNC.
~- ~ ~:~:iS'!~c~::~ ~ ~ ~ CONCEPTDEVLOPMEI~IAN"
h o ~. ~~i~?:~t..__e,=~. . ~,SOUTH OF T~ ~6058
~ ~ :~ ..... f=~ ~ ~ 5~~~L? .... ~- ~" '~'
: I~1
/ ~zo' ~ m
I
I
. .~.~.~,'~ ~ ~ .
......... ~"~ · ~ - ~ 1~ ....... "' I~1
--~ ~
~ rJ
L ........ J
20ZOO' I
I
100.00'
April 17, 2000
To: Mr. Salvador Salazar RC planning division
From: The Assanelli family
Re: Griffin Homes (4t~ and Archibald) and opposition by the Assanelli family for a future
southbound access road to its property. (Parcel #210-062-10 AKA Lucas Ranch
Complex)
Dear Mr. Salazar,
Some months ago you met with Bruce Strickland of Griffin homes and the
Assanelli family attorney, Richard G. Anderson o£Upland.
Our purpose for sending Mr. Anderson was to make it clear that we (the Assanelli
family) are not imeres~ed in selling or developing our property (now or in the future) for
any amount of money. We only warn to use and preserve its uniqueness for residential
purposes only.
We feel that by providing a future southbound access road, this dead end cul-de-
sac will be source of continual problems for both Griffin and Assanelli, and would result
in additional police calls.
Problems such as;
1. Kids hanging out.
2. Graffiti.
3. Extra noise.
4. Unknown cars parking since they would not be in front of any house.
5. Curiosity to see "what's on the other side of the block wall with all of those trees
and buildings7"
6. Loss of privacy.
7. Litter. ("That's not my trash, it belongs to the city. I'm not picking it up")
Our property is occupied by my elderly mother (Maria Assanelli) in one house,
My wife and I and our two children in the second house, and my adult son in the third
house. Plans are already in place for my wife's parents to move into my mother's house
(after mom's eventual death) so that we can care for them, as we have been caring for my
All of our children have expressed a desire to continue living here and preserving
this property. We all continue to pick and crush our grapes yearly, to make our family
zinfandel wine, as well as maintaining our many fruit trees and vegetable garden. Our
houses have new roofs, are properly maintained, and our property is weed flee and fully
landscaped.
In conclusion, the Assanellis are in total agreement that we do not want or need an
access road at the north end of our property. / ~
~:i~t~,.. ,,,., .. ~x .j../~ ~, ~~~~..~.~,.~. {~., ...............
~,. .,,. . I ~ , · .. ~ ,.., ... ,... ~, ....
~ .fill,,J IIl-~,t', ; ' ," ~ ~ l-,-~ -"' ,' ~ III I~1!1 ,, ~,".,3~ II ~ I":~ Ii I1~I: -
'~," I~illl · ~s~ .... ~, : ..... , .... ~111~ ~ ' ~lllld ~lr}l' ~
,~l~" IIIl~ll~ . .,., ..~ . w .. ..- · 9 ~.- 111~1~11 ... ~.~ '. ~ I~111t,~. ~
~ :/L.~"~IIC',L'.~P~- '~tX ..... , :;:1;', .... -.."<' 1 ~1,',:>' , .---', ~111~ ~ ~ ~2111a] ~llt~i ~ ~.Z t t ,,
3~'.){/ .1~1~'~ ...... ~ ? ~ ~.,~.~ * III1.1/ ..... , ~'~'?~I~D~.~-'~
.... , ~, ~., ,, _ ,, ._ ., ~., .., _ "~t~ ~
~:~'~::~'.,,,~z~s: .,' ,.~> .~ )h' s~ '"~'~-~ ~ A~ .~'t~~~:~L
TYPICAL SECTION ~ TYPII :AL SECTION ~ .... '
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:10 p.m. Sal SalazadDuane Morita April 18, 2000
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16058 - GRIFFIN HOME BUILDING GROUP - A request to subdivide
an 18.8-acre site into 92 single-family residential lots, one lot for a private park, one lot (Lot I) for
off-site access, and seven lettered lots for internal roadways. The site is located near the southwest
comer of Archibald Avenue and 6th Street and is in the Low-Medium Residential Distdct (4-8
dwelling units per acre) - APN: 210-062-31.
Background: In November 1999, the City approved a General Plan Amendment, Industrial Area
Specific Plan Amendment, and Development District Amendment for the project site. The project
site was previously located in Subarea 16 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The aforementioned
applications effectively removed the 18.8-acre project site from the Industrial Specific Plan and
rezoned the site to Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre). Tentative Tract
16058 is proposed in accordance with the recently approved applications and underlying zoning.
Design Parameters: The residential lots range in size from 5,231 to 11,902 square feet. The
average lot size is 6,515 square feet. The private park is 20,354 square feet or 0.47 acres. Lot I
is proposed to provide access to those existing off-site lots and residences located northeast of the
project site. A 26-foot wide access easement is also proposed to extend from Lot F to provide
access to the existing off-site lot 'and residence located southeast of the project site. Refer to
Exhibit "A," which presents proposed Tentative Tract 16058.
The applicant proposes Tentative Tract 16058 as an extension of Tentative Tract 15727, which is
contiguous to the project site to the south and east. Tentative Tract 15727 was approved by the
City in 1996 and was processed by the same applicant, Griffin Homes. To provide physical
connection between the two Tentative Tract maps, Lots A and E of Tentative Tract 16058, which
are roadways, will extend and connect with Sunglow Court and Cedar Glen Court, which are located
within the existing residential development built by Tentative Tract 15727. Refer to Exhibit "B,"
which presents the location of Tentative Tract 16058 relative to Tentative Tract 15727. The overall
layout of the proposed tract is consistent with the existing Griffin Community.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Commitiee
discussion.
Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project:
1. Extension of Lot F to Southern Propert7 Line. As presently designed, Lot F is a cul-de-sac
with a bulb, which ends about 65 feet from the southern property line. A 26-foot wide
easement is also proposea to provlae access to the existing resl(~ence lOcate(3 soutrt ot the
project site. This access easement is part of the driveway approach for proposed Lot 14,
which is not desirable. As a solution, it is recommended that Lot F and the cul-de-sac bulb
be extended further south, closer to the property line, which will shorten the required access
easement. This in turn will provide Lot 14 with more frontage for its driveway. This will also
allow the access easement to be widened from 26 feet, as presently proposed, to 30 feet,
which is an Engineering requirement. Refer to Exhibit "A," which presents the proposed
access easement.
2. Re-design of Knuckle for Intersection of Lots F and G As presently designed, Lot G does
not provide sufficient turning radius based on City Engineering standards. As a solution, it
is recommended that a knuckle be provided at the intersection of Lots F and G, similar to the
knuckle being provided at the intersection of Lots D and G. Refer to Exhibit "A," which
presents the intersection location, which requires the knuckle.
DRC COMMENTS
'I'TM 16058 -.GRIFFIN HOME BUILDING GROUP
April 18, 2000
Page 2
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised and returned to the Design
Review Committee, as a consent item, prior to scheduling for Planning Commission.
Attachments
Desitin Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Sal Salazar/Duane Morita
The Committee recommended approval subject to staff's comments and the following:
1. Revise the Tentative Tract Map to extend the cul-de-sac bulb for proposed Lot F further to
the southern property line and widen the access easement to the off-site Assanelli property
from 26 feet to 30 feet in accordance with Engineering recommendation.
2. Revise the roadway transition from Lot G to Lot F to provide sufficient turning radius in
accordance with Engineering standards and requirements. This issue will be addressed
during plan check of the final map.
3. House plotting must comply with 45-foot setback from curb face along Archibald Avenue.
TYPICAL ~ECTIDN . YPXCAL S[CTIDN
I/.
APN 210-062-10
TENTATIVETRAC'I'NO. 16058 ~ll~lmJI II~ c~va. rmmt'~n~,li~Mmm - su~v,c(~G
CONCEPTUAL PLOT PLAN ,~m,,'n~ e~,~ i'a. (~),.tm.~ - ~34 (')~) ~'~ - *~
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 16058, A SUBDIVISION OF 92 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON 18.8 ACRES
OF LAND IN THE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL D'ISTRICT,. LOCATED
NEAR THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND 6TH
STREET, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN:
210-062-31.
A. Recitals.
1. Griffin Home Building Group has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract
Map 16058, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter, in this Resolution, the subject
Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 14th day of June 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing
on that date.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on June 14, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property generally located near the southwest comer of
Amhibald Avenue and 6th Street; and
b. Properties to the south and west are developed with single-family residences;
property to the east, across Archibald Avenue, is developed with industrial uses; property to the
north is vacant. Single-family residences are also located to the northeast and southeast; and
c. The subdivision design, lot sizes, and dimensions are consistent with the Optional
Development Standards of the Low-Medium Residential District of the City's Development Code.
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 Tentative Tract Map and its improvements are consistent with the General
Plan and Development Code; and
b. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and
RESOLUTION NO.
TT 16058- GRIFFIN HOMES BUILDING GROUP
June 14, 2000
Page 2
c. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and
d. The Tentative Tract Map is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and
e. The design of the Tentative Tract Map will not conflict with any easement acquired
for access and/or service utilities within the proposed subdivision.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the November 1996
Cucamonga Cornerpointe Environmental Impact Report and November 1999 Negative Declaration
for General Plan Amendment 99-05A, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 99-02, and
Development District Amendment 99-03, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial
evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment. Further, based upon
the substantial evidence contained in the Environmental Impact Report and 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.
