HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993/02/24 - Agenda Packet1977
CITY OF
RANCFK) CUCA~
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENI
WEDNESDAY
FEBRUARY 24, 1993
7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
COUNCIL CHAMBER
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
me
III·
IV.
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
Commissioner Chitiea
Commissioner McNiel
Commissioner Melcher __
Commissioner Tolstoy
Commissioner Vallette
Announcements
Approval of Minutes
February 10, 1993
V. Public Hearings
The following items are public hearings in which
concerned individuals may voice their opinion of
the related project. Please wait to be recognized
by the Chairman and address the Commission by
stating your name and address. All such opinions
shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for
each project. Please sign in after speaking.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92-33 - CLAUDINE EUBANK
- A request to allow a massage establishment
within a 1,610 square foot leased space in an
existing commercial center on 9 acres of land
in the General Commercial District located at
7890 Haven Avenue, Suite 14 - APN: 1077-401-29.
(Continued from February 10, 1993.)
Be
VARIANCE 93-01 - SHARFI - A request to reduce
the minimum accessory structure setback from
5 feet to 1 foot for a 240 square foot tool
shed and 240 square foot overhang on .5 acre of
land in the Very Low Residential District (less
than 2 dwelling units per acre), located at
9685 Whirlaway Avenue - APN: 1061-541-24.
VI. Director's Reports
VII.
VIII.
IX.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 92-15 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE
PARTNERS - A request to construct approximately
161,000 square feet of retail space within a
previously approved commercial retail center in
the Regional Related Commercial designation
(Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific
Plan, located on the south side of Foothill
Boulevard, west of Etiwanda Avenue - APN:
229-031-28 and 33.
Do
REVIEW OF VINTNER'S WALK IN CONNECTION WITH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-24 - MASI - A review
of the Vintner's Walk plans at the southwest
corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester
Avenue - APN: 229-011-10, 19, 21, and 26
through 28.
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 already appear on this
agenda.
Commission Business
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.
VICINITY MAP
CITY HALL
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
February 24, 1993
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Bullet, City Planner
Steven Ross, Assistant Planner
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92-33 - CLAUDINE EUBANK - A request to
allow a massage establishment within a 1,610 square foot
lease space in an existing commercial center on 9 acres of
land in the General Ccm~ercial District located at 7890 Haven
Avenue, Suite 14- APN: 1077-401-29.
BACKGROUND: At its meeting on February 10, 1993, the Planning
Commission continued the project to its February 24, 1993 meeting in
order to allow staff to investigate whether the project will be able to
comply with the provisions of Ordinance 485 regulating massage
establishments. Specifically, the floor plan in the staff report showed
only one restroom, while Ordinance 485 appears to require separate
shower and restroom facilities for male and female customers. The
Commission was also concerned with enforcement of these regulations.
Staff will address these issues in an oral report to the Commission.
BB:SR:sp
Attachments:
Exhibit #A" - February 10, 1993 Planning Commission Staff
Report
Resolution of Approval
IT~ A
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATF.:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBCrECT:
February 10, 1993
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Bullet, City Planner
Steven Ross, Assistant Planner
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92-33 - CLAUDINE EUBANK - A request to
allow a massage establishment within a 1,610 square foot
leased space in an existing con~ercial center on 9 acres of
land in the General Commercial district, located at 7890
Haven Avenue, Suite 14 - APN: 1077-401-29.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
ae
Be
Site Characteristics: The site is a fully developed shopping center
with a bowling center, retail, and restaurant uses.
Applicable Regulations: The Development Code classifies any
business which provides massage treatments as massage establishments
and, hence, Adult Businesses. These businesses are restricted to
General Con~nercial zones and require the approval of a Conditional
Use Permit.
C. Parking Calculations:
Number of Number of
Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces
of Use Footg.~e Ratio Required Provided
Bowling Alley 36,025 5/Lane 200 200
Office 1,345 1/250 5 6
Medical Office 1,610 1/200 8 6
General Retail 23,668 1/250 95 95
Furniture 6,300 1/500 13 13
Restaurant 4,995 1/100 50 50
Vacant 9,935 1/250 40 43
Beauty College 5,140 3/Station 63 63
Oasis Spa 1,610 3/Station 12 12
TOTAL 90,678 486 488
Beauty salons require 3 parking spaces for each beauty station.
Because the primary service of the Oasis Spa is for this purpose,
the 3/station ratio is appropriate. Therefore, with 4 stations, the
spa requires 12 parking spaces. Adequate parking is available for
the proposed use, and staff does not anticipate any further
conflicts.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 92-33 - CLAUDINE EUBANK
February 10, 1993
Page 2
NOTE:
E1 Pollo Loco and the California State Bank are located on a
separate parcel and also have adequate parking for their
respective businesses.
As the table demonstrates, the shopping center has adequate parking
to support the existing businesses as well as the proposed beauty
salon/massag~ business.
ANALYSIS:
Background: On February 19, 1992, the City Council approved
Ordinances 485 and 486 pertaining to the regulation of massage
technicians, massage establishments, and similar businesses.
Ordinance 486 revised the Development Code's definition of Massage
Establishments as found under the Adult Businesses
classifications. The definition considers virtually any business
which provides massage services as a massage establishment. Because
they are classified as adult businesses, massage establishments are
only permitted in C~neral Cu,~rcial zones subject to the approval
of a Conditional Use Permit and a Massage Establishment Permit.
Ordinance 485 created a detailed permit review process for massage
technicians, establishments, and similar businesses. This
permitting and review process is handled by the Business License
Division. Ordinance 485 requires the approval of the Conditional
Use Permit prior to issuance of the Massage Establishment Permit.
In summary, the Planning Commission is charged with reviewing land
use compatibility of the establisb~-nt, while the Administrative
Services Director reviews the applicant's background and ensures
that the business operation complies with the provisions of
Ordinance 485 (see Section 9.24.050 in particular). Massage
Establishment Permits must be renewed annually. Each massage
technician must also apply for and receive a permit.
General: The applicant's business would provide therapeutic skin
and massage treatments for male and female clients. Specifically,
the proposed services would include: herhal treatments, facial and
skin treatments, european body wrap, and massage. Related beauty
supplies will also be sold at the location. A total of three
employees will work at the establishment. The proposed hours of
operation are from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., Monday through Saturday.
Compatibility of Uses: The proposed use would occupy space in the
middle of the building next to a restaurant on one side and vacant
space on the other side. Richard's Beauty College is located in the
same building. The applicant's business would provide many of the
same services that are offered as ancillary services at some full-
service beauty salons in the City. No complaints have been received
regarding these other similar businesses. The center is
characterized by a mixture of retail, office, and restaurant uses.
Staff does not anticipate any compatibility conflicts with tenants
within the shopping center.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 92-33 - CLAUDINE EUBANK
February 10, 1993
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION: Staff reco~ends that the Planning Co~ission approve
Cond~itional Use Permit 92-33 through adoption of the attached Resolution
of Approval.
City l~lanne r
BB: SR/j fs
Attachments:
Exhibit "A" - Letter from Applicant
Exhibit "B" - Floor Plan
Exhibit "C" - Site Plan
Exhibit "D" - Ordinance No. 485
Exhibit "E" - Ordinance No. 486
Resolution of Approval
Steve Ross
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Community Development Department
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Claudine Eubank
5465 Triple Crown Dr.
Borisall, Ca. 92003
16 December 1992
.... ?~C L
71992
Dear Mr. Ross:
This letter is forwarded to state my intent for the business named
Oasis Spa, located at 7890 Haven Ave, Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730.
The phone number at the established business is (714) 944-0338.
The service we will provide are therapeutic skin and massage
treatments. These treatments will be available for both male and
female clients. My intent is to provide the following specific
services in the city of Rancho Cucamonga:
HERBAL TREATMENTS
FACIAL AND SKIN TREATMENTS
EUROPEAN BODY WRAP
BEAUTY SUPPLIES
MASSAGE
My intende~ hours of operation are Monday Through Saturday from
9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. I intend to employ 3 personnel.
It will be a pleasure to serve the Rancho Cucamonga public.
Sincerely,
i
I
I
PLANlN'-ING-.DMSION
ITEM: COP
EXH~: ~
SCALE:
{j{lillllj ~
CITY OF
PLaNreNO: Dr~S~ON
0
~0
TO~/N CENTER
DELVE
ITEM: CUP q2-33
EXHIBIT: C°2 SCALE:
ORDINANCE NO. 485
AN (~DINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
~, CAT,TFOJ:~?_A, ADDZNG A NE~ (~APT~R 9.24 TO THE
The City Oouncil of the City of Rancho Cue~mnnga does hereby ordain
as follows:
SECTION 1: A new (haptar 9.24 hereby is added to the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code to read, in words and figures, as follows:
"~?cer 9.24
'9~m~ge Establishments and Technicians
,,ARbiteR I - F~ge Es~nhl~-~hments
"Sectio~ 9.24.010 - Definitions
9.24.020 - Permit ~
9.24.030 - ._e~ _ Ex~eptio~
9.24.040 - F~-~e Esenhlish~ent - Application
9.24.050 - Same - Operating
9.24.060 - .~ - Facilities
9.24.070 - Same - Inspections
9.24.080 - Same - Permit Not Assigr~hle
9.24.090 - Same - ~ar~e of Locatic~ or Name
9.24.100 - Same - Notificatio~ of
9.24.110 - Same - Renewal of Permit
9.24.120 - Applicability of P_~ulatic~s to Existir~
"Secti~
9.24.200 -
9.24.210 - Same - Ap~licatic~
9.24.220 - Sa~e -
9.24.230 - Sa~e - Notification by Technician
"A~TICnF. III- Out Call M~age Servioes
"Section
9.23.300 - Out Call M~age Servioes - Special Endu~ement
9.23.310 - -_~ - Applicatic~
9.23.320 - Sa~e - l~ecords
9.24.400 - Prohibit~ Conduct
9.24.410 - Suspensions Pending R~vocation
9.24.420 - P~vocation - F~ge Estnhl~-~hment Permit
9.24.430 - Same - Massage Technician Permit
O£d~na~e No. 485 ,4, J.
Page 2
9.24.440 - Permit Denial/Revocation Appeal Procedure
9.24.450 - Burden of Proof at Hearing
9.24.460 - Penalties for Violation of Chapter
9.24.470 - Civil ~edies Available
9.24.480 - Severability
"Section 9.24.010 - Definitions
"Unless the particular provision of the oontext otherwise requires,
the definitions and provisions contained in this Section shall govern the
constr~ion, meaning, and application of words and phrases used in this
"(a) 'Director' shall mean the Administrative Services D/rector
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or his or her designee.
"(b) 'Employes' m~a_ns any and all persons, other than a m~sage
technician, who may render any service to the permittee, and who receives
compensation from the permittee or his or her agent, and who have no physical
contact with the custom~ or clients.
"(c) 'Hearing Officer' shall m~n the City Manager of the City
of P~r~ho C~camor~/a, or his or her desigr~e.
"(d) 'F~-~ge' m~_ns any method of treating the external parts
of the h%~an body for reme~__ial, health, or hygienic purposes by me~_ns of
pressure. on or friction against; or stroke, kneading, z~Jbbing, tapping,
pour~ng; or stimulating the external parts of the human body with the hands
cr other parts of the human body, with or without the aid of any mechanical or
electrical apparatus or appliances; or with or without supplementary aids,
lotions, ointments, or other similar preparations.
"(e) 'F~ge Establishment' me~_~s any es~hli~m~_nt having a
fixed place of business where any person, firm, association, partnership,
corporation ~ngages in, conducts, or carries on, or permits to be engaged in,
conducted or carried on, any business of giving massages, baths, ~nistra-
tion of fomentation, electric cr magnetic treatments, alcohol rubs, Or any
other type of system for treatmerle or ~ar~ip,~lation of the human body with or
without any character of bath, suc~ as Turkish, Russian, Swedish, Japanese,
vapor, ~'~ower, electric tub, sponge, mineral, fomentation, or any other type
of bath.
"(f) 'M~-~sage Technics' shall include a 'Mm_~age Technician',
to another person, for any f~ of oor~ideratic~, 'm~ge' as defined, or
baths, manipulation of the body, electric massage procedure, or similar
~-ocedure o
"(g) 'Per~i~' m~s ~ person, firm, partnerskip or corporation
having a permit issued hereunder.
"(h) 'R~cognized School of M~_~age' m~ns any school Or institution
of learning which teaches the theory, ethics, practice, profession, Or work of
m~age, which ba-~ been ap~i-o-~ed pur~,~nt to the California ~ducation Code. A
school offering a correspondence course not requiring atter~nce shall not be
~.~ O£ 'u//mance No. 485
Page 3
deemed a 'recognized school'.
right to confirm that the
recognized school of ~ge.
The City of Rancho O~_camonga shall have the
applicant b~ actually atter~ c]~ in a
"(i) 'Out Call Massage Service' m~_~_,'s any busm whe. r~ the ~rL-mrf
function of such business is to engage in or carry on m~=~ge, not at a fixed
location but at a location designat~d by the ~ or client.
"Section 9.24.020 - Permit _~ired
"(a) It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, partnership or
oorporation to engage in, conduct or carry on, or to permit to be en~aged in,
oonducted or carried on, in or upon any premises within the City of Pancho
Cu~-~nga, the opexation of a ~ge ese~hl~bment as herein ~ibed,
without first havin~ obtained a p~-mit issued by the City of Pancho Cucamonga,
pur~,~nt to the provisions hereinaf~-w set forth. Said pexmit shall
expiration of said permit.
"(b) A permit issued pur~,ant to this Chapter shall be valid for
twelve (12) months fmm~ the date of is~,~nce unless revok_-d or suspended. The
permit required shall be in addition to any busir~ license rec~,~ed by City
to any cc{~,_'ti~l use permit or other similar entitlement for use.
"Section 9.24.030 - Same - Exceptions
'~he provisions of th~ Ompter shall not apply to the following
classes of individuals while engaged in the perfoxmance of the duties of their
respective professions:
"(a) Physicians, surge=m,
~hysical therapists who are duly licensed
p~ofessicr~ in the State of California.
California.
"(c) Barbers and beauticians who are duly licensed under the
laws of the State of Calif~,.~a while engaging in ~ctice within the scope of
their licenses, e~ that this ~vision shall apply solely to the massaging
of the neck, face, and/or scalp of the custumer or client.
"(d) Hospitals, nursing hom~, sanatoriums, or other health
care facilities duly licensed by tbm State of California.
"(e) Accredited high schools, junior colleges, and colleges or
universities whose ~-~ and trainars are acting within the scope of their
"(f) Trainers of amateur, semiprofessional or professiomal
athletes or athletic teams.
~ NO. 485 ~ ~· m ·
Page 4
"Section 9.24.040 -Massaqe Establishment Application
"(a) Any person, corporation, or partnership desiring to obtain a
permit 'to operate a m~-~sage establishment shall make application under penalty
of perjury to the Director. Prior to sutmmitting such application, a nonre-
fur~hle fee in an amount established by City Council resolution shall be paid
to the City to defray, in part, the cost of the investigation and repcx~
required by tbi~ Chapter. A copy of the receipt showing payment of the
reck,ired fee shall accompany the application.
"(b) The application and fee required under this Section shall be in
addition to any license, permit or fee requi~ed under any other (21apter of
thi.~ C~e or ordinance heretofore or hereafter adopted.
