Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/10/04 - Agenda PacketCITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA REGULAR MEETINGS 1st and 3rd Wednesdays - 7:00 p.m. October 4, 1995 Civic Center Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 City Councilmembers William J. Alexander, Mayor Rex Gutierrez, Mayor Pro Tern Paul Biane, Councilmember James V. Curatalo, Councilmember Diane Williams, Councihnember Jack Lain, City Manager James L. Markman, City Attorney Debra J. Adams, City Clerk City Office: 989-1851 City Council Agenda October 4,1995 PAGE All items submitted for the City Council Agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. on the Tuesday prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's Office receives all such items. A. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call: Alexander Biane , Curatalo Gutierrez , and Willlares__ B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS Presentation to the City Council of Donations Received Commemorating the First Anniversary of the Rancho CuCamonga Library. C. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council. State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five mihutes per individual. D. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non- controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed by a Councilmember or member of the audience for discussion. 1. Approval of Minutes: September 6, 1995 o o Approval of Warrants, Register Nos. 9/6/95, 9/13/85 and 9/20/95; and Payroll ending 8/24/95 for the total amount of $2,419,138.30. Alcoholic Beverage Application for Off-Sale Beer and Wine for Unnamed Business, Nighat and Sheikh Rashid Hamid, 9032 Archibald Avenue. Approval of extension of Comcast Cable T.V. Franchise. RESOLUTION NO. 91-012V A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO FRANCHISE LICENSE WITH COMCAST CABLE T.V. FOR 90 DAYS UPON EXPIRATION OF CURRENT LICENSE WITHIN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1 11 13 14 City Council Agenda October4,1995 PAGE 2 10. 11. Approval of Banner Applications. Approval to declare surplus miscellaneous City owned equipment. Approval to Parcel Map and Ordering the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 2 for Parcel Map 14238, located on the east side of Hellman Avenue, south of 19th Street, submitted by Laszlo Vass. RESOLUTION NO. 95-129 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 14238 RESOLUTION NO. 95-130 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR PARCEL MAP 14238 Approval to execute a Professional Services Agreement (CO 95-067) with Willdan Associates for Assessment Engineering Services related to a request by property owners in South Etiwanda to form an Assessment District for the amount of $21,109.00 (funded by proponents). Approval to execute Reimbursement Agreements (CO 95-068) with certain property owners in South Eljwanda to cover consultant costs associated with a proposed Assessment District as requested by the property owners. Approval to execute a contract (CO 95-069) with Becker & Bell, Inc., consultants, to perform a classification and compensation study for the City and Fire District in an amount not to exceed $30,000.00 to be funded from Account No. 01-4265-6028. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement, Improvement Security and Ordering the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 6 for Conditional Use Permit No. 94-30, located at the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Carnelian Avenue, submitted by McDonald's Corporation. RESOLUTION NO. 95-131 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURITY FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-30 15 29 38 39 40 43 45 47 49 51 City Council Agenda October 4,1995 PAGE 12. 13. 14. RESOLUTION NO. 95-132 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-30 Approval to execute Improvement Agreement and Security for Conditional use Permit No. 95-06, located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Street (Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 14635, submitted by Gourmet Systems of California, Incorporated).. RESOLUTION NO. 95-133 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURITY FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 95-06 Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 13753, located on the north side of Ellena Street, north of Base Line Road, submitted by Lewis Homes. RESOLUTION NO. 95-134 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13753 Approval to accept Improvements, Release of Bonds and File a Notice of Completion for 6864 Hellman Avenue. Release: Faithful Performance Irrevocable Authority to Pay Labor and Material Irrevocable Authority to Pay $ 8,000.00 4,000.00 RESOLUTION NO. 95-135 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 6864 HELLMAN AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 52 55 57 58 60 61 62 City Council Agenda October 4,1995 PAGE 15. 16. Approval to accept the Nineteenth Street Improvements, from Carnelian Street to Amethyst Street Project, Contract No. 93-052, as Complete, Release the Bonds and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and approve the final contract amount of $731,814.46. RESOLUTION NO. 95-136 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR NINETEENTH STREET IMPROVEMENTS, FROM CARNELIAN STREET TO AMETHYST STREET PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK Approval to accept the Rochester Avenue-Rancho Cucamonga High School Mitigation Program for Landscaping the Rochester Avenue East Side Parkway (LMD No. 2), from Victoria Park Lane to Highland Avenue Project, Contract No. 94-031, as Complete, Release the Bonds and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and approve the final contract amount of $190,142.11. RESOLUTION NO. 95-137 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR ROCHESTER AVENUE-RANCHO CUCAMONGA HIGH SCHOOL MITIGATION PROGRAM FOR LANDSCAPING THE ROCHESTER AVENUE EAST SIDE PARKWAY (LMD NO. 2), FROM VICTORIA PARK LANE TO HIGHLAND. AVENUE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 65 E. CONSENT ORDINANCES The following Ordinances have had public hearings at the time of first reading. Second readings are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. The City Clerk will read the title. Any item can be removed for discussion. No Items Submitted. City Council Agenda October 4,1995 PAGE F. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony. CONSIDERATION OF A MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-46 - FLORES - An appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of a request to modify the approved site plan and certain conditions of approval for a previously approved gas station and mini-market in the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (Subarea 2), located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-192-06 and 07. (Continued from September 20, 1995) RESOLUTION NO. 95-138 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-46, A REQUEST TO MODIFY THE APPROVED SITE PLAN AND CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED GAS STATION AND MINI- MARKET IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN (SUBAREA 2), LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND VINEYARD AVENUE AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 208-192-06 AND 07 CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to change the land use designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Community Commercial for 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, and the future Orchard Avenue on the west and to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 19.2 acres bounded by the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider Commercial, Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre), and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) APN: 0227-151-18 and 24. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Related Files: Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01, Conditional Use Permit 95-11, and Parcel Map 14022. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to change the land use district from "MOC" (Mixed Use Office/Commercial/Residential) to "CC" (Community Commercial) for 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, and the 67 93 115 City Council Agenda October 4,1995 PAGE future Orchard Avenue on the west and to "H" (High, 24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 19.2 acres of land bounded by the future Poplar Drive and future Chumh Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider "C" (Commercial), "M" (Medium, 8-14 dwelling units per acre), and MH (Medium High, 14-24 dwelling units per acre). The changes include amending portions of the text and various tables and graphic exhibits of the community plan to implement design features of the proposed land use designations -APN: 0227-151-18 and 24. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Related Files: General Plan Amendment 95-01 B, Conditional Use Permit 95-11, and Parcel Map 14022. RESOLUTION NO. 95-139 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01B TO CHANGE THE LAND USE MAP FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FOR APPROXIMATELY 47.3 ACRES OF LAND AND TO HIGH RESIDENTIAL (24 TO 30 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 19.2 ACRES OF LAND BOUNDED BY FOOTHILL BOULEVARD ON THE SOUTH, ROCHESTER AVENUE ON THE EAST, THE FUTURE POPLAR DRIVE AND FUTURE CHURCH STREET ON THE NORTH, AND THE FUTURE ORCHARD AVENUE ON THE WEST, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0227-151-18 AND 24 ORDINANCE NO. 550 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01 TO CHANGE THE LAND USE MAP FROM "MIXED USE, OFFICE, COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL" TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FOR APPROXIMATELY 47.3 ACRES OF LAND AND TO HIGH RESIDENTIAL (24-30 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 19.2 ACRES OF LAND BOUNDED BY FOOTHILL BOULEVARD ON THE SOUTH, ROCHESTER AVENUE ON THE EAST, THE FUTURE POPLAR DRIVE AND FUTURE CHURCH STREET ON THE NORTH, AND THE FUTURE ORCHARD AVENUE ON THE WEST, AND TO MAKE CHANGES TO PORTIONS OF THE TEXT AND GRAPHIC EXHIBITS OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN TO IMPLEMENT DESIGN FEATURES OF THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS - APN: 0227-151-18 AND 24. 147 150 City Council Agenda October 4,1995 PAGE o CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - The proposed development of an integrated shopping center totaling 495,736 square feet on 47.33 acres of land with proposed phase one consisting of a 132,065 square foot Home Depot home improvement center in the Mixed Use (Commercial, Office, Residential) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18 and 24. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Related Files: General Plan Amendment 95-01 B, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01, and Parcel Map 14022. RESOLUTION NO. 95-140 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 95-11 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED SHOPPING CENTER TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 495,736 SQUARE FEET ON 47.33 ACRES OF LAND WITH PROPOSED PHASE ONE CONSISTING OF A 132,065 SQUARE FOOT HOME DEPOT HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER IN THE MIXED USE (OFFICE, COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT OF THE TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ROCHESTER AVENUE AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 227-151-18 AND 24. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO.- A subdivision of 66.5 acres of land into 12 parcels in the Mixed Use Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue -APN 227-151-18 and 24. Related files: General Plan Amendment 95-01 B, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 and Conditional Use Permit 95-11. RESOLUTION NO. 95-141 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NUMBER 14022, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ROCHESTER AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-151-18 AND 24 187 188 213 224 City Council Agenda October 4,1995 PAGE G. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have no legal publication or posting requirements. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony. No Items Submitted. H. CITY MANAGER°S STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. No Items Submitted. I. COUNCIL BUSINESS The following items have been requested by the City Council for discussion. They are not public hearing items, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. No Items Submitted. J. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING This is the time for City Council to identify the items they wish to discuss at the next meeting. These items will not be discussed at this meeting, only identified for the next meeting. K. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council. State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. L. ADJOURNMENT I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 28, 1995, seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. September 6, 1995 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Re.qular Meeting A. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council was held on Wednesday, September 6, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The meeting was called to order at 7:09 p.m. by Mayor William J. Alexander. Present were Councilmembers: Paul Biane, James Curatalo, Rex Gutierrez, Diane Williams, and Mayor William J. Alexander. Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; James Markman, City Attorney; Brad Buller, City Planner; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; Bill Makshanoff, Building Official; Robert Dominguez, Administrative Services Director; Suzanne Ota, Community Services Manager; Deborah Clark, Library Manager; Diane O'Neal, Management Analyst II; Susan Mickey, Management Analyst I; Chief Dennis Michael, Fire Protection District; Capt. Ron Bieberdorf, Rancho Cucamonga Police Department; and Debra J. Adams, City Clerk B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS B1. Presentation of a Proclamation to the Youth Accountability Board commemorating their first year of successful and valuable service to the community. Mayor Alexander presented the Proclamation to Cindy Fusie and Pat Boutland. Mrs. Bourland thanked the members of the community that were involved in this and thanked the Council for their assistance, B2. Presentation of a Proclamation to Harry Cohen for his community and humanitarian service through the West End Hunger Program. Mayor Alexander presented the Proclamation to Harry Cohen. C. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No communications were made from the public. City Council Minutes September 6, 1995 Page 2 D. CONSENT CALENDAR D1. Approval of Warrants, Register Nos. 8/9/95 and 8/16/95 and Payroll ending 8/10.95 for the total amount of $3,008,863.89. D2. Approval to order the annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 6 for MDR 94-11, located at the northwest corner of 8th Street and Vineyard Avenue, submitted by Bertino. RESOLUTION NO. 95-122 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR MDR 94-11 (APN: 207- 271-33) D3. Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for the Hermosa Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation, located from Fourth Street to Sixth Street, North of Sharon Circle to Eighth Street and South of Devon Street to Foothill Boulevard, to be funded from Measure "1" Fund, Account No. 32-4637-9520 ($270,000) and S.B. 140 Fund, Account No. 35-4637-9520 ($25,000). RESOLUTION NO. 95-123 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF HERMOSA AVENUE PAVEMENT REHABILITATION, LOCATED AT VARIOUS AREAS BETWEEN FOURTH STREET ND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS D4. Approval to modify government access channel guidelines and policy. MOTION: Moved by Willjams, seconded by Biane to approve the staff recommendations in the staff reports contained in the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0. E. CONSENT ORDINANCES El. CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 95-01 AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 95-03 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Consideration of adding Chapter 9.28 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code establishing definitions and regulations pertaining to convenience stores; and related amendments to the Development Code and the Industrial Area Specific Plan, establishing a l-foot candle minimum lighting standard for commercial/industrial development. Debra J. Adams, City Clerk, read the titles of Ordinance Nos. 546,547 and 548. City Council Minutes September 6, 1995 Page 3 ORDINANCE NO. 546 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 95-01, AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 17.12 PARKING REGULATIONS ORDINANCE NO. 547 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 95-03, AMENDING PART III, SUBSECTION IV DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ORDINANCE NO. 548 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 9.28 TO THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING DEFINITIONS AND REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO CONVENIENCE FOOD STORES MOTION: Moved by Biane, seconded by Gutierrez to waive full reading and approve Ordinance Nos. 546,547 and 548. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0. D2. CONSIDERATION OF SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 95-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the Sign Ordinance to allow signs for service club organizations. Debra J. Adams, City Clerk, read the title of Ordinance No. 549. ORDINANCE NO. 549 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 95- 02, AMENDING TITLE 14 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE MOTION: Moved by Biane, seconded by Gutierrez to waive full reading and approve Ordinance No. 549. Motion carried una, nimously, 5-0. F. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS No items were submitted. G. PUBLIC HEARINGS No items were submitted. City Council Minutes September 6, 1995 Page 4 No items were submitted. H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS I. COUNCIL BUSINESS I1. CONSIDERATION OF A YOUTH PERFORMING ARTS AND TALENT CONTEST Councilmember Biane stated that Kay Bass of Dance Gallery would like to give something back to the youth through performing arts and asked if she would come forward to talk about her program. Kay Bass, Dance Gallery, informed the Council about her program and the state competitions that have taken place in San Jose. She stated she would like to see something like this in Rancho Cucamonga. She asked that the Council consider this idea. Councilmember Biane stated he would like to know if the Council is willing to direct staff to help Ms. Bass set this up. Councilmember Williams felt that Suzanne Ota should work with Ms. Bass on the timing and such and to also include cost information also. She suggested this go to the subcommittee and bring it back to the entire Council for approval. MOTION: Moved by Biane, seconded by Willlares to recommend that the item be referred to the Community Services staff and direct them to work with Ms. Bass to develop the concept and program, for the information to go to the subcommittee and to bring it back to the entire Council for final consideration. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 Councilmember Gutierrez felt Suzanne Ota should also get information from San Jose about this. Councilmember Curatalo stated he supports any program to assist the youth. 12. CONSIDERATION TO WAIVE PLAN CHECK AND PERMIT FEES FOR FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM FOR NORTHTOWN INFILL PROJECT (Oral Report) Mayor Alexander suggested the fee be waived. Chief Michael, Fire District, concurred. MOTION: Moved by Alexander, seconded by Gutierrez to waive the fees, plan check costs and reduce the costs for the sprinkler system for the North Town Project. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0. J. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING No items were identified for the next meeting. City Council Minutes September 6, 1995 Page 5 K. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No communications were made from the public. L. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Biane, seconded by Alexander to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra J. Adams, CMC City Clerk Approved: A A A A A A Z Z uJ C) Z C~ _. u. _l ~ uJ '::) I- I:~ 'J ~ ~ .J I- ,.,f ..J (DI-- · ~0e' Z LUOI,-- O~ (~ za.u~u~ .J V~e~lO U..ultu ..I ,v t..) · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ! · · · · · · · I · · · · · · · · · I · · · I I I · · · · I · · · · · · · · · · · · ! I · · · · I · · I · I I · I · · · · I · I · · · · · · · · · I I · I I · · · · · · I I · I · · · · · I · · · · · · · I · · Z ..r H LD 4 ~ rv, O~: '9, UJC:) UJ H 3 ~( Z u.J J-. H 7 · · · · · · · · · · · · I I · · · · I · I · · I N · · · I · · · · ILl · · 4~ · · 0,. ·· · · · · · I1--1 ~ · · e,"~l el · · · o I · t4J · · I=, · · '~ · I · · '7 · I :) · I ~ I · · I · · I · I · · · I · · · I · · · I · · · 1~-41 · :~, · I1--1 · II · · · · · · s: s I · · · · · · · II · · ! · II · · · II · I · · II II · s · · · · II ! · · luJI I1,~11 · · licks IIZI It.uI ! · t · · · · J Z ,,,,, u,J I-- (..) J /O APPLICATION TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control 4505 Allstate Drive, Suite 102 Riverside, CA 92501 (909) 782-4400 DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: Name of Business: Location of Business: Number and Street City, State Zip Code County Is premise inside city limits? Mailing Address: (If different from premise address) If premise licensed: Type of license Transferor's names/license: CALIfOINIA FOR ALCOHOL BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) File Number ............ 311240 Receipt Number ......... 1046866 Geographical Code ........ 3615 Copies Mailed Date 8--4-95 Issued Date RIVERSIDE 9032 ARCHIBALD AVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA SAN BERNARDINO 6907 VIOLET CT RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730 CA 91739 BEDROSIAN ALEKSAN A 208195 License TVDe Transaction Tvoe Fee TVDe Master DUD Date Fee 1.20 OFF-SALE BEER AND~ PERSON TO_ PEREDN TRANS NA YES 0 AUG 04,1995 $50.00: 2. 20 OFF-SALE BEER AND ANNUAL FEE NA YES 0 AUG 04,1995 $34.00 : 3. 30 TEMPORARY .RETAIL P TEMPORARY PERMIT NA YES 0 AUG 04,1995 $100.00 : TOTAL $184.00 Have you ever been Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control convicted of a felony? NO Control Act, or regulations of the department pertaining to the Act? NO Explain any "Yes" answer to the above questions on an attachment which shall be deemed pan of this application. Applicant agrees (a) that any manager employed in on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SAN BERNARDINO Date AUG 04,1995 Under penalty of perjury. each person whose signature appears below. certifies and says: (1) He is an applicant. or one of the applicants, or an executive officer of the applicant corporation, named in the foregoing application. duly authorized to make this application on its behalf; (2) that he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof and that each of the above statements therein made are true; (3) that no person other than the applicant or applicants has any direct or indirect interest in the applicant or applicant's business to be conducted under the license(s) for which this application is made; (4) that the transfer application or proposed transfer is not made to sa'jsfy the payment of a ban or to fulfill an agreement entered into more than nin:~ra(90) days preceding the day on which the transfer application is filled with the Department or to gain or establish a preference to or for any creditor or trans eror or to d ud or injure any creditor of transferor; (5) that the ransfer application may be withdrawn by either the applicant or the licensee with no resulting liability to the DepartmenL Applicant Name(s) Applicant Signature(s) I HAMID NIGHAT ~/~ ,~ ~ "~ IHAMID SHEIKH RASHID ~b ';~, , ABC 211 (9~93) RECEIVED ,UG 0 1995 C~ty ol Ranc~o Oucamonga planning Division( [ z~ _/ X CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 4, 1995 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lain, AICP, City Manager FROM: Susan Mickey, Management Analyst I SUBJECT: EXTENSION OF COMCAST CABLE T.V. FRANCHISE RECOMMENDATION Adoption of Resolution No. 91-012V extending Comcast's Franchise License for 90 days. BACKGROUND The City staff would appreciate the opportunity to continue with the negotiations with Comcast to insure that every opportunity has been made available to Comcast to obtain a Franchise License. Respectfully Submitted, Susan Mickey Management Analyst I SM:jls Attachment RESOLUTION NO. 91-012V A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO FRANCHISE LICENSE WITH COMCAST CABLE T.V. FOR 90 DAYS UPON EXPIRATION OF CURRENT LICENSE WITHIN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WHEREAS, the Franchise License granted to Comcast Cable T.V. by the County of San Bemardino and grandfathered into the City of Rancho Cucamonga will expire on October 13, 1995; and WHEREAS, negotiations are ongoing between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Comcast Cable T.V.; and WHEREAS, all terms and conditions of the current license will continue the same. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby resolve to extend the Franchise License for 90 days after the expiration of the current County of San Bernardino License. DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT October 4, 1995 Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lain, AICP, City Manager Suzanne Ota, Community Services Manager Karen Matcham, Recreation Supervisor APPROVAL OF BANNER APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS At the September 21, 1995 regular meeting, the Park and Recreation Commission recommended approval of the street banner applications for 1995/1996. BACKGROUND Annually the Community Services Department requests applications for banner displays on Base Line Road and also on Archibald. The policy regulating the display of banners has been in effect for the past five years. These banner applications were reviewed by the Park and Recreation Commission on September 21, 1995, and forwarded to the City Council for approval. ANALYSIS The following applications meet the requirements as established by the City Council: Grape Harvest Festival: September 21 - October 9, 1995 Location: Archibald and Base Line Fire Prevention Week: September 29 - October 15, 1995 Location: Base Line Red Ribbon Week: October 23 - October 30, 1995 Location: Archibald and Base Line Founder's Day Parade: October 15 - October 23, 1995 AND October 30 - November 13, 1995 Location: Archibald and Base Line /5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPROVAL OF BANNER APPLICATIONS October 4, 1995 Page 2 National Library Week: April 13 - April 25, 1996 Location: Archibald Art in the Park: April 25 - May 13, 1996 Location: Archibald and Base Line R.C. Business & Community Expo: May 13 - May 20, 1996 Location: Archibald and Base Line July 4th Celebration: June 20 - July 5, 1996 Location: Archibald and Base Line Movies in the Park: June 14 - August 19, 1996 Location: Archibald and Base Line Concerts in the Park: June 27 - August 30, 1996 Location: Archibald and Base Line In addition, the City is working on developing a concert series of popular entertainment at the Epicenter. Banners similar to the Chicago concert banner would be recommended once the City's concert series is approved. Respectfully submitted, Suzan~taA, Community Services Manager SO/KM/mv Attachments · Street Banner Application City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department Organization: Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce Contact Person: Jenise Clary Address: 8280 Utica Avenue, Ste. 160 Rancho Cucamonga, Street City same Mailing Address: Work Phone: 987-1012 91730 Home Phone: Zip Event: Grape Harvest Festival Date(s) of Event: october 6,7, & 8 1995 A fun family event to help promote the Brief Description of Event: commercial booths and great selection of food.. Grape Proposed Banner Signage: Use space local businesses. Arts & stomping & pie eating contests. provided or attach copy ofproposed signage. GRAPE HARVEST FESTIVAl NEW LOCATION ,OCTOBER 6, 7, & 8 1995 Colors to be Used: Bur~;andv & White Requested Dates. of B.anner Display: From: September 21 Location: Base Line: [ZZ] Archibald: [""] To: October 9th Both: [X~ I have received a copy, have read and understand, and agree to abide by the limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Policies regarding this Street Banner Application. i have been fully authorized by the above organization to submit this form and serve as the primary contact for the organization. I hereby hold harml. ess the City of Rancho Cucamonga, its officers, employees and agents from any and all liability for'damages or loss or injury either to persons or property which may be sustained while this banner · i is posted. Date . , Recommended by Commission: ~ No Administrative: $ Date Heard by CiW Council: Preparation: $ /7 Street Banner Application 'Organization: City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department. / =reposed Banner Signage: Use space prcvicieo cr a~ach copy of propose<: signage. I have received a ce~y, h~ve read ~nc un~ersttnO, ~n~ agree ~t~ ~ide Oy Ci~ of R~cho 'Cuctmonga Policies regarCing this Strsel Btnner Ap~licttion. ~ have ~een fully tuthodzed by t~e ~ove organization to su~mit ~his form ~n~ seNe ~s tffie pnma~ contact far t~e organizition. I hereOy hol~ h~rmless the Ci~ of Rtncno Cuctmeng~. i~s officere, employass ~n~ ~gents from any ~nd ~11 li~iliW fer'~m~ges or loss er inju~ e~t~er ~o ~ets~ns or prcce~ which m~y Oe suettuned while this b~ner ~s pCs~eC, He ' it S af Use Only ~te Reviewed y St~ff: ~ Fees: Paya~le to Ci~ ef R~cho Cucam~ng~ in Advance ' · ~ ' Install & ~smove: $ ~ecommenQed ~y Camm~cn: ~ No Administrative: Date Hear~ ~y C;~ Council: Preparation: $ ;euncfi Action: Apprcved Deni~ T o t a I: $ . Street Banner Application City of Rancho Cucamenga Community Services Department. Streei / 'C.ty Home Phone: Date(s) of Event: ~~r ff-i~,/9¢F ~/~, ~~ ~/~, ',s4', " ,/~ / FIRE P~E YEN T/ON WE EH O~ ./> :¢ is pcs~ed. City Staff Use Only Fees: Payable to City cf RBnchc Cucamenga in Advance Oste Reviewed by St~ff: ~,=, He.r= =v Comm,s,,cn: c~ t ~/', jgq, F' . f Recammencea ~y Camm~ian~ N~ D~le HearG by City Council: Caunc:l Action: Approved Deni~ Install & Remove: $ Administrative: Preparation: Total: Iq City of Rancho Cucamonga Street Banner Application Community Services Department~~ Organization: ~l ~.rz, C.~ ~ ~,)~- ' Contact Person: ~ [')~-/Jt..~ ~ ~ Address: (-~S~ree/~~___~ Mailing Address:'/~' ~'/~P/V,.... ~:E:) 7 Work Phone: ~*/gS"~ X: ~/~ City Zip X.~. q/Tzc? Home Phone: Event: ~ ~ Date(s) of Event: ~i~~ Brief Description of Event: Proposed Banner Signage: Use space prowded or attach copy of proposed signage. Co,ors to ~ Used: ~ , ~'-'.ZZ ~ ~ Requested Dates of B.anner Display: From: ~' ~? ,-~ Location: Base Line: ~ Archibald: [~ Both: I have received a copy, have read ana understand, and agree to abide by the limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Policies regarding this Street Banner Application. I have been fully authorized by the above organization to submit this form ancl serve as the primary contact for the organization. I hereby hold harmless the City of Rancho Cucamonga, its officers, employees and agents from any and all liability for'damages or loss or injury either to persons or proDeny which may be sustained while this banner is posted. Date: Cil Signature: Date Reviewed by Staff: Date Heard by Commission: C 9#/o~/I/~,.~" Recommended by Commission: ~ No Ye Date Heard by City Council: Council Action: Approved Denied Install & Remove: Administrative: $ Preparation: $ Total: $ · Street Banner Application Organization: City of Rancho Cucamonga Contact Person: Karen Matcham City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department Community Services Address: lOSO0 Civic Center Dr Stree~ Mailing Address: P 0 Box 807 Rancho Work Phone: 989-1858 ext 2102 Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 City Zip Cucamonga CA 91729 Home Phone: Event: 17th Annual Parade & 3rd Annual Date(s) of Event: November 11, 1995 Brief Description of Event: 17th Annual Parade & Celebration 3rd Annual Celebration Proposed Banner Signage: Use space provided or attach copy of p'oposed signage. ANNUAL FOUNDERS DAY PARADE & CELEBRATION Saturday, November 11, 1995 Parade: Baseline Road from Vineyard to Hermosa Celebration: Quakes Stadium & Sports Complex For More Informdtion, Please Call 989-1858 Colors to be Used: Nbite & Burgundy October 15 Requested Dates of Banner Display: From: October 30, Location: Base Line: r"'] Archibald: October 23, 1995 AND 1995 To: November 13, Both 1995 I have received a copy, have read and understand, and agree to abide by the limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Policies regarding this Street Banner Application. I have been fully authorized by the above organization to submit this form and serve as the primary contact for the organization. I hereby hold harmless the City of Rancho Cucamonga, its officers, employees and agents from any and all liability for'damages or loss or injury either to persons or property which may be sustained while this banner is posted. Date Reviewed by Staff 0 Fees: Payable to City of Rancho Cucamonga in Advance Dato Heard by Commission: C-~'~f?