Plannin.q Division
1 ) Prior to Final Map approval, the roadway transition from Lot G to Lot F
shall be provided with sufficient turning radius in accordance with
Engineering standards and requirements.
2) Residential design and development shall comply with the Optional
Development Standards for the Low-Medium Residential District.
3) House plotting shall comply with the 45-foot setback from curb face
along Archibald Avenue.
4) Landscaping and wall design along Archibald Avenue shall comply with
the "Landscape Site Plan Conceptual Design," "Conceptual Design,"
and "Grade Change Conceptual Design" requirements of the Archibald
Avenue Beautification Plan.
5) The applicant shall notify those residents living along Sunglow Court
and Cedar Glen Court of the proposed Tentative Tract Map 16058 and
the impending traffic to be expected along their roadways, resulting
with the project's connection of Lots A and E to those roads.
6) The project shall comply with requirements of the Cucamonga County
Water District.
7)A Development Review application shall be required for any house
products.
8) A final acoustical report shall be prepared prior to issuance of any
permits to determine the height of sound attenuation walls to address
traffic noise.
RESOLUTION NO.
TT 16058 -GRIFFIN HOMES BUILDING GROUP
June 14, 2000
Page 3
Enqineerinq Division
1) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the
existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except
for the 66 KV Electrical) on the opposite side of Amhibald Avenue shall
be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permits. The fee shall
be one-half the adopted amount times the length of the project frontage
on Archibald Avenue.
2) The existing overhead utilities on the project side of Amhibald Avenue
shall be undergrounded prior to public improvement acceptance or
occupancy, whichever occurs first.
3) Existing curb adjacent sidewalk along Archibald Avenue shall be
removed and replaced with curvilinear.
4) Reconstruct public improvements along Sunglow Court and Cedar Glen
Courts due to extension of these streets. Extend the existing 36-inch
storm drain on Sunglow Court. Revise existing Drawing No. 1645,
Sheets, 1,3, and 5, to reflect the above improvements, as required by
the City Engineer.
5) Vacate the excess street rights-of-way at the terminuses of Sunglow
Court and Cedar Glen Courts.
6) Provide two separate Q100 laterals and catch basins for each sump
location.
7) The storm drain easement and storm drain pipes on Lot 15 shall be
both angled at the southerly end connecting to the southerly pipe going
east. The connection is unacceptable.
8) Homeowners' Association maintained landscaping along Amhibald
Avenue (Lot H) shall conform to the Parkway Beautification Master
Plan for this Special Boulevard.
9) The non-standard knuckle design at the northerly intersection of Lots
F and G shown on the Tentative Tract Map is not acceptable.
However, a special design can be submitted and reviewed in plan
check.
10) The cul-de-sac bulb on Lot F shall be extended up to the southerly tract
boundary and provide a 60-foot wide lettered lot to be maintained by
the Homeowners' Association.
11) Developer shall accept private drainage from adjacent undeveloped
property to the north into the private street and storm drain system.
12) A copy of the CC&Rs approved by the City Attorney is required prior to
approval of the final map. The CC&Rs shall allow adjacent properties
to join the private community if they so desire. If adjacent properties do
not choose to join, they shall be permitted to use reciprocal emergency
access and/or drainage easements.
RESOLUTION NO.
TT 16058- GRIFFIN HOMES BUILDING GROUP
June 14, 2000
Page 4
13) Final drainage study shall address interim and ultimate conditions along
the north tract boundary:
a. Installation of perimeter wall shall not increase flows to the "Not
A Part" property at the northeast corner of the site. If necessary,
install interim facilities on Lots 23 and/or I to direct undeveloped
flows to Lot F.
b. Clarify whether the facility proposed on Lot 61 is interim or
ultimate. Drainage studies for Tract 15727 show an additional 10
acres of tributary area for existing Line "A-1" north of this tract's
north boundary. However, if potential uses are not compatible,
demonstrate that this area can be accommodated in the
Amhibald Avenue storm drain.
14) Obtain off-site rights-of-way to install necessary inlets for interim
drainage facilities along the north property line or relocation said inlets
on-site.
Fire Protection District:
1) Lot "F" exceeds the maximum allowable of 600 feet for a cul-de-sac.
Provide second access for Lot "F." This may be mitigated with the
installation of automatic fire sprinklers for all houses on this street.
Contact the Fire Marshall's office to discuss details at (909) 477-2770.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:.
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16058
SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION OF AN 18,8-ACRE SITE INTO 92 SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCES
APPLICANT: GRIFFIN HOME BUILDING GROUP
LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND 6TH STREET
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
General Requirements Completion Date
1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its I I
agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the
alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents,
officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents,
officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City
may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but
such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition.
2. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and all I /
Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, building and
construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check.
B. Time Limits
1. This tentative tract map or tentative pamel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning I I
Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the City Engineer within 3 years from
the date of the approval.
C, Site Development
1. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development I I
Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in
effect at the time of building permit issuance.
2. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be I /
located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of
concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground
vaults.
Project No. TTM 16058
CO~nDletion Date
3. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the I
adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map.
4. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the I
Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or
prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be
provided to the City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning
Division a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January I of each and
every year and whenever said information changes.
5. 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.
6. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of I
all lots for City Planner and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice
requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of
construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing.
7. Eight-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double / I
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 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences
along the project's perimeter.
D. Landscaping
1. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be I /
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.
2. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering / /
sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Archibald
Avenue.
3. All wails shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, / I
the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
E. Environmental
1. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the I I
issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise
attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided,
and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be
checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report.
F, 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.
sc -2-0o
2
Project No. TFM 16058
Comeretion Date
SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
G. Existing Structures
1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances
considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings.
H. Grading
1. As a custom-lot subdivision, the following requirements shall be met:
a. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all on-
site drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the
Building and Safety Division prior to final map approval and prior to the issuance of
grading permits.
b. Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water that are conducted onto or
over adjacent parcels, are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of the
Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of grading and building permits.
c. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering and protecting the
subdivided properties, are to be installed prior to issuance of building permits for
construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving,
or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested.
d. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety
Division for approval prior to issuance of building and grading permits. (This may be
on an incremental or composite basis).
e. All slope banks in excess of 5 feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native
grasses or planted with ground cover for erosion control upon completion of grading
or some other alternative method of erosion control shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the Building Official. In addition a permanent irrigation system shall be
provided. This requirement does not release the applicantJdeveloper from
compliance with the slope planting requirements of Section 17.08.040 I of the
Development Code.
2. In hillside areas, residential developments shall be graded and constructed consistent with the
standards contained in the Hillside Development Regulations Section 17.24.070.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
I. 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. An irrevocable offer of dedication for roadway purposes shall be.made for the private streets. I
3. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. I
4. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for I !
approved openings: Archibald Avenue.
5. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall I I
be dedicated to the City.
sc_2 0 /f;/
3
Project No. l"rM 16858
Completion Date
J. Street Improvements
1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, I I
landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City
Standards. interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter,
AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees.
2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: I I
Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail
Archibald Avenue c x x
Notes: (al Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement
reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk
shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be
provided for this item.
3. improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety I I
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 I I
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, I I
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 I /
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.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with I I
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 I /
be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots.
sc-?..oo
4
Project No. TTM 16058
Comoletion Date
h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan
check.
4. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided [or 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 City Engineer's Office in
addition to any other permits required.
5. 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.
6. 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 occum 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 Archibald Avenue.
L. Drainage and Flood Control
1. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final
map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities
shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
M. Utilities
1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, I
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. I
3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the I /
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and
the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernard/no. A letter of
compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits,
whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days
prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the
case of all other residential projects.
N. General Requirements and Approvals
1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for I I
all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to
building permit issuance if no map is involved.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT,
(909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
General Fire Protection Conditions
1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. The I I
developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced
participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the
s c_,.,o Iq2
5
Project No. TTM 16058
Comoletion Cate
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a
fire station to serve the development. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the
developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs.
2. Fire flow requirement shall be: 1,500 gallons per minute, Per '97 UFC Appendix iii-A, 3, (b) I
(increase).
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 fire department
personnel after construction and prior to occupancy.
3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, I
flushed, and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e.,
lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department
personnel.
4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required
hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch
riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet
this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and
model numbers.
5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be
submitted to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is
available, pending completion of the required fire protection system.
6.Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to
final inspection.
7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below:
a. Other: Lot "F" exceeds maximum allowable len,qth. (Or provide second access to Lot
Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as
woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled
stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if the sprinkler system is adequate
for proposed operations.
8. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted:
a. Other: City Standards. ____
9. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. I I
10. Emergency access, a minimum of 26 feet wide, shall be provided, and maintained free and I I
clear of obstructions at all times during construction, in accordance with Fire District
requirements.
11. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet I !
6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus.
12. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the / I
Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information.
13. Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho I I
Cucamonga Fire Protection District as follows:
a. $132 for CCWD Water Plan review/underground water supply.
b. $132 for Single-Family Residential Tract (per phase).
sc_2 0
6
Project No. TTM 16058
Comoletion Date
**Note: Separate plan check fees for Tenant Improvement work, 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 1997 UBC, I I
UFC, UPC, UMC, and RCFD Standards 32 and 15 and 1996 NEC.