"(c) The application for permit does not authorize conducting a
~-~age establi~b/nent until such permit h~-~ ~----~n granted.
"(d) Each applicant for a m~sage eseahlishment permit shall
the following information:
"1.
"2. The p~esent or proposed address where the business is to be
"3. The applicant's full, true name, any other names used, date
of birth, California Drivers Lioense number or Califcxnia identification
number, Social Security number, present residence address and telephone
number. The sex, height, weight, color of hair, and color of eyes.
"4. Previous two (2) residenoes of the applicant and the
inclusi%~ dates at each address.
"5. The applicant's business, occupation, and ~1oyment
for five (5) y~s p~-eceding the date of application, and the
inclusi~ dates of same.
"6. ~he permit bi-~ of the applicant, includirg whether such
person b~ ever b~_d any permit or license issued by any agency, board, City,
County, Territory, or State, the date of is~,~nce of such a permit or license,
whether the permit or license was revoked or suspended, or if a vocational or
professional lioense or permit was issued, revoked, or suspended, and the
therefor.
"7. All convictions for any crim~ involving conduct which
re~ires registration under any state law similar to and including California
Penal (kx~e Section 290, or of -conduct which is a violation of the ~-ovisic~s
of any .~.tate law similar to and including California Penal Code Sections 314,
315, 3161, 318, 647, or any crime involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or moral
t=pit e.
"8. A c~lete definition of all servioes to be pzu~ided.
,., O£dinance No. 485
Page 5
"9. The r~l~e, address, ar~ date of birth of each massage
t___~gmnician, aide, trainee, or employee who is or will be ~1oyed in said
ese~hlishment.
"10. The name and address of any massage business or other like
eseahlishment owned or operated by any person wb~ee name is required to be
given pur~,~nt to this Section wherein the business or profession of massage
is carried on.
"11. __~hle written proof that the applicant is at least
eighteen (18) years of age.
"12. If the applicant is a coxpotation, the name of the
c~rporation shall be set forth exactly as shown in its Articles of Incorpora-
tion or Charter together with the State and date of incorpcxation and the
names ar~ residehOe addresses of each of its current officers and d/rectors,
and of each stockholder holding mo=e than five percent (5%) of the stock of
"13. If the applicant is a partnership, the application shall
set forth the name and residence ~a~es of each of tb~ partners, including
limited partners. If the applicant is a limie_~-d partnership, it shall furnish
a copy of its certificate of limited partnarship as filed with the County
Clerk. If One or mo~-e of the partners is a corporation, the pz~visions of
Subsection 9.24.040(d)12 pe=taining to corporate applicants shall apply.
"14. The applicant, if a corporation, or partnership, shall
designate one (1) of its officers or general partners to act as its
responsible managing employee. Such person shall c~lete and sign all
application forms recp~ired of an individual applicant under this Chapter,
however, only one (1) application fee shall be charged. ~he oorp~ration's or
tb~~~e~'s responsible managing employee ~m,~t, at all times, m~=t all of
es~hlish~ for permittees by th~ Chapee~ or the corporation
who meets such requirements is designarc-d. If no such person is determined
within ninety (90) days, the corporation or partnership permit shall be deemed
canceled without further notice and a new initial application for permit must
be fil~.
"15. The Director may re~,~re the applicant to furnish finger-
Urints when needed for the purpose of estmhlishing identification. Any
recp,~red fingerprintin~ f~ will be the responsibility of the applicant.
-16. TWo (2) p=t it phot 3rap of Um
applicm_nt, two (2) inches by two (2) indmes in size.
"17. A description of any other bus~ to be cperat~-d on the
same premises, or on adjoining ~-emises, ~ or __mm_ntrolled by the applicant.
applicant is not the legal owner of the property, the application must be
accompanied by a copy of the l~e and a no~mrized acknowledgment from the
owner of the property that a massage establishment will be locat~d_ on his/her
prope y.
~£d/na~=e No. 485 ~, ~.
Page 6
"19. Authorization for the City of l~%ncho Cucamonga, its agents
and ~,~1oyees to s~-k information and conduct an investigation into the truth
of the .%-tatements set forth in the application.
"20. The applic~_nt shall ~,~'t any change of address or fact
which m~y occur during the procedure of applying for a m~sage establishment
permit.
"21. The applicant, if an individual, or designated responsible
managi~.~ ~1oyee if a partnership or corporation, shall personally appear at
the Administrative Services Depaktaent and produce proof that the application
fee b~ been paid and shall present the application containing the required
information as described in th~-~ Section.
"22. A certificate of c~liance from both the City of P~ncho
Cu~.~ C~m,..~nity Development Department, Building and Safety Division, and
application approval. Any required inspection fees shall be the responsi-
bility of the applicant.
"If the certificates of c~liance are not received by the'
Directs: within ninety (90) days of tbm date of filing, the application shall
be dee~d void. If any land use permit or other entitlement for use is
re~,~ed, such permit or entitl~m~_nt for use shall be applied for and received
prior t~ the massage establishment permit becc~ effective.
"23. ~b~ Director shall have up to sixty (60) calendar days to
investigate the application and the background of the applicant. Upon the
c~pletion of the investigation, tb~ Director shall 9==nt the permit if he or
she fin~s:
"(a) The required fee ban ~n paid.
"(b) The application conforms in all respects to the
~u¢isi¢~ of this C~a~ter.
"(c) The applicant h~-~ not made a martial m~-~epresenta-
tion in the application.
"(d) The applicant, if an individual, or any of the stock-
holders of the corporation, or any officers or d~-tua~, if the applicant is
a corpc~ation, or any partner if the applic~_nt is a partnership, b~.~ not been
convicted in a court of competent jurisdiction of an offense involving conduct
which z~es registration under California Penal Code Section 290, or of
conduct which is a violation of the provisions of California Penal Code
Sections 314, 315, 316, 318, 647, or any other crime inuolvir~ dishonesty,
fraud, deceit, or mo~-al turpitude.
"(e) The applic~_nt has not had a m~-~ge es~ahl~,
technician, or other s~m~ permit or lioe~se denied, revoked, or
"(f) ~ne appli~_nt is at l~t eighteen (18) years of age.
Ordinance No. 485
Page 7
"(g) The m~ge establishment as proposed by the
applicant would comply with all applicable laws, including, but not limited
to, health, zoning, f/re, and safety requirements and standards.
"24. If the Director, followin~ investigation of the applicant,
determines that the applicant does not fulfill the re~,i~ements as set forth
notice to the applicant. The appli~nt shall have the right of appeal as set
forth in Section 9.24.440.
"Section 9.24.050 - Same - O~erati~g
and all of ~he following requirements are met:
"(a) Each person employed or acting as a massage technician shall
have a valid permit i~_~,~ by the Director. It shall be unlawful for any
cb~ge of or in control of a massage establishment to ~,~1oyee or permit a
person to act as a ~ge technician who is not in possession of a valid,.
is worn clearly visible during working hours.
"(b) Tb~ possession of a valid Massage E~hlishment Permit does not
authorize tb~ posses~r to perform work for which a ~ge Technician Permit
"(c) F~3e and bath operations shall be carried on or conductS_,
and the premises ~hall be open, only bet%~ the b~urs of 7:00 o'clock a.m.
and 10:00 o'clock p.m.
"(d) A list of servioss available and the co~t of such services
shall be posted in an oDen public place within the premises, and shall be
described in readily understandable language. No owner, manager, operate,
tec_hnician shall offer or perform, any service other than those po~ted.
"(e) The M~ge ~s~ahl~m~rfc Permit and a copy of the permit of
each ar~ every massage te~mnician ~mkuloyed in the establishment shall be
displayed in an open and ___,'-v~pi~_~us place on the
"(f) Every m~age establ~ shall k~ep a written record of the
date and hour of each treatment, the r~me and a~ess of each cu~tc~e~r or
client, the name of the massage technician adminis~-ving the treatment, and
the type of treatment adm/nistered. Such written record shall be maintained
in form approved by the Directs. Such records shall be open to inspection
only by officials charged with enforoement of this Chapter and shall be used
for no other purpose, incb~ng use of the file by owners and ~1oyees of the
establishment. Any unauthorized disclosure or use of such information by any
officer or ~1oyee of the City or the County of San Bernardino, or the owner
or employee of the ~ge establishment shall constitute a l~i.~cl~=m~nor and
such persons shall be subject to the penalty of the provisions of tblm Chapter
Ozdinance No. 485 ,~., ~ .~
Page 8
in addition to any other penalties provided by law. Such records shall be
maintained on the premises of the massage establishment for a period of two
(2)
"(g) M~sage establishments shall at all times be equipped with an
adequate supply of clean, sanitary towels, coverings, and linens. Clean
linens shall not be used on more than one (1) cust~m~_r or client, unless such
towel .or linen b~m first been laundered and disinfected. Dis~le towels
and coverings shall not be used on more than one (1) ~ or client.
Soiled linens and paper towels shall be deposited in separate, approved
//~. _. "(h) If male and female customers or clients are to be treated
simult~meously at the .same m~.._~a...ge establishment, a separate massage roc~ or
rock_, separate dresslr~ facilities and separate toilet facilities shall be
provid~ for male and female customers or clients.
"(i) Wet and dry _heat rocks, steam or vapor rooms or cabinets,
shall ~ thoroughly cleaned and disinfected as needed, and at least once each'
day the premises are open, with a d{~infec~ant approved by the San Bernardino
County Health Depa~,~nt. Bathtubs shall be thoroughly cloned with a
dis/nf~T~3nt approved by the Health Department after each use. All walls,
ceil/rigs,, floors, and other physical facilities of the establishment must be
in good[ repair and maintained in a cle~n and sanitary co~tion.
"(j) Instruments utilized in performing m~age shall not be used on
more than one (1) ~ or client unless such instruments have been
sterilized, using approved steTilizing methods.
"(k) All employees, including m~age ted~nicians, shall be clean,
and w~r clean, non-transparent outer ~. Said garments shall not
expose their genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or chest. M~age technicians
shall maintain the massage technician permit visibly on their person during
kusiness hours.
"(1) No person shall enter, be or remain in any part of a ma~age
establishment while in the possession of, consuming, under the influence of or
using any alcoholic beverage or drugs except pursuant to a pTescription for
~_c~ drugs. The owner, operator, responsible managing employee, manager, or
"(m) No m~ge establishment shall operate as a school of ~.~age,
or use 'the same facilities as that of a school of ~ge.
"(n) No massage establishment g=~nted a permit under tbt~ Article
sh~]l place, publish or distrikute or cause to be placed, publ~ or
distributed any advertising matter that depicts any portion of the human body
that w~u/d r~D~hly suggest to prove customers or clients that any
service is available other than those services described in Section
9.24.050(d) of th!~ Article, nor shall any massage establishment or out call
~ge service e~ploy ~ang~age in the text of such ~ing that would
r~-~on~oly surest to a ~-o~pective patron that any service is available other
than th~e services as described in Section 9.24.050(d) of this Article.
~.m O£~inance No. 485
Page 9
"(o) No service emmarated in Section 9.24.050(d) of tbi~ Article
may ~e carried on within any cubicle, ro~, knth or any area within a
eseahlishment, which is fitted with a door capable of being lock~.
"(p) All exterior doors shall remain unlock-d frc~ tb~ interior side
during busin~ b~urs.
"(q) A massage shall not be given and no customer or client shall be
in the presence of a m~ge technician or other e~ployee unless the
custxm~r's or client's genitals are fully covered by a non-transparent
covering and, in addition, a f~aale cust__n~er's or client's br~:s are fully
"(r) No massage es~ah] i~mm~nt shall be open for business without at
least one (1) massage t__~9~nician on the premises at all times who is in
possession of a current, unrevoked permit.
"Section 9.24.060 - Same - Facilities
"Every m~ge ese~hlishment shall maintain facilities meeting all of
the foilming requirements:
"(a) Any signs shall be in conformance with the current ordinances
of the City of Rancho
"(b) ~ lighting shall be -~-ovid_~-d_ in a__~_~nce with Article
220 of the National Electric Code or suoo~ -~vision or provisions, and,
in addition, enough lightir~ shall be provided in each ro~ or enclosure where
-~e services are pe_~fu~.,~d on cuse~=rs or clients to provide a minimum of
seventy foot (75') candle light intensity at three feet (3') above the flo~r
and the same shall be energized and operational at all times when massage
"(c) Min/mum ventilation shall be -~-o¢ided in ~ with
Section 1105 of the Uniform Buildting Code or succ,~.sor p~ovision or
"(d)
used in p~rfcx~mg the acts of ~ge shall be
· dequate equipment for disinfecting and starilizin~ instruments
"(e) Hot and cold running water shall be provided at all times.
"(f) Closed cabinets shall be provided for storage of cle~.~
"(g) ~~ bathing: dressing, .locker and toilet facilities shall
be for , ini m. of (1) or s wer
a dressin~ room contain/rig separa~ lockers which are capable Of bein~ locked
.~bas of c~e (1) separate w~h basin for en~loyees shall be
pk--~rid~ at all times. ~ basin shall be locat~d_ within or as close as
-p~-acticahle to the area devoted to performing of m~sage services. Sanitary
towels shall also be p~-ovid~ at each basin.
O£d/na~e No. 485
Page 10
"(i) Pads used on massage tables shall be covered with a durable,
washable plastic or other waterproof material acceptzhle to the San Bernardino
O=unty Health Depa~ ~,~nt.
"(j) Proof of compliance with all applicable provisions of the
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code and all applicable laws, ordinances and
regulateions shall be provided prior to the is~,mnce of any permits.
"Section 9.24.070 - Same - Inspections
'~ne Chief of Police, Directo~ of C~,,~nity Development, Directc~ and
the San Bernardino County Health Department, or their authorized representa-
tives, :'~all have the right to enter the massage establishment for the purpose
of mak~ reasom~hle unscheduled inspections to observe and enforce c~liance
with a~)licable regulations, laws, and provisions of this Chapter.
"Section 9.24.080 - Permit Non-assic~able
"No mm~sage es~zhlishment permit may be sold, transferred or assigned
by the l~rmittee, or by operation of law, to any other persc~ or persons, and
any such sale, transfer or assigrm~nt, o~- att~_~ sale, transfer or assign-'
ment, ~all be dee~d to constitute a voluntary surrender of suc~ permit and
such permit shall thereafter be ~ terminat_~d and void; provided and
ex~eptirg, however, that if the permittee is a partnership and one (1) or more
of the partners sbxxlld die, one (1) or more of the surviving partners may
acc~,~e, by purchase or otherwise, the interest of the d__~c~a.~ed partner or
partners without effecting a surrender or terminati~ of such permit and in
~rnter(s). one (1) or more proposed partners in a ~x~nip ~nted a
permit ~_reur~er my mak~ application to the Director, t~gether with t_he fee
original. application providing all information as re~ed for partners in the
first J~-~ance and, upon a~l thereof, the transfer of the intsrest~ of
one (1) or m~re partners to the pr~ partner or partners may occur. If
the permit is issued to a c~rp~ti~, stock may be sold, transferred, issued,
or assigned to a person not list_~d on the application as a stockholder,
permit ~'~all be deemed terminated and void; provided, however, the pr~
transferee my ~h~it to the Direct_mr, together with a fee es~ah]].~hed by the
City C~uncil, an application to amend tb~ original applicatio~ Uforiding all
information as required for stockholders in the f~t instance, and, upon
approval thereof, the transfer may then occur.