~.c,TJ, ~,5" Install &Remove: Recommended by Commission: (~ No Date Heard by City Council: Council Action: Approved Denied Administrative: Preparation: Total: Str3et Crganization: Contact Person: Address: Street Mailing Address: same Work Phone: (909) 948-9900, ext. Banner Application Rancho Cucamonga Public Library Deborah K. Clark 7368 Archibald Avenue 5020 City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 City Zip Home Phone: Event: National Library Week Date(s) of Event: Ap.ril 14-26, 1996 Brief Description of Event: National Library Promotion Proposed Banner Signage: Use space provided or attach copy of proposed signage. Same as last year with the dates changed. ,n, copy i.. attached. Colors to be Used: White with purples and teal letters Requested Dates of B,anner Display: From: Apri 113 To: April 2 S Location: .Base Line: r"'l Archibald: r~ Both: [""] I have received a copy, have read and understand, and agree to abide by the limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Policies regarding this Street Banner Application. I have been fully authorized by the above organization to submit this form and serve as the primary contact for the organization. I hereby hold harmless the City of Rancho Cucamonga, its officers, employees and agents from any and all liability for' d~m or loss or '~ ~Z] i~ p ted. Signature: -~ Date: July 26, 1995 Date Reviewed by St~ff: ~es: Payable to CiW of Rancho Cucamonga in Advance D~te Heard by Commission: ~%~. ~/, 2~ Install &Remove: $ Recommended by Commission: G No Administrative: $ Date Heard by City Council: Preparation: Council Action: Approved Deni~ T o t a I: $ Street Banner · Application Organization: C i t y Contact Person: Karen Address: 10500 Civic Streel Mailing Address: P O Box 807 Work Phone: 989-1858 City of Rancho Cucamonga Community' Services Department Event: Art in Date(s) of Event:MaY I 1, Brief Description of Event: and More ] Proposed Banner Signage: of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Matcham Center Dr Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 Cily Zip Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 ext 2102 the Park 1996 Display Home Phone: of Arts and Crafts - Entertainment, Use space provided or attach copy of proposed signage. Games ART IN THE PARK Saturday, May 11, 1996 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Red Hill Coummunity Park - 7484 Vineyard AVe Fore More Information, Please Call 989-1858 Colors to be Used: White, Teal, and Purple Requested Dates of Banner Display: From: April 25, 1996 To: May 13, 1996 Location: Base Line: [""] Archibald: ~ Both: I have received a copy, have read and understand, and agree to abide by the limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Policies regarding this Street Banner Application, I have been fully authorized by the above organization to submit this form and serve as the primary contact for the organization. I hereby hold harmless the City of Rancho Cucamonga, its officers, employees and agents from any and all liability for'damages or loss or injury either to persons or property which may be sustained while this banner is posted. City Staff Use Only 7'~//~'/ Date Reviewed by Staff: Date Heard by Commission: Recommended by Commission:(~ Date Heard by City Council: Council Action: Approved Denied No Fees: Payable to City of Rancho Cucamonga in Advance Install & Remove: $ Administrative: $ Preparation: $ Total: $ Street Banner Application Contact Person:~"~x'~ st e,t Mailing Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department Home Phone: Prdposed Banner Signage: Use space provided or attach copy of proposed signage. Location: Base Line: DZD Archibald: F"'] To: V'Y3 O Both:'~ I have received a copy, have read and understand, and agree to abide by the limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Policies regarding this Street Banner Application. i have been fully authorized by the above organization to submit this form an0 serve as the primary contact for the organization. I hereby hold harmless the City of Rancho Cucamonga, its officers, employees and agents from any and all liability for'damac~s or loss or injury either to persons or property which may be sustained while this banner , is posted. Signature: ~ C~n ate: Date Reviewed by Staff· ·. ees: Payable to City of Rancho Cucamonga in Advance Date Heard by Commission: ~'Jy2/:. 5~// Recommended by Commission:~ No Date Heard by City Council: Council Action: Approved Denied Install & Remove: $ Administrative: $ Preparation: $ Total: $ Street Banner Application City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department Organization: City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Contact Person: Karen ~,!atcham Address: 10500 Civic Center Rancho Cucamonga Street City Mailing Address: P 0 Box' 807 Rancho Cucamon~a CA Work Phone: 989-1858 ext 2102 Home Phone: Ca 91730 Zip 91729 Event: JIJI,Y 4th CEI.ERRATT~.N Date(s) of Event: Thursday, July 4, 1996 Brief Description of Event: Annual Community Event Etc · Entertainment, Proposed Banner Signage: Use space provided or attach copy of proposed signage. Games, Contests, JULY 4TH CELEBRATION Thursday, July 4, 1996 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 Pf,' Red Hill Community Park 7484 Vineyard Ave Games - Crafts - Food - Entertainment For Hore Information, Please Call 989-1858 Colors to be Used: Red, ~l~ite, and Blue Requested Dates of Banner Display: From: June 20, 1996 To: July 5, lqo6 Location: Base Line: E2] Archibald: EZ] Both: EE2D I have received a copy, have read and understand, and agree to abide by the limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Policies regarding this Street Banner Application. I have been fully authorized by the above organization to submit this form and serve as the primary contact for the organization. I hereby hold harmless the City of Rancho Cucamonga, its officers, employees and agents from any and all liability for damages or loss or injury either to persons or property which may be sustained while this banner Recommended by Commission:~v~~~Ci~%eRe Ad m in is t rat ive: ' $ Date Heard by City Council: Preparation: $ Council Action: Approved Denied Tot a I: $ Street Banner Application City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department Organization: CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~,{ONGA COblHUNITY SERVICES Contact Person: Karen Hatcham Address: 10500 Civic Center Dr Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 Street City Zip Mailing Address: P 0 BOx 807 Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 Work Phone: 989-1858 Home Phone: Event: b!ovies in the Park Date(s) of Even~:uesdays July 9-Aug.-13; Weds July 10-Aug Brief Description of Event: Summer ~fovies Series on 6 dates 14;Fridays July 12-Aug at three seperate parks 16 Proposed Banner Signage: Use space provided or attach copy of proposed signage. CITY LOGO P-OVIES IN THE PARK Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Fridays July 9 - Aug 13/July 10-Aug 14/July 12~Aug 16 Red Hill Park **** Windrows Park **** Hilliken Park For ~ore Information, Please call 989-1858 EVENT FREE TO THE PUBLIC LOGO Colors to be Used: Requested Dates of Banner Display: From:June 14. 1996 To: AUGI,ST 19. 1996 Location: Base Line: ["'] Archibald: ["'] Both: I have received a copy, have read and understand, and agree to abide by the limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Policies regarding this Street Banner Application. I have been fully authorized by the above organization to submit this form and serve as the primary contact for the organization. I hereby hold harmless the City of Rancho Cucamonga, its officers, employees and agents from any and all liability for damages or loss or injury either to persons or property which may be sustained while this banner is posted. Date Reviewed by Staff: : Payable to City of Rancho Cucamonga in Advance Date Heard by Commi . Recommended by Commission: No Install & Remove: $ Administrative: $ Date Heard by City Council: Preparation: $ Council Action: Approved Denied Tot a I: $ Street Banner Application Organization: City of Rancho Cucamonga Contact Person: Karen -~!atcham City of Rancho CucarnoncJa Community Services Department Community Services Address: 10500 Civic Center Dr Rancko Cucamon?a CA 91730 Street City Zip Mailing Address: P 0 BOx 807 Work Phone: 989-1858 ext 2102 Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 Home Phone: Event: Concerts in the Park Date(s) of Event: July 11 1996 thru Au.~us-. 15, 1996 Brief Description of Event: Summer Concerts at Red Hill Park Amphitheater Proposed Banner Signage: Use space provided or attach ~oy of proposed signage. CITY LOGO CONCERTS iN,THE PARK Thursdays, July 11, 1996 Thru August 1S, 1296 Red Hill Community Park Amphitheater FOR MORE INFORMATZON, PLEASE CALL 989-18S8 ~VENT FREE TO THE PUBLIC LOGO Colors to be Used: Requested Dates of Banner Display: Location: Base Line: ~ From:June 27, 1996 To: August 32, 1996 Archibald:[ ! Both: ~ I have received a copy, have read and understand, anc~ agree to abide by the limits of the Cih,. of Rancho Cucamonga Policies regarding this Street Banner Appii=ation. I have been fully authorized bv the above organization to submit this form and serve as the pr:~-ary contact for the organization. I hereby hold harmless the City of Rancho Cucamonga, its officers. 9mployees and agents from any ano all liability for damages or loss or injury either to persons or p~erty which may be sustained while 7~is banner is posts:k Date Rev aff: ~~ ble to City of Rancho Cuca.,':nonga in Advance Date Heard by Commis ~ nstall &Remove: $ Recommended by Commission: No Administrative: $ Oate Heard by City Council: Preparation: $ Council Action: Approved Denied To t a I: $ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 4, 1995 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council City Manager, Jack Lam, AICP FROM: Robert C. Dominguez, Administrative Services Director BY: Joan Kruse, Purchasing Agent SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO DECLARE SURPLUS MISCELLANEOUS CITY- OWNED EQUIPMENT RECOMMENDATION That City Council approval be given to surplus the following listed City-owned equipment which is either no longer needed, obsolete or unusable; and based on a priority listing, computer equipment be donated to various organizations within the City. BACKGROUND The City' s purchasing manual identifies two major categories of surplus property: materials and supplies, and capital equipment. It has been the policy of the City to request that the City Council provide authorization to the Purchasing Agent to dispose of City property by declaring such items surplus. Methods of disposition can be transfer to another department, trade-in, sale by bid or auction, sale as scrap, donation, or simply trashing. With the purchase of the City's new computer system various computers, printers, monitors and other equipment are surplus to our need. The attached listing will identify that equipment. Many requests have been received by staff from organizations and school districts for the computer equipment. It is recommended that this equipment be donated as follows: (1) Rancho Cucamonga Police Department Reserve Unit - Volunteer Group; (2) Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce; and (3) the Alta Loma Elementary School District, Alta Loma High School, Cucamonga Elementary School District, and Etiwanda High School. Additionally, the following miscellaneous items have either been replaced by new equipment, were used as trade-ins, or are unrepairable or obsolete, and should be disposed of. Xerox 6010 Memorywriter Typewriter, Tag No. 00188, Fixed Asset 0189 Silver Reed Typewriter, Tag No. 00396, Fixed Asset 0127 Lanier FAX 115AD, Tag No. 00873, Fixed Asset 1326 Dictaphone Dictamaster, Tag No. E-32 Dictaphone Dictamaster Tag No. E-3 Smith-Corona Coronamatic 2500 Typewriter, Tag No. E- 138 Sanyo Memo-Scriber Tag No. E-645 JVC Stereo Cassette Deck Tag No. E-695 RCA VHS Video Cassette Recorder, Tag No. 00008 Motorola High Band Trunk Mount Radio - No visible tags Motorola MINITOR Pagers and Charger, Tag Nos. E-68, #012; E-615, #003; E-614, 002; E- 614, #313; E-68, #012; and untagged pagers, #100; #200; #301; #302; #303; #310; and #312 Tape Recorder Tag No. E-99 Aamco Tire Inflation Cage, S/N 6331 Coats 6000 Truck Tire Changer, S/N 0002515289 ITT 3100 Telephone System, Tag No. 00223, Fixed Asset Nos. 0159, 0801, 0809, 0820, 0861, 0623, 0672, 0771, 0777 Xerox 1025 Xerox 1025 Xerox 5046 Xerox 1090 Xerox 1090 Xerox 1090 Xerox 1040 Xerox 1020 Copier, S/N K02340119, Asset No. 0738, Tag No. 523 Copier, K02354360 Copier, S/N 15G 544213, Fixed Asset 01130 Copier, S/N MO8-028352 Copier, S/N MO8-033617 Copier, S/N MO8-025772 Copier, S/N P70111143 Copier, S/N U43330413 As an added note, staff advertised and contacted several vendors and suppliers of computer equipment to determine the "sale" value of the equipment. We had no offers to purchase any of the equipment; this is indicative of fast moving technology that declares obsolete older technology. Res ~~:tf~ittTd, C. Dom~n~ue~ Attach. SURPLUS INVENTORY Line Item No. CITY: 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Description Compaq Deskpro 286 Compaq Keyboard Compaq VGA Monitor Compaq Deskpro 286 Keyboard Samsung CGA Monitor Compaq Deskpro 286 Keyboard Compaq VGA Monitor Compaq Deskpro 286 Compaq Keyboard Compaq VGA Monitor Compaq Deskpro 286 Compaq Keyboard Compaq VGA Monitor Compaq Deskpro 286 Keyboard Samsung Monochrome Compaq Deskpro 286 Compaq Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor Compaq Deskpro 286 Compaq Keyboard Monitor Compaq Deskpro 286 Compaq Keyboard Samsung Monochrome Compaq Deskpro 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor Serial Number 4930HZ3H0731 9281146C1392 92714544B844 4845AM1B0649 N/A 83102242 4843AM3B0349 8351146PC273 83814544D639 4930HZ3H0044 8011146PH075 92714544C328 4930HZ3H0363 9131146CC103 13214544N381 4845AM 1 B1618 8331146PD972 831 01836 4841AM1B4775 8341146PB330 6XC03961C 4842AM1B1412 1117983 74D90034W 4845AM1B3802 8331146PF635 83102103 4842AM1B1448 1117985 74D90081W Page 1 SURPLUS INVENTORY Line Item No. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Description Compaq Deskpro 286 Keyboard Samsung Monochrome IBM AT IBM Keyboard Quimax Color Monitor IBM-AT IBM Keyboard Sysdyne Color Monitor IBM-AT Keyboard Sysdyne Color Monitor IBM-AT Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-AT Keyboard Sysdyne Color Monitor IBM-AT Keyboard Sysdyne Color Monitor IBM-AT Keyboard Sysdyne Color Monitor IBM-AT Keyboard Sysdyne Mono Monitor PC AT 286 Clone Keyboard Samsung Monochrome Serial Number 484AM1B0241 8361146PD 122 83102083 5206-7505170 20080263 801-1401732 5170-A0550038650 N/A 6040257 5170-7081842 2001238 6260537 2118685170 263142632 75DO4337W 5170-7081273 N/A 6280111 5170-7081556 2001241 6280106 52072875170 270057220 6040294 52075335170 263023735 50483335 978309 K209005417 N/A 28 SURPLUS INVENTORY Line Item No. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Description PC AT 286 Clone Keyboard Samsung Monochrome IBM-XT Model 286 Keyboard IBM-PC Monitor IBM-XT IBM Keyboard Sysdyne Color Monitor IBM-XT Keyboard Samsung Monochrome IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor Serial Number B04255 70209089 N/A 41 5162-1020307 001BTC 1429408 5162-1080358 1118011 6040079 MB70604245 N/A 80102109 5162-1069939 1177299 77D04870J 5162-1024500 K1B234749 6XC03918C 5182-1024503 1047832 6XC03804C 5162-1069982 1177309 77DO5269J 5162-1069576 1118027 74D90051W 5162-1069693 1117311 74D90098W Page 3 SURPLUS INVENTORY Line Item No. 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Description IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Enh Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 Keyboard Amdek Amber Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor Serial Number 5162-1069641 1174000 JC1401P3A 5162-1069627 1117984 74D90002W 5162-1069652 N/A 74D90026W 5162-1024496 1047660 6XC03893C 5162-1069917 1117299 74D90044W 5162-1024514 T1081543 87622858 5162-1069663 1117665 74D90038W 5162-1024397 1085534 6ZH01554A 5162-1024490 1117801 6XC03943C 5162-1024509 1047840 69C14216U Page 4 SURPLUS INVENTORY Line Item No. 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Description IBM-XT Model 286 Compaq Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard Amdek Mono Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard Sysdyne Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard Amdek Amber Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-XT Model 286 IBM Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor Serial Number 5162-1069901 8341146PF843 74D90046W 5162-1069762 1168872 77DO5137J 5162-1069648 1118015 87622914 5162-1069659 116196 74D90033W 5162-1066654 33735 6260185 5162-1024499 1048415 6XC03946C 5162-1024497 1047661 87622837 5162-1069661 1116329 74D90076W 5162-1069657 1047652 69C14205U 5162-1024508 1048410 6XC03799C Page 5 SURPLUS INVENTORY Line Item No. 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Description IBM-XT Keyboard NEC Multisync Color Monitor IBM-PC Keyboard Sysdyne Monitor Xerox Computer Xerox Keyboard Xerox Monitor Xerox Computer Xerox Keyboard Xerox Monitor Clone 386sx/25M Keyboard Mouse Panasonic Monitor Clone 386sx/25M Keyboard Mouse Panasonic Monitor IBM PS2 Model 30 Keyboard IBM Color Monitor Mac SE Apple Keyboard Apple Mouse Mac SE Apple Keyboard Apple Mouse Mac SE/30 Apple Keyboard Apple Mouse Serial Number 5162-1024505 8421146PI723 6XC04652C 19734105150 33735FT 6260185 5316254 G5002285 680 5124443 245053 2542895 N/A N/A 1034040 KH2141488 N/A KB21106775 N/A H1C13300894 23-1548077 N/A 72-0323164 F8056AHM5011 230247 813830 F838BZSM5011 N/A N/A F10500EKK02 AP0489G6%M0312 MI0396Z2C25 Page 6 .,~ ~ SURPLUS INVENTORY Line Item No. CITY (Macintosh): 61 62 63 64 Description 65 Printers: 66 67 68 69 70 71 Mac SE/30 Apple Keyboard Apple Mouse Mac SE/30 Apple Keyboard Apple Mouse Mac SE/30 Apple Keyboard Apple Mouse Mac SE/30 Apple Keyboard Apple Mouse Mac Plus Apple Keyboard Apple Mouse Digital LN03 Laser Laserwriter Plus Laserwriter Plus Personal Laser Quadram Quadlaser Laserwriter lint Serial Number CK1270FZKAT MA11721U%M0312 LT1208SZC22 F10436PNK01 AP04146B%M0312 AP0416Z3C25 F10453TGK01 SR10916503N N/A F10436PQK01 AP04145E%M0312 AP0416Y5C25 BCG9GRM0001A M833M0110A0579 M 007M010085197 HY27805 A630206ZM0156 F74804KM0198 CA1265NX%M 101 LL/A 108055 CA043X2K%M6000 Page 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 4, 1995 Mayor and Members of the City council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager William J. O~leil, City Engineer Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR PARCEL MAP 14238, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE, SOUTH OF 19TH STREET, SUBMITTED BY LASZLO VASS RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving Parcel Map 14238, ordering the annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 2, and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to cause said map to record. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Parcel Map 14238, located on the east side of Hellman Avenue, south of 19th Street, in the Low Residential District, was approved by the Planning Commission on January 13, 1993, for the division of 0.58 acres of land into 2 parcels. The required off-site street improvements were installed by the Developer. A letter of approvai has been received ~'om Cucamonga County Water District. The Consent and Waiver to Annexation form signed by the Developer is on file in the City Clerk's office. City Engineer WJO:WV:dlw ~Attachment A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 14238 WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 14238, submitted by Mr. Laszlo Vass, Subdivider, and consisting of 2 parcels, located on the east side of Hellman Avenue, South of 19th Street, was approved by the Planning Commission on January 13, 1993, as provided in the State Subdivision Map Act and is in compliance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 28 of said City; and WHEREAS, Parcel Map Number 14238 is the Final Map of the division of land approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS, said subdivider has met the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the Final Map. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA' HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: - ~ That the Final Map be approved and the City Clerk is authorized to execute the certificate threon behalf of said City; and That said Parcel Map No. 14238 be and the same is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be filed for record. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR PARCEL MAP 14238 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 1, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as the "Maintenance District"); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" authorize the annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance District; and WHEREAS, at this time the City Council is desirous to take proceedings to annex ,.he property described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated heroin by this referenced to the Maintenance District; and WHEREAS, all of the owners of property within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Maintenance District have filed with the City Clerk their written consent to the proposed annexation without notice and heating or filing of an Engineer's "Report". NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all tree and correct. SECTION 2: That this legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the property as shown in Exhibit "A" and the work program axeas as described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto to the Maintenance District. SECTION 3: That all future proceedings of the Maintenance District, including the levy of all assessments, shall be applicable to the territory annexed hereunder. EXHIBIT 'A" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 2 #//I',' · (~) EXIST. 8 fREET TBEE' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON(IA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA STREET LIGHTS: EXHIBIT "B" WORK PROGRAM PROJECT: PARCEL MAP 14238 NUMBER OF LAMPS Dist. 5800L 9500L 16.000L 22.000L 27.500L S1 ............... LANDSCAPING: Community Equestrian Trail Tuff Non-Tuff Dist. D.G.S.F. S.F. S.F. L1 ......... Trees * Existing items installed with original project (Tract 14192-1 ). ASSESSMENT UNITS: Parcel N/A DU or Acres 2 Assessment Units By District S1 S2 L1 2 2 2 Annexation Date: 10/4/95 Form Date 11/16/94 DATE: TO:. FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA " ...... October 4, 1995 Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Duane A. Baker, Assistant to the City Manager APPROVAL TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN ASSOCIATES FOR ASSESSMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO A REQUEST BY CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNERS IN SOUTH ETIWANDA TO FORM AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT STAFF REPORT .' RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve a professional services agreement with Willdan Associates, assessment engineers, in an amount not to exceed $21,109. This agreement is to be funded from a deposit made by the property owners and will not affect the general fund. BACKGROUND The property owners in South Etiwanda have asked the City to form an assessment district to finance the cost of design and construction of master planned drainage facilities in the south Etiwanda area. This area is shown on the attached map. Before asking the City Council to form an assessment district, a great deal of data must be reviewed and evaluated to determine if a district is feasible and what type of district should be formed. The agreement before the council at this meeting will bring the necessary expertise on board so that analysis of this proposal can begin. This work is being initiated at the request of the property owners and is being paid for by the property owners. Once the feasibility study is complete, staff will bring back the appropriate documents for the City Council's consideration. Duane A. Baker Assistant to the City Manager /dab attachment PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT HIGHLAND AVE. L VICTORIA ST._ RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY-- DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT October 4, 1995 Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Duane A. Baker, Assistant to the City Manager APPROVAL TO EXECUTE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS WITH CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNERS IN SOUTH ETIWANDA TO COVER CONSULTANT COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AS REQUESTED BY PROPERTY OWNERS RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the reimbursement agreements with certain property owners in south Etiwanda who have requested us to investigate the possibility of an assessment district. BACKGROUND Certain property owners in south Etiwanda have asked the City to form an assessment district to finance the design and construction costs of master planned drainage facilities. The area in question is shown on the attached map. Before asking the City Council to form an assessment district the City needs to retain several consultants to study the feasibility of the project. Per City policy, we are requiring the proponents to pay for all of the consultant costs. The reimbursement agreement before the Council sets forth the manner in which the property owner's money is deposited with the City and how it is to be reimbursed from bond proceeds should an assessment district be formed. The City Council is under no obligation to form a district and the agreement specifically reserves for the City the right to abandon these proceedings without having to reimburse funds already spent. As this agreement will help this project move forward without obligating the City, staff is recommending approval. Duane A. Baker Assistant to the City Manager PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT HIGHLAND AVE. N CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 4, 1995 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council City Manager, Jack Lam, AICP FROM: Robert C. Dominguez, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH BECKER & BELL, INC.. CONSULTANTS'. TO PERFORM A CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY FOR THE CITY AND FIRE DISTRICT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $30,000 FROM ACCT. NO. 01-4265-6028 Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council approve entering into an agreement with the consulting firm of Becker & Bell, Inc. to perform a-compensation and classification study for the City and Fire District in an amount not to exceed $30,000. Background The 1995~96 budget included funding for the purpose of conducting a classification and compensation study for the City and Fire District. A request for proposal was prepared by staff and sent to consultants throughout the State. Interviews were conducted, and based on those interviews and reference checks, staff has recommended the firm of Becker & Bell, Inc. The purpose for conducting the classification study is to review positions within the City to determine if they are appropriately classified and titled, based upon the work they are currently performing. The last classification study was performed for the City over five years ago and, as the City Council is aware, the organization has changed significantly during that time. The proposal by the consultant includes conducting a survey of every position in the City and District, as well as, an opportunity for an interview by every employee regarding their position. The consultant estimates project completion in approximately twenty weeks with monthly status reports being provided to the City. Because of the holidays rapidly approaching, this project may elongate slightly. The compensation portion of this study Will include comparisons with both public and private agencies. The consultant has indicated that comparisons with the private sector are becoming a much more common request by public agencies. Accordingly, such comparisons will be conducted. City Council Meeting - October 4, 1995 Compensation & Classification Study-City & Fire District Becker & Bell, Inc. Page 2 The estimated cost for the study is approximately $25,000; however, staff is recommending approval of an amount not to exceed $30,000. The City's budget contains $40,000 for the study and the Fire District $10,000. Respectfully submitted, o e . on~ng~ez Administrative Services Director RCD:pag CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 4, 1995 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lain, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O~eil, City Engineer BY: Jerry A. Dyer, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94--30, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD AND CARNELIAN AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY MCDONALD'S CORPORATION RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions accepting the subject agreement and security, and ordering the annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 6, and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Conditional Use Permit No. 94-30 was approved by the Planning Commission on February 8, 1995, for a McDonald's fast food restaurant of approximately 2210 square feet with a drive-thru, located at the southeast comer of Base Line Road and Camelian Avenue. The Developer, McDonald's Corporation is submitting an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the off-site improvements in the following mounts: Faithful Performance Bond: Labor and Materialmen Bond: $29,351.00 $14,676.00 Copies of the agreement and security, and the Consent and Waiver to Annexation are available in the City Clerk's office. William il WJO:JAD:dlw Attachments VICINITY MAP I i BASE LINE ROAD ........ -'i ............................................................... I PARCEL 1 OF P.M. 4869 BK. 49/PG. 46&47 APN 0207-031-27 McDONALD'S SITE / CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA CUP 94-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURITY FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-30 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement submitted by McDonald's Corporation, Developer, for the improvements within the City of Rancho Cucamonga public right-of-way, generally located on the southeast comer of Base Line Road and Camelian Avenue; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to -the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property as referred to Planning Commission, Conditional Use Permit No. 94-30; and WHEREAS, the Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient _ Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that said Improvement Agreement and Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. __5/ RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDER/NG THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-30 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of Califomia, said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 (hereinafter referred to as the "Maintenance District"); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" authorize the annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance District; and WHEREAS, at this time the City Council is desirous to take proceedings to annex the property described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this referenced to the Maintenance District; and WHEREAS, all of the owners of property within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Maintenance Dislrict have filed with the City Clerk their written consent to the proposed annexation without notice and heating or filing of an Engineer's "Report". NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all tree and correct. SECTION 2: That this legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the property as shown in Exhibit "A" and the work program areas as described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto to the Maintenance District. SECTION 3: That all future proceedings of the Maintenance District, including the levy of all assessments, shall be applicable to the territory annexed hereunder. EXHIBIT "A" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT. NOS. 1 AND 6 BASE LINE ROAD ./ PARCEL ~ P, iVL NO, 48E~ -'; .9 / P S, -',~ E~ a _,4, 7 - - - z°~ Z (:Z: A.P.N 0207-031-27 <C (Z ' Z I FGFND STREET LIGHT STREET TREE 1 EA, 12 EA, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA CUP 94-30 EXHIBIT "B" WORK PROGRAM PROJECT: C.U.P. 94-30 (Parcel 1 of P.M. 4869) STREET LIGHTS: Dist. S1 S6 5800L NUMBER OF LAMPS 9500L 16.000L 22.000L 1 LANDSCAPING: Community Equestrian Trail Dist. D.G.S.F. L3B Turf Non-Turf S.F. S .F. * Existing items installed with original project. ASSESSMENT UNITS: Assessment Units By District Parcel Acres S 1 S6 L 1 N/A 1.10 2.20 1.10 1.10 27.500L Trees F,a. 12 Annexation Date: October 4, 1995 Form Date 11/16/94 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 4, 1995 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O?qeil, City Engineer BY: Jerry A. Dyer, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURITY FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 95-06, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ASPEN STREET (PARCEL NO. 1 OF PARCEL MAP 14635), SUBMITTED BY GOURMET SYSTEMS OF CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the subject agreement and security, and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Conditional Use Permit No. 95 -06 was approved by the Planning Commission on April 12, 1995, for an Applebee's Restaurant and Bar, located at the southeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Street, Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map No. 14635, in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The Developer, Goutmet System of Califomia, Incorporated, is submitting an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the off-site improvements in the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: Labor and Materialmen Bond: $32,868.00 $16,434.00 Copies of the agreemere and security are available in the City Clerk's office. WJO:JAD ~,,Attachrnents VICINITY MAP . FOOTHILL BOULEVARD ........ r' ................................................................ | I i i I i /,,"' i PARCEL 1 OF P.I~{. 14635 ] i APPLEBEE'S ~ RESTAURANT I I mi ~.~ . .~- I LAUREL STREET ! N.T,~L CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA CUP 95-06 RESOLUTION NO. q._..~'/,-~,~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURITY FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 95-06 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement submitted by Gourmet Systems of California, Incorporated, Developer, for the improvements within the City of Rancho Cucamonga public right-of-way, generally located on the southeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Street; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property as referred to Planning Commission, Conditional Use Permit No. 95-06; and WHEREAS, the Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that said Improvement Agreement and Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT October 4, 1995 Mayor, and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager William J. O'Neil; City Engineer Linda R. Beck, Jr. Engineer ~ APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION FOR TRACT 13753, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ELLENA STREET, NORTH OF BASE LINE ROAD, SUBMITTED BY LEWIS HOMES RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, accepting the subject_ agreement extension and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security to guarantee the construction of the public improvements for Tract 13753 were approved by the City Council on August 6, 1992, in the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: $483,089 Labor and Mitterial Bon& $241,545 The developer, Lewis Homes, is requesting approval of a 12-month extension on said improvement agreement due to slow economic conditions. Copies of the Improvement Agreement Extension are available in the City Clerk's Office. Respectfully submitted, William J. ~ City Engineer WJO:LRB:Iy Attachments STANDARD PACIFIC OF ORANGE COUNTY September 8, 1995 Linda Beek City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Release of Subdivision Bond Dear Linda: This letter is to notify. you that the subdivision improvements for 13565-5 have been completed to the satis/hction of the City Inspector. Kathv Becker. Please process tbr release improvement B6nd ~ ,11133172749. If you have any questions, please t~el free to call. , or ia ~ Project Manager cc/ Steve Gilliland, City ofRancho Cucamonga Kathy Becker, City of Rancho Cucamonga 1565 West MacArthur Boulevard Costa Mesa Calitbmia 92626. 714/6684300 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13753 WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on September 5, 1995, by Lewis Homes as developer, for the improvement of public fight-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the north side of Ellena Street, north of Base Line Road; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said Tract 13753; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement Extension. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City ofRancho Cucamonga, Califomia hereby resolves, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement Extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT October 4, 1995 Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Larn, AICP, City Manager William J. O'Neil, City Engineer Linda R. Beck, Jr. Engineer ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE OF BONDS AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR 6864 HELLMAN AVENUE RECOMMENDATION The required improvements for 6864 Hellman Avenue has been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithrid Performance and Material and Labor Irrevocable Authority to Pay Numbers 120192-1 and -2.' BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS As a condition of approval of completion for 6864 Hellman Avenue, the developer was required to complete Street Improvements. It is recommended that City Council release the existing Material and Labor Irrevocable Authority to Pay as follows: Developer: William Perry Roofing 6864 Hellman Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 Release: No. 120192-1 - Faithful Performance Irrevocable Authority to Pay No. 120192-2 - Material and Labor Irrevocable Authority to Pay $8,000.00 $4,000.00 Respectfully Submitted, ' WjO:L~~~ Attachments A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 6864 HELLMAN AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for 6864 Hellman Avenue have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 4, 1995 Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager William J. O~Neil, City Engineer Michael D. Long, Supervising Public Works Inspector ACCEPT THE NINETEENTH STREET IMPROVEMENTS, FROM CARNELIAN STREET TO AMETHYST STREET PROJECT, CONTRACT NO. 93-052, AS COMPLETE, RELEASE THE BONDS AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION AND APPROVE THE FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $73 1,814.46 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council accept the Nineteenth Street Improvements, from Carnelian Street to Amethyst Street project, Contract No. 93-052, as complete, authorize the City Engineer to file a "Notice of Completion," and retain the Faithful Performance in the amount of $773,375.89 to be used as the Maintenance Bond and authorize the release of the Labor and Materials Bond in the amount of $773,375.89 six months after the recordation of said notice if no claims have been received. Also, authorize the release of the retention in the amount of $73,181.45, 35 days after the approval of the final contract amount of $73 1,814.46. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The subject project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The final contract amount, based on project documentation, is $73 1,814.46, which includes one contract change order for additional grading, concrete driveways and additional landscaping. The original amount approved by Council was $773,375.89, and the revised amount approved by Council is $73 1,814.46 Respectfully submitt~C William ~ City Engineer Attachments WJO:MDL:sd A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR NINETEENTH STREET IMPROVEMENTS, FROM CARNELIAN STREET TO AMETHYST STREET PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Nineteenth Street Improvements, from Carnelian Street to Amethyst Street Project have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF [IF, PORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 4, 1995 Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager William J. O'Neil, City Engineer Michael D. Long, Senior Public Works Inspector ACCEPT THE ROCHESTER AVENUE-RANCHO CUCAMONGA HIGH SCHOOL MITIGATION PROGRAM FOR LANDSCAPING THE ROCHESTER AVENUE EAST SIDE PARKWAY (LMD NO. 2), FROM VICTORIA PARK LANE TO HIGHLAND AVENUE PROJECT, CONTRACT NO. 94-031, AS COMPLETE, RELEASE THE BONDS AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION AND APPROVE THE FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $190,142.11. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council accept the Rochester Avenue-Rancho Cucamonga High School Mitigation Program for Landscaping the Rochester Avenue East Side Parkway (LMD No. 2) from Victoria Park Lane to Highland Avenue project, Contract No. 94-031, as complete, authorize the City Engineer to file a "Notice of Completion, and retain the Faithful Performance in the amount of $182,942.11 to be used as the Maintenance Bond and authorize the release of the Labor and Materials Bond in the amount of $182,942.11 six months after the recordation of said notice if no claims have been received. Also, authorize the release of the retention in the amount of $19,014.21, 35 days after the approval of the final contract amount of$190,142.11. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The subject project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The final contract amount, based on project documentation, is $190, 142.11, which includes one contract change order for additional grading and clearing and grubbing. The original amount approved by Council was $201,236.11 and the revised amount approved by Council is $190,142.11. Respectfully submitted, William J. O~Neil City Engineer WJO:MDL:dlw Attachment A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR ROCHESTER AVENUE-RANCHO CUCAMONGA HIGH SCHOOL MITIGATION PROGRAM FOR LANDSCAPING THE ROCHESTER AVENUE EAST SIDE PARKWAY (LMD NO. 2), FROM VICTORIA PARK LANE TO HIGHLAND AVENUE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Rochester Avenue-Rancho Cucamnga High School Mitigation Program for Landscaping the Rochester Avenue East Side Parkway (LMD No. 2), from Victoria Park Lane to Highland Avenue Project has been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bemardino County. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 4, 1995 TO: Mayor. and Members of the City Council, Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAl USE PERMIT 93-46 - FLORES - An appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of a request to modify the approved site plan and certain conditions of approval for a previously approved gas station and mini-market in the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (Subarea 2), located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-192-06 and 07. RECOMMENDATION Approve the modification to Conditional Use Permit 93-46 through adoption of the attached Resolution. BACKGROUND On September 20, 1995, the City Council conducted a public testimony on the request. After concluding the testimony, the Council indicated their desire to revisit the site and, in the interim, directed staff to prepare a Resolution of Approval for the modification requested by the applicant. The attached Resolution contains the following conditions pertinent to the request: The applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a cash deposit for the construction of the on-site improvements on the Red Hill Liquor Store site. The applicant will then be required to make all reasonable efforts to obtain the property owner's permission to install the landscaping and other improvements. If all remedies fail, the deposit will then be returned to the applicant. If the property owner's permission is obtained, the deposit can be used to pay for the improvements. (Planning Division condition no. 1 ) CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CUP 93-46 - FLORES October 4, 1995 Page 2 The applicant shall make a good-faith effort to obtain the dedication across the Red Hill Liquor Store site and install the street improvements. If the applicant is unable to secure the dedication, the applicant would be .able to request the City begin negotiations with the liquor store owner to acquire the property at ~he applicant's expense. (Engineering Division condition no. 3.c) ,, Resp_ y Submitted, BB:SM:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - City Council Staff Report dated September 20, 1995 Resolution of Approval CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 20, 1995 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council, Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-46 - FLORES - An appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of a request to modify the approved site plan and certain conditions of approval for a previously approved gas station and mini-market in the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (Subarea 2), located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-192-06 and 07. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the modification to Conditional Use Permit through adoption of the attached Resolution. BACKGROUND On July 27, 1994, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 93-46 for the construction of a gas station and mini-market on a .63 acre parcel at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue. At the time of approval, the applicant owned both the gas station site and the adjoining Red Hill Liquor site. Because of the size of the gas station site and the dependence on the liquor store for access to Foothill Boulevard, the two sites were considered as part of the same application. Improvements proposed to both the gas station and liquor store site included formal hardscape and street tree planting treatment and a landscaped planter and screen wall behind the right-of-way. Also, the existing drive approach for In-N-Out Burger would be eliminated and access provided through the liquor store site. In October 1994, the applicant sold the Red Hill Liquor store to the current property owner. In the process of transferring title, the applicant did not obtain the necessary legal documents (e.g. dedications, easements, right-of-entry) to allow construction of the street and on-site improvements required as part of the original approval. The applicant has indicated that the liquor store property owner has been unwilling to provide the necessary agreements to the applicant. City Council Staff Report CUP 9346 - flores September 20, 1995 Page 2 ANALYSIS Because of the applicant's inability to obtain the necessary easements to complete the improvements as required by the COnditiOT~S of approval, the applicant he,s submitted a modification request to eliminate those on:site improvements required on the liquor store site. Also, the applicant has requested that the applicant initiate condemnation proceedings on the liquor store site in order to obtain the necessary right-of-way to complete the public improvements. On August 23, 1995,' the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider modifications to the approved site plan and conditions of approval for the gas station and mini-market application. After receiving testimony on the application, the Commission determined that since they did not have the authority to initiate condemnation proceedings, any discussion of off-site improvements would be premature. The Commission felt that the improvements should not be deleted across the liquor store site for the following reasons: ,,- Widening of Foothill Boulevard was necessary to provide greater safety for vehicles entering the site from Foothill Boulevard. The widening created, in essence, a right- turn pocket so vehicles entering the site would be out of the normal travel lanes. The combination of the three drive approaches on the Red Hill Liquor Store and In- N-Out Burger sites into one drive approach was necessary to better control access to Foothill Boulevard and minimize tuming conflict of vehicles entering or exiting the site. The parking lot and landscape improvements are necessary to bring the Liquor Store site into greater conformity with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan requirements. jRespe ly Submitted, BB:SM:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Applicant Letter of Appeal Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 23, 1995 Exhibit "C" - Planning Commission Resolution Exhibit "D" - Planning Commission Draft Minutes of August 23, 1995 Exhibit "E" - Street Improvement Plans Resolution of Denial '7 C) CHARLrS S. VOSE CONNIE COOKE SANDIrER JAMES OUFF MURPHY EDWARD W. LEE ROGER W. SPRINOER STIrVEN B. OUINTANILLA MARY L, MCMASTER ARTHUR J. HAZARABEDIAN JUDITH FAYE ROBERTS BRADLEY E. WOHLENBERG LAW OFFICES (::)LIVER, BARR ~c VOSE THE PARK 281 SOUTH FIOUrROA STREET, SECOND FLOOR LOS ANO EL[S. CALIFORNIA 90012 TEL[PHONE [Z131 TELECOPIER 12131 OF COUNSEL WILLIAM B. BARR RECEIVED August 29, 1995 ~#rY OF RCAiNCHO CUCAMONG,~ TY City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 SEP 0 5 1995 ijll ,~ ~'i ~Oi z: a z~i ~i 2131415 164 Re: Modification to Conditidnal Use Permit 93-46 Dear City Clerk: You are hereby notified that applicants Arturo Flores and Diana Flores hereby appeal to the City Council the decision of the Planning Commission and the Resolution to deny said applicants request for a Modification of Conditional Use Permit 93-46. Said decision was made on August 23, 1995. Enclosed is a check made payable to the City Clerk in the amount of $126..00. Please schedule the appeal hearing at the earliest possible date and notify the undersigned of the date of said hearing. Very truly yours, h of OLIVER, BARR & VOSE JDM:crn enclosures cc: Arturo and Diana Flores 288'78 7/ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: August 23, 1995 "' "' ~ Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission, Brad Buller, City Planner Scott Murphy, AICP, Associate Planner . MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-46 - FLORES - A request to modify the approved site plan and certain conditions. of approval for a previously approved gas station and mini-market in the Community Commercial designation (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of E--oothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-192-06 and 07. BACKGROUND: On July 27, 1994, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 93-46 for the construction of gas station and mini-market on a .63 acre parcel at the southeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue. At the time of approval, the applicant owned both the gas station site and the adjoining Red Hill Liquor site. Because of the size of the gas station site and the dependence on the liquor store for access to Foothill Boulevard, the two sites were considered as part of the same application. The applicant proposed improvements to the liquor store site that would bring the site into closer conformance with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan development standards. Street improvements, formal hardscape and street tree planting would be provided along the property frontage. Landscaping and a rock screen wall would be provided behind the public right-of-way to screen the parking area. The parking area would be restriped consistent with Code requirements. The access to In-N-Out Burger would be revised to access through the liquor store site, thereby eliminating a drive approach on Foothill Boulevard. In October 1994, the applicant sold the Red Hill Liquor store to the current property owner. In the process of transferring title, the applicant obtained easements for the construction of the trash enclosures and for reciprocal access across the liquor store site. The escrow instructions for the sale indicated that the applicant would be constructing improvements across the front of the liquor store site and that the buyer was aware of these improvements. Prior to the close of escrow, however, the applicant did not obtain the PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 9346 - FLORES August 23, 1995 Page 2 necessary legal documents (e.g. dedications, easements, right-of-entry) to allow construction of the street and on-site impro~rements. The applicant h~is ir~o"icated that the liquor store property owner has been unwilling to provide the necessary agreements to the applicant. ANALYSIS: Because of their inability to obtain the necessary agreements to complete the improvements across the liquor store site, the applicant is requesting two actions by the City. First, the applicant is requesting the City initiate condemnation proceedings against the liquor store site. Condemnation of the right-of-way would allow the applicant to install the street improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and drive approach. These improvements would combine the three drive approaches on the liquor store and In-N-Out Burger sites into one approach on the liquor store site. The majority of the street trees and formal landscaping will be installed within the public right-of-way. A Condition of Approval has been incorporated into the Resolution stating, that the applicant shall make a good faith effort to obtain the dedication prior to the City's initiating condemnation proceedings. The cost of the condemnation would be paid by the applicant. The second action requested by the applicant is a modification to the approved site plan to eliminate those improvements on the liquor store site. As noted previously, the approved plans call for the construction of landscaping and a screen wall behind the public right-of-way, restriping the parking lot, the installation of landscaping adjacent to the liquor store building, and the construction of a median at the Foothill Boulevard drive approach. While the majority of these improvements are aesthetic in nature, the opportunity to bring the site into closer conformity with the development standards, as previously agreed to by the applicant, will be greatly reduced. With previous applications, the Planning Commission required the applicant to obtain the consent of the liquor store owner for the improvements necessary to complete the street and parkway improvements. The applicants for Conditional Use Permit 88-03, the prior application approved in September 14, 1988, had reached an agreement with the property owner to install the improvements consistent with the required improvements of this application. Without the property owner's consent, the applicant would not have the ability to complete the project and, in essence, have "no project." Rather than simply waiving the requirements, staff recommends that the applicant be 'required to enter into an agreement requiring the posting of a cash deposit to cover the cost of the on-site improvements. The applicant must then make a good faith effort to obtain the right-of-entry to install the improvements in conformance with the originally approved plans. Only after the applicant has exhausted all reasonable efforts without success would the deposit be returned to the applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 9346 - FLORES August 23, 1995 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the modification to Conditional Use Permit 93~6 with the condition that tTie'ai~plicant post a cash deposit to cover the on-site improvement costs. A Resolution of Approval containing this condition has been attached for your adoption. Respectfully submitted, Br Buller City Planner BB:SM:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "B" - Original Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Revised Site Plan Resolution Approving Modification to CUP 9346 August 13, 1995 Raftfling Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive 'Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91729 Vineyard Shell 89 19 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga, CA C, U. P~ #93-46 RECEIVED A U G 15 1995 City of RanchO Cucamonga Planning Division Dear Commissioners: The developers, Art and Diana F/ores are submitting a revised site plan for consideration and approval to areenid the existing Conditional Use Permit for the above referenced project. This request is necessary for the project to proceed. The: C. U.P. approval encompasses the common vehicular ingress and egress involving three separate parcels. Unfortunately, the owner of parcel two has illustrated his unwillingness to agree to the conditions of approval. The owner of parcel two was in attendance at the planning commission meeting for the presentation of the project. No objections were voiced at this time, The F/ores have made repeated attempts to obtain the easement document approval from the owner of parcel two. These easements would include on-site end off-site improvements and. access. The lack of cooperation from the owner of parcel two have left the F!ores with no other alternative but to file for this amended C.U.P. We are requesting that the C.U.P. be amended to omit the requirements of on-site improvements to parcel two. Your understanding and approval will be greatly appreciated. Wesley Okamoto cc: ,4rt and Diana F/ores Horacio Santos Jim Brennan Scott Murphy WESLEY OKAMOTO, ARCHITECT 15675 altarnir8 drive, chi~o I~ills, ca 9 ~ f909) 393-8934 pager f909) 482-3112 fax (909) 597-5444 · -t s i 7~ O,.LOINV'NO ,k3'IS3/A O,LO.V'~O ,~3'~{=3~ 313HS OBVA3NIA 1 ii RESOLUTION NO. 95-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93-46, A REQUEST TO MODIFY THE APPROVED SITE PLAN AND CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED GA,.S STATION AND MINI-MARKET~IN. THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN (SUBAREA 2) OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND VINEYARD AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 208-192-06 AND 07. A. Recitals. 1. Art and Diana Flores have filed an application for a modification to Conditional Use Permit No. 93-46, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafier in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On July 27, 1994, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 93-46, subject to certain conditions, through adoption of Ptanning Commission Resolution No. 94-67. 3. On August 23, 1995, the Planning Commission of the City Of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application and concluded said headng on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the ,City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public headng on August 23, 1995, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the southeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue with a street frontage of 140 feet along Foothill Boulevard and 155 feet along Vineyard Avenue and is presently vacant; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated for commercial uses and is developed with a retail center. The property to the south is designated for residential uses and is developed with a residential condominium project. The property to the east is designated for commercial uses and is developed with a liquor store. The property to the west is designated for commercial uses and is vacant; and c. The development of the gas station and mini-market is consistent with the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and the Commercial designation of the General Plan; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 93-46 - FLORES September 13, 1995 Page 2 95-39 d. The application contemplates acquisition of right-of-way across the frontage of the Red Hill Liquor Store site. The ability to initiate proceedings to acquire the right-of-way rests solely with the City Council. Should the City Council decide not to initiate condemnation proceedings to acquire the right-of-way, the application would result in the following: i. The odginal approval required the combination of the ~re~ t:lr. ive approaches on the Red Hill Liquor Store and In-N-Out Burger sites into one approach on the Liquor Store site. The combination of these ddve approaches results in safer vehicular movements and greater access controls to Foothill Boulevard. Elimination of these requirements will result in the continuation of unsafe, uncontrolled turning movements, posing a threat to public safety; and ii. The odginal approval required the widening of Foothill Boulevard across the front of the gas station and liquor store sites. This widening created, in effect, a right turn lane for vehicles entedng the subject site. This widening will allow the vehicles to pull out of the travel lanes, thereby creating safer access to the site; and e. The odginal application, together with the attached conditions of approval, complies with the standards of the Development Code. Elimination of the frontage improvements across the Red Hill Liquor Store site will result in a project which does not meet the requirements of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the July 27, 1994, and the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. b. The proposed use does not comply 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 denies the application 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1995. PLANNING C~,/IMISSI~.OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 13Y" I C~~'~ Barke an ATTEST~ ec'~~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 93-46- FLORES September 13, 1995 Page 3 95-39 I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of September 1995, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNI EL, MELCHER' NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY o~onv~o ~s~ 1'~3HS :3BY,k3NIA J J J o o DRAFT DiScuSsiON PURPOSES ONLY MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PETIT 93-46 - FT.OR~S -A re~eet to modify the a~roved eite ~lan and certain condition= of a~roval for a ~rev~ously a~roved gaeetat~onandmini-mar~et ~nthe Cobunity Co~ercial designation (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard S~cific Plan, located at the southeas~ corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN 208-192-06 and 07. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker asked what would happen if th~ Planning Commission took certain actions and the City Council decide~.not to proceed=with condemnation. Mr. Murphy outlined on a map the two existing driveway locations on the liquor store site. He pointed out the proposed improvements with a new driveway constructed. He said if the City Council elected not to condemn the liquor store site, the City might take a lien agreement or cash deposit for future improvements if and when the whole section of Foothill Boulevard could be completed. He said there is concern that doing improvements on the gas station site and providing a taper or temporary curb and gutter could lead to maintenance problems for Caltrans. He said another option would be for the gas station to complete their improvements with a taper and improvements behind the taper could be completed at some future time. He said that would leave the two existing drive approaches on.the liquor store site. He thought there would also be a possibility of closing off one of those driveways because the existing driveways are within the right-of-way. Chairman Barker asked if there had been ~ consideration that any modification approved by the Commission be contingent upon the pursuance of condemnation procedures by the City Council and failure of the Council to enact condemnation would reverse the Planning Commission action. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the Commission could add such a condition. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what would happen if the driveways are left as they currently exist. Mr. Murphy outlined where landscaping would be in place and the access. Commissioner Lumpp asked if the parcels have reciprocal access. Mr. Murphy stated he had seen documents to indicate there is reciprocal access across all three parcels. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that would be the best solution. Commissioner Lumpp questioned if staff had asked the adjacent property owner why he would not grant the right to have their property improved. Mr. Murphy replied the liquor store owner has objections to the proposed location of the drive approach from Foothill Boulevard being on the east side of his property and has requested that it be on the west side of his property. He said he has concerns about his patrons backing out of the parking in front of his store into the drive aisle if the driveway is located on the east side of his property. Chairman Barker asked why the driveway could not be located where the liquor store owner prefers it. Planning Commission Minutes JX/-BB//' " -12- August 23, 19~ ~" ' .......... FUP-POSE:S ONLY M~. Hu~hy ~es~nded the d:~ve~ay Zocat~on ~as de~e~ned based u~n the d~stance f:om the VLneya:d ~venue and ~ooth~ZZ 5ouZevard ~nte=sect~on. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, stated the proposed driveway is 220 feet from the curb return of the intersection. Chairman Barker asked if there is not currently a driveway at the location the liquor store owner would like it to be placed. Mr. James responded there is currently an asphalt d~iveway in that location. Mr. Murphy stated that currently the driveway approach is simply rolled asphalt, not an approach built to City standards. Chairman Barker noted there has been a driveway there for a long time. Commissioner Tolstoy asked why a driveway could not be left there since there is already one in place. Commissioner Melcher thought parking would be reduced if the driveway is allowed to remain on the west side of the liquor store site. He noted that if the driveway is moved to the west side of the liquor store site, the lost parking spaces could not be moved to the east side of the liquor store site because that would obstruct the entrance to the In-N-Out site. He thought that moving the entrance to the In-N-Out further south on the In-N-Out parcel to accommodate moving of the driveway to the west side %f the liquor store site, would also interfere with the existing drive-thru lane and delete parking on the In-N-Out site. Mr. Murphy agreed that in order to accommodate moving the driveway to the west on the liquor store site, parking would be lost and the circulation on the In-N- Out site would be negatively impacted. He said staff has not pursued a scenario of moving the driveway to the west side of the liquor store site because it is felt that will be too close to the intersection. Mr. James said that the City has reduced the minimum distance necessary in certain instances. He stated he had not been personally informed that the liquor store owner wanted the driveway on his west property line. He said the driveway on the south boundary of the property is less than the 200 feet from the intersection, but staff was recommending that it be allowed to go less than the standard 200 feet because it is the best location that can be obtained on the site. Commissioner McNiel felt the originally proposed configuration is the best to serve all three properties. Commissioner Melcher stated he was chagrined that the project is back before the Commission with no effort to address a concern he had raised on several occasions. He asked that the impact of adding a Church's Fried Chicken franchise to the service station be considered. He asked that the Commission consider whether people will be coming to this constricted lot to buy chicken rather than gas. He feared that having people utilize the parking spaces while they wait five to ten minutes for their dinner to be prepared will further congest a site that is already too congested and was only approved because it was felt it was the only way the property could be developed. Planning Commission Minutes -13- August 23, 19!~q i='C2{ D SCUSSiOp,] PURPOSES ONLY Mr. Buller noted that staff had received a letter from the property owner across Vineyard Avenue expressing the opinion that traffic not be allowed to make a left turn when exiting the site on Vineyard Avenue. Duff Murphy, 281 South Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, stated he is the attorney for the applicant. He said Mr. Flores was available to answer any questions the Commission may .have. Art Flores, 3762 Henderson Place, Claremont,'stated the Church's chicken would be available strictly for take-out. ~e said they had!applied for. ~11 the permits and he had complied with all of the City's requests. He askedtfo~ approval of his application. He said the project. has been in process for three years and it has been a difficult application. He also stated that the chicken is prepared on site and kept in a warmer for up to 45 minutes, at which time fresh product is prepared. He said there should usually always be fresh product available for the customers resulting in very fast transactions. Commissioner Melcher asked how many square feet would be devoted to the chicken operation. Mr. Flores said it would be approximately 450 square feet. He indicated what portion of the service station would be devoted to the chicken sales. Commissioner Melcher asked if service station staff would handle the chicken sales. Mr. Flores replied he is the franchisee for Church's Chicken. Commissioner Melcher asked if there are presently any other service station operations in Southern California where this is being done. Mr. Flores said there are several stations with this new concept; one in Murietta with a McDonald's in a Mobil station, a Taco Bell in La Verne, and-several others proposed. Commissioner Lumpp asked for a comparison to purchasing a hot dog at an ARCO mini-mart. Mr. Flores said it should take approximately the same time because the product is already prepared. He said they would only be serving fried chicken, mashed potatoes, and certain types of vegetables and all food would be pre-prepared. Me said the cashier would take the food from the warmer and give it to the purchaser and the purchaser would serve their own drink from the fountain. Commissioner Lumpp asked why the applicant cannot come to a resolution with the adjacent property owner regarding the property improvements. Duff Murphy stated that when the property was sold to the adjacent owner, Mr. Flores thought the issue had been addressed. He said that when the City requested a reciprocal agreement with the adjoining property owner to permit some of the offsite improvements to be constructed, the adjoining property owner (Mr. Sandhu) resisted signing the agreement. He indicated there appears to be a breakdown in communications and a disagreement over what was agreed to when the property was sold. He stated there is clearly reciprocal access across the three properties and Mr. Flores also reserved the driveway easement on Foothill Boulevard in the configuration on the previously approved plan and the plan before the Commission this evening. He said attorneys were not involved in drawing up the buy/sell agreement and the exact limitation of how much land was Planning Commission Minutes -14- August 23, 19~5 DRAFT :rCR DISCUSSION P~JRPO~JES ONLY necessary for dedication on Foothill Boulevard and the delineation of that dedication. He stated that because the requested 15 feet was not specifically delineated, there is a question of how much land Mr. Sandhu is required to dedicate. He reported that Mr. Flores is now not able to obtain that 15 feet and Mr. Flores is willing .to agree to make a good faith effort to acquire that dedication, but requests that the City initiate condemnation proceedings at his expense if he is unable to obtain the dedication. He understood that the City Council, rather than the Planning Commission, would have to initiate the condemnation proceedings. Mr. Murphy did not fe~l the City Council would have the authority to condemn property for'~he proposed landscape ~re~ and stated Mr. Flores would post a cash deposit to cover the cost of the on-site Lmprovements, which would be refunded to Mr. Flores' if he is unable to obtain agreement for the installation of the landscaping. He noted that if the liquor store is developed in the future, the Commission would have the opportunity to further address the landscaping issue. Commissioner McNiel asked if Mr. Sandhu saw the plans prior to the sale transaction. Mr. Flores said that Mr. Sandhu approached him to purchase the property because his master lease was going to expire later this year. He said he had explained his project and shown plans to Mr. Sandhu and they had an agreement that he would cooperate for the completion of the project. Duff Murphy said he did not believe Mr. S~ndhu was present when the Commission previously considered the Conditional use permit, but he thought Mr. Sandhu's wife and daughter were present at the hearing. Mr. Flores said Mr. Sandhu saw the plans on several occasions and was aware of the reciprocal entrance with In-N-Out. Commissioner McNiel asked if a Conditional use permit carries with a property when it is sold if the Conditional use permit covers reciprocal access across the property. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, replied that the reciprocal access agreement has been recorded against the properties and does perpetually bind all three properties. He said that agreement had been reviewed by the City when the map was recorded. Commissioner McNiel asked if the accompanying plans for the Conditional use permit are affected. Mr. Hanson stated Conditional use permit plans also run with the land. Commissioner McNiel asked if the landscaping would then be enforceable. Mr. Hanson replied the owner has changed. He said the project was not for the liquor store and the City can now only hold up the service station project as a means of enforcement. Commissioner Melcher stated he was puzzled that the cash deposit Mr. Flores was being asked to make would revert back to him if he is unable to get Mr. Sandhu to agree to on-site improvements on the liquor store property. Me thought the money should revert to the City because he thought the City will be called upon to solve problems resulting from an underdeveloped parking lot being used for ingress and egress to the service station and he thought the deposit money could help defray any costs the City incurs. Planning Commission Minutes -15- August 23, 199~ 1.~'o Hanson stated the money is for good faith funds for private .improvements, not public .improvements, and the City would not go onto private property to improve a liquor store. He noted that the public improvements will be completed as part of the project. Scott Murphy stated the condition was placed in the resolution in order to enable the applicant to pull a building permit prior to knowing whether or not he would be able to complete the improvements. Commissioner Lumpp asked if Mr. Sandh~-purchased the property before or after the Conditional use permit was approved. Mr. Flores replied Mr. Sandhu purchased the property after the approval. Duff Murphy believed the configuration of Foothill Boulevard had been approved in a configuration similar to what is now proposed, but that was subject to Caltrans approval, and when Caltrans approved the final design approximately three months later, it required an additional 3 feet over what the Planning Commission initially approved. He thought the sale had taken place prior to Caltrans' ultimate decision. Vernon Jolley, 15610 Terraceview Court, Riverside, stated he is an attorney representing Mr. Sandhu. He stated Mr. Sandhu contends he was not shown this map prior to purchase. Me said the real issue does not concern the easement for the landscaping or sidewalks, but instead deals with the driveways which have been there for approximately 30 years and were a major consideration when his client paid over $500,000 for the property. He observed it is their contention that the driveways were specifically discussed and they thought the bargain they were entering into dealt with the gas station using the existing west driveway. He said that Mr. Sandhu had not known that the western driveway would be eliminated and that there would be a common driveway for all three parcels, including In-N-Out. He noted the plans were approved when one person owned both the service station site and the liquor store and that one person could suffer losses from one business to another, but one person no longer owns both parcels. He felt Mr. Sandhu's liquor store will be boxed in by having only one driveway. He noted there are currently no parking stalls along the northern boundary and he felt elimination of the western driveway and putting in parking stalls will not benefit the liquor store, but only the gas station business. He observed that the proposed setup will require flow-through traffic continually through Mr. Sandhu's property. He stated easements were granted with the idea that the western driveway would be most used by the gas station. He thought the fuel tanks are located on the southern portion of the service station site and felt that fuel trucks will enter from Vineyard, cross the liquor store property and exit via the eastern driveway. He felt this would cause increased liability exposure for Mr. Sandhu because of the increased traffic. He said Mr. Sandhu is willing to discuss landscape easements and public improvement setbacks and does not want a condemnation proceeding. He was not sure if In-N-Out is aware of the plan to combine driveways. He said Mr. Sandhu would not have purchased the property if he had known about the proposal to eliminate the western driveway. He asked that the City eliminate the restriction regarding driveways being located within 200 feet of an intersection. He noted that the driveway on Vineyard is less than 200 feet from the intersection. He asked that the City make an exception on Foothill Boulevard ae well. Commissioner McNiel asked if Mr. Sandhu saw the plans prior to purchasing the property. Planning Commission Minutes -16- August 23, 1995 ~--~ ~""~; 'c~'=C~;~4 PURPOSES ONLY Joe Sandhu, 1033 Pomello Drive, Claremont, stated he had not seen the plans until recently when he received a copy from the City. He said he had not seen the plans prior to purchasing the property and that he would not have bought the property if he had known the fuel trucks would be going across his property. He stated that when he went to the City, he was shown plans that had been submitted by a previous developer which showed both driveways being kept and the two properties sharing the western driveway. Commissioner Lumpp questioned why a title report.would not show the approved Conditional use permit .... .. ~ Scott Murphy stated that Conditional use permits are not typically recorded. He said only reciprocal access documents are recorded. He noted that the reciprocal access agreement is very generic and merely states there is reciprocal access across all three parcels without specifying drive approach locations or numbers. Commissioner Lumpp asked if Mr. Sandhu was totally oblivious of the approved Conditional use permit and plans at the time he purchased the property. Mr. Sandhu replied he was aware there would be improvements on Foothill Boulevard and he would end up giving up some property but he was not aware that only one driveway would be used for the service station and his property. He feared there will be traffic conflicts when his patrons back out of his parking spaces in front of his store because they will be backing into the drive aisle for the service station. Commissioner Lumpp asked if Mr. Sandhu was aware he would have to give up some of his property but was unaware there were any other approvals by the City regarding the property. Mr. Sandhu said that was correct. Mr. Jolley said an escrow instruction discusses certain requirements and improvements on Foothill Boulevard stating that the seller will be responsible for improving the property per the City's requirements in order to complete the projec~ on the corner property and the improvements to the subject property will be on the Foothill Boulevard side of the new property and shall consist of putting in sidewalks and off-site work per plans approved by the City and government agencies. He said Mr. Sandhu was therefore aware there would be sidewalks and a widening of the boulevard. He stated there had been discussions about driveways and that it was agreed the west driveway would be used by the service station parcel. He said there were no discussions regarding the elimination of the west driveway and the installation of parking stalls that will only benefit the service station. Commissioner McNiel noted that the escrow instructions mentioned approved plans - of the City and Mr. Sandhu did not seek out the plans. Mr. Jolley stated that because the instructions said the improvements "shall consist," Mr. Sandhu thought the plans had not yet been approved.. Commissioner McNiel noted the instructions also said ~approved by the City,~ which he felt meant the plans were already approved. Mr. Jolley said that "shall" is a future tense. Planning Commission Minutes -17- August 23, 199~ D; ,AFT h.i .n B.r er t .ll on. it did mean that the plans were not already approved. He felt that was something that attorneys and the courts may have to deal with. Mr. Jolley thought the matter could be settled if the City will allow both driveways to remain. He thought the matter of landscaping, sidewalks, and the widening of Foothill Boulevard could be worked out between the property owners. Chairman Barker stated that the normal requirement along Foothill Boulevard is 300 feet and the approved driveway is. already less ehan the-300 ~eet. Commissioner McNiel noted it is a safety consideration. Chairman Barker asked if Mr. Sandhu is opposed to the southern driveway off Vineyard Avenue. Mr. Jolley said it was his understanding that it will be in the location of the present alleyway. He stated Mr. Sandhu is not opposed to that driveway location or the improvements as shown. Diana Flores, 3762 Henderson Place, Claremont, stated they showed the plans to Mr. Sandhu when they first started discussions regarding his purchase of the property. She said they explained the conditions that the City was requiring so that their project could be completed. She said they walked through the parking lot and pointed out that the liquor store s~gn would have to be replaced when the western driveway was closed and the parking'spaces were installed. She commented the escrow instructions include a paragraph that Mr. Sandhu would be responsible for future signs for the liquor store when that sign is removed. Chairman Barker asked if the plan depicted one driveway in the approved location. Mrs. Flores said that was correct. Mr. Flores said they sold the property in good faith at their cost. Mrs. Flores said the approved previous project which had been submitted by Abrams also showed elimination of the west driveway. She said they do not care if the western driveway is eliminated, they just want their project to proceed. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. Commissioner McNiel felt it would be a benefit to the liquor store to have traffic travel across in front of their front door. He thought the project will make the liquor store more attractive. He also thought the parking along Foothill Boulevard will benefit the liquor store as well as the service station. He opposed moving the proposed driveway along Foothill Boulevard to the west because he felt it would be too dangerous to have it closer to the intersection. Commissioner Lumpp stated the objective of the original approval of the Conditional use permit was to better the conditions and improve the health and safety of the area. He was perplexed that Mr. Sandhu was totally oblivious of actions that were going on with regard to the service station approval and that he thought the two driveways would remain when only one driveway was proposed and approved. He noted that testimony had been given that Mr. Sandhu's family was at the earlier Planning Commission hearing. He agreed with Commissioner McNiel that the proposed traffic flow would focus on the front door of the liquor store property and should benefit the store. He thought the project will improve the property and he was amazed that Mr. Sandhu would be unhappy. Planning Commission Minutes -18- August 23, 19~ Chairman Barker asked Commissioner Lumpp to address Mr. Sandhu's attorney's comment that their objective is to have two driveways. Commissioner Lumpp thought that one of the objectives of the original Conditional use permit was to modify the driveway entrances and combine them into one for all three parcels. He said the City Planner advised him that In-N-Out is well aware of the requirement to 'close their driveway and combine it into one driveway to make a safer condition. He did not believe two driveways is an appropriate solution, because he felt one combined driveway' will make Foothill Boulevard Commissioner Tolstoy noted the appl'icant was asking for two things; 1) condemnation, which only the City Council has the authority to do; and 2) elimination of improvements on the liquor store site. He was not ready to eliminate the improvements on the liquor store site until finding out if the City Council is ready to initiate condemnation proceedings. Commissioner Melcher noted that when the project went through the process it was subjected to several rigorous reviews by the Design Review Committee and discussed at great length by the Planning Commission. He felt it is a problem site and the intensity of development now being proposed is too great. He noted that it is nevertheless an approved project. He thought that what had been approved represents the very least level of development acceptable to the City under the circumstances. He stated he was not concerned with the private· property owner's problems. He thought the~conditions of approval should not be changed. He felt that as a Planning Commissioner, his responsibility is to be sure that development is in the best interest of the City and he did not feel it to be in the best interest to leave a less than safe driveway condition or to allow a development to do less than what was intended and live with a blighted appearance of the liquor store for years to come. He said he could not support less than what was previously approved. Chairman Barker questioned if all of the Commissioners felt there should be only one driveway on Foothill Boulevard for the three because that would be the safest condition. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the driveways should be combined or the property should be left the way it is. Commissioner Melcher felt the Commission was not being asked to make a recommendation to the City Council with regard to the condemnation, but was only being called upon to diminish the requirements on the Conditional use permit and he was opposed to doing that. He indicated he was sympathetic to the Flores, but he felt they had made a business deal which resulted in a business problem. He did not feel it is the Commission's responsibility to solve business problems. He thought the Commission is to do the planning for the City and to see that private development best meets the goals of the City. Commissioner Lumpp agreed with Commissioner Melcher that it is the Commission's job to improve the community, not to resolve private property issue~. He thought the conditions approved in July 1994 are in the best interest of the community and protects the health and safety of the community. Commissioner McNiel asked if it is in the best interest of the community that the site remains as it currently exists or if the Commission can alter the conditions to allow development and improvement of the property. He asked what costs would be incurred by the City if condemnation proceedings are undertaken. Planning Commission Minutes -19- August 23, 19~D ~-~ t?..',-,2,..t"', ;'~-~ON ~ RPOSES ONLY Mr. Hanson stated it'Wo~'d--b~a~'e~sl~e endeavor, but the costs would be borne by the developer. Commissioner McNiel felt the options are for the City to initiate condemnation, or the project will probably die. He thought one of the ways to arrive at a solution would be for the City to bring some pressure to bear. He felt the Commission should approve the requested modifications contingent upon condemnation action by the City Council. Commissioner Tolstoy did not want to ~ange any of the conditien~ ~ntil the City Council makes a decision regarding condemnation proceedings. Chairman Barker said the Commission could act to approve the request to modify the Conditional use permit, approve the request contingent upon the City Council's agreeing to condemnation proceedings, or deny the request. He suggested the Commission could recommend that there be no changes and could also recommend that the City Council initiate condemnation procedures in order to allow the originally approved design. Mr. Buller said that if the Commission denies the application to amend the Conditional use permit but recommends that condemnation proceedings be instituted, the City would then be initiating and paying for the condemnation proceedings. Commissioner Melcher observed that the applicant would have the right to appeal to the City Council if the Commission denies the application and the City Council could then also consider the condemnation request. Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Lumpp, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial for Modification to Conditional Use Permit 93-46 for adoption on September 13, 1995. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY - carried , , , , , Planning Commission Minutes -20- August 23, 199~/ Z J A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93-46, A. REQUEST TO MODIFY THE APPROVED SITE PLAN AND CERTAIN CONDITIONS, OF APPROVAL FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED GAS {BTATION AND MINI-MAR!~ET IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN (SUBAREA 2) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND VINEYARD AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 208-192-06. A. Recitals. 1. Art and Diana Flores have filed an application for a modification to Conditional Use Permit No. 93-46, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On July 27, 1994, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 93-46, subject to certain conditions, through adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 94-67. 3. On August 23, 1995, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application and concluded said headng on that date. After receiving all public testimony, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Resolution of Denial. 4. On September 13, 1995, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 95- 39, denying the application. 5. On September 5, 1995, the applicant appealed the Planning Commission's decision within the time limits prescribed by law. 6. On September 20, 1995, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application and continued said headng to October 4, 1995, directing staff to prepare a Resolution approving the application. 7. On October 4, 1995, the City Council concluded the public headng on the application. 8. All legal prerequisites pdor to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council 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 Council dudng the above- referenced public hearing on September 20 and October 4,' 1995, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9346 - FLORES APPEAL Page 2 October 4, 1995 a. The application applies to property located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue with a street frontage of 140 feet along Foothill and 155 feet along Vineyard Avenue and is presently vacant; and b. The property to the north of the subject sit~ iS designated for, commercial uses and is developed with a retail center. The prol:;~rty to the south is designatOll for ~residential uses and is developed with a residential condominjum project. The property to the east is designated for commercial uses and is developed with a fast food restaurant. The property to the west is designated for commercial uses and is vacant; and c. The development of the gas station and mini-market is consistent with the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and the Commercial designation of the General Plan; and d. The application, together with the attached conditions of approval, will comply with the standards of the Development Code; and e. The application maintains the same parking setback along Foothill Boulevard of 40 feet as approved as part of Vadance 88-09. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence ~resented to this Council dudng the above- referenced public hearings and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. c. The. proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. The Negative Declaration was been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, the Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application and issued a Negative Declaration on July 27, 1994. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paregraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Division 1) The applicant shall make a good-faith effort to obtain a right-of-entry agreement to install on-site improvements on the liquor store site (APN: 208-192-07) in accordance with the originally approved site plan, as shown on the attached Exhibit "A." The applicant shall post a cash CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9346 - FLORES APPEAL Page 3 October 4, 1995 2) deposit with the City to cover the cost of the on-site improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. If, after exhausting all reasonable efforts to obtain the agreements determined by the City Planner, the applicant is unable to acquire the property owner's permission to complete the improvements~..the deposit shall be refunded.; .-' The street trees along Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue shall be planted at 30 feet on center consistent with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (FBSP). The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and City Engineer pdor to building permit issuance. 3) The sidewalks along Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue shall extend to the raised planters. That portion of the sidewalk outside of the public right-of-way shall be maintained by the property owner. 4) Decorative light fixtures, benches, potted plants, and trash receptacles shall be provided consistent with the FBSP. The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner pdor to building permit issuance. 5) The canopy fascia lighting shall be ~liminated. The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner pdor to building permit issuance. 6) Architectural details of the project shall be worked out with staff prior to building permit issuance. 7) A comprehensive sign program shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. 8) The parallel parking stall on the west side of the site shall be modified to expand the landscape area on the south end and replace the landscaping on the north end with a painted stdpe. The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. 9) Extensive landscaping shall be provided along the south property line. The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner pdor to building permit issuance. 10) Provisions for the following design features in the trash enclosure shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Planner: a) Architecturally integrated into the design of the project. b) Separate pedestrian access that does not require the opening of the main doors. c) Large enough to accommodate two trash bins. d) ' Roll-up doors. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-46 - FLORES APPEAL Page 4 October 4, 1995 e) Trash bins with counter-weighted lids. f) Architecturally treated overhead shade trellis. g) Chain link screen on the,tOp to prevent trash from blowing ~oUt of the enclosure and designed to be hidden from view. " "· ' 11 ) Graffiti shall be removed wiihin 72 hours. 12) Trash collection shall occur between the hours of 9 a.m. and 10 p.m. only. 13) The entire site shall be kept free from trash and debris at all times, and in no event shall trash and debris remain for more than 24 hours. 14) Signs shall be conveniently posted "No Overnight Parking" at the site entdes and "Employee Parking Only" along the south row of parking. 15) All operations and businesses shall be conducted to comply with the following standards which shall,,be incorporated into the lease agreements of all tenants: a) Noise level - All commercial activities shall not create any noise that would exceed an extedor noise level of 60 dB during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and 65 dB dudng the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. b) Loading and unloading - No person shall cause the loading, unloading, opening, closing, or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or other similar objects between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 aom., unless otherwise specified herein, in a manner which would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area. Engineering Division 1) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunication and electrical, excluding 66 kV lines) on Vineyard Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole south of the south project boundary to the first pole on the north side of Foothill Boulevard. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half of the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development or redevelopment as it occurs on the adjacent parcel to the south or on the opposite side of Vineyard Avenue. 2) An in lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunication and electrical) at the south property line shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The amount shall be the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9346 - FLORES APPEAL Page 5 October 4, 1995 3) Foothill Boulevard: a) An additional 15-foot dedication of right-'of-way shall be required for a total distance of 75 feet as .measured from the street centerline fronting As.Sessor's Parcels Number 208,:. 