NOTE: SEPARATE PLAN CHECK FEES FOR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS, FIRE PROTECTION I I
SYSTEMS (SPRINKLERS, HOOD SYSTEMS, ALARMS, ETC.), AND/OR ANY
CONSULTANT REVIEWS WILL BE ASSESSED UPON SUBMITTAL OF PLANS.
NOTE: A SEPARATE GRADING PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL IS REQUIRED FOR ALL NEW
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS WHERE
IMPROVEMENTS BEING PROPOSED WILL GENERATE 50 CUBIC YARDS OR MORE
OF COMBINED CUT AND FILL. THE GRADING PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED,
STAMPED AND SIGNED BY A CALIFORNIA REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER.
June 14, 2000
Emily wlmer, Assistant Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Attention: Chairman and members of the Planning Commission
RE'. Piannino~ Commission meeting (June
CUP Modification 00-03
Mc Alan's Pub and Grille
I, Jeff JennJsan, representing Charles Dunn Real Estate Company, have spoken
independently to both parties invo,lved in the issues presented in Mike Toie's
letter (June 14a, 2000). Both part,es have agreed to bye resolutions a3 the
issues presented in the letter.
1. The landlord will be willing to assist with the cost and constmcl~on of two (2)
ramps m remedy and assist with of delivery of goods to the To~e House Cafe.
2. An added condition with the approva! that alcohol service will not commence
on the patio at Mc Alan's Pub and Grille until after 2:00pm (wt~en Tole House
Cafe is dosed),
Should you have any questions or require any additional information, please do
not hesitate to contact me at (949) 752-23t 1,
J J~n~'ison"
the city of
l~ancho C.eamon~a
SlaffReport
DATE: June 14, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Bulier, City Planner
BY: Emily VVimer, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT- 00-03 MCALAN'S PUB AND
GRILLE - A request to modify a previously approved restaurant and bar to permit
serving of alcoholic beverages in the outdoor patio area in the Neighborhood
Commercial District of the Haven Village Center, located at 6321 Haven Avenue
(formerly Willie & Pies Pizza) - APN - 201-271-69.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant requested a modification to the Conditional Use Permit previously approved on March
22, 2000. The proposed modification will allow seating and serving of alcohol in the patio area
which currently exists at the location. The former "Willie and Pies" restaurant used this area for
outdoor seating.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Site Characteristics and Surrounding Land Use: Site characteristics and surrounding land
uses are the same a~ the previously approved Conditional Use Permit. The surrounding land
uses are compatible with the approved pub and grille. The site characteristics will stay the
same as the approved restaurant except the addition to serving alcohol in the enclosed patio
area.
B. Parking: The expanded use of the patio area is identical to the former "Willie and Pies"
outdoor seating area. Parking for the pub and grille will not exceed the spaces used by the
previous tenant. Haven Village Center has a total of 485 parking spaces.
ANALYSIS:
A. Proposed Uses: The applicants, Mr. Alan and Ms. Campero, propose to modify the original
Conditional Use Permit which approved the pub and grille on March 22, 2000. The proposed
[TEN L
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00 - 03
June 14, 2000
Page 2
modification will allow serving alcohol and food within the patio area. The wrought iron patio
enclosure, which currently exists, is a total of 377 square feet. Currently a gate is located at
the front of the patio. The applicant proposes to close the entrance and extendthe wrought
iron fencing. There will be no access from the parking area.
B. Compatibility of Use: The pub and grille is located on the northwest corner of Haven Village
Center. The use is not expected to disturb existing residences or any of the surrounding
businesses as discussed in the previous analysis.
Conclusion: Based on the above analysis, staff believes that the proposed modification is
compatible with the surrounding uses and complies with the objectives of the Neighborhood
Commercial Center.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in thelnland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within
a 300-foot radius of the project site and all the tenants within the Haven Village Center.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the modification to Conditional Use Permit
through adoption of the attached Resolution.
Brad Buller
City Planner
BB:EVV~Is
'Attachments: Exhibit"A" - Site Plan
Exhibit "B" - Floor Plan
Resolution of Approval for Modification to CUP 00-03
~c.~- 1. Toll House Caf
~'~' 2. chl£op£ac~o£
~'~ i 3. Stake Farm
[~ TOP VALU.,.~RKET 5. Nail Sa~on
~:: 16. PHASEII 7. Tanning
~ .~s~. fl. Tailor
· 9. Chlnese F~a~
'~'~ 10. Avnil~le
.... ~2. Available
Pad
pad A Pad C C. HcOonald s Restaurant
'
PAD B: Up To 3.6~SF McDonald's Open~ 12/93 PHAS~
For Sale: rn
~ I~ ......
PAnKING 485 -~~.. - . NO~I,I
HEALTH DF.J~qIIMENT No'rE8 ~ a,l~ // ~'x ', '
, ~~,=~...--. -'-:.: ,,
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MODIFICATION TO
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 00-03 TO SERVE ALCHOLIC
BEVERAGES IN THE OUTDOOR PATIO AREA, LOCATED AT 6321
HAVEN AVENUE, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT,
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 201-271-69
A. Recitals.
1. Mark Alan and Vivian C. Campero have filed an application for the issuance of
Modification to Conditional Use Permit No. 00-03, as described in the title of this Resolution.
Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as 'the
application."
2. On the 14th day of June 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing
on that date.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on June 14, 2000, 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 6321 Haven Avenue, on the
southeast corner Haven Avenue and Lemon Avenue with a street frontage of 161 feet and lot depth
of 455 feet and is presently improved with the Haven Village Center; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is developed with single family
residential (Low, 2-4 dwellings per acre), the property to the south is the Route 30 freeway, the
property to the east is developed with Medium-High residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre), and
the property to the west is a small shopping center on the southwest corner; and
c. The modification to the proposed use, the serving of alcoholic beverages in the
outdoor patio area, is consistent with the Neighborhood Commercial District, and the surrounding
Haven Village Center and;
d. The proposed use would be compatible with the surrounding center.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 00 - 03
March 8, 2000
Page 2
a. The proposed use is in accordance with the General Plan, the objectives of the
Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located.
b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code.
4. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the project identified in this
Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunde', pursuant to Section 15301 of the
State CEQA Guidelines.
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.
Planning Division
1 ) Approval is for the serving of alcoholic beverages in the outdoor patio
area of the recently approved McAlan's Pub and Grille. Expansion or
intensification of the patio area shall require a modification to the
Conditional Use Permit.
2) When entertainment is being conducted, doors to the patio shall
remain closed for noise attenuation purposes. No entertainment shall
be conducted outdoors.
3) Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if
building permits are not issued or the approved use has not
commenced within 24 months of this date.
4) Approval of this request shall not wave compliance with any sections of
the Neighborhood Commercial District, State Fire Marshal's
regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances.
5) If operation of the facility causes adverse effects upon adjacent
businesses or operations, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought
before the Planning Commission for consideration and possible
termination of the use.
6) The facility shall be operated in conformance with the performance
standards as defined in the Development Code including, but not
limited to, noise levels.
7) Any signs proposed on the facility shall be designed in conformance
with the City's Sign Ordinance and the Uniform Sign Program for the
Haven Village Center and shall require review and approval by the City
Planner prior to installation.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 00 - 03
March 8, 2000
Page 3
Private parties with or without bar service may be allowed during the day and
must end before the regular bar opens.
Buildinq and Fire Safety Division
1) Occupancy of the facility shall not commence until such time as all
Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal's regulations have been
complied with. Detailed plans shall be submitted to the Rancho
Cucamonga Fire District and the Building and Safety Division for
review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The
building shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy.
2) The modification to the approved plans after occupancy of the building
will require additional review and/or permits from the Fire District and
the Building and Safety Division.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
A'I-FEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14th day of June 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
the city of
g!aneho Cueamonsa
Staff Report
DATE: June 14, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-06 - CABOT
INDUSTRIAL TRUST- The development of two industrial buildings in two phases, consisting
of a 254,494 square foot building to be constructed dudng Phase I and a 61,598 square foot
building to be constructed during Phase II on 17.73 acres of land in General Industrial Distdct
(Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of Arrow
Route and I-15- APN: 229-021-29 and 57.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoning:
North - Commercial development (Foothill Market Place); Regional Related Commercial, Foothill
Boulevard Specific Plan
South - Existing industrial development; Heavy Industrial (Subarea 15)
East - Vacant parcel; General Industrial (Subarea 8)
West - Interstate 1-15
B. General Plan Desiqnations:
Project Site - General Industrial
North - Commercial
South - Heavylndustdal
East - General Industrial
West - Interstate I-15
C. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and contains no significant vegetation. The undeveloped
17,73 acres slope from north to south at an approximate 2 percent incline.
ITEM ~
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 00-06 - FREEWAY DISTRIBUTION CENTER
June 14, 2000
Page 2
D. Parkin.q Calculations:
Type Square Parking Number of Number of
Of Use Footaqe Ratio Spaces Required Spaces Provided
Office /
(Building A) 14,121 1/250 56
Warehouse
(Building A) 240,373 1/1000 (1st 20,000) 20
1/2000 (2nd 20,000) 10
1/4000(above 40,000) 5Q
80 222
Office /
(Building B) 3,499 1/250 14
Warehouse
(Building B) 58,099 1/1000 (1st 20,000) 20
1/2000 (2nd 20,000) 10
1/4000(above 40,000) --5
35 79
TOTAL 185 301
In addition to the above parking requirements, one semi-trailer parking space is required for each
dock-high door. The project is in conformance with this required ratio.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The site contains two vacant and adjacent triangular shaped parcels that will be merged into
a single parcel of 17.73 acres. There are no mature trees on-site nor is there other significant
vegetation on-site. The site is currently cultivated as a vineyard. The site slopes from north to south
at an approximately 2 percent.