"Section 9.24.090 - Chan~e of Location or Name
"(a) A change of location of a m~sage es~ahl~t my be approved
by the Directc~ -~--uvided all ~nanoes ar~ regulations of the City of Rancho
Cu~mnnga are o~lied with.
"(b) No pe~.~ttee shall operate under any name or conduct any
establishment under any designation not specified in the permit.
"(c) Any application for a~ expansi~ of a building or other place
of business of a m~age establishment shall re~,~e c~mpliance with Section
9.24.060 of this Article.
Ordinance No. 485
Page 11
"Section 9.24.100 - M~saqe Establishment Notification of Chan~e
"(a) The holder of the permit to operate or conduct a massage
establishment shall notify the Director, in writing, of the r~me and a~
of each person en~loyed, including m~age technicians, at such establishment
within five (5) days of said person being e~ployed.
"(b) If, during the term of a permit, the appli~_nt has any d~nge
in informatio~ provided o~ or concern/rig the original applicatic~ or permit
renewal application, notification must be made to tbm Directmr in writing,
within ten (10) busir~ss days of the charge.
"Section 9.24.110 -Same-Renewal of Permit
"A ~-~ge eseahl~h~ent lice~u~ed ~]er this C~ shall ~,~t ~
~li~ti~ f~ ~1 ~ (30) ~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~ti~ ~f. ~
~~ ~ ~t~fa~ ~1~ wi~ all ~~ ~ov~io~ of ~
"Section 9.24.120 - A~olicabilitv of Regulations to Existin~
"The provisions of this Article shall be appli~ble to all persons
and businesses described herein whether the ~cribed activities were
ese~hl~ befog% or after the effective date of tb~ Article, exuept that
manage establishments legally in business ~ior to the effective date hereof
shall have One Hundred Eighty (180) caler~ar days or until the ex~iratio~ of
b~_reof.
AR~/~.~. II - MASSAGE T~X~NICIANS
"Section 9.24.200 - Massage Technicians - Permit ~uired
"(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the business
of acting or to act as a m~ge technician unless such person bz~lds a velid
m~ge technician permit issued by the City. Each ~ge technician perm/t
holder shall be issued a pb~fco i~ntification badge which will also serve as a
massage technician permit. The permit holder shall maintain the massage
technician permit visibly on his or her person during business b~u~. Each
permit holder shall immediately surrer~er to the Director any massage
technician permit issued by the City upon the suspension, revocation, or
expiration of such permit.
"(b) A permit under this Section shall be walid for twelve (12)
~ont_hs frc~ the date of ~-~_~mnce uruless revok~ or ~pended.
Ordinance No. 485 ~_, ~.
Page 12
"Section 9.24.210 - Same - ADplication
"(a) Each applicant for a ma~sage technician permit shall make
application under penalty of perjury to the Director. Prior to ~,b~itting an
application, a nonrefur~hle fee as established by the City Council shall be
paid to help defray the costs of investigation and report required by th~m
Article. A copy of the receipt shall acc~,~x%ny the application.
"(b) Permit fees required under this Section shall be in addition to
any lio=_nse, permit or fee rec~ed under any other Section or Chapter of this
Code.
"(c) Tom application for permit does not authorize the applicant to
massage until such permit bm~ been w£=nted.
"(d) Each applicant for a massage technician permit shall ~,~it the
follow~ ,x~ information:
"1. Each and every fact or inquiry set forth in Sections
9.24.040(d)3 through 9.24.040(d)7, inclusive, of Article I of this ~hapter.
"2. Aocep~mhle written ~oof that the applicant is at least
eightee~ (18) years of age.
"(e) The applicant must furnish a diploma or certificate of
~uation frc~ a minimum 100-hour course of instruction fi~c~, either:
"1. A recognized school of Im3ssage as defined in Section
9.24.010(h) of Article I of this Chapter; or
"2. An existing school or institution of learning outside the
State of California, together with a certified transcript of the applicant's
school z~oords showing date of enrollment, hours of instruction and ~£~duation
f~ a ¢x~rse having at least the m~nimum requ~r~sments prescribed by Title 5,
Divisio~ 21, of the California Oode of Regulations, wherein the theory,
method, profession and work of massage is taught, and a copy of the school's
approval by its Stats Board of ~ucation.
"(f) The m~-~age es~blishment's full name, address and telephone
number ~Wnere the massage technician will be ~,~1oyed at a fixed place of
business~. In the event the applicant seeks to conduct out call m~age
services~ not listed in the origimal application, a separate application and
fee ~lSt, be ~,~itted.
"(g) Such other identification and information as the Directmr may
recp~,~re in u~der to discover the truth of the matteA~ herein specified as
re~,~red to be set forth in the application.
"(h) Two (2) portrait ("passport") ~ of the applicant, two
(2) inches by two (2) inches in size.
"(i) The Directc~_ may re~,~e the applicant to furm4-~h firmerprints
when n~ed for the purpose of establishing identification. Any recp,~red
fingerprinting fees will be the responsibility of the applio~nt.
No. 485
Page 13
"(j) A certificate from a medical doctor licensed to ~actice in the
State of California stating that the applicant b~, within thirty (30) days
immediately preoed/n~ the date of application, been examined and found to be
free of arff cc~tagio~s or C~L,L~h~ic~ble di_~e.
"(k) Authorization for the City of Pancho O~-nga, its agents an~
employ~ to seek /nfoxmation and co~t an investigation into the truth of
the statements sat forth in the application.
"(1) The Director shall have up to sixty (60) calem~w days to
investigate the application and the background of the applicant. Upon
ocm%01etion of the investigation, shall ~-ant the permit if he or she fir~ in
acco~noe with Section 9.24.040(d)23(a) through (f), inclusive; and
"1. The applic~_nt b~-~ furmi~hed an accelable diploma or
oertificate of graduation frc~ a recognized s~%~ol; or
"2. The ap~licent b~-~ furnished written -~oof fL~, a r~oognized
school that the minimum number of hours of instruction have ~em complete.
"(m) If the Director, following investigation of the application,.
determi~s that the applicant does not fulfill the requirements as set forth
notice. Any applicant for a permit who is refused a permit by the Directc~
~ay appeal the denial as set forth in Section 9.24.440.
"Section 9.24.220 - Sa~e - Renewal
"A massage technician licensed under this (hapter shall file an
application to renew the permit thirty (30) days prior to the date of expira-
tion th~-eof. Approval shall be oo~th~ent ~n satisfactory czm~lianoe with
all pextinent sections of tb~ Article, includin~ a c~L=nt medical clearanoe.
A renewal fee as eseahlish~ by the City Council shall be c~3ed to defray,
in part, the co~t of the renewal investigation requ~e~ by this Article.
"Section 9.24.230 - Sa~e - Notification bv Techr~cian
thereof as the case may be, tb~ massage technician shall notify the Director
of suc~ change within ten (10) k~siness days thereof, in writing.
"Section 9.24.300 - Out Call Ma~sa~e Services - Special Endorsement
"It shall be unlawful for any massage establishment or m~ge
technician to p~-ovide, or to offer to provide, ~-~ge at any location except
at the place of business approved for a m~age es~hl~ hereunder;
provided, however, that a m~ge establishment or m~-~ge technician may
obtain a special er~lcrsement to the permit issued thereto specifically
authorizing out call m~-~ge services.
~e No. 485 ~..· ~·
Page 14
"Section 9.24.310 - Same - ADDlication
"Any m~sage establishment or m~sage technician desiring to provide
cut call massage services shall ~z~it to the Director, together with the
requisite nonrefur~hle fee therefor as established by the City Council, an
application to provide out call massage services within the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. In addition to the requirements set forth herein pertaining to
m~age establishment permit or ma-~sage technician permit application, as the
case may be, the applicant shall ~,~ ~nit detailed information settin~ forth the
manner and m~ns of transporting, to and from the premises where out call
ma.~age services are to be perfo ~r~__, the clean, sanitary towels, coverings
~y aids, equipment or devices to be utilized and the mathod(s) of disposal
thereof.
"Section 9.24.320 - Sa~e - Records
"All m~sage technicians authorized to perfokm out call m~-~sage
servic~ hereunder shall keep a written record, at the ~-~age technician's
princi~Ll place of business, a separate record of out call ~-~_~age servi_~gs~
perfomm~ as required by, and subject to the restrictions of, Section'
9.24.050(f) of Article I hereof and shall include therein the location, by
"Section 9.24.400 - Prohibit~ Conduct
"(a) It shall be unlawful for any massage technician to m~age the
genital area of any custxxaer or client or the breasts of any f~le cust_~er
or client or for any massage establishment to allow or permit such ~.~age.
"(b) M~age technicians shall be fully clothed in non-transparent
clothing' at all times that shall not expect their genitals, pubic area,
"(c) It shall be unlawful for a massage technician to perform any
m~sage services at any location other than that location specified on the
ma-~sage technician permit.
"Section 9.24.410 - SusDension Pendin~ Revocation
'54hen the grour~-~ for revocation under this Article are that the
permittee is suspected of immoral, improper, or otherwise objectioma~le
conduct, the permit may be suspended until the revocation hearing ~ocedure
ba.~ ~---n o~leted.
"Section 9.24.420 - Revocation - Massaqe Establishment Pera~t
"The Directc~ shall revoke the massage establishment permit of any
p~z~on, firm, ~zershi9 or corporation holding th~ sam~ upon reo~ipt of
satisfact__mry evidence that the permitt~e_ b~ made a material ~epresentation
on the ~_rmit application, or if the permitts_, any managing responsible
No. 485
Page 15
e~plo}~ thereof or any of the persons en%m~rated in Sections 9.24.040(d)12 ~r
9.24.040(d) 13 of Article I of this C~ape~ ~_~ been convice~ of or entered a
plea of guilty or nolo oontendere to any c~a~ge of a violatic~ of any of the
p~-ovisic~s of this Ompter, or of the enumerated statutes set forth in
9.24.040(d)7 of Article I of this C~apter or any lesser incl~__~d offense. The
Director- my ~voke, after notioe and hearing, a ~ge ese~hlishment permit
if, c~ the basis of satisfactoxy evidence__, it is shown that the permittee, any
managing responsible employee, or any employee, representative, or agent of
in = co~stitut/x~ a violatic~ of tb~ Oreapter or of any of the
e~rat~ statutes set forth in Sectic~ 9.24.040(d)7 of Article I of tbt~
Oreapter. The Director shall ~i~e the pexmitec~ with written notioe of the
~ of the massage establishment as shown on the applicati~.
"Section 9.24.430 - Same - _M~_~ge Technician Permit
'~he Director shall revoke the m~ge tedmi¢isn ~rmit of any
~erson hols~W th~ sam upon rsmiving satisfact~f ~vide~m that the
permittee has made a material m~ .~ .~T~entation on the permit a~01icatic~ or
if the pexmitt~ b~_~ ~n c0~victed of or entered a plea of guilty or nolo
contendere to any ~3e of a violation of any of the ~u~isic~s of this
Chapter, or any of the er~m~rated statutes set forth in Section 9.24.040(d)7
of Article I of tb~ ~hapter or to a less~r incl, ~d offense. The Director
may, after notice and hearing, revoke the ~m~ge t___~hnician permit of any
permittee if, c~ the basis of satisfactory evidence it shows that the
permittee b~-~ en~ in conduct co~mtitutin~ a violatic~ of this Chape-~ or
any of the er~m~rated statut__~ set forth in Section 9.24.040(d)7 of Article I
of tb~ (~pt. ~er. The Dirmct~ shall provide the permittee with written notice
of the revocation by certified rail ~4~ to the peTmitt~ at the addr~
of reoo=d shown c~ the massage technician permit application.
"Section 9.24.440 - ~t Denial/Revocation ApDeal ~£ocedure
"~he applicant or ~mitt~, as the case may be, withi~ te~ (10)
busim~ days. after receipt of denial of an application for a permit ur~er
either Article I c= Article II, hexmof, or notice of revocation, may file an
appeal with the City Clerk to be ~n to the Hearing Officer. In the event
an appeal is filed within the ten (10) day time frame, a suspension may be in
effect until the final decision b~ been rendered by the Hearing Officer.
"If the applicant or permittee fails to make an appeal within the ten
(10) day filing period provided herein, denial/-£evocation shall e~ke effect
immediately upon expiration of ~h filing period. No pexmit
until after a hearing shall have been held before the F~ing Officer to
dete~dne good cause for such revocation, or the appeal filing period has
lapsed. It is unlawful for any person to oo~,~t a ~-~.~e ese~hlishment or
ca~y on the busir~ of ~-~ge until the ~=~oked permit b~-~ been reinstat~
by the Hearing Offioer.
'~otice of such b~_aring shall be given in writing and mailed at
ten (10) days ~rior to the date of the hearing, by certified mail, addressed
to the address listed on the massage establishment application, or massage
technician application, as tb~ case may be.
Ordinance No. 485 ~, ~.
Page 16
"The notice shall state the grounds of the cu~laint and shall state
the time and place where such hearing will be held.
"After said hearing, the Hearing Officer sb~11 render a written
decision within ten (10) business days from the date the matter is ~,bmli'tted
for decision. The action of the Hearing Officer shall be final and
conclusive.
"Section 9.24.450 - Burden of Proof at Hearing
"Unless otherwise specifically Urovided by law, the burden is on the
permittee/applicant in any hearing under this Article to urove that the deter-
ruination of the Director which is being appealed is unreasonhie, erroneous,
or clearly abusive of discretion.
"Section 9.24.460 - Penalties for Violation of Chapter
"It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, partnership, or
coxporat~ion to violate any provision or to fail to __~3~p__ ly with any of the
requirements of this Chapter. Any person, firm, partnership or corporation
violating any provisions of this Chapter or failing to comply with any of its'
recp,~rements shall be d__~ guilty of a m~.~d~an~r and upon conviction
thereof shall be punished by a fine not ex~ One Thousand Dollars
($1,000.00), or by imprisonment not exceed{ng six (6) m~nths, or by both such
fine and im~risor~ent. Each and every person, fir~, partnership, or corpora-
tion shall be deems4 guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or
any portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of
partnership or corpok-ation, and shall be d~----med punishable therefor as
"Section 9.24.470 - civil Remed~_ies Available
'"the violation of any of the provisior~ of this Chapter shall
oonstitute a m~-~ance and may be e_~ by the City through civil ~£ocess by
means of restraining order, preliminary or permanent injunction or in any
other manner -~k~vided by law for the abat~m~/Yc of such
"Section 9.24.480 - Severability
"The City Council declares that, should any provision, section,
paragraph, sentence or word of this Chap~-r be rendered or declared invalid by
any final court action in a court of c~cent jurisdiction, or by reason of
sentences and wor~s of tb~ (~mapter shall remain in full fu~e ar~ effect."
SECTI~ 2: ~e Mayu~- shall sign tb~ ~-dinanoe and the City Clerk
sh~]l cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its
passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of
general c/rculation published in the City of Ontario, Califu~.~a, and
circulat~d in tb~ City of Rancho Cucamor~a, Califcxnia.
~., Ordinance No. 485
Page 17
PASSED, APPROVED, ar~ ADOPlOD this 4th day of M~ch, 1992.