1 92:06 and 208-192-07. '" b) Full public improvements on the south side fronting Assessors Parcels Number 208-192-06 and 208-192-07 from Vineyard Avenue to the east property line of Assessor's Parcel Number 208-192-07. Provide necessary public improvements fronting Assessors Parcel Number 208-192-08 to the east of the project for transitioning, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Caltrans. c) The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests for street dedication and a construction easement from Assessors Parcel Number 208-192-07 necessary to construct the required public improvements, if he/she sho;Id fail to do so the developer shall, prior to the issuance of a building permit, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the proposed project. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. d) The developer shall be eligible for reimbursement for permanent public improvements installed on the frontage of Assessor's Parcel Number 208-192-07 upon development or redevelopment of that parcel. A request for a reimbursement agreement shall be submitted within the six months following City acceptance of the public improvements. If the developer fails to submit a request for the reimbursement agreement within the 6 month period, all right of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. e) Acquire necessary additional fight-of-way to transition public improvements fronting Assessor's Parcel Number 208-192-08 adjacent to the east of the proposed project. A contribution in lieu of construction for one-half the cost of the median island within Foothill Boulevard, including landscaping and irrigation, shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The value of the median island shall be based on the distance from the centerline of Vineyard Avenue to the eastedy property line of Assessors Parcel Number 208-192-06. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9346 - FLORES APPEAL Page 6 October 4, 1995 g) The parkway activity center shall be constructed per the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan fronting Assessor's Parcels Number 208-192-06 and 208-192-07 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Caltrans. 4) Vineyard Avenue shall b~'Constructed as follows: "' "' 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) a) Full improvements on' the east side from Foothill Boulevard to the south property line with a transition to the south of the project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. b) All improvements shall be constructed with respect to the new centerline of construction as it was determined for the required. improvements of Parcel Map 12596 on the northeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue. c) The parkway activity center shall be constructed per the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. Sidewalk easements shall be provided for as necessary. Modification and relocation, as r~'ecessary, of the traffic signal at the Foothill Boulevard/Vineyard Avenue intersection shall be the responsibility of the developer. The relocation and modification shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Caltrans. "No Parking/Stopping" signs shall be posted along the frontages of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue on Assessor's Parcels Numbers 208-192-06 and 208-192-07. A cash contribution in lieu of construction towards one-fourth the cost of constructing special pavers within the Foothill Boulevard/Vineyard Avenue intersection shall be paid to the City pdor to the issuance of building permits and shall be based on the square footage of the intersection. The developer shall obtain a fight-of-entry for ddveway removal and parking lot reconstruction from the owner of Assessors Parcel Number 208-192-07 pdor to the issuance of building permits. The Foothill Boulevard driveway shall serve as a joint access for Assessor's Parcels Number 208-192-06, 07 and 08. A signed and recorded agreement between the owners of all affected parcels shall be submitted pdor to the issuance of building permits. On Foothill Boulevard, the sidewalk shall be extended to the curb within the bus stop area. The length will be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The band of decorative pavement within the Vineyard Avenue access shall be located behind the public sidewalk. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9346 - FLORES APPEAL Page 7 October 4, 1995 12) A corner cut-off for the right-of-way at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue shall be dedicated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 6. This Council hereby provides notice to Art and Diane Flores that the time within which judicial review of the decision represented by this Resolution must be sought is governed by the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 7. The City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby directed to: (a) certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, return-receipt requested, to Art and Diane Flores at the address identified in City records. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAN DAR D ,-.CON DITIONS PROJECT #: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Those items checked are Conditions of Approval. ,..t,F_.c y APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (~39) 989-1861, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Time Limits 1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of ~F- -- 41, 2. Developme~Design Review shah be approved prior to / / 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted subjed to the approval of Complcdora Datc /__/ / /__ / / The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Fadlities Distrial (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distrial to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the District's proparty upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the Distdct in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developor shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello:-.Roos Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing Distrial prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Melio-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of app~val of the project and prior to lhe fecordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. This condition shall be waived it 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. Prior to mcordation of the final 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 of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days pricrto final mapapproa~alinthecaseofsutx:livisionorpriortois, suance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. B. Site Development v/ I · The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the appmved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, extedor materials and ceiors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Cede regulations, and f=~'~//J-. ~:r.t/-~y~ 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. ,/- Occupancy of the facility shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall's regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency priorto issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.), or prior to final map approval in lhe case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community Plans or Spadfic Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. A detailed on-site lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Sheriff's Department (989-6611 ) pdor to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent proparties. ,/- 8. 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 subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 10. All ground-mounted utility appudenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screeeted through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Completion Date: / / / / / / / /__/ / / / / / / / /.__ Completion Date: 11. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with __/ /.__ the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. v/ . 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 priorto approvaland recordation of the Final Tract Mad a~d. prior to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade andconstruct all trails, including fencing and drainage deviceS, in conjunction with street improvements. 14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping of equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors 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 shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. 16. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof o! 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 shall 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 shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map or issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, except for utility wires and similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.060-G-2. 18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shall 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. rebcmion, 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 An aitemative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units and for heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial deveioprnent shall be supplemented with solar heating. Details shall be included in the building plane and shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. All dwellings shaft have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment, detailing and increased delineation of sudace treatment subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. / / / / / / / / /.__ /__/__ / /.__ 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 permits. v/' 4. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to t.he satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. .... D. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 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 dwe Ilings/units/buildings with open spaces/ plazas/recreational uses. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. 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 pdor to issuance of building permits. E. Landscaping (for publicly maintained landscape arms, refer to Section N.) V/ 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscap- ing in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval priorto the issuance of building. permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barder in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arbodsrs recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting and tdmming methods. A minimum of trees pergross 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.: A minimum of ~ % of trees planted within the project shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-<Jalion tree for every three parking stalls, sufficient to shede 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. Completion Date: / /.__ / / / /.__ / / /~ / / / / / /__ / / / / / /.__ .sc - 10/94 4 / C)..~ 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 lessthan 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this sealion shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in'vedkSal height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appe~irance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or I~rger size shrub per each 100 eq. 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. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continu- ously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is so id and occupied by t he buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those u nits, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 10. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are respen- sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debds and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, deed, 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 requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 12. The final design of the pedmoter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 13. Special landscape features such as mounding, 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 pedrneter of this project area shell be continuously maintained by the developer. 15. All walls shell be provided with decorative treatment. If locmed in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 16. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree apecles. 17. Landscaping and irrigallon shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xedscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Complcdo~ Dat~: / / / / / / / / / /I/ / /~ / / / /.I / / /.~ 5c- lo/94 5 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 pdor to issuance of building permits. 3. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or tewn~omes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division pdor to issuance of building permits. G. Environmental The developor shall provide each prospective 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 developor shall provide each prospedive 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 developor shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, pdor 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 permils. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to beiow45CNEL, the building matedals and construction techniques provided, and ff appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for contormance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. H. Other Agencies 1. Emergency secondary access shall be provided in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Standards. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 26 feet wide at all times dudng construction in accordance 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 protection 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. Completion Date: / /~__ / / / /~ / / / / / /__ / /__ For projects using septic tank facilities, written cedifioation of acceptability, including all supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bemardino County Department of Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits. / / APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 989-1863, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development v/ 1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechani- cal 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 OPclinbnce and applicable handouts. . v/3. v/ Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay doveiopment fees at the established rate. Such fees 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 Structure 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use, area, and fira-rasistiveness of existing buildings. 2. Existing buildings shall be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be dornolished. 3. Existing sewage disposal fadlities shell be removed, filled and/or capped to comply with the Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Building Code. 4. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans submitted for building permit application. K. Grading V/ 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of Calitomia to perform such work. The development is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a Soil Disturbance Permit is required. Please contact San Bemardino County Dapartrnent of Agriculture at (714) 387-2111 for permit application. Documentation of such permit shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance ol rough grading permit. 4, A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check, 5. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved priorto issuance of building permits. Completion Date: / / / / / / / / / /__ / / / L' / /__ / 7 ! o (,.c' 6. As a custom-lot subdivision, the following requirements shall be met: a, Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all on-site drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to final map approval and priorto the issuance of grading permits. b. Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels, are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of grading' and 6uilding permits:; ; c. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatedng and protecting the subdivided properties, are to he installed pdor to issuance of building permits for construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested. d, Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building and grading permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis.) All slope banks in excess of 5 feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native grasses or planted with ground cover for erosion control upon completion of grading or some other alternative method of erosion control shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Building Official. In addition a permanent irrigation system shall be provided. This requirement does net release the applioantJdeveloper fror13 compliance with the slope planting requirements of Section 17,08.040 1 ol the Development Code, Completion Date: / / / / / /__ APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DNISION, (909) 989-1862, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L. Dedication and Vehicular AcceSs ,/ Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for nen-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentalive map. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): ~¢l'lg:V~ total feet on total feet on total feet on total feet on 3. An irrevocable offer of dedication for for all private streets or drives. -foot wide roadway easement shall be made 4. Non-vehicular access shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets: / /__ sc- 10/94 Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensudng access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or pdor to the issuance of building permits, where ne map is involved. 8 6. Private drainage easements forcross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 7. The final map shall clearly delineate a I O-foot minimum building restriction area on the neighboring lot adjoining the zero lot line wall and contain the following language: "l/We hereby dedicate to the City of Rancho Cucamonga the fight to prohibit the construction of (residential) buildings (or other structures) within those areas designated on the map as building restriction areas." A maintenance agreement shall also be granted from each lot to the adjacent I;>t thr~u'gh the CC&R's. ,/ 8. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the final map. 9. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City wherever they encroach onto pdvate property. 10. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. 11. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improve ,ments, and if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Cede Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a pertion of these costs shall be in the form ol a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developers cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. M. Street Improvements Y" 1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, ddve approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. ,/ 2. A minimum of 26- foot wide pavement, within a 40 -foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half-section streets. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Completion Date: / /.__ / /.__ / /.__ / /__ / ./.__ / / / / /.__ STREET NAME CURB l A.C. Si)iS- DRIVE STREET ~rREET COMM MEDIAN BIK~ GUTTER PVI/T WALK APP~. LIC1HYS TREES TRAL ISLANO TRAIL v- v' Y v" v" v/ ('~..) v' v' v" y' e,' v" OTHER ,5C- 10/94 9 I ,/ Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and oredays will be determined dudng plan check. (c) ff so marked, side- Improvement plans and construction: .... ,. ~ a. Street improvement plans including street trees and street lights, prepared by a ~egis- tered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted'to and aiDproved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or pdvate street improve- ments, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to any work being pedormed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic, street name signing, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. de Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed on any new construction or reconstruction of major, secondary or collector streets which intersect with other major, secondary or collector streets for future traffic signals. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1) All pull boxes shall be No. 6 unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pullrope. e. Wheel chair ramps shall be installed on all four comers of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. A street closure permit may be required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family lots. h, Handicap access ramp design shall be as spedfiad by the City Engineer. i. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. 5. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior. to any work being performed on the pri- vate streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City 'Engineers Office in addition to any other permits required. · 6. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. Completion Date: / /__ I / I I I /__ I I I I I.__/__ I /.__ so- 1ol94 10 v" 7. Intersection line of site designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. a. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Walls, signs, and slopes shall be located outside the lines of sight. Landscaping and other obstructions within the lines of sight shall be approved by the City Engineer. b. Local residential street intersections shall have their ~oticeability improved, usually by moving the 2 +/- closest street tree s on each side away from the sireet and placed. in a street tree easemont. : 8. A permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any work within the following right-of-way: 9. All public improvements on the following streets shall be oporatlonally complete pdor to the issuance of building permits: Completion*Date: ! /.~. / / / / N. Public Maintenance Arm 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscape parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails, or other areas.are required to be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: / / ,/ 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/orform the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be beme by the developer. 3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. 4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautfficatlon Master Plan: / / /__ · /' O. Drainage 1. and Flood Control The project (or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, flood protection measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. It shall be the developers responsibility to have the currenl FIRM Zone designation removed from the project area. The developers engineer shall prepare all necessary repods, plans, and hydmlogic/hydraullo calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Lelter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. / / /__/__ 4. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its right-of-way. 5. Trees are pmhibitod within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public .storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. 6. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a sump catch basin on the public street. P. Utilities / ,/ 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, ~vater, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV(all Underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2.The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 3.Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bemardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Completion Date: / /.__ / / /.__ t' / / / Q. General Requirements and Approvals 1. The separate parcels contained within the projed beundades shall be legally combined into one parcel prior to issuance of building permits. 2. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, for: / / / / 3, Prior to approval of the final map a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District among the newly created parcels. e Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondan/Regional, and Master Plan Drainage Fees shall be paid prior to final map approval or pdor to building permit issuance it no map is involved. 5. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right-of-way: / / / / / / 6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the Law Enforcement Community Fadlities District shag be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Formation costs shell be bome by the Developer. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be, com- pleted beyond the phase boundahes to assure secondan/access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map. / APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 987-6405, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. sc- zo/94 12 / /__ v/ 2. Fire flow requirement shall be z//'~rl~ gallons per minute. ._A. v/B. v/c. A previous fire flow, conducted gpm available at 20 psi. revealed A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additlonal'fi~e flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by rife builder/developer and witnessed ~y~he fire department personnel after cons, truCtion and prior to occupancy. Fire hydrants are required. All required public oron-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and olDerable priorto delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided priorto water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any, will be determined by this department. Fire District standards require a 6" dser with a 4" and a 2-1/2" outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safely Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction,evidence shall be submitted to the Fire District that temporary water supply for fire protedlon is available, pending completion of required fire protection system. 6. Hydrant reflective markere (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. 7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: I//Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. Other / /__ / / / / / l__ / / / / ,/ Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking, plastics manufacudhg, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled stock, etc. Contact Fire Safety Division to determine it sprinkler system is adequate for proposed operations. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of sprinkler system. 9. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. Calitomia Code Regulations T~tle 24. NFPA 101. ,' Other / / / sc- ~0/94 10. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire Districts fire lane standards, as noted: All roadways. Other 13 / /__ ,/ v' 10194 11. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. 12. Emergency secondary access shall be provided in accordance with Fire District standards. 13. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 26 feet wide at all times dudng construction in accordance with Fire District requirements. 14. All trees planted in any median shall be kept trimmed a minimdm ot 14'6" from ground up so as not to impede fire apparatus. '-- --- '. ~ 15. A building directory shall be required, as notbd below: Lighted director within 20 feet of main entrance(s). Standard Directory in main lobby. Other 16. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordedng information. 17. GatecL/restricted entry(s) requ ire installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire Safely Division for specific details and ordering information. 18. A tenant use letter shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. 19. Plan check fees in the amount of $ An additional $ (¢~. -'- Prior to water plan approval. I'/' Prior to final plan approval. ~ have been paid. shall be paid: Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, Ixxx:l systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consuitanf reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. 20. Special permits may be required, depending on intended use, as noted below: v/A. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described below, which in the judgemenf of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions hazardous to life or proparty. B. Storage of readily combustible material. C. Places of assembly (except churches, schools and other non-profit organizations) D. Bowling alley and pin refinishing. E. Cellulose Nitrate plastic (Pyroxylin). F. Combustible fibers storage and handling exceeding 100 cubic feet. __ G. Garages Motor vehicle repair (H-4) H. Lumber yards (over 100,000 board feet). 14 / /__ / /.__ / / / / / /__ / / t / / / / /.__ M. N. O. V/p. V/Q. R. V/S. T. v/U. V. W. Tim rebuilding plants. Auto wrecking yards. Junk or waste material handling plants. Flammable finishes. Spraying or dipping operations, spray booths, dip tanIs, electrostatic apparatus, automobile undercoating, powder coating and. organic peroxides and dual com- penent coatings (per spray booth). -~ Magnesium (mare tha 10 pounds per day). ~ Oil burning equipment operations. Ovens (industrial baking and drying). Mechanical refrigeration (over 20 pounts of refrigerant). Compressed gases (store, handle or use exceeding 100 cubic feet). Cryogenic fluids (storage, handling or use). Dust-producing processes and equipment. Flammable and combustible liquids (stora.,ge, handling or use). High piled combustible stock. Liquified petroleum gas (store, handle, transpefi or use more than 120 gallons). Matches (more than 60 Matchman's gross). Welding and cutting operations: to conduct welding and/or cutting operations in any occupancy. sc- ~o/94 15 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJEGT: October 4, 1995 Mayor and Members of the Cit~;'Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Brad Buller, City Planner Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - A request to change the land use designation from Medium (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Community Commercial for approximately 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Drive and Church Street on the north, and the future Orchard Avenue on the west and to High (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 19.2 acres bounded b.y the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider Commercial, Medium (8-14 dwelling units per acre), and Medium-High (14-24 .dwelling units per acre) APN: 0227-151-18 and 24 ENVIRONMI=NTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - A request to change the land use district from "MOC" (Mixed Use Office/Commercial/Residential) to "CC" (Community Commercial) for approximately 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Drive and Church Street on the north, and the future Orchard Avenue on the west and to "H" (High 24-30 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 19.2 acres bounded by the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider "C" (Commercial), "M" (Medium, 8-14 dwelling units per acre), and "MH" (Medium-High, 14-24 .dwelling units per acre). The changes include amending portions of the text, and various tables and graphic exhibits of the community plan to implement design features of the proposed land use designations. APN: 0227-151-18 and 24 RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the subject applications through the adoption of the attached Resolution and Ordinance. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT GPA 95-01B & TVCPA 95-01 October 4, 1995 Page 2 BACKGROUND This recommendation has been forwarded to the City council without an environmental assessment recommendation because of the 'incompleteness of the traffic imp'act.analysis (TIA) which forms a significant part of the environmental documentation. As of the writing of this report, staff believes that the conclusions of the TIA i'eport will enable the City Council to determine that no significant impacts will result from the land use changes. If so, the City Council may consider the adoption of a Negative Declaration pdor to its action on the land use applications. Please refer to the Staff Report dated September 13, 1995 for specifics of the environmental assessment and project analysis. The Planning Commission determined that the residential portion of the site should be designated Medium High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) rather than High (24-30 dwelling units per acre) as requested by the applicant, Of primary concern in this determination was the realization that the site's zoning presently calls for Medium (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) designations and that a High designation would result in a residential project too dense for the immediate area. Respe~ Bra Buller City Planner BB:AW/jf.s Attachments: Planning Commission Reports of September 13 and 27, 1995 Resolution of Approval - General Plan Amendment Ordinance Adopting Term Vista Community Plan Amendment and Text Changes CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF RF, PORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: September 27, 1995 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to change the land use designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Community Commercial for 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Ddve and future Church Street on the north, and the future Orchard Avenue on the west and to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 19.2 acres bounded by the future Poplar Ddve and future Church Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider Commercial, Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre), and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) - APN: 0227-151-18 and 24. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Related Files: Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01, Conditional Use Permit 95-11, and Parcel Map 14022. (Continued from September 13, 1995) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01 - LEWIS DEVFLOPMENT CO. - A request to change the land use distdct from "MOC" (Mixed Use Office/Commercial/Residential) to "CC" (Community Commercial) for 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Ddve and future Church Street on the north, and the future Orchard Avenue on the west and to "H" (High, 24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 19.2 acres of land bounded by the future Poplar Ddve and future Church Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider "C" (Commercial), "M" (Medium, 8-14 dwelling units per acre), and MH (Medium High, 14-24 dwelling units per acre). The changes include amending portions of the text and vadous tables and graphic exhibits of the community plan to implement design features of the proposed land use designations - APN: 0227-151-18 and 24. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Related Files: General Plan Amendment 95-01 B, Conditional Use Permit 95-11, and Parcel Map 14022. (Continued from September 13, 1995) This item was continued from the September 13, 1995, meeting due to the incompleteness of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) which forms a significant part of the environmental documentation. As of the writing of this report, the final TIA has been submitted for review but its evaluation has not been completed at SANBAG. If SANBAG's completed review becomes available pdor to the meeting, staff will give an oral presentation as to the findings and recommendations of the TIA. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 95-01B/'I'VCPA 95-01 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 27, 1995 Page 2 Staff anticipates the study may identify only minor impacts that should allow for the issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. Alternatively, if the information is not available, then the Planning Commission may forward all applications and t,heir environmental assessmeqt. s to ,the City Council for initial and final determinations. Please refer to the staff report of September 13, 1995, for specifics of the project analysis. A proposed revision to the Terra Vista Community Plan text regarding buffering between Residential and Commercial uses is included on Pages IV-12 and IV-13 attached to the proposed Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolutions, thereby recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 95-01B and Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 upon the City Council's determination of a Negative Declaration for environmental impacts. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:AW:gs Attachments: September 13, 1995, Staff Report Resolution Recommending Approval of GPA 95-01B Resolution Recommending Approval of TVCPA 95-01 (with draf~ Ordinance and Text Changes) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA _ STAFF RF, PORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: September 13, 1995 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01B ~ LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to change the land use designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Community Commercial for 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, and the future Orchard Avenue on the west and to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 19.2 acres bounded by the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider Commercial, Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling u~'its per acre), and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) APN: 0227-151-18 and 24. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to change the land use district from "MOC" (Mixed Use Office/Commercial/Residential) to "CC" (Community Commercial) for 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, and the future Orchard Avenue on the west and to "H" (High, 24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 19.2 acres bounded by the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider "C" (Commercial), "M" (Medium, 8-14 dwelling units per acre), and "MH" (Medium-High, 14-24 .dwelling units per acre). The changes include amending portions of the text, and various tables and graphic exhibits of the community plan to implement design features of the proposed land use designations. APN: 0227- 151-18 and 24. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant/Terra Vista Planned Community - Low Medium (LM), Medium (M) and High (H) South - Vacant (future Masi Center)/Industrial Area Specific Plan - Industrial Park East Single family neighborhood, vacant/Low (L), Foothill Blvd. Specific Plan - Office West - Partially developed with medical offices, vacant/Terra Vista Planned Community - Hospital & Related Facilities, Office (MHO) _J PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 13, 1995 Page 2 General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) North Low Medium Residential (4-8 ~Welling units per acre) South Industrial Park East Office, Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) West Commercial, Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) Site Characteristics: The site encompasses approximately 66.5 acres of undeveloped land bounded on the south by Foothill Boulevard and on the east by Rochester Avenue. The northern and western boundaries are contiguous undeveloped land. The site is generally level and slopes from north to south at approximately 2 percent. The soil conditions are stable and the site is covered with grasses, shrubs and mature Eucalyptus trees along Foothill Boulevard. A small earthen swale exists along Foothill Boulevard and another crosses the site west to east collecting site runoff and depositing it in a basin at the southeast comer of the property. There are no structures on the site or any apparent use taking place. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff has reviewed the Initial Study, Part I and completed the Environmental Checklist, Part II of the Initial Study, and has found no significant adverse environmental impacts will occur because of the proposed land use amendments. Potential impacts, determined not to be significant, include the following: TraffiC: A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was developed by the applicant's traffic consultant and reviewed by the City's Traffic Section and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) for conformity with the County Congestion Management Plan. SANBAG completed the initial review and has forwarded correction comments to the applicant's traffic consultant. As of the wdting of this report, the amended study was not available for SAN BAG and City review. Staff recommendation on the environmental analysis cannot, therefore, be offered until the study is completed and approved by City Traffic and SANBAG staff. Air Quality: The land use change was expected to increase the air emissions (from vehicle trips) due to development of the site for total retail activities above that expected from the approved office/retail mix. However, because of a high emissions baseline resulting from automobile sales, as currently authorized on part of the site, the proposed retail commercial center, without auto sales, actually lowers the anticipated emission levels. LAND USE ANALYSIS: Appropriateness of the existing designation: There is little existing commercial development in this area of Foothill Boulevard. The MOC (Mixed uses, commercial, office, residential) designation calls for the combination of listed uses with office to the western portion, multiple family residential in the northern part, and commercial activities in the eastern portion. These uses relate well, as provided for in the Terra Vista Community Plan text, to the remainder of the plan area and generally to the surrounding areas outside the planned community. Staff foresees no inherent problems with allowing the existing land use designation to remain as currently adopted. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 13, 1995 Page 3 Need and appropriateness of additional retail commercial uses in the area and within the specific site: The request to significantly increase the amount of commercial development on the site over what is presently authorized (MOC) requires a general plan amendment. Locationally, with the approved Masi p,.r. oject across the 'street, the..vac.ant commercial designated land east of Rochester, and the relative location to the nearby residential development, staff concurs with the applicant that the site is generally well suited for the intended uses. The General Plan provides, "Community shopping centers shall be encouraged to provide residents with a greater range of services and merchandise than found in the neighborhood commercial level." Although the proposed commercial portion, at 47 acres, is under the limit of the area (50 acres) criterion established in the General Plan for community commercial, the proposed center does exceed the suggested upper building area limitation of 300,000 square feet for community commercial sites. However, the anticipated uses at this location conform with those listed in the community commercial provisions. As with General Plan Amendment 94-01A, which was approved last year at the northeast corner of Foothill and Spruce, the question of the need for additional commercial land in the City has been addressed. The market and ~conomic study provided for General Plan Amendment 94-01A included the analysis of this site and the recommendations for the Foothill/Spruce site were applicable to the Foothill/Rochester site. The conclusions of that report provided sufficient information to recommend additional commercial acreage as requested. The applicant requested that the study, as it did include the site in question, be applied to the review market analysis questions in this application. Since the study is over a year old, staff requested that it be revisited by the consultant and updated as appropriate to reflect the most current trends. An updated evaluation was submitted that contained the more current economic data (1992, 1994, & 1995 figures) from SCAG, US Government, and private data vendors. This new review provides the following information: Because of the Ontado Mills Centers significantly greater market area, it is believed "that at most 10 percent of the facility's space -- or 200,000 square feet -- will be effective within Rancho Cucamonga itself." In the Terra Vista area the vacancy rate has increased to 7.7 percent (up from 4.9 per cent in 1994) for the DSTM (department stores, apparel, furniture, home furnishing, appliance, etc.) square footage. "Much of this vacant space... was either leased or in the lease negotiation stage although it appeared vacant." The consultant states that the increased vacancy rate merely reflects the "new additions of space" in the Terra Vista area. In addition, the consultant had a strong belief that the Kmart site will be recycled to a non retail commercial use (possibly governmental) and therefore its vacancy need not be viewed as added commercial space inventory. Staff believes that retail use for the building is still more viable that other use alternatives. o Based on trade area population and expenditure per capita, the DSTM and Home Center expenditure potentials are expected to continue to grow significantly (60 percent for DSTM - 2010). Updated data indicates that the net leakage in the DSTM category PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 13, 1995 Page 4 has been reduced to about $184.5 ($191.6 million -1994) million and increased in the Home Centers to about $55 million ($11,9 million -1994) from the 1994 report. Much of this change can be attributed to significantly' updated, information. Staff does believe that the trade area population estimate of 280,000 is high and theref/Dre .might present a brighter economic picture that re, ally exists. ~ The study concludes "The population growth taking place in the Rancho Cucamonga area has produced a market which is increasingly regional in scale." Further, the "current evaluation shows on a very conservative basis the continuing need for significant additional DSTM and Home Center Space in Rancho Cucamonga." This updated analysis is consistent with the economic study provided for the "Best Buy" application (General Plan Amendment 94-01A) last year which essentially verities the current need for additional commercial development in the community. Appropriateness of high density residential uses in the area and within the specific site: The current Terra Vista Community Plan allows for 342 to 589 units on 28.7 acres on this site. An estimate of 460 to 576 units is provided for the remaining portion of the site not allocated for the shopping center. VVhile the density increases, the total unit count will remain essentially the same or be reduced because of less land allocated for residential use. The residential complex, when proposed, will undoubtedly exhibit a more compact and dense urban design than would be expected under the present land use allowances. A High density area is provided to the northwest of the site that would provides for continuation of density and design characteristics in the immediate area (see Exhibit "B"). D. Alternate land uses: Commercial (General) - This designation, provides a wide range of use activities odented to provide more local commercial services. While no size limitation is listed in the General Plan, those areas so designated to date are not of the size and scope of the proposed retail center. Medium (8-14 dwelling units/acre) - At the medium designation the site could only be authorized 130 to 270 units, a substantial decrease in the current provisions. A significantly less dense and more open designwould result. Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units/acre) - This designation would allow for a range between 231 and 463 units. Again a less dense and more open design would result when compared to the proposed land use density. With existing and proposed community plan development standards, both Medium and Medium-High projects could be designed to be compatible with the proposed shopping center. COMMUNITY PI AN TEXT CHANGFS: Because of the changes in the land use, vadous graphics and text need to be modified as they pertain to the site· Many of the changes proposed are based on the discussions and directions from previous Commission°s design workshops on the Conditional Use Permit. The proposed graphics and text changes are summarized below: PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 13, 1995 Page 5 Add buffering criteria between residential and commercial uses in Chapter III as shown in Exhibit "A" of the attached proposed Ordinance. Modify Figure IV-23, Greenway System [~esign Features, where the Type :E trail is moved to the north side of Poplar Drive and a Type B trail is proposed along Rochester Avenue between Poplar Drive and Foothill Boulevard· Add design guidelines, consisting of text and graphics, in areas of Site Planning and Pedestrian Network, Landscape Treatment, and Foothill Boulevard Centers Concept as shown in Exhibit "A" of the attached proposed Ordinance. Various graphics changes to reflect the change in land use as shown in Exhibit "A" of the attached proposed Ordinance. Corrections to the text, as provided, should include the following: All of the Gateways indicated on Church S..treet, with the exceptions of those on Haven and Rochester, should be moved to Foothill Boulevard on the respective cross streets. (Figure IV-64, Page IV-49). These locations are consistent with the current Terra Vista Community Plan dated April 1990 and including the most recently approved Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment dated July 1994. The Gateways description on Page IV-50 should remain essentially as written in the current-Terra Vista Community Plan. Type II gateways should only be referenced for Church Street at Haven and at Rochester (as indicated on Figure IV-64). Figure 111-16 and Figure 111-17 should be amended to include regional as well as Citywide bus stop locations. FACTS FOR FINDING: Based on the facts and conclusions listed above, staff believes the Planning Commission can make the following facts for findings regarding these applications: The properties are suitable for the uses allowed in the proposed land use and development district designation in terms of access and size, as evidenced by the site's location within the boundaries of an existing mixed use community plan, on Foothill Boulevard, the City's primary commercial arterial, and in near proximity to existing and proposed commercial recreation development; and, The proposed amendments would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the findings and conclusions of the Initial Environmental Study that indicated that no significant impacts would be expected as a result of this land use change; and, Co The proposed amendments are in conformance with the General Plan and Development Code due to the site's capacity to promote the goals and objectives for community commercial development. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 13, 1995 Page 6 CORRESPONDENCE: These items have been advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and.notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. ,, RECOMMENDATION: Because of the lack of i~ completed traffic impact analysis, staff cannot, at this time, recommend approval of a Negative Declaration for these applications. Therefore, it is recommended that the items be continued to the next regularly schedule meeting, 1995, in anticipation of the completion of the environmental analysis. If the TIA is satisfactorily completed, indicating no significant traffic impacts, then the issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. With such a finding, staff could recommend approval of these applications through adoption of the attached Resolutions. Respec y submitted Br ~ Pla BB:AW:gs Attachments: Exhibit "A" General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit "B" Terra Vista Community Plan Land Use Map Exhibit "C" Research Update; Market Support For New Retail Space Resol~Jtion Recommending Approval of GPA 95-01B Resolution Recommending Approval of TVCPA 95-01 (with draft Ordinance and Text Changes) COMMERCIAL ~!:i:¥y-I COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL i · t NEIGHBORHOOD COMM. ~ REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ~:::ss:.':q OFFICE E:E:E:E:E:E!EiE:] LOW 2-4DU's/AC LOW- MEDIUM 4-8 DU°s/AC MEDIUM 8-~4 DU's/AC MEDIUM-HIGH 14-24DU's/AC HIGH 24-30 DU's/AC INDUSTRIAL 7////~ INDUSTRIAL PARK r,'///////j GENERAL INDUSTRIAL crrY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVISION ITEM: GPA 95-01B and TVCPA 95-01 TITLE: General Plan Land Use Map EXHIBIT:"A" SCALE realty aevelopment research, inc. 542 s. dearborn street, chicago. illinois 60605-4508 312/663-5'1 '1 '~ fax: 3'121663-9'136 RECEIVED June 22, 1995 Mr. Gregory N. Hoxworth "- Executive Director of Commercial Development Lewis Homes Management Corp. 1156 N. Mountain Ave. Upland, California 91785 JUN 2 7 1995 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division Re: Research Update; Market Support For New Retail Space; Rancho Cucamonga, California Dear Mr. Hoxworth: Pursuant with your recent request, our group has reviewed our prior analyses regarding the extent of market support in Rancho Cucamonga {prepared in 1993 and 1994) to develop a current indication of the market area's need for additional retail space. This new evaluation has become necessary as a result of your rezoning request for the site of the planned Terra Vista Promenade at the N/W/C of Rochester Avenue and Foothill Boulevard in Rancho Cucamonga. This center will be of the strip type and include an estimated 450,000 square feet of leasable area. Key tenants will include Kinart and Home Depot. A major portion of the space will be of the DSTM * type while the Home Depot outlet will primarily merchandise home center goods. This evaluation has, accordingly, been focused on these two key retail categories. The present evaluation included the preparation of updated population projection data based on 1994 and 1995 information supplied by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and 1994 income estimates by census tract from Cladtas/NPDC -- a private data vendor. This data afforded an indication of the present level of retail demand in the market area. Similarly, development of additional retail space since the last studies were completed -- including the planned Ontado Mills shopping facility '- were also factored into the updated retail supply calculations. Background. RDR's most recent Rancho Cucamonga market evaluation was completed in March, 1994. The evaluation indicated that Rancho Cucamonga's retail facilities continued to be not able to meet the retail demands created by the community's relatively rapid rate of population growth. This growth pace is reflected by a projected population gain of nearly 55,000 persons in the immediate Rancho Cucarnonga vicinity alone during the ten year time frame between 1990 and 2000, The last evaluation indicated that locally generated expenditure potential e.xceeded sales in all key retail categories with especially significant variances in those categories oriented to comparison shopping, In particular, the important DSTM category lost *DSTM includes department and discount store facilities; catalog outlets; apparel and accessories operators; furniture, home furnishings, floor coverings, and appliance stores; and miscellaneous shopping goods (toy, hobby, card, gift, book, office supply, sporting good, luggage, jewelry, and the like) facilities. Exhibit "C" realty development research, inc. Mr. Gregory N. Hoxworth Page 2 June 22, 1995 a verysignificant 65% ofits expenditure potentialto locations outside theimmediate Rancho Cucamonga area. DSTM facilities are especially significant to shopping center facilities because of the presence of stores of this type in all types of shopping facilities -- including both the Ontario Mills complex and the subject Terra Vista Promenade center currently planned by Lewis Homes. The lesser representation of DSTM facilities in Rancho Cucamonga and the consequent loss of a significant portion of the locally generated DSTM expenditure potential results in a variety of costs to the community including a lower level of collected real estate taxes, greater required driving distances for the purchase of goods and services, and lower levels of local employment. It is noted that the type of employment most often connected with retail facilities typically augments a family's income and/or provides work for younger persons who are often underemployed. For these reasons, an adequate retail space inventory is important as an enhancer of the quality of life in a community. Changes in the Rancho Cucamonga Market Area's Competitive Alignment, Since the last evaluation a number of developments have occurred or been announced which will impact the area's competitive make-up. The most significant event since the last report was completed was the announcement of the planned opening of the near 2.0 million square foot Ontario Mills project to be situated at the N/W/C of the intersection of 1-15 and 1-10 in Ontario, This promotional enclosed mall facility has been granted all its necessary public approvals and is scheduled to begin operation in late 1996. The market area for a Mills-type center is geographically very extensive -- far larger than the immediate Rancho Cucamonga area. On this basis, it is believed that at most 10% of the facility's space -- or 200,000 square feet -- will be effective within Rancho Cucamonga itself, The market area also includes 145,000 square feet of space connected with the new Tetra Vista Square facility - the property evaluated in RDR's last study of this market. If additions to other centers in Rancho Cucamonga are accounted for, including Central Park Plaza and Tetra Vista Town Center, a total of 185,000 square feet has been added to the space inventory since the last study was completed. Approximately 100,000 square feet of space, moreover, are planned to be added to these existing centers. It is noted that this area does not include pad space which is most often geared to restaurant and automotive users. The only other known change in the area's retail alignment is the planned relocation of a Kinart outlet from Haven Avenue south of Foothill to the property under cbnsideration in this evaluation. The existing Kinart space will probably be utilized for a non-retail use based on its proximity to an area of governmental and office use. Thus, only about 30,000 square feet of new space will be added to the space inventory, Thus, an additional estimated 330,000 square feet are planned in the near future including the Ontario Mills and the incremental Kinart space outlined above. See Table 1 for details, q realty development research, inc. Mr. Gregory N. Hoxworth. Page 3 June 22, 1995 As a result of the recent addition of new space to existing facilities, the level of vacancy has increased by about 20,000 square feet since' our-last evaluation. This change has resulted in a somewhat higher vacancy~percentage -- 7.7% at the IXesen~c time versus about 4.9% in the last evaluation. The current level is still relatively low 'and when the newness of the recently built space is. taken into account, it is a very acceptable level since much of it will be absorbed in the near term future. Table I provides further details regarding the above discussed vacancy changes. Rancho Cucamonga Trade Area Definition and Population Trend, The Rancho Cucamonga trade area is made up of a Pdmary zone which is roughly corerruinous with the City of Rancho Cucamonga as well as a Secondary zone which includes primarily the Fontana area to the east of Rancho Cucamonga and I-15. The attached map highlights the Rancho Cucamonga trade area definition. The latest SCAG population estimates and projections indicate that the defined trade area has a 1995 population of somewhat less than 280,000 persons. By the year 2000 this level is expected to increase to just under: 315,000. Further, these levels are projected to increase to about 356,000 and neady 400,000 in 2005 and 2010, respectively. Thus, during the fifteen year planning pedod, a trade area increase of about 120,000 persons can be anticipated, Population gain in the Primary zone will also be significant. 1995 population is nearly 200,000. These levels are expected to increase to about 225,000, 258,000, and 292,000, respectively. Of the total population increase, over 90,000 persons will reside in the Primary zone. While these levels of increase are substantial, they, nevertheless, represent a small decline from the projections used in our earlier assessments, Table 2 provides detail regarding the ul~dated population projections. Future Trade Area Expenditure Potential, Expenditure potential is an expression that represents the total number of dollars available within an area for various store types, It is the product of trade area population and the expenditure per capita in particular study years. The level of expenditure per capita represents a portion of per capita income based on historical spending patterns in particular regions of the U,S, Table 3 outlines the updated expenditure potential indications in the Primary zone for all the store categories - including the important DSTM and Home Center categories - in the 1995 to 2010 study period. These estimates are expressed in 1994 constant dollars which eliminate any future inflation which may occur. RDR has evaluated only the Primary zone since the expenditure potential in this zone most directly relates to Rancho Cucamonga's retail inventory, As shown, DSTM and Home Center expenditure potential will grow rapidly in the Primary zone during the study period with the former increasing from needy $398,0 million in 1995 to about $632.0 million in 2010 while the latter will increase from about $79.0 million to over $125.0 million, respectively. The gain in DSTM expenditure potential is especially impressive with an indicated increase of about $234 million or close to 60%. q realty aevelopment research, inc. Mr. Gregory N. Hoxworth Page 4 June 22, 1995 1992 DSTM Expenditure Potential and Update of 1992 DSTM Sales Based on U.S. Census of Retail Trade. Since the 1992 U.S. Census of Retail Trade was not available at the time of RDR's research in 1994~,this now available information was incorporated in this study to afford a more definitive indication of the true level of sales' in Rancho Cucamonga. Table 4 provides a comparison of the 1987 and 1992 U.S. Censuses of Retail Trade with state sales tax information. The trend in the growth of sales tax revenues was utilized in our prior study to update the 1987 sales data according to the U.S. Census. Comparing the prior estimates with the actual census data indicates that the actual sales pattern varied by store type. For example, in the DSTM category actual sales exceeded the RDR estimate by somewhat more than $10.0 million with nearly $167.0 million recorded in the census. Conversely in the home improvement category, RDR's estimate substantially exceeded actual sales -- nearly $50.0 million versus about $15.0 million, respectively. Accordingly, in these two important retail categories net leakage -- on the basis of the Primary zone alone-- was reduced in the former to about $184.5 million and increased in the latter to about $55.0 million. 