The site is surrounded by the Interstate 15 to the west and northwest and to the northeast is
commercial development (Foothill Market Place). To the east is a vacant vineyard with no other
significant vegetation. To the south are industrial uses such as, Parallel Products and the recently
approved Origen industrial warehouse project.
The proposed buildings are designed to house either a single or multiple industrial tenants. The
building design will be oriented (facing south) to front Arrow Route (approximately 1,160 feet) and will
side and be cleady visible from 1-15 (1,660 feet) on the north and northwest side of the property.
Each of the buildings will have office area portions that front on to Arrow Route. Building "A" has an
office area of 14,121 square feet and building "B" has an office area of 3,499 square feet. The
storage and loading areas do not face 1-15 or Arrow Route. Each of these loading areas is oriented
towards the east and will be screened from the public right-of-ways with 8-foot high screen walls.
The buildings incorporate two primary building materials. The buildings are well articulated with
strong vertical and horizontal changes and recess to the building plane, that are carded throughout
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 00-06 - FREEWAY DISTRIBUTION CENTER
June 14, 2000
Page 3
and on all sides of the buildings. Additionally, the public patio areas are designed to be accessible to
the office entr3/ways of the facilities without conflicting with on-site traffic maneuvering areas. The
color variation of the building is a stonewall grey, white and silver chime color scheme on a concrete
tilt-up fac..ade. There are bands of medium sandblast concrete along with blue reflective colored
glazing accents to help create contrast.
B. Desiqn Review Committee: The Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Fong ) reviewed the project, on May 2,
2000, and the applicant submitted a revised scheme to reduce pavement at the northeast comer of
the site. The Committee recommended approval (see attached Design Review Committee Action
Comments Exhibit "G").
C. Technical and Gradinq Review Committees: The Committees reviewed the project and recommended
approval subject to the conditions outlined in the attached Resolution of Approval,
D. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study was completed by the applicant and staff
completed Part II. Staff identified potential short-term impacts related to air quality due to construction
activity. Mitigation measures have been identified that would make the impacts less than significant.
If the Planning commission concurs, then issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be in
order.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review
00-06 through adoption of the attached Resolution with Conditions and issuance of a Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
City Planner
BB:DF/Is
Attachments:Exhibit "A" - Radius Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Elevations Building - "A"
Exhibit "D" - Elevations Building -"B'
Exhibit "E" - Initial Study Parts I and II
Exhibit "F" - Design Review Comments May 2, 2000
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
Freeway Dlatrlbu~lon Cenfer
C.__hh_! Indua~rlal True!
['" ~ ~ hm plnckert architects, Inc.
~omposlte 200~ 300~ & 600' radius map - sire plan , --~
~ site plan keynotes
/ _~ tabulations
/
project information
/ ~ ~/~ ~,. ..... site plan general notes
vicinRy map
site leqend
,,~~~Ll~liI,L. ~,~.,,~?~. I~-, I
, . . . .... .... .:-' . .~:~' y
~ Freewo Distribution Center
........ *-~; .......... -~--~-:~ .............. ~:~-~ / ~fll pinc~ert orc~itects, inc.
overall rote pt~nl , , I , r-
I A . 5 IS~AR~AB
Freeway Distribution Center
Cabot Industrial Trust
Building 'A' Elevations hill plnckert architects, Inc.
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION FORM
(Part I - Initial Study)
Planning Division
(909) 477-2750
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
infom]ation.
Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: ~) ~- 0 (~ - 0 ~o
Name & Address of project owner(s): C_~.E~0'7 ..T~kJ~bt ~iZl A-l.-
2~o~'ro~J ~ MA- O~to~- IqOG
Name & Addre$$ of developer or project sponsor: ~ { I,/ (~f'~ ~ l l'~
Telephone NumbeK ~ D r~- ~ -- ~ / OD
Name & Address of pe~on p~padng this fo~ (if different f~m above):
Telephone Number:.
INITSTDI.WPD - 4/96 ' ~'~ ~:;~' Page1
Information i~dicated by astedsk (') 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 sile, and indicate the
site boundaries.
2) Provide a set of color photographs which show representative views into the site from the north, south, east and west;
views int__.~o and from the site from the pdmary access points which serve the site; and representative views of significant
features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph.
3) Project Location (descdbe): ~(~3.."[ ~ ~IiD..~ (~'- /~x2~r~,~)b~ ~"T ~ ,, ~ tc> ~v~ ~..~.)O"[
4) AssessoYs Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): ~ p ~ .~ ~_c{ _ 0 ~-. ( - "'~ ~ ,~ ~JO
°5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.): ~.~ I ~-
'6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications):
7) Descdbe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet
if necessary:
8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary fram the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental
agencies in order to fully implement the project:
Descdbe the physica~ se~ing ~f the si~e as it exists bef~re the pr~ject inc~uding inf~rrnati~n ~n ~p~graphy~ s~i~ stabi~ity~ p~ants
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. A~ach photographs of significant features described. In addition,
site all sources of information (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies):
10) Descdbe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Site all sources of infom?ation (books. published reports and
oral history):
11) Describe any n~ise s~urces and ~heir ~eve~s that n~w a~ect the site (aircraft~ roadway n~ise~ etc~) and h~w they wi~~ a~ect
proposed uses:
IN ITSTD1.VVPD-4/96' /~/{~ Page3
12) Desc/fbe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use which
will result from the prosed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur
with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessa/y:
Indicate the type of land use (residential, commereial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops,
department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.):
14) Wi~~ the prop~sed pr~ject change the pattem~ sca~e ~r character ~f the surrounding genere~ area ~f the preject?
15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated, including soume and amount. How will these noise levels
affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What methods of sound proofing am proposed?
'16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: J~ l l3 ~J~
17) indicateanybodiesofwater(includingdomesticwatersupplies) intowhichthesitedrains:
18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further cladfication, please contact
the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at 987-2591.
a. Residential (gal~day) Peak use (gal/Day)
b. Commercial/ind. (gal~day/ac) //~0 (Z~ Peak use (gal/min/ac) ~, ~
19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. __ Septic Tank ~(~ Sewer. If septic tanks are preposed, 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 cladfication, please contact the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at 987-2591,
a. Residential (gal~day)
b. Commercial/Ind. (gal~day~ac) c:~.~C:~3
RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS:
20) Numberofresidentialunits: ~k~ jr~
INITSTDI.WPD - 4/96 ' ,~-/'~ Page5
Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units):
21) AnticipatedRentSale Pdce(S)(per month)range of sale pdces
22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type:
23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit t~e:
24) Indicate the expected ~mber of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropdate School
Districts as shown ~Kttachment B:
a. Elementa~/~
b. Junio~gh: .
c. ~erfior High ·
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS
25) Descdbetypeofuse(s)andmajorfunction(s)ofcommemial, industdalorinstitutionaluses:
26) Total floor area of commercial, industdal, or institutional uses by type:
27) Indicate hour~ of operalion: ~)0"[ ~l~ /LJO t~/J ~i-'~"- "-~'~ ~' "'~'1'/1~
28) Numberofemployees: Total: J~O~- ~<~(3[k3~j
Maximum Shift:
Time of Maximum Shift:
29) Pmvidebreakd~wn~fanticipatedj~bc~assi~cati~ns~inc~udingwageandsa~aryranges~aswe~~asanindicati~n~ftherate
of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet ff necessaq/):
30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City:
'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):
ALL PROJECTS
32) Have the water~ sewer~ ~re~ and ~~~d c~ntre~ agencies sen/ing the preject been c~ntacted t~ determine their abllity t~ pr~vide
adequate sen/ice to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response.
~n the kn~wn hist~y ~f this pmperty~ has thera been any use~ st~rage~ ~r discharge ~f hazard~us and/~r t~xic mateda~s?
Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but am not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and
he~oicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and ether flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above.
Please list the materials and describe their uae, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if
known.
34) t4411 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 inventoq/ 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.
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 infon'nation presented are true and
correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional infon'nation may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
°ate: /$,gna,ure:
I NITSTD1.WPD - 4/96 ' ~"~/~'~' Page8
ATTACHMENT A
Water Usa.qe
Average use per day
Residential
- Single Family 600 gal/day
Apt/Condo 400 gal/day
Commercial/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 Usage
For all uses
Average use x 2.0
Sewer Flows
Residential
Single Family 270 gat/day
Apt/Condos 200 gal/day
Commercial/Industrial
General Commercial 2000 gaFday/ac.