AYES: Alexander, Buquet, Stout, Williams, Wright
NOES: None
ABS~: None
D~:.-~ J. ~, City Clerk
I, D~A J. ADAMS, CITY ~.F~K of the City of Rancho ~,
C~lifo~ia, do h~eby oertify that th~ foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a
regular meeting of the Council of the City of Rancho ~,~nga held on the
19th day of Febi~m~y, 1992, and was finally ~ at a re~3ular meeting of the
City Council of the City of Rancho Cucam0~3a held on the 4th day of F~ch,
1992.
Executed tb~ 5th day of
California.
1992, at Rancho C~c~m~r~3a,
J. , City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO. 486
AN (~DINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RAN(X~O
CUCA~DNC41, CALIFf~NIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMenT O00E ~
~ 91-05, AM~qDING TITLE 17, ~ 17.02.140 OF ~{E
~DF
The City Council of the city of Rancho ~ does hereby ordain
as follc~s:
S~-TION 1: Section 17.02.140 is revised to read as follows:
MASSAGE ESTABLI~: Any establishment having a fixed plaoe of
business wb~re any person, firm, association, partnership, or
engaged in, oo~__,ct~, or carried on, any business of giving
m~-~ges, baths, adm/nistration of fc~entation, electric or magnetic
treat~_nts, alcohol rub~, or any other type of systsm for treatmer~
or manipulation of the h,m~n body with or without any character of
electric tub, sponge, mineral, fomentation, or any other type of
Fe~age establishments shall not include the following:
b. Nurses registered ur~_er the laws of the State of
California.
c. Barbers am~ beauticians who are duly licensed under the
laws of the State of California while engaging in ~ctioe
shall apply solely to the ~gin~ of the neck, face, and/or
scalp of the customer or client.
d. Hospitals, nursing ~, sanatoriums, or other b~alth care
facilities duly licensed by the State of California.
e. Accredited high schools, junior colleges, and oollecjes or
universities whose coaches and trainers are acting within
scope of their employment.
f. Trainers of amateur, semiprofessional, or professional
athletes or athletic t~-~.
SqDCITON 2: q~is Council finds that this amendment is not oonsidered
a project by the California Env'~xx~ental Quality Act and is, tb~_~efore,
exempt (~ Article 5, c~m~encin~ with Section 15061).
Ord{nar~e No. 486 ..,, ~
Page 2
SECTION 3: The City Council declares that, should any provision,
section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this o£dinance be rendered or
declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdic-
tion, or by r~a~n of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions,
sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this O~dinance shall r~m~in in
full force and effect.
SECTION 4: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk
shall certify to the adoption of this OTd~ ar~ shall cause the same to be
published within 15 days after its adoption at least once in the Inland Valley
Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of
Ontario, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
PASSfD, APPROg~D, and ADOPTfD this 4th day of March, 1992.
Alexander, Buquet, Stout, Williams, Wright
AYES:
NOES: None
~: None
Dennis L. Stout, Mayor
I, Dkn~RA J. ADAMS, CITY cr.F~K of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
Califor~tia, do hereby certify that the foregoing O~.]~nance was introduced at a
regular meeting of the Council of tb~ City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the
19th day of Fe~'~,~y, 1992, arzl was finally passed at a regular ~ of the
City C~mncil of the City of Pancho Cucamonga held c~ the 4th day of March,
1992.
Execu~_~d this 5th day of March,
Califor~,~ a.
1992, at Rancho Cucamonga,
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 92-33 ALLOWING A MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT WITHIN
A 1,610 SQUARE FOOT LEASED SPACE IN AN EXISTING
COMMERCIAL CENTER ON 9 ACRES OF LAND IN THE GENERAL
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 7890 HAVEN AVENUE, AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1077-401-29
A. Recitals.
(i) Claudine Eubank has filed an application for the issuance of
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-33 as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use
Permit request is referred to as "the application."
(ii) On February 10, 1993, and continued to February 24, 1993, 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.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced public hearing on February 10, and February 24,
1993, 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 7890 Haven
Avenue, $14, within the existing Deer Creek Village Shopping Center; and
(b) The property to the north of the subject site is the Deer
Creek Channel and Flood Control Basin, the property to the south is the
Virginia Dare Shopping Center, the property to the east is the Terra Vista
Town Center and vacant office property, and the property to the west is the
Deer Creek Channel and graded industrial land; and
(c) The application applies to massage services which will
operate from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., Monday through Saturday.
(d) In addition to massage, the salon will provide herbal
treatments, facial and skin treatments, and european body wraps. Beauty
supplies will also be sold at the site.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 92"33 - CLAUDINE EUBANK
February 24, 1993
Page 2
(e) Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 9.24.040 requires
that this application be applied for and approved prior to the Massage
Establishment Permit becoming effective.
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 proposed use is in accord with the General Plan,
the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in
which the site is located.
(b) 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.
(c) That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable
provisions of the Development Code.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to
each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Plannin~ Division
l)
Approval of the required permits for the
massage establishment and the massage
technicians must be granted by the
Administrative Services Director prior to the
operation of the Massage Establishment, in
accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No.
485.
2)
Approval of this request shall not waive
compliance with all sections of the Development
Code and all other applicable City Ordinances.
3)
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
reconsideration and possible termination of the
use.
4)
Any sign proposed for the facility shall be
designed in conformance with the comprehensive
Sign Ordinance and the Uniform Sign Program for
the complex and shall require review and
approval by the Planning Division prior to
installation.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 92-33 - CLAUDINE EUSANK
February 24, 1993
Page 3
5)
The facility shall be operated in confo'rmance
with the requirements as defined in Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 9.24,
regulating massage establishments and shall
comply with all provisions of the Massage
Establishment Permit.
6) Hours of operation shall be from 9 a.m. to
9p.m.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1993.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Bullet, Secretary
I, Brad Bullet, 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 24th day of February 1993, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT
COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 92-33 - CLAUDINE EUBANK
February 24, 1993
Page 2
(e) The business clientele will be limited to female customers
only, until such time as a separate restroom/locker facility is provided for
male customers to the satisfaction of the City Planner and the Administrative
Services Director.
(f) Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 9.24.040 requires
that this application be applied for and approved prior to the Massage
Establishment Permit becoming effective.
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 proposed use is in accord with the General Plan,
the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in
which the site is located.
(b) 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.
(c) That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable
provisions of the Development Code.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to
each and every condition set forth below.
Plannin~ Division
Approval of the required permits for the
massage establishment and the massage
technicians must be granted by the
Administrative Services Director prior to the
operation of the Massage Establishment, in
accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No.
485.
2~
3~
Approval of this request shall not waive
compliance with all sections of the Development
Code and all other applicable City Ordinances.
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
reconsideration and possible termination of the
4~
Any sign proposed for the facility shall be
designed in conformance with the comprehensive
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CUP 92-33 - CLAUDINE EUBANK
February 24, 1993
Page 3
Sign Ordinance and the Uniform Sign Program for
the complex and shall require review and
approval by the Planning Division prior to
installation.
5)
The facility shall be operated in conformance
with the requirements as defined in Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 9.24,
regulating massage establishments and shall
comply with all provisions of the Massage
Establishment Permit.
6)
Hours of operation shall be from 9 a.m. to
9 p.m.
7)
The business clientele shall be limited to
female customers only while one restroom/locker
facility exists. If a separate restroom/locker
facility is provided to the satisfaction of the
City Planner and the Administrative Services
Director, male customers may also be permitted.
Such a change in the use shall not require
modification to this Conditional Use Permit.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1993.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Bullet, 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 24th day of February 1993, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
OERERRL i'l'111':.RO BYBTEITIB
INCORPORATED .
February 22, 1993
Rancho Cuc~monga Civic Center
Planning Commission
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cuc~monga, CA 91730
-- RECEIVED --
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING DIVISION
AS per our meeting today with Brad Bullet, Steve Hayes,
Rick Gomez and Jerry Grant, we hereby request a continuance
of Variance 93-01 (Sharfi) until March 10, 1993. This will
allow the commission adequate time to review our submittal
of February 22, 1993.
Should you need to contact us please call Ben at work at
980-4863 or either of us at our residence at 980-??42.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. We
hope that this issue will be resolved soon.
8358 MAPLE PLACE · RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 · (714) 980-4VME (4863) * FAX: (714) 987-4VME
February 19, 1993
TO: Co .....~ssioner Chitiea
C~ssionerN=Nie~
C~....~ssioner Melcher
Co-~ssioner Tols2oy
comissioner Valle2te
FROM: Benj,,,n & Lila Sha~~
RE: Variance 93-01 Sharfi
Public Hearing for 2/24/93
Yesterday, we received a copy of the Staff Report dated
February 24, 1993, addressed to "Chairman and Members of the
Planning Commission" from Brad Buller.
We were quite saddened and disappointed by Mr. Buller's
recommendation to deny our variance request. We feel that
many of his assumptions/reasons for denial are invalid due
to misinformation and would very much appreciate your
reading our responses to his findings.
MOST IMPORTANTLY:
According to the "Official Records - recorded Jan
20, 1978 with the San Bernardino County Clerk and
Recorder" - The 'DECLARATION OF ESTABLISHMENT OF
CONDITIONS COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS,
AND EASEMENTS" for our neighborhood - Lots 1-48,
Tract 9521, County of San Bernardino, Book 138,
Pages 49/50 of Maps in the Office of the County
Recorder, (attached as Exhibit A) WE ARE NOT IN
VIOLATION OF ANY CODE. As stated in the above
Declarations on Page 2 - Paragraph 3 - Lines 5 - 8:
"..Residential structures shall be located so that
side lot line set back shall be not less than 5
feet. XC P ING ACCESSORY ~UI?.~INGS. NOT FOR
~SID~NTI~?. US~. ?.YIN~ ~NTI~?.Y TO TW~ ~ OF. AND
NOT C~.OS~R TH~N T~N f10~ F~T TO TWO.
BUI!.~ING. .... "
ANaLYSiS
A. Mr. Buller's Staff Report
stated that:
(referring
to the old shed)
This is incorrect. The original structure was the
same size on the exact same footing as the replacement
structure. It was permanently fastened to the existing
concrete slab, as is the replacement. No Bigger or
Smaller. The old structure had electrical permits, as
does the replacement.
We were not given a correction notice until after
thousands of dollars were spent and MANY months of
construction for the replacement shed, pond and
landscape were complete.
What is terribly confusing is that James E. Schroeder,
Building Inspection Supervisor, visited Lila Sharfi on
November 17, 1992 (Ben was out of town on business) and
informed her that he had been watching the construction
during the previous s,mmer months. If this is in fact
true, why didn't he step forward at that time to avoid
this current situation. THE CITY NEVER STOPPED BY
DURING CONSTRUCTION WHEN THIS SITUATION COULD HAVE BEEN
RESOLVED WITHOUT ISSUE.
The contractor performing the construction of the shed,
as well as the artist building the whale tale, info£med
us that many times they noticed a city vehicle outside
our property (even taking photo's at one time). This
is even more proof that the city knew of some probl-m
much earlier than Nov-mher of 92, yet did nothing until
all work was complete. (See attached letters Exhibit C)
B. The Staff Report goes on in this section to state that:
Although we currently have access from the south side
of the property, it is not relied upon as the only
access. We most often access the shed and storage from
the sidewalk in the lower yard. However, it has always
been our, and our neighbors, understanding that an
access way will continue to exist on the south border
even if there is construction on the property. For
this reason, you will notice that all properties on our
side of Whirlaway have access fences on the south end
of their property. However, we believe this is an
irrelevant point in denying the variance.
****The structure can not be moved 4 feet east****
The south end of the storage shed is more than one foot
higher in elevation than the pond area. There is a 3
foot access sidewalk along the east side of the shed
for access to the shed, pond, and covered storage area.
Then, there is 2 1/2 feet of pond vegetation, including
a mature palm tree, before you get to the concrete
pond. Moving the shed 4 feet east would disable access
to the storage, pond area, and pump control valves
located in the vegetation areal Tearing down the shed
and ripping out the concrete and destroying the "Whale
tail fountain" should be considered a financial and
aesthetic hardship. Moving the shed to the only other
vacant lawn area would severely compromise the beauty
of our lower yard. It would surely be an eye sore to
the neighbors and community. We have school buses full
of children stopping to view our lower yard, as well as
grandparents with their grandchildren, and the many
walkers and bicycler's in the area. Moving the shed
should never have been an option. Within the next
year, the vegetation should grow around the majority of
the shed, making it even less visible to viewers.
It should be noted that HARDSHIP is a relative term.
Not only would there be needless financial loss in
changing the structure, it would require more unsightly
construction noise and work which is a hardship to us
and our neighbors.
FACTS FOR FINDINGS
Please visit our yard personally if you don't believe
us or the Xerox of the photos, but the structure can
not be moved 4 feet east. If it were, there would
definitely be a hardship in accessing the storage area
and in maintaining our pond and waterfall. 12 inches
in not enough width between hardscapes.
We take offense to the statement that the "hardship was
self imposed". We did seek advice from certified
contract workers in Rancho Cucamonga before building.
And Ben spoke with Steve Hayes and was told that "If
the structure previously existed, no permits would be
needed". Even if there was a misunderstanding of the
situation, we were "ignorant" of the regulation - not
guilty of knowingly building without a permit. This
hardship (if it can be called one) was not self-
imposed. It was caused by the city of Rancho Cucamonga
and its inspection staff by not coming forward at the
time of construction to inform/question us about the
requirement of permits. As per the attached letters
(Exhibit C) and James Schroeders statement, the city
did come by, yet did not bring up an issue. And had
the city (Jim Schroeder) visited us during construction
when he a~mittingl¥ first noticed the problem, this may
have been avoided. So how is this self-imposed? Ben
has worked closely with the city for the past few years
while building his own office building in Rancho
Cucamonga. We would not knowingly go against code!
All the electrical wiring for the shed previously
existed. The concrete pad for the shed previously
existed. Permits for electrical were given in 1988
when a "Certificate of Occupancy" was issued. The
structure was in compliance with the covenants of the
community as stated in the opening page of this letter.
These are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
for putting the replacement shed in the same location
as the original.
As stated before, it is not possible to move the
structure 4 feet east, and the most unsightly thing we
could do would be to put the structure in the middle of
our lower yard - the only open grass space existing.
We have many trees planted here, but most importantly,
it would be an eyesore to us and the community. It
would stick out like a sore thumb. Literally hundreds
of people enjoy stopping and viewing our pond and
feathered friends. A storage shed in the now open
space would look terrible. In speaking with dozens of
our neighbors, we found that none of them want to see
our shed moved or changed. We have a petition stating
this. NOT ONE NEIGHBOR OBJECTED TO OUR SHED. NOT ONE!
We would rather have two metal storage sheds back on
the pad and risk the wind damage and unsightly effects
of them, than to move the shed.
According to the "Official Records - recorded Jan
20, 1978 with the San Bernardino County Clerk and
Recorder" - The 'DECLARATION OF ESTABLISHMENT OF
CONDITIONS COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS,
AND EASEMENTS" for our neighborhood - Lots 1-48,
Tract 9521, County of San Bernardino, Book 138,
Pages 49/50 of Maps in the Office of the County
Recorder, (attached as Exhibit A) WE ARE NOT IN
VIOLATION OF ANY CODE. As stated in the above
Declarations on Page 2 - Paragraph 3 - Lines 5 - 8:
"..Residential structures shall be located so that
side lot line set back shall be not less than 5
feet, mXCEPTING ACCESSORY BUILDINGS. NOT FOR
~RSIDmNTIAL USm. LYING RNTIRE?.Y TO THE REAR OF. AND
NOT CT.OSmR TH~N TmN (10) FERT TO THE MAIN
BUILDING ..... "
There are many other properties in the community with
buildings less than 5 feet from their property line. Some
may be less than 120 sq./ft, but they do exist. We
guarantee the safety and aesthetic appearance of our
replacement shed. It far exceeds those that are of smaller
size.