1992 Expenditure Potential Leakage Assuming the Addition of New Space. RDR has updated the current indication of expenditure potential leakage in the Primary zone alone in the key DSTM and home center retail categories. Since no home center space was added during this time, RDR has made the assumption that all of the new space which was added since 1992 was of the DSTM type. This evaluation is, accordingly, extremely conservative since only the Primary zone is considered in the calculations and secondly all the new space has been considered to be of the DSTM type. If the new square footage which is now in place is accounted for in the 1992 base year normally associated with this type of space - assuming it produces the average level of sales productivity of $200 per square foot, new DSTM sales of about $37.0 million are yielded. Thus, total 1992 DSTM sales would have been about $204.0 million with the inclusion of this space. Contrasting this level against the 1992 sales potential of $351.3 million· indicates that DSTM expenditure potential leakage would have been in excess of $148.2 million. While this level is lower than the near $290.0 million indicated in RDR's earlier evaluation, it is neverthelesS still a very significant level of expenditure potential leakage. If the trade area's Secondary zone is also included, the level of expenditure potential loss is considerably higher. Table 6 provides details regarding the above calculations. Home Center expenditure potential leakage was actually considerably higher in 1992. At the same time. the census indicated that sales in stores of this type actually declined between 1987 and 1992 with a level of about $14.7 million produced in the latter year. · This level of expenditure potential has been recalculated on the basis of the revised population projections from SCAG and lower levels of income indicated by Claritas/NPOC. realty development research, inc. Mr. Gregory N. Hoxworth Page 5 June 22, 1995 When contrasted with the level of expenditure potential in 1992, a leakage of about $55.0 million is indicated -- a level in excess of ~8%'of expenditure potential. See Table 4 for additional detail ..... Overall, the 1992 U.S. Census of Retail Trade data in conjunction with the inclusion of new space built since our last evaluation clearly substantiates that a significant loss of expenditure potential continues to take place in the trade area -- in particular, from the Primary zone -- in spite of these changes. In the next section, RDR has updated the Primary zone expenditure potential projections on the basis of the most recent population and income data. In addition, sales have been further adjusted to reflect space planned in the future as well as sales growth. Accordingly, a more accurate indication of future expenditure potential loss is provided. Future Expenditure Potential Leakage Indication for DSTM and Home Center Facilities. While sales in all the store categories will no doubt increase, growth in the DSTM and home center groupings will be constrained by the capacity limits of the existing space inventory if no additional space is added. Sales levels in the DSTM and Home Center categories have been increased at 4% per annum compounded between 1992 and 1995 to yield essentially inflation adjusted sales. Accordingly, as shown in Tables 7 and 8, sales increase in the latter year to about $228.5 million and $16.5 million, respectively. Finally, 1995 sales have been adjusted to include space planned to be added to the space inventory. Again RDR has made the conservative assumption that all of this space will be of the DSTM type and will produce an average level of productivity per square foot of $250. It is believed that a higher productivity level is appropriate for this square footage given the higher sales productivities associated with Mills-type facilities. As outlined above, there is about 100,000 square feet of new space planned at Rancho Cucamonga's existing centers which when combined with the portion of space related to Ontario Mills estimated to be effective in Rancho Cucamonga and incremental Kmart space yields a total planned area of 330,000 square feet. Applying the $250 per square foot productivity level to the planned square footage yields an additional $82.5 million in DSTM sales. Thus, total adjusted 1995 DSTM sales in Rancho Cucamonga are estimated at nearly $311.0 million. Table 7 highlights details of the above calculations. When the levels of expenditure potential in the Primary zone of the trade area are contrasted with the updated sales indications, it is clear that the level of expenditure potential loss will grow quickly over the study period. By the year 2000 the loss of DSTM expenditure potential out of the Priman/trade area will total well over $152.0 million in 1994 constant dollars while the Home Center leakage will be about $75.0 million. By 2010 these levels of leakage increase further to over $321.0 million and about $109.0 million, respectively. realty development research, inc. Mr. Gregory N. Hoxworth Page 6 June 22, 1995 Conclusion. The population growth taking place in,,the Rancho Cucamonga aretJ~as produced a market which is increasingly regional in scale. Thus, a growing variety of 'new retailers are considering locations in this area., Furthermore, RDR's current evaluation shows on a very conservative basis the continuing need for significant additional DSTM and Home Center space in Rancho Cucamonga. The subject Terra Vista Promenade is especially well situated to meet a significant portion of the unmet market. In particular, its Home Depot and Kinart outlets will provide especially appropriate store formats to address this growing market. Sincerely, REALTY DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH, INC. P i au G. Vogel. CRE President \ Art. Via Fax (909) 949-6740 and UPS Next Day RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, TRADE AREA r;,. Arlingfo4 Mtn. & Rancho Cucamonga, California Realty Development Research, Inc. E] City of Rancho Cucamonga Table 1 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER VACANCY/NEW AND PLANNED SQUARE FOOTAGE 1994 Current In-place GLA In-place GLA Vacancy Central Park Plaza 66,000 89,0~0' 12.4~ Terra Vista Village 135,000 135,000 7.4~ Terra Vista Town Center 504,000 521,000'* 6.4~ Terra Vista Square 145,000*** Total 705,000 890,000 7.7~ Space Available 11,000 10,000 33,000 54,000 Total new space added: Total space planned: Total additional space: 185,000 S.F. 96,400 S.F. 281,400 S.F. * Additional 10,000 S.F. planned plus pads. ** Additional 41,400 S.F. planned. *** 45,000 S.F. additional planned plus pads. Table 2 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA TREND IN TRADE AREA POPULATION. 1980-2010 Zone 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Primary 93,400 ' 170,900 =197,700 224,500 258,050 291,600 Secondary 37,900 72,400 80,900 89,400 98,050 106,700 Total 131,300 243,300 278,600 313,900 356,100 398,300 1980-1998 Change 1990-2000 Change 2000-2010 Change Zone # t t ~ # ~ Primary 77,500 83.0~ 53,600 31.~ 67,100 29.!Pm Secondary 34,500 91.0) 17,000 23.5~ 17,300 19.4~ Total 112,000 85.3~ 70,600 29.0~ 84,400 26.99m Source: Lewis Homes Management Corp.; 1980 and 1990 U.S. Censusess of Population; Southern California Association of Goverrnents (SCAG) - 1994; Claritas/NPDC Inc.; Realty Oevelopment Research, Inc., Jbne, 1995. realty development rese;,~h,~c. Table 3 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA PRIMARY ZONE SALES POTENTIAL. 1995-2010 (000s) 1995 2000 2005 2010 Type of Business Potentia] Potential Potential Potential DSTH $397,708 $463,027 $545,663 $6~2,167 Building materials $78,856 $91,807 ~'[08,192 $125,343 Food stores $325,709 $379,203 *$446,879 $517,723 Automotive $305,138 $355,253 $418,655 $485,024 Gasoline service $123,426 $143,698 $169,344 $196,190 Eating & drinking $147,426 $171,639 $202,272 $234,338 Drug stores $61,713 $71,849 $84,672 $08,095 Hfscellaneous retail $109,712 $127,732 $150,528 $174,391 Total retail $1,549,688 $1,804,208 $2,126,205 $2,483,271 Table 4 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA PRIMARY ZONE 1992 SALES LEAKAGE (O00s) 1992 1992 Net Export Type of Business Potential Soles # t DSTH $351,339 $166,839 $184,500 52.5t Building materials $69,662 $14,648 $55,014 79.~ Food stores $287,735 $156,431 $131,304 45.69~ Automotive $269,562 $14,087 $255,475 g4.&t Gasoline service $109,036 $35,344 $73,692 67.6t Eating & drinking $130,238 $76,735 $53,503 41.1t Drug stores $54,518 $31,546 $22,972 42.1t Hlscellaneous retail $96,921 $29,110 $67,811 70.0~ Total retail $1,369,011 $655,925 $713,086 52.1~ Source: 1992 Census of Retail Trade; Claritas/NPOC Inc.: Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG); Realty Oevelopment Research, Inc., June, 1995. realty development research, inc. Table 5 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA U.S. CENSUS OF RETAIL TRADE VS. TAXABLE SALES (000s) 1987 1992 1987 Taxable (Census- 1992 Taxable Census Sales Tax Sales)' Census Sales DSTM $47,968 $48,485 "' ($517) $166,839 Building materials $33,193 $20,715 $12.477 $14,648 $29,007 General merchandise * $19,438 $21,341 ... $96,263 $815,515 Food $90,310 $50,069 $40,241 $156,431 $81,276 Auto dealers $12,632 $14,299 ($1,667) $14,087 $13,363 Apparel/Accesortes * $9,039 $8,706 $333 $17,880 $16,540 Furniture/Appliances * $7,349 $3,471 $3,878 $14,701 $5,484 Nisc. * $11,849 $19,674 ($7,825) $29,110 $61,665 Gasoline $21,910 $23,357 ($1,447) $35,344 $35,347 Drug $13,475 $8,371 $5,104 $31,540 $16,535 Eating & drinking $52,524 $49,079 $3,445 $76,735 $73,620 (Census- Tax Sales) $10,693 ($14,360) $9,748 $75,155 $724 $1,340 $9,217 ($32,555) ($3) $15,011 $3,115 TOtal $272,011 $214,375 $57,636 $495,629 $485,294 $90,334 * 1997 figures represent Rancho Cucamonga only while th(OSTN total has been multiplied by the appropriate factor in order to estimate the Primary zone's sales. Table 6 1992 RANCHO CUCAMONGA DSTM-SALES WITH NEW SPACE ACCOUNTED FOR AT $200 PER SQUARE FOOT (000s) 1992 OSTN Sales $166,839 New space: 85,000 square feet e $200 PSF $37,000 Total adjusted 1992 sales: $203,089 1992 OSTN expenditure potential: Adjusted 1992 DSTN sales leakage $351,339 $148,250 Source: 1992 Census of Retail Trade; Realty Development Research, Inc., June, 1995. realty development research, inc. Table 7 ESTIMATED 1995 RANCHO CUCAMONGA DSTM SALES (000s) Adjusted 1992 DSTR sales $203,089 Estimated 1995 OSTM sales (1992 sales increased @ 4~ per annum) $228,448 Addition of sales at planned space: 330,000 square feet e $250 PSF $82,500 Total adjusted 1995 DSTN sales $310,940 Table 8 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA '~ ESTIMATED DSTM AND HOME CENTER SALES IN 1995 CONTRASTED WITH PRIMARY ZONE EXPENDITURE POTENTIAL. 1995-2010 Sales Expenditure Potential (000s) 1995 1995 2000 2005 2010 DSTN $310,940* $397,708 $463,027 $545.663 $632,167 Home Center ~16,477 $78,856 $91,807 $108,192 $125,343 Sales/ExoendtturePotcmttal Difference OSTN $86,708 $152,087 $234,723 $321,227 Hune Center $62,379 $75,330 $91,715 $108,866 Note: Source: Total adjusted 1995 DSTN sales Expenditure potential expressed in 1994 constant dollars. 1992 Census of Retail Trade; Realty Oevelopment Research, Inc., June, 1995. realty development research, inc. realty development research, inc. 542 s. dearborn street, chicago, illinois 60605-4508 3 '12/663-5 '1 '~ ~ fax: 3 '12/663-9 ~ 36 August 15, 1995 Mr. Alan Warren, AICP Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Re: Questions Regarding Research Update; Market Support For New Retail Space; Rancho Cucamonga, California Dear Mr. Warren: Mr. Gary Luque of Lewis Homes Management Corp. forwarded a copy of your recent memorandum and asked that I address your questions directly to expedite the review process. Our organization prepared the report document which evaluated the extent of the market available for the shopping center facility planned to be developed by Lewis Homes in Rancho Cucamonga. I apologize about the difficulty you encountered in reviewing our report. Unfortunately it had to be prepared quickly and appropriate detailing obviously suffered. I believe this memorandum and attachments will better detail the issues with which you have concern. Each of your concerns has been reviewed in the order outlined in your memorandum. 1. Retail Space Built in Rancho Cucamonga Since Last Market Review and Planned New Space. An important purpose of the research connected with this update was to account for space built since completion of our last review of the market in 1994. This step allows a more accurate indication of the sales requirements of the currently existing space inventory. Data in this report reflected the year 1993 -- the last full year which was available in 1994. As you know the 1993 to 1995 period was at the tail end of a national recession -- one more deeply experienced in southern California. These recessionan/conditions negatively impacted the amount of new retail space added to the retail inventory during this period nationally, in California, and in Rancho Cucamonga. Due to the focus of development in the Terra Vista area in eastern Rancho Cucamonga, RDR made the assumption in this most recent evaluation that retail development activity was also oriented to this portion of the community -- especially given the market's recessionan/condition. Our group, however, has again revisited this issue since receiving your memorandum. On the basis of discussions with knowledgeable persons in the area's retail brokerage community, it realty development research, inc. Mr. Alan Warren, AICP Page 2 August 15, 1995 was determined that an additional 80~000 square feet of DSTM s~sac~ L.in excess of that previously indicated -- was added to the marketplace since 1993. Accordingly, RDR's current review of the Rancho Cucamonga area indicates that approximately 265,000 square feet of new DSTM space, instead of the 185,000 square feet indicated in our memorandum of June 22, was built in the Rancho Cucamonga area since 1993. A major portion of this space is represented by the recently completed Tetra Vista Square -- the subject of RDR's last evaluation. This change has been incorporated in the space demand calculations outlined below. I apologize about your problems with Table 1: it should have been clearer. I have attached a revised Table I to this memorandum that more clearly presents information regarding' new square footage, planned square footage and changes in vacancy. Essentially new square footage built since ~993 and indicated in the table represents the difference between that indicated as operative by a 1993 Grubb & Ellis market survey (used in our 1994 report) and that indicated as operative at the present time. This figure -- 265,000 square feet -- is shown in the third column from the left in the first part of revised Table 1. Table 1 should have also shown planned new square footage and this has, accordingly, been included in revised Table 1 in a new section at the bottom. The planned new DSTM square footage either in or effective in the Rancho Cucarnonga market area totals heady 330,000 square feet as outlined in the table. New square footage planned in Rancho Cucamonga market area is again oriented to the growing Terra Vista area or its immediate vicinity. Vacant Space. Your comments regarding the treatment of vacancy in our report are correct. Discussion about the general level of retail vacancy in Rancho Cucamonga was not included in this report. It should have been. Nevertheless, RDR's research did include conversations with knowledgeable persons vie-a-vie the general level of vacancy in Rancho Cucamonga's retail centers. This information was designed to update the comprehensive inventory of space vacant throughout Rancho Cucamonga as well as in the Terra Vista community which was included in our 1994 study -- a copy of which should be in your files. This latter inventory was prepared as part of the above mentioned Grubb & Ellis market survey. To briefly recapitulate, the survey indicated, firstly, that Rancho Cucamonga's retail vacancy rate compared very favorably with other communities in the Inland Empire, and secondly, that the vacancy rate of those centers in the Terra Vista area were very much in line with those in the rest of the community. Terra Vista's vacancy rate was 4.9% while neighborhood and specialty/promotional centers elsewhere in the community had a combined 4.7% rate. Separately realty development research, inc. Mr. Alan Warren, AICP Page 3 August 15~ 1995 neighborhood centers had a 5.8% rate while specialty/promotional"cen~ers had a 3.8 % rate. Our recent conversations with retail brokerage professionals indicated that vacancy in the community overall has increased somewhat since the 1994 report was prepared. Nevertheless, much of this vacant space was related to Terra Vista Square. This space was either leased or in the lease negotiation stage although it appeared vacant. Accordingly, this perspective corroborates the appropriateness of our focus on changes which have occurred in the Terra Vista area. It is the area which has consistently experienced nearly all the net new additions of space. 2 and 3. Table Reference. The report should have referred to Table 5 rather than Table 4. Original Table 5 does provide the comparison between the 1987 and 1992 years. Original Table 4 is also included. It is also noted that Table 6 has been adjusted to reflect space added between 1993 and 1995. Revised Table 6 is attached. 4. Missing Tables. Tables 7 and 8 were supplied to Lewis Homes. They are attached in revised form to account for the new square footage above noted. 5. Multipliers. Attached New Table 3 provides the household and per capita income levels related to the Primary and Secondary zones of the trade area for the various years in the study period. Future years are expressed in 1994 constant dollars with only an annual increment of 0.5% included to reflect real increases in income. Also indicated, in New Table 4 are the percentages of per capita income utilized do develop per capita expenditures for various types of retail stores. Multiplying the resulting per capita expenditures for each retail store type by the zonal population (see Original Table 2) in each respective study year yields the related level of sales potential. 6. Population Estimation. The attached diagram superimposes the boundaries of Rancho Cucamonga on the defined trade area. The underlying census tracts are also shown. It should be apparent that a considerable amount of populated area has been included in the trade area which lies outside the city itself. 7. Potential Commercial Re-Use of Krnart Building. The report stated that a very strong probability exists that the existing Kinart store will be recycled into another non-retail commercial use. It is this consultant's opinion that retail is not the highest and best use at this location. The proximity to a governmental center does not necessarily mean demand for additional public sector space as stated in your memorandum. It can also relate to realty development research, inc. Mr. Alan Warren, AICP Page 4 August 15, 1995 demand for a variety of private sect~ activities -- especially profe~Sien~l .services -- which tend to locate in the vicinity Of a governmental complex. I hope that this letter clarifies the various questions you outlined in your memorandum of July 24. Please feel free to give me a call if there are any other questions or comments. Sincerely, REALTY DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH, INC. p2~'~o~CRE President PGV:hs ATT. Via Fax (909)987-6499 CC Mr. Robert McClendon -- Lewis Homes Management Corp. Mr. Greg Hoxworth -- Lewis Homes Management Corp. Via Fax (909)949-6740 Revised Table 1 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER VACANCY/NEW AND PLANNED SQUARE FOOTAGE Increased 1994 Current Square In-place GLA [n-Olace GLA Footaqe Central Park Plaza 66,000 89,000*. 23,000 Current lgg4 Current Space 1994 Space Vacancy Available Vacancy Available 12.4t 11,000 0.0~ ... 7.aJm 10,000 7.0~ 9,500 6.4~ 33,000 5.0~ 25,000 N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.7~ 54,000 4.91 34,500 Terra Vista Village 135,000 135,000 Terra Vista Town Center 504,000 521,000'* 17,000 Terra Vista Square ... 145,000'" 145,000 Other various additions ... 80~000 80,000 Total 705,000 890,000 265,000 Planned new square footage Terra Vista Com~nity (above indicated) 96,400 Ontario Mills (space effective in trade area) 200,000 Kmart relocation (net nee space) 30,000 Total 326,400 * Additional 10,000 S.F. planned plus pads. ** Additional 41,400 S.F. planned. *** 45,000 S.F. additional planned plus pads. Originial Table 2 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA TREND IN TRADE AREA POPULATION. 1980-2010 Zone 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Primary 93,400 170,900 197,700 224,500 258,050 291,600 Secondary 37,900 72,400 80,900 89,400 98,050 106,700 Total 131,300 243,300 278,600 313,900 356,100 398,300 1980-1990 Change 1990-2000 Change 2000-2010 Change Zone Primary 77,500 83.0t 53,600 31.4~ 67,100 29.9t Secondary 34,500 91.0~ 17,000 23.5~ 17,300 19.4~ Total 112,000 85.3~ 70,500 29.0~ 84,400 26.9t Source= Leeis Homes Ranagement Corp.; lg80 and 1990 U.S. Censuses of Population; Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) - 1994; Claritas/NPOC [nc.; Realty Development Research, Inc., June and August, 1995. realty development research, inc. New Table 3 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA FORECASTED TRADE AREA INCOME USING A 0.5% GROWTH RATE PER YEAR 1994 1995 1996 1998 2000 2005 2010 AHHI* AHHI AHHI AHHI AHHI AHHI AHH[ Prima~y trade area $51,903 $52,163 $52,423 $52,949 $53,480 Secondary trade area $39,586 $39,784 $39,983 $40,384 $40,789 $41,818 $42,874 Total Trade Area $47,998 $48,238 $48,479 $48,965 $49,456 $50,705 ' $51,985 1994 1995 1996 1998 2000 2005 2010 PCHI** PCHI PCHI PCHZ PCHI PCHI PCHI Primary trade area $17,256 $17,342 $17,429 $17,604 $17,780 $18,229 $18,689 Secondary trade area $11,827 $11,886 $11,948 $12,065 $12,186 $12,494 $12,809 Total Trade Area $15,407 * $15,484 $15,561 $15,717 $15,875 $16,276 $16,687 New Table 4 ~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA PERCENTAGE OF PER CAPITA HOUSEHOLD INCOME USED FOR EXPENDITURE POTENTIAL Type of Business % of PCH[ DSTIq 11.6t Building materials 2.3t Food stores 9.5~ Automotive 8.99~ Gasoline service 3.69~ Eating & drinking 4.39~ Drug stores 1.8~ MIscellaneous retail 3.21 Total retail 45.2t * Average household income. ** Per capita household tnccam. Source: 1980 ar~l 1990 Censuses of Population; Claritas/NPOC Znc.; Realty Develol~nent Research, [nc., August, 1995. realty development research, inc. Original Table 5 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA U.S. CENSUS OF RETAIL TRADE VS. TAXABLE SALES (000s) 1987 1992 1987 Taxable (Census- 1992 Taxable Census Sales Tax Sales). Census Sales DSTN $47,968 $48,485 "' ($517) $166,839 $i~6,~4~ Building materials $33,193 $20,715 $12,477 $14,648 $29,007 General merchandise * $19,438 $21,341 ... $96,263 $86,515 Food $g0,310 $50,069 $40,241 $156,431 $81,276 Auto dealers $12,632 $14,299 {$1,667) $14,687 $13,363 Apparel/Accesories * $9,039 $8,706 $333 $17,880 $16,540 Furniture/Appliances * $7,349 $3,471 $3,878 $14,701 $5,484 Misc.* $11,849 $19,674 {$7,825) $29,110 $61,665 Gasoline $21,910 $23,357 {$1,447) $35,344 $35,347 Drug $13,475 $8,371 $5,104 $31,546 $16,535 Eating& drinking $52,524 $49,079 $3,445 $76,735 $73,620 {Census- Tax Sales) · $10,693 ($14,360) $9,748 $75,155 $724 $1,340 $9,217 ($32,555) ($3) $15,011 $3,115 Total $272,011 $214,375 $57,636 $495,629 $405,294 $90,334 * 1987 figures represent Rancho Cucamonga only while th~OSTMtotai has been multiplied by the appropriate factor in order to estimate the Primary zone's sales. Original Table 4 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA PRIMARY ZONE 1992 SALES LEAKAGE (000s) 1992 1992 Type of Business Potential Sales DSTM $351,339 $166,839 Buildingmeterials $69,662 $~4,648 Food stores $287,735 $156,431 Automotive $269,562 $14,087 Gasoline service $109,036 $35,344 Eating & drinking $130,238 $76,735 Drug stores $54,518 $31,546 Miscellaneous retail $96,921 ~29,110 Total retail $1,369,011 $655,925 Net Export $184,500 52.R $55,014 79.) $131,304 45.6) $255,475 94.81 $73,692 67.61 $53,503 41.11 $22,972 42.1t ~67m811 70.0~ $713,086 52.1~ Source: 1992 Census of Retail Trade= 1980 and 1990 Censuses of Population; Claritas/NPDC Inc.; Realty Development Research, Inc., June, 1995. realty development research, inc. Revised Table 6 1992 RANCHO CUCAMONGA DSTM SALES WITH NEW SPACE ACCOUNTED FOR AT $200 PER SQUARE FOOT (000s) 1992 DSTM Sales $166,839 DSTtt space constructed in 1993: 140,000 square feet e $200 PSF $28,000 New DSTN space: 265,000 square feet e $200 PSF Total adjusted 1992 sales: $53,000 $247,839' 1992 DSTH expenditure petenttal: $351,339'* Adjusted 1992 DSTH sales leakage $103,500 * Adjustment has not been made for sales from the Secondary trade area and from outside the trade area. ** Primary trade area. Revised Table 7 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ESTIMATED 1995 DSTM SALES (000s) Adjusted 1992 DSTH sales Estimated 1995 DSTN sales (1992 sales increased e 4~ per annom) $219,839 $279,582 Addition of sales at planned space: 330,000 square feet e $250 PSF $82,500 Total adjusted 1995 DSTN sales $361,882* * Adustment has not been made for sales framthe Secondary trade area and from outside the trade area. Revised Table 8 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ESTIMATED DSTM AND HOME CENTER SALES IN 1995 CONTRASTED WITH PRIMARY 7ONE EXPENDITURE POTENTIAL. 1995-9010 -DSTN Sales" Expenditure Potential (O00s) 1995 1995 2000 2005 2010 DSTN $325,694** $397,708 $463,027 $545,663 $632,167 Hme Center $16,477 $78,856 $91,807 $I08,192 $125,343 Sales/Exo. Potential Olffm DSTN $72,014 $137,333 $219,969 $306,684 Ham Center $62,379 $75,330 $91,715 $108,866 * Sales have bee increased by4~ per annamco~.__ be.t~eea 1992 and 1995. *" Sales have been adjusted by a cnoservattve 10~ factor to account for sales fram the Secondary trade area and from outside the trade area. Source: 1992 Census of Retail Trade; Realty Development Research, Inc., August, 1995. realty development research, inc. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVES GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01B TO CHANGE THE LAND USE MAP FROM.MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER AC.P,E) TO COMMUNITY COMMER.CIAL FOR APPROXIMATELY 47.3 ACRES OF LAND AND TO MEDIUM RIGH RESIDENTIAL ( 14-24 DWELLING U N ITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 19.2 ACRES OF LAND BOUNDED BY FOOTHILL BOULEVARD ON THE SOUTH, ROCHESTER AVENUE ON THE EAST, THE FUTURE POPLAR DRIVE AND FUTURE CHURCH STREET ON THE NORTH, AND THE FUTURE ORCHARD AVENUE ON THE WEST, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 0227-151-18 AND 24. A. Recitals. 1. Lewis Development Company has filed an application for General Plan Amendment No. 95-01B as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On September 13, and continued to September 27, 1995, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and recommended the approval of the application by the adoption of Resolution-No. 95-43. 3. On October 4, 1995, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites pdor to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the above- referenced public headng on October 4, 1995, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 66.5 acres of land, basically a triangular configuration, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Rochester Avenue and the future Orchard Avenue, south of the future Poplar Ddve and future Church Street and is presently vacant and undeveloped. Said property is currently designated as Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre); and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Low Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) and is vacant. The property to the west is designated Commercial and CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. GPA 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 2 Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and is vacant. The property to the east is designated Office and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with a single family neighborhood and is partially vacant. The property .to the south is designated Industrial Park and is primarily undeveloped. c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and d. This amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the above- referenced public headng and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed distdct in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included with the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council dudng the public headng, CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. GPA 95-01B - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 3 the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth .in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves General Plan Amendment No. 95-01B. 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ORDINANCE NO. _,~ .~ 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 95-01 TO CHANGE THE LAND USE MAP FROM "MIXED USE, OFFICE, COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL" TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FOR APPROXIMATELY 47.3 ACRES OF LANDAND TO MEDIUM HIGH RESIDENTIAL (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 19.2 ACRES'OF LAND BOUNDED BY FOOTHILL BOULEVARD ON THE SOUTH, ROCHESTER AVENUE ON THE EAST, THE FUTURE POPLAR DRIVE AND FUTURE CHURCH STREET ON THE NORTH, AND THE FUTURE ORCHARD AVENUE ON THE WEST, AND TO MAKE CHANGES TO PORTIONS OF THE TEXT AND GRAPHIC EXHIBITS OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN TO IMPLEMENT DESIGN FEATURES OF THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS - APN: 0227-151-18 AND 24. A. Recitals. 1. On September 13, and continued to September 27, 1995, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headrig with respect to the above- referenced Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment. Following the conclusion of said public headng on September 13, 1995, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 95-44, thereby recommending that the City Council adopt Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment No. 95-01. 2. On October 4, 1995, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng and concluded said headng pdor to its adoption of this Ordinance 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ordains as follows: SECTION 1: This Council hereby specifies and finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of the Ordinance are true and correct. SECTION 9: Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all wdtten and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. The Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. TVCPA 95-01 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 2 b. Based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follow'S: In considering the record ~'s ~ Whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council dudng the public headng, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. SECTION 3: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council finds as follows: a. The Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public headng held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommended approval of the Community Plan land use and text amendment hereinafter described to the City Council. This City Council has held a public headng in the time and manner prescdbe~d by law and duly heard and considered said recommendation. b. The Community 'Plan land use and text amendment are consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c. The Community Plan land use and text amendment are consistent with the Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. d. The Community Plan land use and text amendment will have no significant environmental impact, as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. SECTION 4: The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby approves Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 as described in the title and included in Exhibits "A" and "B" of this Ordinance. SECTION 5: Within 60 days of City Council approval, a revised Terra Vista Community Plan, incorporating the changes required shall be submitted to the City Planner. A total of 25 bound copies of the plan shall be submitted for distribution to the City Council, the City Clerk, the Planning Commission, and staff. In addition, one unbound odginal copy, and one executable copy on a 3.5 computer diskette in a format acceptable to the City, shall be submitted. SECTION 6: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontado, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. 0 Z 0 u)0 U,I Exhibit "A" ~ E '; ~ m ~ w 0~ w e~ _~wew -- . mcc~c · _o~ ~. ~ ~ c ~ w c~ > w._ w o c > c c= c ~ ';: w '; w o m w w w .~ ~ ~._u mE ~._ oo' · - c c ~ w ~ ~ E ~ w ~ i E ~ -~ '~ ~:...~ w 3 w w ~ m~ o'~C c ~ o' u 6 ' Zo ~:Ee w =w woo . ~._ . ~ c ~m m m ~ m m ~ ~ m o~ 5 w 3 "= o= w . c w '~ ._j i'3AV N3XII'IlR i .__ill _1 III III III 'gAV UalSaHOOH Ill__ s _1 LU 0 LU ill '=JAY N':aAVHI F _1 u. Q. 0 ao U4 144 ~: o Z w n- Ill ':9AV U:a,I.S:gH::)OU Ill ill U u Z E · LU ), m- .__~ ,'3AV N3)II"IqlVl ~ - ____ III I I I- 0 0 .'qA~ z ']AV N]AVI"I~ -~ mm o :Z LLI~ OQ · IA'V UIAilH :~-~5 ,r u,J ,__111 III 'qAV UqlSqHOOMIIL__ I- ~ ! CITY OF KANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 4, 1995 Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager -,. Brad Buller, City Planner Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - The proposed development of an integrated shopping center totaling 495,736 square feet on 47.33 acres of land with proposed phase one consisting of a 132,065 square foot Home Depot home improvement center in the Mixed Use (Commercial, Office, Residential) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18 and 24. Related Files: General Plan Amendment 95-01 B, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 and Tentative Parcel Map 14022. (The Planning Commission recommends issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project). RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit 95-11 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions and issue a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. BACKGROUND This recommendation was forwarded to the City Council without an environmental assessment recommendation because of the incompleteness of the traffic impact analysis (TIA) which forms a significant part of the environmental documentation. As of the writing of the report, staff believes that the conclusions of the TIA report will enable the City Council to determine that no significant impacts will result from the land use changes. If so, the City Council may consider the adoption of a Negative Declaration prior to its action of the land use applications. The attached Planning Commission Staff Reports dated September 13 and 27, 1995 analyze this project in detail. ~~;pe u~ City Planner BB:SH:mlg Attachment: Exhibit "A" - Planning Commission Staff Reports Dated September 13 and 27, 1995 Resolution of Approval with Conditions _j /S7 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 95-11 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED SHOPPING CENTER TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 495,736 SQUARE FEET ON 47.33 ACRES OF LAND WITH PROPOSED PHASE ONE CONSISTING ~).F A 132,065 SQUARE FOOT HOME DEPOT HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER IN THE MIXED USE (OFFICE, COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT OF THE TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ROCHESTER AVENUE AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-151-18 AND 24. A Recitals. 1. Lewis Development Company has filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit No. 95-11, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On September 13, and continued to September 27, 1995, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and recommended the approval of this application by the adoption of Resolution No. 95-45. 