Neighborhood Commercial 100-1500 gal/d~y/ac
General Industrial 2000 gal/day/ac
Heavy Industrial 3000 gal/day/ac
Source: Cucamonga County Water District Master Plan, 9/86
INITSTD1.WPD - 4/96 ' /~/~/~' Page9
ATTACHMENT B
Contact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees:
Elementary School Districts
Alta Loma
9350 Base Line Road, Suite F
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(909) 987-0766
Central
10601 Church street, Suite 112
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(909) 989-8541
Cucamonga
8776 Archibald Avenue
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(909) 987-8942
Etiwanda
5959 East Avenue
P.O. Box 248
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
(909) 899-2451
High School
Chaffey High School
211 West 5th Street
Ontario, CA 91762
(909) 988-8511
INITSTD1.WPD - 4/96 ' ~'~/? Page 10
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1. Project File: DR 00-06
2. Related Files: Industrial Area Specific Plan
3. Description of Project: Environmental Assessment and Development Review 00-06
Cabot Industrial Trust - The proposed project is the construction of two, concrete, tilt-up
industrial buildings, totaling 298,472 square feet, on a 17.73-acre lot located at the
northeast corner of 115 Freeway and Arrow Route. The Project will be completed in two
phases and take approximately eighteen months to complete. Building A is
approximately 240,298 square feet and will be constructed during Phase I. Building B is
approximately 58,130 square feet and will be constructed during Phase I1. The ultimate
use will be industrial manufacturing, warehouse and distribution.
4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Riverside Commercial Investors, Inc.
· 3685 Main Street, Suite 200
Riverside, California 92501
5. General Plan Designation: General Industrial
6. Zoning: General Industrial (Subarea 8) Industrial Area Specific Plan.
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is currently an abandoned vineyard and
is located on the north side of Arrow Route. The site is bordered on the west and north
sides by the 1-15 Freeway. Parallel Products manufacturing, and proposed Rancho Rail
Center warehouse distribution center, are directly across Arrow Route to south of the
site. East and adjacent to the site is vacant land.
8. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
9. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Doug Fenn, Associate Planner
(909) 477-2750
10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless
Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
( ) Land Use and Planning (,/') Transportation/Circulation ( ) Public Services
( ) Population and Housing ( ) Biological Resources ( ) Utilities and Service Systems
(v') Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources (~') Aesthetics
( ) Hazards
(¢') Water ( ) Cultural Resources
(v') Air Quality (v') Noise ( ) Recreation
(v') Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
() i find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
(v') I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the
project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but
at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based
upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially
Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
() I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to
applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed.
'~-Xr°ject' ~
S ig n e d: C-~ ~sNebe~oYr~~- ~ May 3, 2000
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 3
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an
explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a
discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified.
Significant
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Poter~tiallyUnless Than
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) (./)
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or ( ) ( ) (v')
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project?
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the ( ) ( ) (v')
vicinity?
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an ( ) ( ) ('/)
established community?
Comments:
a-d) The proposed 'project was designed in accordance with the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan. The project site is located on the north
side of Arrow Route east and adjacent to the 1-15 Freeway. The site is a former
vineyard area now designated General Industrial and is zoned Subarea 8 within the
Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan. The designation provides for
General Industrial activities and assures a transition area from the Heavy Industrial
category. No increase in density or plan amendment is proposed and therefore no
impacts will result from the project.
Issues and Suppoding Information Sources: PotentiallyUnless Than
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposah
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local ( ) ( ) ( (,/)
population projections?
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/)
housing?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 4
Comments:
a-b) Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new
employees to the area. Operation of the warehouse will include both warehouse
and office/clerical positions. The addition of these employs will not create a demand
for additional housing as a majority of the employees will likely be hired from within
the City or surrounding communities. Until recently, Rancho Cucamonga was
considered a housing rich community. With development of this and other similar
projects, the City is reaching a balance between jobs and housing thus achieving
one of SCAG's major goals for the sub-region.
c) The site is currently an abandoned vineyard. No existing housing is located onsite
or within the general vicinity of the site as the area is designated General Industrial.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Then
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ) ( ) (,/)
b) Seismic ground shaking? ) (v') ( )
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (v') ( )
d) Seiche hazards? ( (v')
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( (v')
f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil ( (~')
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
g) Subsidence of the land? ( (
h) Expansive soils? ( ( (.")
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( (
.Comments:
a-c) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is
it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault. The
Red Hill Fault, or Etiwanda Avenue Fault, passes within 2.5 miles north and west of
the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 8 miles northwest. These
faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0 - 7.0 earthquakes, respectively. Also, the
San Jacinto fault, capable of producing up to Mw 7.5 earthquakes is 12 miles northeast
of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 13 miles
northeast of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking.
Adhering to the Uniform Building Code will ensure that geologic impacts are less than
significant.
d) The site is not located near a body of water.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 5
e) The site is relatively flat and is located in a developed industrial area adjacent to the
Day Creek Channel. Therefore, the site is not susceptible to landslides or mudflows.
f) The topography will be altered to accommodate the project because the site is
currently vacant. Grading will be done in accordance with a grading plan approved
by the City Engineer. The impact is not considered significant as the site is relatively
fiat with minimal grading required.
g-h) Soil type on-site and in the vicinity is Tujunga Soboba association. These soils are
excessively drained, readily level to moderately sloping soils formed on alluvial fans.
Runoff is very slow, and hazard of erosion is slight. Included with this soil in
mapping are areas of Tujunga gravely loamy sand in scattered tracts 10 to 20 acres
in size. Also included are small areas of Delhi fine sand. The project site is east,
north and outside of the Ontario Recovery Unit for the Delhi Sands Flower-loving
Fly (DSF) as indicated in Figure 6 of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Final Recovery
Plan for the DSF. Therefore, the site does not contain significant amounts of Delhi
sand or appropriate habitat for the Delhi Sand Flower-Loving Fly.
i) The site contains no unique geologic or physical features.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
4. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, ( ) ( ) (¢') ( )
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
b) Exposure of people or property to water related ( ) ( )
hazards such as flooding?
c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration ( ) (,")
of surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)?
d) Changes in the amount of su~ace water in any ( ) (,~')
water body?
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction ( ) (-/')
of water movements?
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either ( ) (,,')
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations, or through substantial loss of
groundwater recharge capability?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) (¢')
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( )
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 6
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: s,o.~,~.~ Mitigation SignificantNO
I Impact I Ir;corlx~-ated Impact Impact
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ( ) ( ) ( )
groundwater otherwise available for public water
supplies?
Comments:
a) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate
and amount of surface water runoff due to the amount of new hardscape proposed
on the currently vacant site. All runoff will be conveyed to drainage facilities, which
have been designed to handle the flows and must be approved by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of grading permits. The impact is not considered significant.
b) The site is not located within the 100-year flood plain as indicated on Figure III-G/2
"Flood Hazards" in the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan EIR.
c-e) The project site is not located near a body of water. The Day Creek Channel runs
adjacent to the 1-15 Freeway along the west border of the site, and contains water
intermittently generally during heavy storms. The applicant will provide a drainage
study showing how stormwater runoff will be conveyed both during
grading/construction and once the site is developed and occupied, prior to issuance
of a grading permit.
f-i) The project will not interfere with groundwater management practices in the area
because the site is not used for groundwater recharge.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potent[ally Unless Then
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposah
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to ( ) (v~) ( ) ( )
an existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) (v~) ( ) ( )
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or ( ) ( ) ( ) (v~)
cause any change in climate?
d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,~)
Comments:
a-b) Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-
Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is
the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site.
Sources of emissions dudng this phase include exhaust emissions from
construction vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 8
Sources of emissions during this phase include exhaust emissions from
construction vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of
construction vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed surfaces. NOx and
PM~o levels may be exceeded during this phase, however with implementation of
the following mitigation measures, impacts will be reduces to less-than-significant
levels.
1. The site shall be treated with water or other soil stabilizing agent
(approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM~0 emissions, in
accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403.
2. Arrow Route and the Access Drive (if paved) shall be swept according to
a schedule established by the City to reduce PM~0 emissions associated
with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon
time of year of construction.
3. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed
25 mph to minimize PM~o emissions from the site during such episodes.
4. Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be
applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours
or more to reduce PM~o emissions.
5. The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used.
on-site based on Iow emission factors and high-energy efficiency. The
construction contractor shall ensure the construction grading plans
include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and
maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
6. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel
powered equipment where feasible.
7. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans
include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in
use.
c-d) The proposed project is the construction of two industrial buildings on 17.73 acres
of vacant land within Subarea 8, of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, in accordance
with the City code. The end use of the proposed projec{, general industrial,
warehouse and distribution, will not generate emissions that could cause climatic
changes or objectionable odors.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle tdps or traffic congestion? ( ) ( ) (,,') ( )
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 8
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Polen~ially Unless Than
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to ( ) ( ) (,~') ( )
nearby uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~')
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting ( ) ( ) ( ) ('/)
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~')
Comments:
a) The project site is part of the larger Industrial Area Specific Plan area. The City has
established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant
prior to issuance of building permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements
necessary to support adequate traffic circulation, in addition, the project is required
to comply with standard conditions of approval for provision of adequate
ingress/egress from the site, employee/visitor parking on-site, and large truck
access. Compliance with conditions of approval will ensure that project-related trips
are less than significant.
b-d) The site is a triangular parcel with three entries on Arrow Route. There are set
backs for each entry so visitors to the site will not back up into the street. Access for
emergency vehicles is adequate with two, 50-foot driveways and one, 35-foot
driveway. According to the City Fire Department although Building B does not have
sufficient room to facilitate fire depadment truck tum-around at the north end of the
project, secondary access through Building A side of the site will resolve this issue.
Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant.
e-f) A Regional Multi-Purpose Trail runs adjacent to the Day Creek Flood Channel. The
trail provides trail user access to community facilities such as parks, schools and
shopping centers. The Multi-Purpose trail does not cross at any point within the
project area and therefore is not impacted.
g) Located four miles from Ontario Airport, the site is offset northeast of the flight path
and will not be dangerous to users or aimraft.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 9
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their ( ) ( ) ) (,,')
habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds)?