All of the neighbors within 300 sq./ft of our home,
and many others in the neighborhood are in support
of leaving our shed as is - as is proven by the
petition attached as Exhibit B. (Not one .person
refused to s~gn the petition) All the neighbors
expressed disappointment in the City for
unnecessarily harassing us when there are true code
violations going on elsewhere.
5. OUR REPLACEMENT SHED IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC
HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE. IT IS NOT MATERIALLY INJURIOUS
TO PROPERTIES OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY. In fact, the
metal storage sheds (which are legal) are far more dangerous
to the community than our well built replacement shed.
OPTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER
The shed can not be relocated 4 feet east. And moving
it to the center of the yard would severely compromise
the beauty of the neighborhood - our neighbors
specifically asked us NOT TO PUT THE SHED IN THE MIDDLE
OF THE YARDer!
Removing a portion of the structure would compromise
the safety of the remaining portion. It was built with
strong walls and roof supports. Also, making it less
than 120 square feet reduces the amount of the original
storage structure. It is important for us to keep lawn
maintenance tools and work tools secured and out of
view from the community. We could not do this with a
smaller shed.
Please note: Phil Mosely informed Ben that all Public &
Safety regulations could be met by adding a 1 hour fire wall
to the west side of the shed. This is an option that we
will pursue if the variance is granted.
**All electrical pe~.,its have been aiven for the structure**
SUMMARY
We believe the Variance should be granted because:
1. We are not in violation of the covenants of our
community, filed with the city since 1978.
2. The structure is a replacement of an existing structure.
3. All of the neighbors within 300 feet of our property and
beyond, overwhelmingly support leaving the structure. In
fact, they all feel that if it were anywhere else on the
property, it would be an eyesore to the neighborhood.
4. The city was aware of construction of the replacement
shed as early as spring, yet did not contact us as to any
violations until late November.
5. It can not be moved 4 feet east, and should not be moved
anywhere else for aesthetic purposes. The community is very
concerned about the looks of its neighborhood as well.
6. The old structure had electrical permits as does the
replacement one - and all other structures on our property.
We sincerely appreciate your time and attention to this
matter. It is our hopes and prayers that you will not deny
this variance. Only 48 inches of property is in question.
48 inches of property that causes NO DETRIMENTAL effect to
any person, place, or thing - and is in compliance with the
covenants of our community. Our home and yard is a peaceful
place where landscape, gardening and animals make everyone
smile. Why would the city object to these 48 inches. We
have painted the shed to blend in with the landscape in
order to be less visible than the prior one. We truly
believe that one securely built wooden structure is safer
and more pleasing to the eye than flimsy metal storage sheds
could ever be. This belief is also held by all of our
neighbors and is documented in the attached petition.
Thank you - and please come visit our yard if you haven't
yet.
Mayor Dennis Stout
Phil Mosley
Brad Buller
shown or omitted, on any plans or specifications upon which it may pass,
or any buildings or structures erected therefrom. Three persons appointed
by the Company, acting without compensation, shall comprise the Architeej
tural Committee until such time as new members are elected by the record
owners of a majority of the lots in said tract. The Company hereby ap-
points, as members of said Committee, Richard A. Lewis-
Randall W. Lewis , and William K. Speer
all of whom have as their principal business address, 924 Wgst Ninth Street,
Upland, California 91786.
A majority of the Committee may designate a representative to act
for it. In the event of death or resignation of any member of the Com-
mittee, the remaining membars shall have full authority to designate a
successor. The decision of a majority of such Architectural Committee
upon any matters submitted or referred to it shall be final, provided,
however, tha~t such decision does not violate any of the conditions set
out in the declaration.
2. The main building on any lot in said tract shall be constructed
or assembled on said tract and not moved'thereon from elsewhere. Writfen
approval of at least two members of the Committee as to style, design,
appearance, quality of workmanship and materials, harmony of external
design with existing structures, and proposed location thereof with re-
spect to topography and finish grade elevation, shall be obtained prior
to the commencement of any construction on any lot in said tract; if no
Committee exists, o~ if after thirty (30) days from the date such plans
and %~itten application have been submitted, approval or disapproval has
not been given; or if no suit to enjoin the erection of such structure
has been commenced, then provided all other requirements contained herein
are complied with, then such approval shall not be required.
3. (a) All frame buildings on any lot in said tract shall be
painted with at least two coats of paint or one coat of stain. No resi-
dential structure shall be located nearer than 25 feet to the
front property line, or nearer than 15 feet to the rear lot
line. Residential structures shall be located so that side lot line
-2-
d~iTER ~'./hi'CORDING, RETURN TO: ~
'Lewis Homes of California
P. O. Box 670
Upland, CA 91786 DECLARATION OF ESTABLISHMENT OF CONDITIONS
RECORDED IN OF ClAL .EOORD$
20 AT
V. DENNIS WARDLE
CLERK-RECORDER
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIF.
'. COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND EASEMENTS
~','7' i~;~{;7) ~:;'"~' ':- ......
'"'i :; :'"~" ' ..... iP "'~ ~ '
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that LEWIS HOMES OF CA~.I~ORNIA
, a partnership , whose principal
business address is 924 West Ninth Street, Upland, California 91786,
hereinafter referred to as "the Company", owner of the real property in
the County of San Bernardino , State of California..
described as follows:
Lots 1
City of
State of
Book 138
to
California
· Pages
48 , inclusive, of Tract 9521
, County of San Bernardino ,
· as per map recorded in
49 & 50 of Maps in the office
of the C.~unty Recorded of said county.
hereinafter referred to as "said property" or as "said tract",
HEREBY ~CERTIFIES AND DECLARES that the following covenants and
conditions are placed on said property for the protection of the owners,
and in their entirety shall apply to all lots.
Said conditions are as follows:
1. Before commencing any building operations, written approval
must be obtained from the Architectural Committee covering building and
plot plans for all structures erected, altered, placed, assembled, or
permitted to remain on any lot in said tract, including garages and
fences, except, however, that approval of the Architectural Committee
shall not be required for building operations conducted by the Company
itself. The approval of said Committee shall be confined to style, de-
sign, appearance, and location of the proposed structure, and as to cor-
ner lots, the street frontage thereof, bu't shall not be construed as
modifying, altering, or waiving any of the provisions, conditions, coy-
enants, or restrictions herein set out. Neither shall the Company, nor
the Committee, nor any member thereof be held responsible, or liable in
an5, manner whatsoever, for any loss or damage due to errors or defects,
-1-
set back shall be not less than 5 feet, excepting accessory
buildings, not for residential use, lying entirely to the rea~ of, and
not closer than ten (10) feet to the main building; on corner lots the
side set-back on all side streets shall not be less than ten (10) feet.
No residential structure in this tract shall have an area of les~ than
1,800 square feet, exclusive of garage, open porches; ~nd patios.
No hedge, fence, or wall in excess of three (3) feet in height shall be
maintained within the front set-back lines.
(b) No dwelling shall be erected or placed on any lot having
a width of less than 75 feet at the minimum building set-back
line, nor shall any d~elling be erected or placed on any lot having an
area of less than 20,000 square feet.
4. (a) Lots 1 through 48 of said tract shall be used
only for oneor two-story single-family residences, for private garages
for not more than three cars, and other necessary and appurtenant out-
buildings.
(b) No residence in this tract may be used for a public
boarding house, sanitarium, hospital, asylum, or institution of any
kindred nature, or anything which may.become a nuisance to the neigh-
borhood.
5. No structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, ~tent,
shack, garage, barn or other out-building shall be used on any lot at
any time as a residence either temporarily or permanently. No dwelling
on any lot in said tract shall be occupied while under construction,
nor shall any trailer be parked on the front half (1/2) of any lot.
6. No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon any
lot nor anything be done thereon which may be or may become an annoy-
ance or nuisance to the neighborhood.
7. With the exception of company signs pertaining to the sale or
-3-
EXHIBIT A
VARIANCE 93-01 - SHARFI
rental of properties within said tract, no billboards, signs, or adver-
tising of any kind shall be erected or maintained upon any of said
property without the written consent of the Company or the Architectural
Committee. However, each property owner shall have the right to erect
a sign of reasonable dimensions advertising his property for sale.
8. No derrick or other structure designed for use in b~ring,
mining, or quarrying for water, oil, or natural gas, or precious metals
shall ever be erected, maintained, or permitted upon any lo~ in said
tract.
9. No fence, wall, hedge, or schrub planting which obstructs
sight lines at elevations between two (2) and six (6) feet above the
roadways shall be placed or permitted to remain on any corner lot within
the triangular area formed by the street property lines and a line con-
necting them at points twenty-five (25) feet from the intersection of
the street l~nes, or in the case of a round property corner from the
intersection of the street property lines extended. The same sight-
line limitations shall apply on any lot within ten (10) feet from the
intersection of a street property line with the edge of a driveway or
alley pavement. No tree shall be permitted to remain within such dis-
tances of such intersections unless the foliage line is maintained at
sufficient height to prevent obstruction of such sight lines.
10. (a) Unless suitable retaining walls are constructed to sup-
port the earth, the natural angle of repose of the ground shall not be
altered by excavation within five (5) feet of any boundary line of any
lot in said tract by other than a slope of two (2) feet horizontal to
one (1) foot vartical, provided, however, that nothing in this paragraph
shall be construed to prevent any such alteration in any manner, with
or without retaining walls, by the Company, its successors or assigns,
in carrying out the development and improvement of said property.
(b) Each grantae of a lot in said tract agrees for himself,
his heirs, assigns, or successors in interest that he will permit free
access by owners of adjacent or adjoining lots to slopes or drainage-
ways located on his property which affect said adjacent or adjoining
-4-
lots, when such access is essential for the maintenance of permanent
stabilization on said slopes, or maintenance of the drainage facilities
for the protection and use of property other than the lot on which the
slope of drainageway is located. -
(c) Each grantee of a lot in said tract agrees for himself
and his assigns that he will not in any way interfere with the estab-
lished drainage pattern over his lot from adjoining or other lots in
said tract, or that he will make adequate provisions for prop~ir. drainage
in the event it is necessary to change the established drainage over
his lot. For the purposes hereof, "established" drainage is defined
as the drainage which occurred at the time the overall grading of said
tract, including the landscaping of each lot in said tract, was completed
by the undersigned grantor.
11. Easements for installation and maintenance of utilities and
drainage facilities are reserved as shown on the recorded tract map.
Within these easements,
no structure, planting or other material shall be placed or permitted
to remain which may damage or interfere with the installation and
maintenance of utilities, or which may change the direction of flow
of drainage channels in the easements, or which may obstruct or retard
the flow of water through drainage channels in the easements. The
easements area of each loc and'all improvements in it shall be maintained
continuously by the owner of the lot, except for those improvements~ for
which a public authority or utility company is responsible.
12. Easements for bridle paths for the use of the public are
reserved as shown on the recorded tract map. The areas within these
eaLsements may not be used by adjoining property owners for storage,
p][anting or any structure, fence or vehicle parking that might interfere
with use of the strips for aforesaid purposes. Owners of each lot
adjoining said bridle path must maintain the area of his lot adjoining
the bridle path in a clean and sanitary manner so that it will not
become a nuisance, sanitary or health hazard. This continuous maintenance
of sanitary conditions shall include taking all necessary steps to prevent
flies and objectionable odors. It is understood that no bicycles, mini-
bikes, motorcycles, campers, trailers or recreational vehicles of any
type shall be permitted on said bridle path areas.
-5-
13. These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding
on all parties and all persons claiming under them for a period of thirty
(301) years from the date these covenants are recorded, after which time
said covenants shall be automatically extended for successive periods of
ten (10) years unless an instrument signed by a majority of t~ then owners
of the lots has been recorded, agreeing to change said covenants in whole
or in part.
14. Encorcement shall be by proceedings at law or in equity against
any person or persons violating orlattempting to violate any, covenant
either to restrict violation or to recover damages. Breach of any of
said conditions shall not defeat, affect, or render invalid the 'lien of
any mortgage or deed of trust made in good faith and for value upon any
lot or lots or portions of lots in said tract, but such conditions shall
be binding upon and effective against any owner thereof whose title is
acquired by foreclosure, trustee's sale, or otherwise, as to any subsequent
breach. It is expressly understood and agreed that a violation of any of
said covenants, conditions, or restrictions shall not result in a re-entry,
forefeiture, or reversion of title.
15. Invalidation of any one of these covenants by judgment or court
order shall in no wise affect any of the other provisions which shall
: remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned owner has caused this instrument
to be executed this 18th day of January , 19 78 ·
LEWIS HOMES OF CALIF0~, a p,~artnership
Authorized Agent
$S.
m,~TLE INSURANCE
ANDTRUST
· before me, the undersigned. a Notary Public
in and for said state, personally appeared Richard A. Lewis ,
known to me to be the ~.gent of the partnership that executed the within instrument and acknowledged 1o me
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO January 18, 1978
that__ he__ executed the same for and on behalf of said
partnership and that said partnership executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and omcial seal.
Edna A. Galaudet
EDNA A. GALAUDET
NOTARY PUBLIC" CALIFORNIA
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
EXHIBIT
VARIANCE 93-01 - SHARF I
February 19, 1993
We, the neighbors of Lila and Benjamin Sharfi, who reside at
9685 Whirlaway Street, Alta Loma, CA 91737, fully support
Variance 93-01 filed with the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
It is our opinion that the storage shed should be left as
is, as it poses no detrimental effects of public health,
safety or welfare. We do not object to the storage unit
being less than 5 feet from the property line.
If asked in person, I would attest to the above:
N~AME: f~ ADDRESS: PARCEL # IF KNOWN:
EXHIBIT C
VARIANCE 93-01 - SHARFI
February 18, 1993
Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 90030
RE: Variance 93-01 - Sharfi
Beginning in May of 1992, I worked closely with the Sharfi family on landscape projects, pond and
storage shed construction. I assisted them in removing what remained of the original storage shed and
then rebuilding its replacement.
What remained of the original storage structure was permanently bolted to the concrete slab. I used the
original concrete slab for the replacement structure without increasing its size. In my opinion the
structure was made safer and more aesthetic pleasing to blend in with the environment..
During the many months I assisted them, as early as the removal of the original structure - spring of 1992
- I witnessed, on more than three separate occasions, vehicles from the City of Rancho Cucan~onga drive
by to observe what was taking place. To the best of my knowledge, not once did they stop to talk to
either myself, Ben or any other worker. Further, during the construction of the pond and the landscape,
on at least two other occasions, the city vehicle stopped by to observe what was taking place. Again
there was no cormnents, notices or indication that there was a violation of code.
During the construction of the replacement shed, I spoke with Carolyn Kane (the property owner to the
west of the Sharfi's, whom I have done landscape work for before) to get he~ opinion on the replacement
shed. She stated that she had no problems with it and she was glad to see the old tool shed replaced.