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, ( ) ( ) ) (,,')
eucalyptus windrow, etc.)?
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., ( ) ( ) ) (¢')
eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and ( ) ( ) ) (¢')
vernal pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) ) (¢')
Comments:
a) The site is an abandoned vineyard and is currently vacant. No natural habitat exists
onsite, and the property is not within the Ontario Recovery Unit as indicated in
Figure 6 of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Final Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sands
Flower-loving Fly habitat. Onsite vegetation is sparse and consists of non-native
species. It is unlikely that any DSFLF will move on to the site due to the lack of
natural habitat.
b-c) There are no existing trees onsite.
d) There is no riparian or wetland habitat on-site.
e) The site, along with other sites in the vicinity, is undeveloped. However, intermittent
industrial development to the south and north and the 1-15 freeway on the west has
eliminated any wildlife corridors that may have occurred in the past.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially ,Unless Than
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposah
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
plans?
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
inefficient manner?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 10
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Miti~fiorl Significant NO
I ,mpsct I 'r,corpo~,ed
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
mineral resource that would be of future value to
the region and the residents of the State?
Comments:
a-b) The project will be required to conform to applicable City standards for energy
conservation.
c) The project site is located on the Day Creek alluvial fan, an area classified as a
Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ-2). An MRZ-2 zone contains deposits of known value
and marketability. However, the State Geologist has determined that the area is not
a Designated Area of available resources due to urbanization.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of ( ) ( ) (~')
hazardous substances (including, but not limited
to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency ( ) ( ) (v')
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential ( ) ( ) (v')
health hazard?
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of ( ) ( ) (v')
potential health hazards?
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable ( ) ( ) (~')
brush, grass, or trees?
Comments:
a/c/d) During a site Visit on March 16, 1999, no evidence of discarded drums, containers,
hazardous wastes or discolored soils were observed. There was no indication of
underground storage tanks or illegal dumping of refuse on-site.
b) The proposed project includes adequate entries to the site, two 50-foot driveways
and one 35-foot driveway, to allow for emergency response assistance and/or
evacuation.
e) The site is currently vacant with sparse non-native weedy vegetation. The site will
be graded and landscaped in accordance with approved plans to minimize
potential fire hazards. The project will not increase fire hazards within the area.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 11
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: u,~e~
10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) (¢') ( )
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
Comments:
a) The proposed project may produce noticeable short-term and operational noise as
the site's proposed construction and end use includes truck traffic. The project
would increase noise levels since the site is currently vacant and the development
would add people and traffic to the area. However, the site is in an industrial area
with no nearby sensitive receptors so no significant impacts would occur.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiallyUnless Than
11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/)
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
e) Other governmental services? · ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
Comments:
a-e) Fire Protection - The site, located on Arrow Route in Rancho Cucamonga, is served
by a fire station located on the southwest corner of Jersey and Milliken,
approximately 1.5 miles from the project site. Standard conditions of approval from
the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project so no impacts to
fire services will occur.
Police protection ~ Additional police protection is not required as the addition of two
industrial buildings will not change current facility operating hours and will not have
a substantial increase in area to be patrolled as the project site is small,
approximately 17.73 acres. Eight-foot walls and entry gates at each entrance will be
locked during non-operating hours to discourage entry. The project will not require
additional police protection.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 12
Schools - The proposed construction activities will not generate a substantial
number of new job opportunities or induce people to move to the project area.
Therefore, construction activities will not adversely impact local schools.
Parks - Proposed construction activities will not generate a substantial number of
new job opportunities or induce people to move to the project area. Therefore, the
project will not adversely impact local parks or recreational opportunities.
Public Facilities -The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities and will be
consistent will the City of Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan.
I
Potentially
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Then
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) (-/')
b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) (v')
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution ( ) ( ) (,/)
facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) (v')
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (¢')
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
Comments:
a-g) The project will use existing gas, electrical and communication systems. Solid waste
disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler. Currently municipal
solid waste from the City is taken to San Bernardino, Riverside or Orange County
landfills for disposal; depending on the hauler. The project will increase demand
upon storm drain systems due to the increased runoff from new hardscape
proposed on the currently vacant site. Storm drain improvements will be necessary
to accommodate the project. This does not result in substantial alterations to the
master plan of storm drainage. The impact is not considered significant since it can
be mitigated by providing proper stormwater drainage per the City Engineer.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 13
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Uniass Than
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposah
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,")
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/)
c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) (,") ( )
Comments:
a) The site is visible from the 1-15 freeway, which runs parallel and east of the Day
Creek Channel. The site will be developed along Arrow Route with landscaping. A
total of 12 percent landscape coverage of the net lot area is proposed and
30 percent of the required trees used in the parking lot are 24 inch box as required
in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (11-33.6.). The
conditions of approval will require landscaping of freeway slope along entire
westerly project boundary.
b) The proposed project is located in an area designated Industrial Park and proposed
uses will be consistent with the goals and objectives set forth in the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan. The proposed design and exterior
elements of the industrial building will be consistent with design standards set forth
in the approved plan.
c) The project will create new light and glare because the site is currently vacant. The
design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on site plans, which require
review for consistency with City standards. The impact is not considered significant.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Un~ess Than
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb Paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) (,/)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) (,")
c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) (,/)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change, ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢')
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢')
the potential impact area?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 14
Comments:
a-e) Although no cultural resources were observed during the site visit, grading of the
site may expose or unearth historic cultural resources. The site is approximately
17.73 acres and is east and adjacent to Day Creek Channel and the 1-15 Freeway.
The property has been disturbed from past agriculture use so the likelihood of
unearthing cultural resources is minimal and impacts are considered less than
significant.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
Significant Mitigation Significant NO
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or ( ) ( ) (,") ( )
regional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) ("')
Comments:
a) An increased demand for neighborhood or regional parks is.unlikely as a majority of
the employees will likely be hired from within the City or surrounding communities
where recreational facilities are planned to support the population.
b) The proposed project will not affect existing recreational opportunities as the site is
located on Arrow Route within an area designated General Industrial. Surrounding
property, with the exception of property to the east, is completely developed.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiailyUnleSS mh~/1
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the ( ) ( ( ) (v')
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?
I Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 15
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
Significanl Mitigalion Signilicant No
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential ( ) (v') ( ) ( )
to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one which occurs
in a relatively brief, definitive period of time.
Long-term impacts will endure well into the
future.)
c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that ( ) ( ) (¢') ( )
are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have ( ) ( ) ( )
environmental effects, which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
a) The Initial Study did not identify any significant adverse impacts to biological
resources. The vegetation onsite is sparse and composed mainly of non-native
species. The site does not contain appropriate habitat for any listed endangered or
threatened species and is outside of the Ontario Recovery Unit for the Delhi Sands
Flower-loving Fly.
b) The 17.73-acre site could generate significant amounts of fugitive dust during site
grading. The contractor will be required to minimize dust generation through water
applications per the City's standard conditions of approval. Additional mitigation
measures presented in Section 5 of this initial Study will reduce impacts to less than
significant. Noise associated with site construction will not result in an impact as
there are no sensitive receptors within the area.
c) Cumulative effects of the 240,298 and 58,130 square foot industrial buildings may
include increased traffic within the immediate vicinity. However the impacts are not
considered significant as the site plan includes set backs to mitigate potential back
up into the street, and the applicant will be required to pay appropriate
transportation fees established for development within the Industrial Area Specific
Plan area. Fees are used to make roadway improvements with the area to keep the
circulation system at acceptable levels of service.
d) Development of the 240,298 and 58,130 square foot industrial buildings would not
cause substantial adverse effects on humans, either directly or indirectly. The initial
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR 00-06 Page 16
study did not identify any impacts that would have a potentially significant affect to
the environment.
EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative
Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within
the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on
the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study
and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500
Civic Center Drive (check all that apply):
(,/) General Plan EIR
(Certified April 6, 1981)
(¢')Master Environmental Assessment for lhe 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, cedified January 4, 1989)
(v')Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR
(Certified September 19, 1981)
(,/) ' US Fish & Wildlife Service Final Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly
(Prepared September 14, 1997)
APPLICANT CERTIFICATION
I cedify 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. Fudher, 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 occu[.
Signature: ~ ~'-/ //~' ~--~ Date:
Print Name and Title: ~)A.Q.~UL "~t~t..X:J~.-.,
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Doug Fenn May 2, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-06 -CABOT - A request
to construct a two phased project consisting of building "A" which is 240,373 square feet that will
........ b~'E-o-n~tF~t~-d-dbTin~:~h~h~o~lFdi~-~-"B"~lh~8;'099-'squ~e~l~n~ll be construct~-d
during Phase II on 17.73 acres of land in General Industrial Distdct (Subarea 8) of the Industrial
Area Specific Plan, located northeast corner of Arrow Route and t-15 -APN: 229-021-29 and 57.
Desitin Parameters: The site contains two vacant and adjacent triangular shaped parcels that will
be merged into a single parcel of 17.73 acres. There are no mature trees on-site nor is there other
significant vegetation on-site. The site is currently cultivated as a vineyard. The site slopes from
nodh to south at an approximately 2 percent.
The site is surrounded by the Interstate 15 to the west and nodhwest and to the northeast is the
commercial development (Foothill Market Place). To the east is a vacant vineyard with no other
significant vegetation. To the south are industrial uses such as, Parallel Products and the recently
approved Origen industrial warehouse project.
The proposed buildings are designed to house either a single or multiple industrial tenants. The
building design will be odented (facing south) to front Arrow Route (approximately 1,160 feet) and
will side and be cleady visible from 1-15 (1,660 feet) on the north and northwest side of the property..
Each of the buildings will have office areas portions that front on to Arrow Route. Building "A" has
an office area of 14,121 square feet and building "B" has an office area of 3,499 square feet. The
storage and loading areas do not face 1-15 or Arrow Route. Each of these loading areas is oriented
towards the east and will be screened from the public right-of-ways with 8-foot high screen walls.
The buildings incorporate two pdmary building materials. The buildings are well articulated with
strong vertical and horizontals changes and recess to the building plane, that are carded throughout
and on all sides of the buildings. Additionally, the public patio areas are designed to be accessible
to the office entryways of the facilities without conflicting with on-site traffic maneuvering areas. The
color variation of the building is stonewall grey, white and silver chime, color scheme on a concrete
tilt-up facade. There are bands of medium sandblast concrete along with blue reflective colored
glazing accents to help create contrast.
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:
]. The large area at the north end of Building "A" is an excessive amount of asphalt paving
without trees for shade. Suggest redesigning area to provide employee recreation fadlities
(i.e., volleyball or basketball court). If area is intended as future building expansion, then
temporary hydroseeding would be appropriate.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. The applicant should consider how to address severe Santa Ana winds which may affect
truck loading operations.
City of Rancho Cucamonga
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code.
Project File No.: DR 00-06 Public Review Period Closes: June 14, 2000
Project Name: DR 00-06 Project Applicant: Riverside Commercial Investors, Inc.
Freeway Distribution 3685 Main Street, Suite 200
Center Riverside, CA 92501
Project Location (also see attached map): Northeast corner of 1-15 freeway and Arrow Route.
Project Description: The proposed project is the construction of two, concrete, flit-up industrial buildings,
totaling 298,472 square feet, on a 17.73-acre lot located at the northeast corner of 115 Freeway and Arrow
Route. The project will be completed in two phases and take approximately eighteen months to complete.
FINDING
This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an
Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is
proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding:
[] The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant
effect on the environment.
[] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but:
(1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this
proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or
mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and
(2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a
significant effect on the environment.
If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required.
Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all
related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at
10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847.
NOTICE
The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period.
Date of Determination Adopted By
RESOLUTION NO. 00-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 00-06, FOR TWO INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS
TOTALING 316,092 SQUARE FEET (BUILDING "A" 254,494 AND BUILDING
"B" 61,598 SQUARE FEET)ON 17.73 ACRES OF LAND IN THE GENERAL
INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (SUBAREA 8) OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA
SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARROW
ROUTE AND THE 1-15 FREEWAY AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF- APN: 229-021-29 AND 57.
A. Recitals.
1. Cabot Industrial Trust has filed an application for the approval of Development Review
No. 00-06, 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 June 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng
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 dudng the above-
referenced public hearing on June 14, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property bounded by Foothill Market Place to the north,
vacant Industrial property to the east, Arrow Route to the south, and Interstate I-15 to the west, with
an approximate street frontage of 1,160 feet along Arrow Route; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is developed with an commercial
shopping center, the property to the south consists of an industrial building, the property to the east
is a vacant parcel, and the properly to the west is Interstate 1-15; and
c. Storm drain improvements necessary to accommodate the project are not in excess
of that provided by the master plan of storm drainage; and
d. The project, together with the recommended conditions of approval, complies with
all minimum development standards for the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and
e. The project will provide warehousing/distribution facilities of substantial size
conveniently located relative to the industrial area and regional circulation routes.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-
DR 00-06 FREEWAY DISTRIBUTIUON CENTER
June 14, 2000
Page 2
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public headng 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 distdct 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 Mitigated Negative
Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for
the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project
will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration
based upon the findings as follows:
a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines
promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared
therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this
Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative
Declaration with regard to the application.
b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into
the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur.
c. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California
Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a
whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that
the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat
upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning
Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption 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 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 ) Berms shall be provided along Arrow Route. Berms shall undulate and
have an average height of 3 feet (maximum slope not to exceed
3~ :1).
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-
DR 00-06 FREEWAY DISTRIBUTIUON CENTER
June 14,2000
Page 3
2) No wall shall exceed an exposed height of 8 feet as viewed from
adjacent properties and streets.
3) No chain link fencing is permitted.
4) Provide significant landscaping within landscape setbacks along the
street frontages.
5) Provide landscaping, including evergreen trees, in front of all buildings
and screen walls to screen truck loading area behind.
6) Security gates and associated fencing fronting Arrow Route shall be
view obscuring to fully screen truck loading areas from view of Arrow
Route. The gates shall be automatically operated so that they are
open a minimum amount of time.
7) Provide tables, chairs, and shade for outdoor employee eating areas.
8) Truck parking spaces shall be a minimum of 14 feet wide by 50 feet
deep.
9) All equipment, both ground- and roof-mounted, shall be completely
screened and architecturally compatible with the elevation design from
view of surrounding properties and public rights-of-way.
Engineering Division
1) Missing frontage improvements shall be installed on frontage street,
including but not limited to curbs and gutters, pavement, street lights,
street trees, sidewalks, signing, stripings etc.
2) Provide two way left turn lane on Arrow Highway for all driveways.
3) Revise City Drawing NO. 1433 to include the new improvements.
4) All frontage improvements shall be completed by developer and
accepted by City prior to occupancy of the first building.
Environmental Miti.qation Measures
1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil stabilizing agent
(approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM~0 emission,
in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403.
2) Arrow Route and the access drive (if paved) shall be swept according
to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM~o emissions
associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary
depending upon time of year of construction.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-
DR 00-06 FREEWAY DISTRIBUTIUON CENTER
June 14, 2000
Page 4
3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25
mph to minimize PM~o emissions from the site during such episodes.
4) Chemical Soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be
applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96
hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions.
5) The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment
used on-site based on Iow emission factors and high-energy efficiency.
The construction contractor shall ensure the construction grading plans
include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and
maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
6) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel
powered equipment where feasible.
7) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading
plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when
not in use.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted bythe
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 14~h day of June 2000, by the ~'ollowing vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM
Project File No.: Development Review 00-06 - Cabot Industrial Trust
This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation
measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program
has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are
implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resoumes Code).
Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements:
1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and
the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of. approval
are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project.
2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This
procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom
and when compliance will be reported.
3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring
progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon
recommendations by those responsible for the program.
Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project
planner, assigned by the City Planner, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project
planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly
and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the
conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department.
Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
1. A fee covedng all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in
performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant.
2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its
corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached
hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and
to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will
be kept in the project file with the department having the odginal authority for processing the
project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency
Planning Division
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
DR 00-06- CABOT INDUSTRIAL TRUST
June 14, 2000
Page 2
3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed, as
determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation
activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner.
4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the
completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each
measure is vedfied for compliance, no further action is required for the spe~;ific phase of
development.
5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off
as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP
Reporting Form.
6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation
measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions.
An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department
and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel.
7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of
construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after wdtten
notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the
authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached
hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to
hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented.
8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the
responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department. The
Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee)
with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff
time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time.
9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City
with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring
results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether
the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall
conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director pdor
to the issuance of building permits.
MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III)
Project File No.: DR 00-06 Applicant: Riverside Commercial Investors, Inc.
InitiaI Study Prepared by: Nancy Fer.quson Date: May 18, 2000
The site shall be treated with water or other soil stabilizing CP C Review of plans A/C 2
agent) approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce
PM~0 emission, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403.
Arrow Route and the access drive (if paved) shall be swept CP C Review of plans A/C 2
according to a schedule established by the City to reduce
PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-
site. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of
construction.
Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds CP C Review of plans A/C 2
exceed 25 mph to minimize PM~o emissions from the site
during such episodes.
Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and CP C Review of plans A/C 2
,,RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas
that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10
emissions.
The construction contractor shall select the construction CP B/C Review of plans .A/C 2
equipment used on-site based on iow emission factors and
high-energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall
ensure the construction grading plans include a statement
that all construction equipment will be tuned and
maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's
specifications.
The construction contractor shall utilize e~ectric or clean CP B/C Review of pla~s A/C 2
alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible,
The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-
CP/CE B Review of plans C 2
grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut
off equipment when not in use.
Key to Checklist Abbreviations
CP - Ci[y Planner or des gnee B - Pdor To Construction B - other Agency Perm t / Appmva 2 - W thho d Grad ng or Bud ng Perm t
BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports / Studies I Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order
PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds
FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #: Development Review 00-06
SUBJECT: Freeway Distribution Center
APPLICANT: Cabot Industrial Trust
LOCATION: Northwest corner of Arrow Route and 1-15
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. General Requirements Comoletion Date
1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its /
agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the
alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents,
officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents,
officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City
may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but
such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition.
2. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and all !
Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, building and
construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check.
B, Time Limits
1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if !
building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the
date of approval. No extensions are allowed.
C. 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 Specific Plan.
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all I
Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
SC -2-00
Project No. DR 00-06
Cornolefion Date
3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code I
and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall
be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety
Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to
occupancy.
4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be !
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for
consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment,
building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or
approved use has commenced, whichever comes first.