Sincerely,
909-987-3002
10500 e~
~ ~W~, ~ 90050
February 20, 1993
Planning Division, City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729
To Whom It May Concern,
RE: Variance 93-01 Sharfi
We am writing this letter with regard to the property directly across the street from our
residence, 9685 Whirlaway, the home of Ben and Lila Sharfi. It is our understanding
that the Sharfi's are seeking a waiver of a building ordinance with regard to set back
from the property line of a shed that was built recently to replace a deteriorating metal
shed.
These are the facts as we know them. The original shed was built by the previous owner
at least eight years ago prior to the acquisition of the property by the Sharfi's. The
original structure was a large metal shed that rested on a large cement foundation in the
lower part of the backyard. As we recall, the shed was essentially right against the
property line, approximately set back 1 foot. Over the last seven years that we have lived
across the street the original metal shed started to age and deteriorate until it became
rather unattractive and perhaps dangerous.
(We believe that the original metal structure was becoming dangerous as it aged due
to the strong winds that frequently occur in the area coupled with the fact the metal
was clearly rusting and starting to come apart;)
During the summer ofi992 the Sharfi's invested a significant amount of money in re-
landscaping their backyard, part of which was to replace the old metal shed with a new
wooden shed on the same foundation. The new shed which is only visible once one has
descended nearly 75feet down a significant slope appears to be well constructed and is
very attractive.
While we recognize and appreciate the building codes, particularly the set back
provisions to protect neighboring property owners, we believe that the distance of the
present structure does not pose any problems nor does it take away any benefits from the
neighboring properties. It is also our understanding after reading the provision in the
covenants of our neighborhood that the structure is not in violation to the set back
requirement. A strict enforcement in this situation would be unfair as the actions taken
by the Sharfi's have resulted in a very attractive addition to their yard and the
neighborhood, as well as, replacing a dangerous structure. Thus, we are in favor of the
Sharfi's receiving their requested variance.
Should you have any questions concerning our position on this matter, please do not
hesitate to contact us at our residence 989 - 2615.
Sincerely,
Mr. and Mrs. Robert Mason Jr.
RM/gm
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
February 24, 1993
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Buller, City Planner
Steve Hayes, Associate Planner
VARIANCE 93-01 - SHARFI - A request to reduce the minimum
accessory structure setback from 5 feet to 1 foot for a
240 square foot tool shed and 240 square foot overhang on
· 5 acre of land in the Very Low Residential District (less
than 2 dwelling units per acre), located at 9685 Whirlaway
Avenue - APN: 1061-541-24.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
The site is developed with a single family residence on the northern
portion of the lot. The middle third of the lot is a significant
downslope and occurs between two relatively flat terraces. The
structure in question is on the lower (south) terrace. The property to
the south is vacant, but properties in all other directions are
developed. with single family homes.
ANALYSIS:
Background: The applicant purchased the residence at the above-
referenced address in 1988. An existing tool shed (with a poured-
in-place concrete slab) was located near the southwest corner of
the property, approximately 1 foot from the west (interior side)
property line.. This shed was less than 120 square feet in roof
area and did not require building permits. Hence, the City's
setback requirements did not apply.
The tool shed received significant damage during wind storms last
winter. When the damage occurred, the applicant constructed a new,
lar~r shed structure with an additional covered roof overhang on
the same concrete slab. This structure now exceeds the 120 square
foot roof area, necessitating the requirement for a building
Permit.
The applicant was given a correction notice by a City building
inspector to obtain a Permit for the new structure. The applicant
was also informed of the minimum accessory structure setback
~-requirements at that time. A copy of the applicant's letter and
pictures of the property are attached for your review (see Exhibits
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VAR 93-01 - SHARFI
February 24, 1993
Page 2
Variance Evaluation: The applicant is utilizing the structure and
overhang for storage at this time. Currently, the shed and
overhang can be accessed from the adjacent vacant property to the
south through an existing chain link fence and gate. When the
~property to the south develops, this access will no longer be
available to the applicant.> ~ ~ S ~ I
Based upon a review of the site plan and a site visit, staff
believes that the structure could be moved to meet the minimum
5-foot setback. The shed is located in the lower flat terrace of
the rear yard, where the applicant has constructed a pond with a
sculpture and a combination bird aviary and
areas of hardscape an~-~ landscaping also exist in this part of the
rear yard. Despite these improvements, there are still several
areas where the shed could be rebuilt in the rear yard area and
meet the City's setbacks. In fact, the structure could be moved~4_
feet east from its current location and still be separated from the
closest structure, the pond, by an estimated 3 feet.
The applicant contends that the structure should not have to be
moved because it does not create any de_tr~en~al.effects on the
property owner to the west. Given the topography and landscaping
existing in this area, this may be t~e. However, variances
require that legal findings~f hardship be made and not be ~ranted.
on the basis of convenience (i.e., the structure is existing),
FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order to grant this Variance, the Planning
Commission must make all of the findings as listed below:
~. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the
specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with t~e obj~ctive~ of
the Development Code. L ~ ~ ~O~,~ 0~' ~--~1%~
Staff Conum~nt Staff believes that the setback could be mat and
still provide adequate separation between the buildin~ and other
existing structures in the rear yard. Staff believes any hardship
was self-imposed by the applicant's const,ructing wi%hout ,proper
~hat there are except~onaZ or extraordinary ¢ircx~stances or
conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended
use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties
in the same zone.
Staff Comment: The applicant has made no claims of unusual
circumstances other than the location of the previously existing
pLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VAR 93-01 - SHARFI
February 24, 1993
Page 3
That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the
specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges
enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone.
Staff Comment: The minimum setback of 5 feet would still allow for
the structure in this location or at another location in'the large
rear yard area. ~ 0 \~ ~ ~Pt'-c4~ ~.
That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other
properties classified in the same zone.
Staff Comment: A reduction in the required setback from 5 feet to
I foot would be a special privilege not afforded other property
owners in this zone~ ~
That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the
public health, ~afety,__ or welfare or materially injurious to
properties or improvements in the vicinity.
OPTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER: The following options would meet
the City's requirements while still providing room for the storage
building within the side and rear yard areas:
1. Relocate the structure 4 feet east of its current location or
to another unobstructed area of the rear yard that meets the
minimum setback requirements.
_~2~. Remove a portion of the structure so the roof area is less
/- ~ than 120 square feet Hence, the structure,would not req~uire a
V~aarC~anM~ceNDtA~rIOOuN :gh aSJaopftfiorneCo°~t~ed~th~etdh%;sloaln3tiincgn.COmmission deny the
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Applicant
Exhibit "B" - Vicinity Map
Exhibit "C" - Site Plan
Exhibit "D" - Pictures of Property
Resolution of Denial
EiEFIER L fi'II RPI
iNCORPORATED
Benjarnin K. Sharfi
President
January 13, 1993
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building and Safety Division .
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
To Whom It May Concern.
In 1988, I purchased my 1/2 lot. with a home, at 9685 Whirlaway in Alta
Loma. There was a tool shed located in the lower yard of this property. The
shed .was built on a concrete slab measuring approximately 19' x 12' and had'
electrical, plumbing, and a telephone line. This concrete slab. on which the
original shed was built, is located on the lower west portion of the property,
between 1'-2' from the western property line.
In 1989, the house underwent major remodeling and an occupancy pei~,dt was
given to me. During the remodeling and final occupancy inspection, there was
no mention or discussion of the tool shed.
The tool shed received major damage in a windstorm during the winter of 1991.
The roof and 'doors were blown in and/or off, making the structure unsafe for
us, and for our neighbors. At this time, I was involved in the construction of
my corporate office which is located at 8358 Maple, in Rancho Cucamonga. I
discussed, with my business contractors, replacing this shed with a safer
structure bufit on the same concrete pad. I wa~ told it would be "okay" as it
was "existing". Unfortunately, I proceeded with this action without the fo~u~al
approval of the city. The tool shed wa~ completed. The electrical was not
replaced; however, a GFI was added for safety.
This tool shed is not attached to any other structure, and l~ not intended for
occupancy by any person. I take great pride in the presentation of my home,
and of my place of business in Rancho Cucamonga. All of the work which has
been done on my home and office, has been completed with the highest
standards of workmanship and safety. In fact, many neighbors stop by our
home and yard to express to my wife and I '%Vhat a wonderful job we have done
with our home and yard", and that "they enjoy walking by and viewing it."
They have also expressed the hope that "others in the neighborhood would take
as good care of their yards and homes as you do."
8358 M~p~
P.O. B~: 3689
Rancho Cucamonga
(9~) 987~E
P, EFIEIRRL i'flIEi Pl 3 . TEITi3
INCO RPO~L~TED
Benjamin K. 5harfi
Preside?~t
In closing, I would like to state that If the structure were unsafe or needed
Improvements, I would be more than glad to accommodate that request.
However, as this Is not the case, I would like to request that the board accept
the existing structure, and not requir~ us to tear It down. Thank you for your
attention to this matter,
Benjamin K. Sharfi
Homeowner - 9685 Whirlaway. Alfa Loma, California 91737
Business Owner - 8358 Maple Place, Rancho Cucamonga, California
91730
X lgg0.7
CLINO! I I'~1~
ITEM: ~/~,"l~,~ce ~'~--o/
· rrrL~: V,:.,,,,,+,.,,
/
EXH[B~: ~/~x, SCALE:
P~mNc~. D~S~ON
£X'H. I1:t[T:/~.~)'I" SCALE:
ITY' OF .... .. ,i'.:... UCAMONGA
PLANm'N.'G~. DMSION
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING VARIANCE NO. 93-01
TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM 5
FEET TO 1 FOOT FOR A 240 SQUARE FOOT TOOL SHED AND 240
SQUARE Foot OVERHANG ON .5 ACRE OF LAND IN THE VERY LOW
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (LESS THAN 2 DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE), LOCATED AT 9685 WHIRLAWAY AVENUE, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1061-541-24.
A. Recitals.
(i) Benjamin Sharfi has filed an application for the issuance of
Variance No. 93-01 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter
in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the
application."
(ii) On the 24th day of February 1993, 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.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced public hearing on February 24, 1993, 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 9685
Whirlaway Avenue with a street frontage of approximately 100 feet and lot
depth of approximately 200 feet and is presently improved with a single family
residence; and
(b) The property to the north, east, and west of the subject
site are single family homes, while the property to the south is vacant and
zoned Very Low Density Residential; and
(c) The applicant has constructed an accessory storage shed
without required building permits; and
(d) The carport structure is set back only i foot from the
property line and the required setback is 5 feet per Section 17.08.060A.d; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VAR 93-01 - SHARFI
February 24, 1993
Page 2
(e) The site is a typical rectangular single family lot of
approximately 20,000 square feet; and
(f) Several unobstructed areas in the rear yard exist where
the structure could be moved and meet the required setbacks.
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 strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of
the specified regulations would not result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the
Development Code.
(b) That there are not exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the
intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties
in the same district.
(c) That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of
the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed
by the owners of other properties in the same district.
(d) That the granting of the Variance will constitute a grant
of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties
classified in the same district.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby denies the application subject to
each and every condition set forth below.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1993.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY .'
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VAR 93-01 - SHARFI
February 24, 1993
Page 3
I, Brad Bullet, 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 24th day of February 1993, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
February 24, 1993
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Buller, City Planner
Steve Hayes, Associate Planner
VAP~IANCE 93-01 - SHARFI - A request to reduce the minimum
accessory structure setback from 5 feet to 1 foot for a
240 square foot tool shed and 240 square foot overhang on
· 5 acre of land in the Very Low P~sidential District (less
than 2 dwelling units ~er acre), located at 9685 Whirlaway
Avenue - APN: 1061-541-24.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
The site is developed with a single family residence on the northern
portion of the lot. The middle third of the lot is a significant
downslo~e and occurs between two relatively flat terraces. The
structure in question is on the lower (south) terrace. The property to
the south is vacant, but properties in all other directions are
developed with single family homes.
ANALYSIS:
Background: The applicant purchased the residence at the above-
referenced address in 1988. An existing tool shed (with a poured-
in-place concrete slab) was located near the southwest corner of
the property, approximately 1 foot from the west (interior side)
property line. This shed was less than 120 square feet in roof
area and did not require building permits. Hence, the City's
setback requirements did not apply.
The tool shed received significant damag~ during wind storms last
winter. When the damage occurred, the applicant constructed a new,
larger shed structure with an additional covered roof overhang on
the same concrete slab. This structure now exceeds the 120 square
foot roof area, necessitating the requirement for a building
permit.
The applicant was given a correction notice by a City building
inspector to obtain a permit for the new structure. The applicant
was also informed of the minimum accessory structure setback
requirements at that time. A copy of the applicant's letter and
pictures of the property are attached for your review (see Exhibits
~'A" & "D").
IT~ B
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VAR 93-01 - SHARFI
February 24, 1993
Page 2
Variance Evaluation: The applicant is utilizing the structure and
overhang for storage at this time. Currently, the shed and
overhang can be accessed from the adjacent vacant property to the
south through an existing chain link fence and gate. When the
property to the south develops, this access will no longer be
available to the applicant.
Based upon a review of the site plan and a site visit, staff
believes that the structure could be moved to meet the minimum
5-foot set_back. The shed is located in the lower flat terrace of
the rear yard, where the applicant has constructed a pond with a
sculpture and a combination bird aviary and playhouse. Significant
areas of hardscape and landscaping also exist in this part of the
rear yard. Despite these improvements, there are still several
areas where the shed could be rebuilt in the rear yard area and
meet the City's setbacks. In fact, the structure could be moved 4
feet east from its current location and still be separated from the
closest structure, the pond, by an estimated 3 feet.
The applicant contends that the structure should not have to be
moved because it does not create any dstrimental effects on the
proparty owner to the west. Given the topography and landscaping
existing in this area, this may be true. However, variances
require that legal findings of hardship be made and not be granted
on the basis of convenience (i.e., the structure is existing).
FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order to grant this variance, the Planning
Commission must make all of the findings as listed below:
That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the
specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of
the Development Code.
Staff Comment Staff believes that the setback could be met and
still provide adequate separation between the building and other
existing structures in the rear yard. Staff believes any hardship
was self-imposed by the applicant's constructing without proper
perm/tso
That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended
use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties
in the same zone.
Staff Comment: The applicant has made no claims of unusual
circumstances other than the location of the previously existing
storage shed and concrete slab.
pLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VAR 93-01 - S~ARFI
February 24, 1993
Page 3
That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the
specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges
enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone.
Staff Comment: The minimum setback of 5 feet would still allow for
the structure in this location or at another location in the large
rear yard area.
That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other
properties classified in the same zone.
Staff Comment: A reduction in the required setback from 5 feet to
1 foot would be a special privilege not afforded other property
owners in this zone.
5e
That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to
properties or improvements in the vicinity.
OPTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER: The following options would meet
the City's requirements while still providing room for the storage
building within the side and rear yard areas:
Relocate the structure 4 feet east of its current location or
to another unobstructed area of the rear yard that meets the
minimum setback requirements.
2e
Remove a portion of the structure so the roof area is less
than {20 square feet Hence, the structure would not require a
building permit.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the
Variance through adoption of the attached Resolution.
BB:SH:mlg
Attachments:
Exhibit "A" - Letter from Applicant
Exhibit "B" - vicinity Map
Exhibit "C" - Site Plan
Exhibit "D" - Pictures of Property
Resolution of Denial
GErlER L m r-RO B 'BTEm5
I1~ RPORATED
Benjamin K. Sharfi
President
January 13, 1993
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building and Safety Division
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
To Whom It May Concern.