6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development
Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in
effect at the time of building permit issuance.
7. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of
building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of
shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties.
8. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, I
and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior
to the issuance of building permits.
9. If no trash receptacle(s) are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with all I I__
receptacles shielded from public view.
10. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be I
located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of
concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground
vaults.
11. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, !
including proper illumination.
12. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property / I
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.
D. Building Design
1. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or I I
projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and
streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally
integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
Details shall be included in building plans.
2. For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main / /
building colors.
E. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans)
1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space I /
abuts a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of
11 feet wide.
sc -2.00
Project NO. DR 00-06
Completion Date
2. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall
contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb).
3. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles,
entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards.
4. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building
permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn-
around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars
stacking into the public right-of-way.
5. 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.
6. Motorcycle parking area shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more
parking stalls. Developments with over 100 parking stalls shall provide motorcycle parking at
the rate of one percent. The area for motorcycle parking shall be a minimum of 56 square
feet.
7. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily
residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the
required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater.
After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional 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.
8. 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.
F. Trip Reduction
1. Transit improvements such as bus shelters, bus pullouts, and bus pads shall be provided. I
2. Shower facility accessible to both men and women shall be provided for persons walking o I
bicycling to work for each project which meets the following thresholds:
Commercial 250,000 square feet
Industrial 325,000 square feet
Office 125,000 square feet '
Hotels and Motels 250 rooms
G. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home I
landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building
permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision.
2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a'construction barrier I
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.
SC -2-00
Project No. OR 00-06
Comoletion Date
3. A minimum of 20% of trees planted within industrial projects, and a minimum of 30% within I
commercial and office projects, shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger.
4. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three I
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 I
tree per 30 linear feet of building..
6~ All .private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than /
2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for
erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation
system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
7. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible I
for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted
areas within the public right-of-way. Ali landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and
debris and maintained in healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning,
fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material
shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage.
8. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be I
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.
9. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering I I
sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along .Arrow Route
1-15. (See #13)
10. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on / I
the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
11. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, I I
the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
12. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of I I
Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code.
13. On projects which abut the 1-15 Freeway, the developer shall provide landscaping within the
freeway right-of-way along the boundary of this project or pay an in-lieu of construction cash I I
deposit. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared in conformance with Caltrens
and City Standards through the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Planner and City Engineer. Landscape and irrigation shall be installed
prior to the release of occupancy of the project. If final approvals and/or installation is not
complete at that time, the City will accept a cash deposit for future landscaping of the Caltrans
right-or-way.
H. Signs
1. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this i /
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.
I. Environmental
1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of I I
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 $719, prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory
performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the
SC -2-00
Project No. DR 00-06
Cornoletion Date
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.
J. Other Agencies
1. Tho applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Sor~ice to determine the appropriate type and I
location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead
structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the
design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to
the issuance of building permits.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
K. General Requirements
1. Submit four complete sets of plans including the following: I
a. Site/Plot Plan;
b. Foundation Plan;
c. Floor Plan;
d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan;
e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and
size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams;
f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and
waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating
and air conditioning; and
g. Planning Division Project Number (i.e., TI' #, CUP #, DR #, etc.) clearly identified on the
outside of all plans.
2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report.
· Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal.
3. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls.
4. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation I
coverage to the City prior to permit issuance.
5. Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by I
the Building and Safety Division.
L. Site Development
1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be I
marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01). The applicant shall comply with the
latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code,
National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Please contact the
Building and Safety Division for availability 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 nat limited to: Transportation Development
Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. Applicant shall provide a
copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance.
SC -2-00
Project No. De 00-06
Cornoleflon Date
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/pamel map recordation I
and prior to issuance of building permits.
4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday I
through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays.
5. Construct trash enclosure(s) per City Standard (available at the Planning Division's public I
counter).
6. The following is required for side yard use for increase in allowable area: __/__ __
a. Provide a reduced site plan (8 %" x 11") which indicates the non-buildable easement.
b. Recorded "Covenant and Agreement for the Maintenance of a Non-Buildable
Easement," which is signed by the appropriate property owner(s).
c. Sample document is available from the Building and Safety Division.
M. New Structures
1. Provide draft stops in attic areas, not to exceed 3,000 square feet, in accordance with UBC !
Table 5-A.
2. Provide smoke and heat venting in accordance with UBC Section 906. I I
3. Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be needed. / I
N. Grading
1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City I I
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. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the / /
time of application for grading plan check.
4. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. I I
5. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for I I
existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more
of combined cut and fill The Grading Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a
California Registered Civil Engineer.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
O. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1.Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured
from street centedine):
50 total feet on Arrow Route I I
2. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall I I
be dedicated to the City.
P. Street Improvements
1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: ! /
SC -2-00
Project No. DR 00-06
Completion Date
Curb & I A.C. I Side-[ Drive I Street I Street [Comm I Median I Bike I Other I
Street Name Gutter Pvrnt walk Appr, Lights Trees Trail Island Trail
Arrow Route X b c X X X
Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement
reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk
shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be
provided for this item.
2. Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety
lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security
shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street
improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits,
whichever occurs first.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a
construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any
other permits required.
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.
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 I I
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 I
check.
3. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review I
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 City Engineer's Office in
addition to any other permits required.
4. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in I
accordance with the City's street tree program.
5. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with I I
adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project
SC-2-00
Project NO.. DR 00-06
Comoletion Date_
intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or
industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required.
Q. Public Maintenance Areas
1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting I I
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.
R. Drainage and Flood Control
1. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe ! !
measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk.
S. Utilities
1. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the I I
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and
the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of
compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits,
whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days
prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the
case of all other residential projects.
T. General Requirements and Approvals
1. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right-of-way: I
connection of storm drains to MWD box.
2. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for I
all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to
building permit issuance if no map is involved.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT,
(909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
U. General Fire Protection Conditions
1. Meilo Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. The I !
developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced,
participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a
fire station to serve the development. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the
developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs.
2. Fire flow requirement shall be: 8000 gallons per minute, Per '97 UFC Appendix Ill-A, 3, (b) I
(Increase).
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 c6nducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire
department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy.
3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, I
flushed, and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e.,
lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department
personnel.
SC -2-00
8
Project No. DR 00-06
Completion Date
4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required I
hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch
riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet
this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and
model numbers.
5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Combustible construction, evidence shall be !
submitted to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is
available, pending co .mpletion of the required fire protection system.
6. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to
final inspection. I
7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below:
a. Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. I
b. Other: Per UBC. I
Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as
woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled
stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if the sprinkler system is adequate
for proposed operations.
8. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of i
sprinkler system.
9. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted:
X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 32. I
X Other: Provide second access at the north end of Buildin,q "B". __1 I
10. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. I !
11. Emergency secondary access shall be provided in accordance with Fire District standards. I I
12. Emergency access, a minimum of 26 feet wide, shall be provided, and maintained free and I I
clear of obstructions at all times during construction, in accordance with Fire District
requirements.
13. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet, I I
6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus.
14. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall I /
be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific
details and ordering information.
15. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the I I
Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information.
16. A tenant use letter shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire / /
Safety Division for the proper form letter.
17. Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho / I
Cucamonga Fire Protection District as follows:
X $677 for New Commercial and Industrial Development (per new building).**
**Note: Separate plan check fees for Tenant Improvement work, fire protection systems
(sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon
submittal of plans.
SC -2-00
Project No. DR 00.06
(~c~mpleti0n Date
18. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1997 UBC,
UFC, UPC, UMC, and RCFD Standards 32 and 15 and 1996 NEC.
V. Special Permits
1. Special permits may be required, depending on intended use, as noted below:
a. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically
described below, which in the judgement of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions
hazardous to life er property.
b. Storage of readily combustible material.
t. High piled combustible stock.
u. Liquefied petroleum gas (storage, handling, transport, or use exceeding more than 120
gallons).
NOTE: SEPARATE PLAN CHECK FEES FOR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS, FIRE PROTECTION
SYSTEMS (SPRINKLERS, HOOD SYSTEMS, ALARMS, ETC.), AND/OR ANY
CONSULTANT REVIEWS WILL BE ASSESSED UPON SUBMI'I-rAL OF PLANS.
NOTE: A SEPARATE GRADING PLAN CHECK SUBMIT]AL IS REQUIRED FOR ALL NEW
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS WHERE
IMPROVEMENTS BEING PROPOSED WILL GENERATE 50 CUBIC YARDS OR MORE
OF COMBINED CUT AND FILL. THE GRADING PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED,
STAMPED AND SIGNED BY A CALIFORNIA REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
W. Security Lighting
1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power.
These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell.
2. 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.
X. 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.
2. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices.
3.All roof openings giving access to the building shall be secured with either iron bars, metal
gates, or alarmed.
Y. 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 ~eet 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.
SC -2-00
Project No. DR 00-06
Cornpletlon Dat~
Alarm Systems
1. install a burglar alarm system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and I I
employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of false alarms and in
turn save dollars and lives.
2. Alarm companies shall be provided with the 24-hour Sheriff's dispatch number:
(909) 941-1488, I I
SC -2-00
Project No. DR 00-06
Comoletion Date
turn save dollars and lives.
2. Alarm companies shall be provided with the 24-hour Sheriff's dispatch number:
(909) 941-1488. __ I__
SC -2-00