In 1988, I purchased my 1/2 lot, with a home, at 9685 Whirlaway in Alta
Loma. There was a tool shed located in the lower yard of this property. The
shed-was built on a concrete slab measuring approximately 19' x 12' and had'
electrical, plumbing, and a telephone line. This concrete slab, on which the
original shed was bufit, is located on the lower west portion of the property,
between 1'-2' from the western property line.
In 1989, the house underwent major remodeling and an occupancy pe,:,,dt was
given to me. During the remodeling and final occupancy inspection. there was
no menUon or discussion of the tool shed.
The tool shed received major damage in a windstin'lb during the winter of 1991.
The roof and doors were blown in and/or off. making the structure unsafe for
us, and for our neighbors. At this time, I was Involved in the construction of
my corporate office which is located at 8358 Maple, in Rancho Cucamonga. I
discussed, with my business contractors, replacing this shed with a safer
structure built on the same concrete pad. I was told it would be "okay' as it
was "exlsUng". Unfortunately, I proceeded with this action without the forLz~al
approval of the city. The tool shed was completed. The electrical was not
replaced; however, a GFI was added for safety.
This tool shed is not attached to any other structure. and is not intended for
occupancy by any person. I take great pride in the presentation of my home,
and of my place of business in Rancho Cucamonga. All of the work which has
been done on my home and office, has been completed with the bi~_.hest
standards of workmanship and safety. In fact. many neighbors stop by our
home and yard to express to my wife and 1%Vhat a wonderful Job we have done
with our home and yard". and that "they enjoy walking by and viewing It."
They have also expressed the hope that "others in the neighborhood would take
as good care of their yards and homes as you do."
P.O. Bar 3689
Rancho
C_~i~ai~ 917.~
(909) 98~E
(9~) ~7~E F~
· EiqERFL IT1ICRO SYsTEms
1~4CORPORATED
Benjamin K. Sharfi
President
In closing, I would like to state that if the structure were unsafe or needed
improvements. I would be more than glad to accommodate that request.
However, as this is not the case. I would like to request that the board accept
the existing structure, and not require us to tear it down. Thank you for your
attention to this matter.
Sincerely. ~ ~ /~
Homeowner - 9685 Whirlaway, Alta Loma. California 91737
Business Owner - 8358 Maple Place, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
crn, o~' ".~g'~'.'0::.: UC.,~ONOA
PLANI!~IN~. DIVISION
CLINO! I
OF '.~C:t-~'O:.,:.C,,UCAMONGA
PLaN~'~G-. [~rv'KsION
ITEM:
EXH. IBrr:
ITEM: ~/~-~ q3-o/
EXI-~m IT~'C)-~~ SCALE:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING VARIANCE NO. 93-01
TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM 5
FEET TO 1 FOOT FOR A 240 SQUARE FOOT TOOL SHED AND 240
SQUARE FOOT OVERHANG ON .5 ACRE OF LAND IN THE VERY LOW
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (LESS THAR 2 DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE), LOCATED AT 9685 WHIRLAWAY AVENUE, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1061-541-24.
A. Recitals.
(i) Benjamin Sharfi has filed an application for the issuance of
Variance No. 93-01 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter
in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the
application."
(ii) On the 24th day of February 1993, 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.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced public hearing on February 24, 1993, 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 9685
Whirlaway Avenue with a street frontage of approximately 100 feet and lot
depth of approximately 200 feet and is presently improved with a single family
residence; and
(b) The property to the north, east, and west of the subject
site are single family homes, while the property to the south is vacant and
zoned Very Low Density Residential; and
(c) The applicant has constructed an accessory storage shed
without required building permits; and
(d) The carport structure is set back only 1 foot from the
property line and the required setback is 5 feet per Section 17.08.060A.d; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VAR 93-01 - SHARFI
February 24, 1993
Page 2
(e) The site is a typical rectangular single family lot of
approximately 20,000 square feet; and
(f) Several unobstructed areas in the rear yard exist where
the structure could be moved and meet the required setbacks.
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 strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of
the specified regulations would not result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the
Development Code.
(b) That there are not exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the
intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties
in the same district.
(c) That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of
the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed
by the owners of other properties in the same district.
(d) That the granting of the Variance will constitute a grant
of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties
classified in the same district.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby denies the application subject to
each and every condition set forth below.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1993.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VAR 93-01 - SHARFI
February 24, 1993
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 24th day of February 1993, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
February 24, 1993
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Buller, City Planner
Scott Murphy, Associate Planner
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 92-15 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS - A
request to construct approximately 161,000 square feet of
retail space within a previously approved commercial retail
center in the Regional Related Commercial designation
(Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located
on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of Etiwanda
Avenue - APN: 229-031-28 and 33.
ABSTRACT: This item is the detailed review of the eastern phase for the
Foothill Marketplace shopping center.
BACKGROUND: On August 21, 199~, City Council approved the Master Plan
for Foothill Marketplace, a 62-acre comm~rcial center, and the site plan
and building elevations for Price Club. Conditions of Approval required
various items to be reviewed and approved by the planning Commission
prior to the issuance of building permits. These items include
architectural details to establish the theme for the center, phasing of
the development, integral public art, and a uniform sign program.
Leading up to and following approval, the Planning Comm$ssion conducted
a n%u~ber of workshops to review architectural details for the center.
These elements included the cornice treatment, wainscoat treatment,
transitional tower designs, hardscape treatment, pre-cast bollards and
plant pots, etc. Some of these elements were found to be favorable by
the Commission but other items remained outstanding. At that time, the
applicant did not have many of the proposed tenants signed for the other
phases of the project. As a result, the applicant decided to wait until
further commi~-~-nts had been obtained before proceeding with the
conceptual plans for future phases.
On February 26, ~992, the Planning Cc,,m~ ssion approved the plans for the
131,451 square foot Wal-Mart building. This building proposed many of
the elements previously considered by the Commission (i.e., cornice,
wainscoat, etc.). Both Price Club and Wal-Mart have since begun
construction, with Price Club opening for business in the middle of
October. Wal-Mart anticipates opening the first part of March, 1993.
IT~4 C
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 92-15 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE
February 24, 1993
Page 2
ANALYSIS:
General: The applicant is now proposing to develop the majority of
the eastern phase of Foothill Marketplace. The application
consists of one major tenant (50,000 square feet), three
intermediate tenants (ranging from 17,000 to 25,050 square feet),
and 44,820 square feet of shop building space connecting the major
and intermediate tenants. The majority of the parking area will be
constructed with the application. Only the small areas adjacent to
the free-standing pads will remain undeveloped until construction
of the pad buildings.
The main focal point of the eastern phase will be a large plaza
area (approximately 80 x 120 feet) located at the terminus of the
entry drive from Foothill Boulevard. The plaza is designed with
varying levels and will contain outdoor seating and a majority of
the integral public art proposed for the eastern phase. The
artwork will include: murals, a bas-relief and reflecting pool,
grape arbors, and a grape leaf pattern stamped into concrete.
Planning Commission Workshop/Design Review: On January 19, 1993,
the Planning Cc~%mission conducted a workshop to review the design
of the eastern phase. Generally, the Planning Commission found the
design to be much improved over the previous submittals. The
Planning Commission appreciated the attention that had been paid to
details of the project. During the discussion, the applicant
agreed to provide decorative paving in front of the major and
intermediate tenants, providing a sidewalk connection from Etiwanda
Avenue to Food4Less, tel.cation of a medallion from Pad 4 to Pad 3,
and working with staff on the location of landscaping (trees) in
front of the shopfronts to maintain shop visibility. Additionally,
Planning Commission recommended the following refinements to the
plan:
vine pockets should be provided along the south side of the
loading docks for Food4Less.
2. Substantial landscaping should be provided along the east side
of Food4Less, including vines on the trellises.
3. The proportions of entry elements for the major and
intermediate tenants needed additional consideration.
The half-round element proposed on the northwest corner of
Food4Less presented an awkward termination of the roof tile
and raised concerns about the view of the element from the
east side.
5e
Fencing similar to that used in the Town Center should be used
to section off the pad area for Major 4 until it is ready to
be constructed.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 92-15 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE
February 24, 1993
Page 3
The front elevation of Food4Less was too plain in comparison
to the rest of the center.
7. The entry for Michaels appears incomplete and should receive
additional study.
The applicant should explore the layering of elements, varying
the heights of the wainscoat, etc., to provide more relief on
the major tenants.
The Planning Commissioners agreed that the changes necessary to
approve this phase were minor in that the revisions could be
reviewed by the Design Review Committee at their next meeting.
Following the Planning Commission workshop, the applicant provided
revised building elevations for consideration by the Design Review
Committee. The Michaels' elevation included the use of more
substantial support columns at the entry with pre-cast elements and
a polished stone wainscoat. Food4Less elevations included
additional stucco banding elements and the use of recessed stucco
and ~olished stone banding across the top of the building. The
Design ~view Committee (McNiel, Coleman) reviewed the plans and
recommended approval subject to a condition requiring the entry
arch over Michaels to receive a more layered look similar to that
used with adjoining support columns.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Development Review 92-15 through adoption of the attached Resolution.
BB:SM:sp
Attachmmnts:
Exhibit "A" - Overall Site Plan
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Roof/Landscape Plan
Exhibit "D" - Plaza Plan and Elevations
Exhibit "E" - Building Elevations
Resolution of Approval
E
dS gOZ'~'
O $dONS
JNI~
H~¥~
3N1'1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
R~CHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW NO. 92-15, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT APPROXIMATELY
161,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE WITHIN A PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER IN THE REGIONAL RELATED
COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION (SUBAREA 4) OF THE FOOTHILL
BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, EAST OF ETIWANDA AVENUE, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 229-031-28 AND 33.
A. Recitals.
(i) Foothill Marketplace Partners has filed an application for the
approval of Development Review No. 92-15 as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review
request is referred to as "the application."
(ii) On the 24th day of February 1993, the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded
said meeting on that date.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
E. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced meeting on February 24, 1993, including written
and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) The application applies to property located at the
southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue with street
frontages of ± 1,300 feet along Foothill Boulevard and ± 600 feet along
Etiwanda Avenue. The property is presently rough graded; and
(b) The property to the north is designated for commercial use
and ie developed with single family residences and small businesses. The
property to the south is designated for industrial use and is developed with a
water transmission facility. The property to the east is designated for
residential use and is developed with single family homes. The property to
the west is designated for commercial use and is developed with the Price
Club; and
(c) The development of the retail buildings is consistent with
the Regional Related Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific
Plan and the Commercial designation of the General Plan; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 92-15 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE
February 24, 1993
Page 2
(d) The application, with the attached Conditions of Approval,
will comply with all applicable standards of the Foothill Boulevard Specific
Plan and the Development Code.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts
set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and
concludes as follows:
(a) That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives
of the General Plan; and
(b) That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of
the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is
located; and
(c) That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the
applicable provisions of the Development Code; and
(d) That the proposed use, together with the conditions
applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has
been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby finds a Negative
Declaration was issued on August 21, 1991.
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 attached Standard
Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Plannin~ Commission
1)
All applicable conditions contained in Resolution
Nos. 91-86A and 91-87, approving the Conditional Use
Permit 90-37 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 13724.
2) Vines shall be provided within pockets along the
south side of the loading docks for Major 1.
3)
Trees along the storefronts shall be selected and
placed to minimize disruption to possible sign
locations.
4)
Decorative paving shall be provided in front of each
major and intermediate tenant's entry.
5)
The medallion proposed for Pad 4 shall be relocated
to Pad 3.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 92-15 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE
February 24, 1993
Page 3
6) A sidewalk connection shall be provided from Etiwanda
Avenue to Major 1.
7)
The entry arch for Major 2 shall be redesigned to
create a layered appearance.
8) The screen wall for the easterly loading shall be
angled to match the screen wall to the west.
9)
Substantial landscaping, including vines for the
trellis, shall be provided on the east side of
Major 1 to soften the building.
10)
If Major 4 is not developed concurrently with the
balance of the eastern phase, decorative fencing
shall be provided to section off the pad area from
the balance of the site. The final design shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to
the issuance of building permits for any building
within the eastern phase.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1993.
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 24th day of February, 1993 , by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT::
COMMISSIONERS:
DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
Those items checked are Conditions of Approval.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION , (714) 98~-1861, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDrrlONS:
A. Time LIMES
Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are
not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the data of approval.
Development/Design Review shall be approved prior to / /
Approval of Tentative Tract No.
is granted subject to the approval of
.__/ /
__/ /
SC-2/91
The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced,
participated in, or consummated, a Idelfo-Roo8 Community Facilities District (CFD) for the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of
a tire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to
all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the
Districts property upon corr~etion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in
accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all
applica13io laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer
by the time recordation of the final map occurs.
Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building parmits, whichever comes
first, lhe applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the eatatdishment of a Melio-Roos
Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school
facilities. However, if any school clistrict has previously established such 8 Community
Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the
project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the tinal map
or the issuance of building parmits, whichever comes lirst. Further, if the affected school
district has not formed a Melio-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from
the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance
of building permits tot said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void.
This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected
school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school
impacts as a result of this project.
o
Prior to recordation of the linal map or prior to issuance of building permits when no map is
involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water
facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the
Department ol Community Development. Such litter must have been issued by the water
district within 90 days prior to final map appmvaf in the case of subdivision or priorto issuance
of permits in the case of all other residential projects.
B. Site Development
v/ 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 fill in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein,
Development Code regulations, and /~k~,,~,W/Z/.. ,~'Z la~.
Specific Plan and
Planned Community.
/ /
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all _._/ /
Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
3. OccupancyofthefacilityshaflnotcommenceuntilsuchtimaasallUniformBuildingCodeand _._/ /
State Fire Marshalrs regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall
be submiffed to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety
Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to
4.
v/ 6.
*/' 7.
Revised site plans and building elevations incofTx)rating all Conditions of Approval shall be
submiffed for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shaft 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, whichover comes first.
Approval of this request shall not waive ~ompliance with all sections of the Development
Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and eFpI~:-'-Is Community Plans or Specific
Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance.
A detailed on-site lighting plan shaN be reviewed and adlxoved by the City Planner and
Sheriff's Department (989-6611) prior to the issuance of building penTtits. SUCh plan shall
indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely
affect adjacent properties.
/ /
/ /
SC - 2/91
10.
If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units
with all receptacles shielded from public view.
Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations,
and the number of trash receptacles shall be sul~jact to City Planner review and approval
prior to issuance of building permits.
All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC concleneers, etc., shall
be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of
concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City
Planner.
/ /
._./ /
11. Street names shall be submitted tor City Planner review and approval in accordance with
the adored Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the tinal map.
12. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner,
including proper illumination.
13. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes. physical conditions, fencing, and
weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for City
Planner review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prig r
to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct
all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements.
14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shell not prohibit the keeping of equine
animals where zoning requirements forlhe keeping of said animals have been met. Individual
lot owners in subdivisions shall have the Ol:Xion of keeping said animals without the necessity
of appealing to beards of directors or homeowners' associations for amendments to the
CC&Rs.
15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the
Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shell be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or
prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs firat. A recorded copy shall be
provided to the City Engineer.
16. All parkways, open areas, and andsgaping she# be permanently maintained bythe properly
owner, homeowners' association, or other means accept,hla to the City. Proof of this
landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits.
17. Solar access easements shell be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or
dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of
a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions for
the subdivision which shell be recorded concurrently with the recordation ol the linal map or
issuance of permits, whichever comas first. The easements shall prohibit the casting o!
shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, excepl for utility wires and
similar objects, pursuant to DevelopmeN Code Section 17.08.060-G-2.
18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shell be developed and
maintained in accordance with the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No.
· Any further modifications to the site including, but not limited to, exterior alterations and/or
interior alterations which affect the exteriorof the buildings or structures, removal of landmark
trees, demolition, relocaticn, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or changes to the site,
shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic
Preservation Commission review and approval.
C. Building Design
SC-2/91
An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units
and for heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other altemative energy systems are
demonstrated to be of equivalent cap=city and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the
time of initial development shall be supplemanted with solar heating. Details shell be
included in the building plans and shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval
prior to the issuance of building permits.
All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural
treatment, detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to City Planner
review and approval pdor to issuance of building permits.
Pmiect No.: ~'~"
Completion D~tc:
___/ /
_.._/ /
/ /
__/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
3. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners' Association shall be submitted for
City Planner and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building pem~its.
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or
projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and
streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be amhitecturally
integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
Details shall be included in building plans.
D. Parking and Vehicular AocII~ (Indicate detalia on bullcling planl)
v/ 1. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall
contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb).
Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be
provided throughout the development to connect dwellinge/units/buildlngs with open spaces/
plazas/recreational uses.
All parking spaces shall be double striped par City standards and all driveway aisles,
entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards.
All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in
depth from back of sidewalk.
o
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles
on this site unless they are the principal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit
parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas.
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
parmits.
E. Landscaping (for publ~ly maintained landscape area~, refer to Section N.)
v/ 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including sio~ planting and model home landscap-
ing in the case of residential development, shall be prel~rad by a licensed landscape
architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval priorto the issuance of building
parmits or prior final m&o approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision.
Proiezt No.: ~'
Com$¢Uou Date:
/ /
/ /
__J /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
2. Existing trees required to be preserved in placa shell be profected with a construction barrier / /
in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted onthe grading plans.
The location of those trees to be presewed in place and new locations for transplanted trees
shall be shown on the detailed landecape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the artx)risrs
recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting and tdmming methods.
3. A minimum of trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided ~ /
within the project: % - 48- inch box or larger, % - 36- inch box or larger,
__ % - 24- inch box or larger, % - 15-gallon, and ~ % - 5 gallon.
4. A minimum of ~ % ol trees planted within the project shall be specimen size trees - __/ /.__
24-inch box or larger.
5. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three / /
parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21.
SC - 2/9!
v/ 6. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one
tree per 30 linear feet of building.
All private slope banks 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than
2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for
erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation
system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
AIIprivateslopesinexcessof5feet, butlessthan8 feet inverticalheight andof 2:1orgreater
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 of 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one
5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. if. of slope area· Trees and shrubs shall be
planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this
section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to
occupancy.
For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continu-
ously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit
is sold and occupied bythe buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection
shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory
10. For multHamily residential and non-reeldential development, property owners are respon-
sible for the cominuai maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous
planted areas within the pul~io right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from
weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive
regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and Irimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or
decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage.
11. Front yard landscaping shall be required per the Development Code and/or
· This requiremare shall be in addition to the required
street trees and slope planting.
12. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be
inclucled in the required landscapa plans and shall be ~ to City Planner review and
approval and coordinated for consistency w'Nh any parkway landscaping plan which may be
required by the Engineering Division.
13. Special landscape leaturas such as moundtrig, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meander-
ing sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along
14. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on
the pedmetor of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
15. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. ff located in public maintenance areas,
the design Shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
16. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and SublTdlted for City Planner review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteria shell encourage the natural
growth characteristics of the selected tree species.
__ 17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to consewe water through the principles of
Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code.
SC - 2/9 1
/ /
/..
/ /
__/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
F. Signs
The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval.
Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall
require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any
signs.
2. A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted for City Planner review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits.
Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or townhomes
prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning
Division pdor to issuance of building permits.
G. Environmental
3.
The Oeveloper shall provide each prospeclive buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock
Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a
cash deposit on any property.
The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted
Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City
Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property.
The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway
project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash
deposit on any property.
A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the
issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the lavel of interior noise
attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided,
and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be
checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report.
H. Other Agenclee
· // 1. Emergency secondary access shall be provided in a __,~_ rdance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Protection District S~andarcis.
v/ 2.
Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 26 feet wide
at all times during construction in accorclance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
District requirements.
Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be
submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District that temporary water supply for
fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire prolection system.
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.
Complc~on Date:
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
.__/ /
/ /
/ /
_._/ /
/ /
For projects using septic tank facilities, written certification of acceptability, including all
supportive information, shall be oblained from the San Bernardino County Department of
Environmanfal Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic
Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits.
/ /
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (714) 989-1863, FOR
. COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
.. Site Developmere
1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechani-
cat Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please
contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and
applicable handouts.
C. ompl ed.o~l
Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition
to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay doveiopment fees at the established rate. Such tees
may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems
Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees.
/ /
3. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or ___/
addition to an existing development, the applicant shell pay deveiopment lees at the
established rate. Such tees may include, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee,
Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees.
4. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation __./
and prior to issuance of building permits.
J, Existing ~tructurel
/ /
K. Grading
Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances
considering use, area, and fim-resistivenass of existing buildings.
Existing buildings shell be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations for
the intended use or the building shall be demolished.
Existing sewage disposal facilities shell be removed, filled and/or capped to comply with the
Uniform Plumping Code and Uniform Building Code.
Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans suDrnitted for
building permit application.
Grading of the subiect property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City
Grading Standards, and accepled grading practices. The final grading plan shell be in
substantial conformance with the approved grading plan.
A soils report shell be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of Calilomia to
perform such work.
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
The development is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a Soil Distu~oance
Permit is required. Please contact San Bumardino County Department of Agriculture at (714)
387-2111 for permit application. Documentation of such permit shell be submitted to the City
prior to the issuance ol rough grading permit.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geoiogist and submitted at
the time of application for grading plan check.
The final grading plans shall be completed and approved priorto issuance of building permits.
/ /
SC - 2/9]
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
February 24, 1993
chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Buller, City Planner
Beverly Nissen, Associate Planner
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner
REVIEW OF VINTNER'S WALK IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE
pERMIT 91-24 - MASI - A review of the Vintner's Walk plans at
the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester
Avenue - APN: 229-01~-10, 19, 21, and 26 through 28.
B~C~u~o: Conditional Use Permit 91-24, a 30-acre industrial, multi-
tenant and office project at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard
and Rochester Avenue was conditionally approved by the City Council on
September 2, 1992.
Prior to final approval of the project, the Historic Preservation
Com~ission reco-~ended that the LaFourcade store located on the site be
designated an Historic Point of Interest. As a result of this
designation and as a mitigation measure for demolition of the structure
known as the Cow Girl Theater, a condition requiring commissioned public
art and development and placement of interpretive public displays was
recommended by the Historic Preservation Commission and approved by the
Ci~r Council. In working towards fulfillment of this condition, the
applicant met with a subcommittee of the Historic Preservation
Conm~ission and the Planning Comm~ssio~ (Marsha Banks, Steve Preston,
Larry McNiel, Suzanne Chitiea) on May 27, 1992, to discuss their
pr~)osal for these items. The applicant presented their concepts to the
sutx:omm%ttee which were essentially acceptable. The following proposals
were approved by the Historic Preservation Commission on July 2, 1992:
Interpretive Public Displays and Vintner's Walk: The walkway will
extend approximately ~60 feet along Foothill Boulevard as originally
proposed. The names of the Vintner families, along with the dates
their wineries were established, will be incorporated into the walk
on inscribed pavers. The walkway will have a metal trellis along
its length and historical display panels with the text and photos
depicting the history of wine ~king in the area starting with the
LaFourcade period and covering the i-~grant grape growers and
vintners of the 1920s to ~930s. Areas for seating will be
incorporated along the walkway. The applicant has proposed four to
six display panels; however, staff would recommend that six be
utilized along the length of the walk.
l'l'k~4 D
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 91-24 - MASI
February 24, 1993
Page 2
2e
The applicant has also proposed a 7-foot wide "story board" at the
eastern end of the Vintner's Walk where the original LaFourcade
store stood. The story board would be a bas-relief depicting the
LaFourcade winery. The applicant has proposed that the relief
pictorially show LaFourcade directing the construction of the first
wells in Cucamonga as well as views of some of the buildings he
constructed.
Also in partial fulfillment of the interpretive display
requirements, the applicant has proposed an additional story board
location at the western end of the Vintner's Walk depicting the Masi
family. The bas-relief would portray the hillside vineyards of the
Masi's home town in Italy, members of the Masi family, and their
lands and winery in Cucamonga.
Co~nissioned Public Art: To fulfill this requirement, the applicant
has proposed a sculpture of a vintner carrying a basket or bunch of
grapes which would be located approximately midway along the
Vintner's Walk. The sculpture is intended as a tribute to the wine
making families of the area.
The conceptual plans were reviewed by the Planning Commission at their
July 27, 1992 hearing. The plans were approved in concept with the
following conditions:
A revised concept plan for the co~issioned public art and the
interpretive public displays shall be reviewed by the full Planning
Commission. The revised concept plan shall graphically depict how
the Vintner's Walk, co.~issioned art, and public displays will be
developed and maintained and how they will function as a whole.
Final detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Planner prior to the issuance of any permits.
Installation of the Vintner's Walk hardscape and landscaping shall
be completed concurrently with Foothill Boulevard improvements,
prior to the release of occupancy of any buildings in Phase I.
Installation of the Vintner's Walk trellises, vines, interpretive
panels, and public art shall be completed prior to the release of
occupancy of buildings in Phase II.
In the event permits have been issued and Phase II is substantially
under construction prior to the occupancy of any building in Phase
I, hardscape and landscaping improvements may be deferred to be
completed, prior to the release of occupancy of any building in
Phase II.
A~ALYSIS: The applicant has submitted revised plans for review by the
Planning Commission. Following is a synopsis/evaluation of their
submittal:
PLANNING CO~4ISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 91-24 - MASI
February 24, 1993
Page 3
Interpretive Public Displays and Vintner's Walk: The walkway extends
approximately 160 feet along Foothill Boulevard and is provided with
Vintner's names and their wine labels inscribed onto the ground plane.
The details of the pavers, however, still need to be provided and worked
out with staff. They should be flush with the ground, durable, and
integrated with the rest of the design of the walkway.
The metal trellis has been incorporated along the walkway and will be
painted burgundy and planted with some type of vining plant material.
Historical display panels are provided along the walkway depicting the
history of wine making in Cucamonga. Five display panels have been
provided, although staff had originally recommended that six be
utilized. However, considering the extent of the other elements
provided, staff feels as though five panels are adequate. The thematic
groupings are appropriate and the exact written text on the plaques
should be deferred to be reviewed and approved by staff prior to the
issuance of any building pez~its for Phase II.
Seating areas have been incorporated along the walkway in the form of a
native rock seat wall provided along the entire length. Staff feels
this is appropriate and the applicant should be advised to utilize
native river rock. The applicant has indicated in his proposal a
"Vintner's Walk Graphic" at the center of the walkway. It is unclear
from the drawings submitted what this is composed of or constructed
of. Details of this element should be worked out with staff prior to
the issuance of any building permits for Phase II.
The applicant originally proposed a 7-foot wide "story board" at the
eastern end of the Vintner's Walk where the original LaFourcade store
stood. The original concept was that the story beard would be a
bas-relief. The concept currently proposed has been significantly
altered from that which was reviewed by the Historic Preservation
Commission and Planning Commission subco-~ttee. The current design is
constructed of aluminum and is contemporary in appearance. This element
should be revised and the original concept more strictly adhered to.
The same comment applies to the display at the western end of the
walkway adjacent to the proposed Spaghetti Factory.
Commissioned Public Art: A statue of a vintner (i.e., Sebastian Masi)
has been proposed and will be located at the center of the Vintner's
Walkway. This is acceptable to staff; however, it appears as though the
statue will be mounted on some type of pedestal or base which should be
clarified.
Additional Issues:
submittal which
appropriate:
The following items have been included in the
either need further clarification or are not
1. Masi Plaza Monument Sign: Any reference to signage should be
deleted and included as part of a Uniform Sign Program application.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 91-24 - MASI
February 24, 1993
Page 4
2e
Thematic Pedestrian Light Fixture: The specific design of light
fixtures should be consistent with design guidelines of the Foothill
Boulevard Specific Plan, but the location of those fixtures may be
noted on the plans.
Decorative Flags: More details such as height, color, and material
are required. A maintenance program should also be established and
approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of any permits
for Phase II.
LaFourcade Entry Arch and Plaque: The current submittal only
indicates the future location of the LaFourcade arch. The details
of how the preserved LaFourcade arch will integrate with the
proposed restaurant should be reviewed by the Design Review
Co~nittee upon submittal of the elevations of the building.
Maintenance: Per the Planning Con~nission's direction, the applicant
submitted an initial memo of commitment regarding the continued
maintenance and conservation of the integral public art program (see
Exhibit "A"). Comparing this me~ to the submitted plans, however,
reveals an inconsistency in the way in which the heavy gauge
al,,m!numwill be inscribed. Staff would recommend that all text and
graphics be etched into rather than silk screened onto the faces of
all displays.
~ECX)~gATIO~: Staff recommends that the Planning Co~nission approve
the proposed Vintner's Walkway and public art concepts with final
details to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the
issuance of any permits for Phase II.
Cit~' Planner
BB:BN:AH/mlg
Attachments:
Plans for Vintner's Walk (provided to Commissioners
separately)
Exhibit "A" - Memo Regarding Maintenance of the Vintner's
Walk Displays
Fr~
Date:
Anthas Hartig
City of Rancho cucmmonqa
M. Soandiffic
Mast Plaza Project
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG,
JAN 1 1993
Maintenance of Vintner Walk Historical Displays
January 14, 1993
The historical ~isplays are made of heavy gauge aluminum (see
vintner Walk exhibit). The text is etched into the face of the
panel. The enamel finish on the displays are reasonably resistent
~o graffiei; that is, the surfaces can usually be cleaned off.
However, no suitable product in the marketplace can offer 100%
protection.
The construction of ~hese displays are like ~hose typically used
for public information displays in urban areas. The base of the
displays are of concrete for d~rability. The concrete bases may
have =o be painted ~rlodically if they are defaced; again, there
ar~ no products available that can guarantee 100% protec=ion.
The design and £abrication of the displays are by Brilliane Signs
of Santa Ans. The designer, Milton Solomon, is internationally
known ~n the field of sign design.
Maintenance oft he historical displays, the vintner statue, Vintner
Walk surface and trellis are pert of the common area maintenance
program for the Masi Plaza proje~rt. They will be maintained on
an ongoing basis Just as all the other interior landscape features
and building facades are maintained.
We consider the Vintner Walk an integral par'l: of the project and,
as such, it will be maintained to the same high s~andards that we
have set for all the common areas of the project.
One final note. The title "Historic vintner Walk" will appear in
the place as indicated on t~e plan. The style of the lettering
will be "M~chelangelo'. The letters will be approximately ~welve
t~ches high and made of aluminum.
If you have any questions, please call be at (818) 846-2070.
Sincerely, ~ _ ,
Michael Scandiffio ) '