3. On October 4, 1995, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B, Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public headng on October 4, 1995, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue with a Foothill Boulevard frontage of 2,080 feet and a maximum lot depth of 1,190 feet and is presently unimproved; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is vacant, the property to the south consists of primarily vacant land and an existing building most recently used as a church, the property to the east is single family residential and vacant, and the property to the west is vacant; and c. The property is currently zoned MOC (Mixed Use-Office, Commercial, Residential) and related amendments to the Terra Vista Community Plan and General Plan have been filed to change the zoning of the shopping center site to CC (Community Commercial); and CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 2 d. The application contemplates the development of a commercial/retail shopping center with Phase One development consisting specifically of a Home Depot home improvement center with required on and off-site improvements; and · e. The application contemplate~the development of a pedes~'~:ian ~'otivity center at the comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue with Phase One development, consistent with the requirements of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed use is in accordance with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. The Negative Declaration has been prepared in 'compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said .Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. Based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council dudng the public headng, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council 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: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 3 Planning Division 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Approval of Conditional Use Permit 95~11 is granted subject to the approval of General Plan Amendment 95-01B and Te.r..ra ,V, ista Community Plan Amendmen{'95-01. ' 7) All back sides of the enlarged storefront entrance features for all tenants and buildings shall be treated architecturally identical to the exposed front sides, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Additional enriched pavement shall be provided across vehicular ddve aisles at key pedestrian crossing locations subject to review and approval of the City Planner pdor to the issuance of building permits. Enlarged landscape planter areas, per the conceptual landscape plan (approximately the size of two parking stalls), shall be provided in the parking areas throughout the project, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Berming, low walls, dense hedgerc~ws of evergreen shrubs, or any combination thereof, shall be provided to sufficiently screen all parking areas from public view of perimeter streets, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. The detailed landscape/irrigation plans shall be in compliance with this requirement. There shall be provisions for the following design features in the trash enclosures to the satisfaction of the City Planner. (The exact location for the trash enclosures shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits): a) Architecturally integrated into the design of this project; b) Separate pedestrian access that does not require opening the main doom; c) Large enough to accommodate two trash bins; d) Trash bins with counter weighted lids; e) Architecturally treated overhead shade trellis; and Chain link screen on top to prevent trash from blowing out of the enclosure. The screen shall be designed to be hidden from view. The satellite dish shown on the roof of the Home Depot on the conceptual plans shall be completely screened from view by the roof parapet system, to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO CUP 95-11 -LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 4 8) 9) 10) Approval is for Phase One development only, as shown on the proposed Phasing Plan. The remainder of the Master Plan is shown in concept only. A modified Conditional Use ,permit application shall be submitted for review and approval for any modifications to, the conceptually approved Mast~ Plan. " A Uniform Sign Program for ti~e shopping center, including provisions for major tenants, other in-line tenants and pad buildings, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of building permits. The standards shall be designed to be compatible with the architectural style of the shopping center. The size of the sign copy shall be visually balanced and proportionate to the buildings and the architectural style. Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. A uniform hard scape and street furniture treatment, including trash receptacles, freestanding potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, benches, etc., shall be utilized for the shopping center and shall be designed to be compatible with tl~ architectural style. Detailed designs shall be included in the Design Guidelines Supplement, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits. 12) The following trees shall be at least 36-inch box size: 13) 14) 15) ~6) a) Trees framing the main focal point. b) Entry access trees framing the main ddve aisles throughout the project. c) On-site Activity Center trees at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue. All future building pads shall be seeded and irrigated for erosion control. Detailed plans shall be included within the landscape and irrigation plans which shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval pdor to the issuance of building permits. All future projects within the shopping center shall be designed to be compatible and consistent with the architectural program established. Any outdoor vending machines shall be recessed into the building faces and shall not extend out into the pedestrian walkways. The design details shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. The entire site shall be kept free of trash and debris at all times, and in no event shall trash and debds remain on the site for more than 24 hours. CITYCOUNCIL RESOLUTION NO CUP 95-11- LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October4,1995 Page 5 17) 19) 20) 21) 22) 23) 24) 25) The applicant shall resolve any Building Code compliance difficulties (with construction of canopies, property lines in relation to walls and other openings, and roof tile installation to withstand severe winds) with the Building and Safety Division pdor to the issuance o.f building permits. "' "'~ Stacking of materials shall n~t exceed the height of the screen walls for the Home Depot and Major One Garden Centers. A security patrol plan for the shopping center shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval. A Bus Shelter on Foothill Boulevard shall be installed with the Phase One improvements. The final design and location shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of any building permits for the center. Any phasing plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance o,f building permits. No permanent outdoor storage of shopping carts shall be permitted, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission. Provision for bicycle storage facilities shall be installed on the property in accordance with current City regulations. Security racks shall be provided for each storage space and shall be located near the main building entrances in highly visible areas to minimize theft and vandalism. An aisle or other space shall be provided for bicycles to enter and leave the storage spaces with a minimum width of 5 feet to the front or the rear of a standard 6-foot bicycle parked in the space. No restaurant use (other than the two proposed fast food pads) are proposed for the center. If over 15 percent of the gross leasable area is occupied by food service uses, one additional parking space per 100 square feet of gross leasable floor area used for food service shall be provided. Likewise, if a cinema or offices are proposed, then additional parking may be required. Trash collection shall occur between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. only. 26) The business shall be conducted to comply with the following standards: a) Noise Levels: All commercial activities shall not create any noise that would exceed an extedor noise level of 60 dBA dudng the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and 65 dBA dudng the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 6 27) 28) 29) 30) 31) 32) 33) 34) 35) 36) b) Loading and Unloading: No person shall cause the loading, unloading, opening, closing, or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or similar objects between the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., unless otherwise specified herein, in a ,.manner which would cause..a .nOise disturbance to a residential area. ~ Truck loading and unloadin~ zones shall be properly marked to the satisfaction of the City Planner. The final design of the intersection at the terminus to the Rochester Avenue ddveway shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner pdor to approval of the final site plan and issuance of any permits for construction. The final design of the screen walls, landscaping, and sidewalk along the south side of Poplar Ddve shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and City Engineer pdor to the issuance of a rough grading permit. The pedestrian Activity Center shall ~>e continued for a distance west along the Foothill Boulevard frontage, consistent with the project on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, as determined by the City Planner. The extedor treatment used on the pick-up canopy and facades of the Home Depot shall be carried around to the back and undersides of these elements, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. The final design of the focal point and roofing materials for the promenade shall be considered by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits for any buildings in the line of major tenants, as shown on the conceptual Master Plan. The final design of the customer pick-up lane in front of the Home Depot shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. The final design of the enhanced storefronts for the major tenants shall be considered by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits for any buildings in the line of major tenants, as shown on the conceptual Master Plan. The final design of the sidewalk connections from the Foothill Boulevard sidewalk to the pad buildings shall be reviewed by the Design Review Committee as part of each Design Review application for development of the pad buildings. In addition to the required screening of the roof-mounted mechanical equipment by the parapet walls, all roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be painted to match the building and parapet walls, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 7 37) Outdoor displays of merchandise for the Home Depot shall be limited to the area under the roof canopy on the front (south) elevation and as to not block or hinder pedestrian or vehicular circulation in front of the Home Depot. 38) Two works of art shall be pl~Ced; one at the Activity Cen~'er at"' the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue, and one at the terminus of the main driveway from Foothill Boulevard in front of the west side of Major 6. 39) The art piece at the Activity Center shall be installed within 180 days after the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for Home Depot. The art piece at the terminus of the main ddveway from Foothill Boulevard in front of the west side of Major 6 shall be installed prior to occupancy of Building 6. 40) The property owner and/or trustee shall be responsible to maintain the two art works focal elements for the life of this commercial center. The property owner and/or the tenar~t shall be responsible to ensure all shopping carts are collected and stored at the approved designated place at the end of the work day. 42) Public telephones shall be placed inside the building. Placement of outside public telephones may be allowed and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to installation. 43) Placement of newspaper racks and other street furniture, etc. may be allowed subject to City Planner review and approval prior to installation. 44) A portion of the Activity Center shall be completed with Phase One development. The final design of the Activity Center and the phasing of improvements shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permit for Phase One. 45) The design of the Activity Center, including the art piece, the pedestrian fumiture, and focal elements such as a water feature shall incorporate features that exhibit the heritage of the historic citrus industry in the City. This coordinated vocabulary of design features shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permit for Phase One. Engineering Division 1) Foothill Boulevard shall be constructed as follows, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, subject to modification by and approval of Caltrans, with Phase One development: a) Full improvements on the north side from Rochester Avenue to Orchard Avenue, including right-turn lanes for Orchard Avenue and all project driveways and a bus bay at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 8 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) b) A landscaped median between Rochester Avenue and Orchard Avenue with left-turn pocket lengths to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. c) Thirty-two feet of pave,,ment on the south side of the .median, transitioning to existing pavement west of the Orchar<j Avdnue median break. d) Remove, or abandon in place with a slurry fill, the 18-inch corrugated metal pipe which crosses Foothill Boulevard. e) The developer may request a reimbursement agreement for permanent improvements south of the centedine, including half of the landscaped median costs, from future development as it occurs on the south side of the street. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Construct the main shopping center.entry off Foothill Boulevard with Phase One development. A street type ddveway shall align with and mirror the width of the future Masi Ddve, as currently designed. Install a traffic signal, which shall be operational prior to the release of occupancy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement for one-half the cost of the signal from future development as it occurs on the south side of Foothill Boulevard. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Should the Foothill Boulevard improvements and signal referenced in Conditions 1 and 2 above be installed by development to the south, this development shall reimburse its share of those improvements. Install Rochester Avenue improvements with Phase One development. Provide a pavement transition on the west side of Rochester Avenue north of Poplar Ddve to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The bus bay indicated on the Site Plan shall not be constructed. Obstructions such as walls and landscaping shall be located such that lines of sight between trucks in the angled service exit onto Rochester Avenue south of Poplar Ddve and Rochester Parkway trail users are maintained, to the satisfaction of the City Planner and City Engineer. Modify the existing traffic signal at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue as 'needed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer with Phase One development. Install Poplar Ddve, full width except for parkway improvements on the north side, from Rochester Avenue to the north property line for Parcel 1, with Phase One development. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 9 8) Construction traffic for Phase One shall take access to the site from streets other than Rochester Avenue; otherwise, the Rochester Avenue frontage improvements shall be installed pdor to the issuance of permits. 9) Install a traffic signal at RocBester Avenue and Chervil S{'~e~t iNith Phase Two development, or. earlier if warranted. 10) 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) Install Orchard Avenue, full width except for off-site parkway improvements, from Foothill Boulevard to Church Street, with Phase Two development. Install traffic signals at the intersections of Foothill Boulevard with Orchard Avenue and Milliken Avenue with Church Street. The developer shall receive credit against, and reimbursement of costs in excess of, the Transportation Development Fee for both signals, in conformance with City policy. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Extend the master plan storm drain in Foothill Boulevard from Rochester Avenue to west of Orcl~ard Avenue and install a local storm drain in Orchard Avenue as required by the City Engineer. Extend the master plan storm drain in Rochester Avenue from Foothill Boulevard to north of Poplar Ddve and install a local storm drain in Poplar Drive as required by the City Engineer. Structures within the storm drain easement north of the Foothill Boulevard right-of-way, like the bus shelter and monument signs, shall be designed such that concentrated loads are not placed on the storm drain. "No Parking/Stopping" signs shall be posted on all public street frontages. The minimum commercial ddve approach width is 35 feet at the right- of-way (except as approved by Caltrans along Foothill Boulevard) and the maximum approach radius is 20 feet. Transitions to lesser widths on-site should be smooth and easily driveable, especially for truck service drives. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated cost of operating all street lights dudng the first six months of operation, pdor to building permit issuance or approval of the Final Parcel Map. whichever occurs first. An in-lieu fee for one-fourth the cost of constructing special pavers within the Foothill Boulevard/Rochester Avenue intersection shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase One. The fee amount shall be based on the square footage of the intersection. 18) Development shall comply with the Terra Vista Park Implementation Plan. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 10 20) Parkway landscaping along the Rochester Avenue frontage, and trail amenities required by the Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment, shall be compatible with the landscaping theme developed on the east side of Rochester Avenue, to the satisfaction of the City Planner and City Engineer. An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 kV electrical) on the opposite side of Rochester Avenue shall be paid to the City pdor to the issuance of building permits. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length from the center of Foothill Boulevard to the center of Poplar Street. Upon completion of the installation of utility facilities, the developer may submit a request for a refund of any portion of said in-lieu fee for work performed which may be attributed to the ultimate undergrounding of existing overhead facilities on the east side of Rochester Avenue. The amount of refund shall be reviewed and determined by the City Engineer. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoptio.gn of this Resolution. Ran! i..le':"~nga. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT -- DEPARTMENT STAN DAR D -.CO'N DI-TIONS PROJECT #: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Those items checked are Conditions Of Approval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DNISION, (909) 989-1861, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Ae Time LImits 1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, it building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. 2. Development/Design Review shag be approved prior to / / 3. Approval of Tentative Tract I%1o. is granted subject to the approval of Complf~ Date / / / /.__ The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Ranche Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shell be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the Districts property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. Prior to recordatlon of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the applicant shell consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello.-Roos Community Facilities District lor the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Fadlities District, the applicant shall, in the aitemative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordatlon of the final map or the issuance of building permils, whichever comas first. Further, ff the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval ot the project and Ixiof to lhe fecordation of the tinal map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shell be deemed null and void. sc- 1o/~4 V/' 6. This condition shell be waived it the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts heve entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to issuance of building permits when no map is involved, written cedification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map appro~tal in t he case of subdivision or prior to issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. : B. Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and specitlo Plan and I ,- ,- Planned Community. Compie~o~ Date: . / / / /~ ,/ ,/ e Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commancad thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Occupancy of the fadlity shell not commence until su;h time as all Uniform Building Cede and State Fire Marsheirs regulations heve been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shell be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency priorto issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.), or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and appiicabis Community Plans or Specific Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. A detailed M-site lighting plan sham he reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Sher~f's Department (989-6611 ) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properlk~. / / / / / / /__ / / / / sc- 1o/~4 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 recept~(s) are required and shall meet City starKlards. The final design, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shall be sul:~lect to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screeeed through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 2 / / /__/__ / / 11. Street names shell be submitted for City Rannar review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. 12. All building ~umb~rs and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. PmicctNo.:C-t/P Comp[cdon Date: / / / /~ 13. 14. 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 priorto approvaLand recordation of the Final TractMap ,arid prior 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. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shell not prohibit the keeping of equine animals where zoning requirements forthe keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors or homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. / / / 15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restridions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Altomay. They shell be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. 16. All perkways, open areas, and landscaping shell be ~.errnanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shell be subrrdtted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. / / / / 17. Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or dwelling unit shell 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 recorclation of the final map or issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, except for utility wires and similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.060-G-2. 18. The project contains a designreed 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 exterior of the buildings or structures, removal of landmark trees, demolition, relocation, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or chenges to the site, shell require a modification Io the Historic Lanclmerk Alteration Permit subject to Historic Preservation Conlnission review and approval. / /__ C. Building I:)eslgn An alternaive energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwellir'q units and for heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shell be supplemented with solar heating. Details shell be included in the building plans and shell be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. / /~__ All dwellings shall have the frort side and mar elevations ullraded with amhitectufal treatment, detailing and irr, reased delineation of surface treatment subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. / /.__ SC- 10/94 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 permits. %/ 4. All rOof appudenances, including air conditbners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent propedies and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. Parking and Vehicular Access (Indicate details on building plans) ~/ 1. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/unitsrouiidings with open spaces/ plazas/recreational uses. 3. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway. aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 4. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. 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 permits. Landscaping (for publicly maintained landscape arm, refer to Sactlon N.) V//1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscap- ing in the case of 'residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Ranner review and approval priorto the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborisrs recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting and tdmming methods. A minimum of trees per gross acre, cornCwised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the project: % - ,$8- inch box or larger, % - 36- inch box or larger, __ % - 24- irr.,h box or larger, __ % - 15-gallon, and __ % - 5 gallon. ,. 4. A minimum of % of tress 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 - 1o/94 4 ~ / Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. Ail private slope banks 5feet or less in vertical height and of 5! 1 org reater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet but less than 8 feet in vertk?,al height and of 2: 1 o r greater slope shall be landscaped and ir~g;lied for eF6Slon control and to soften their a'lSpe~rbnce 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. ~. of slope area, ~tnd 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. ~. 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 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 by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those u nits, an inspection shall be conducted by the Ranning Division to determine that they am in satisfactory condition. 10. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, proparty owners are respon- sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in a heaitby and thriving condition. and shall receive regular pnjning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, deed, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of darnage. 11. From yard landscaping shall be required per the Development Code and/or · This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. v'//12. The final design of the parirneter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 13. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, spedmen size trees, meander- / 14. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the pedrneter of this project arse shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 15. All walls shah be provided with decorative treatment. ff loc,.qted in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. Tree maintenance criteria shag be daveloped and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteda shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xedscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucarnonga Municipal Code. / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / F. Signs The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any, signs Im'oposed lor thle *development shall comply with tile 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 pdor to issuance of building permits. 3. Directon/monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or townriomes prior to occupancy and shall require separate'application and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. G. Environmental The developer shall provide each prospective 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 pmporty. The developer shell provide each prospective buyel: 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. 4. A final acoustical report shell be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuse the level of interior noise attenuation to beiow45CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provlded, and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. H, Other Agencies /1. Emergency secondary accesS shell be provided in accordance with Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District Standards. v,/2. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance Iree and clear, a minimum of 26 feet wide at all times during construction in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protedion District requirements. Prior to issuance of building parrnits for combustible construction, evidence shall submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District thai temporary water supply for fire protection is available, bending completion of required fire protection system. The applicanl sham contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overheed structure for mall boxes with adequate lighting. The rmal 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. __./ / /.__/ / / / / / / / / / /.__ / / / / / 5 For projects using septic tank facilities, written cartitication of acceptability, including all supportive information, shell be obtained from the San Bemardino County Department of Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building bermits. / /.__ sc- ~o/94 6 d'~(:::>..~ APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 989-1863, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLO~/ING CONDITIONS: I. Site Devek~pmont ~/1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechani- cal 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 los copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. / / Prbr to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but am not limited to: City Beautffication Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Prbr to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shah pay developrnent fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but am not limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. Street addresses shell be provided by the Building Official, aftertract/parcel map recordation and prbr to issuance of building permits. J. Existing Structure8 / / /__/__ / / 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings. 2. Existing buildings shell be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shell be demolished. 3. Existing sewage disposal fadlities shell he removed, filled and/or capped to cornply with the Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Building Code. 4. Underground on-.site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans submitted for K. Grading ~/' 1. Grading of the subje¢l propeely shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and aca~ed grading practices. The final grading plan shell be in substantial coNorman~ with the appmved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of Califomia to / /__ ~l. The development is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a Soil Disturbance Permit is required. Please contact San Bernardino County I::)epartmont of Agriculture at (714) 387-2111 for permit application. Documentation of such permit shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of rough grading peffnit. 4. A geological report shell be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 5. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. / / /__/__ sc- ~o/94 6. As a custom-lit subdivision, the following requirements shall be met: a. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing cornpietlin of all on-site drainage facilities necessary for dewatedng all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to final map approval and prior to the issuance of grading permits. b. Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage. water that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels, am to be delineated and recoiled,to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of grading and building permits.:; c. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatedng and protecting the subdivided properties, are to be installed prior to issuance of building permits for construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested. Final grading plans for each parcel am to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building and grading permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis.) ee All slipe banks in excess of 5 feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native grasses or planted with ground cover for erosion control upon completion of grading or some other alternaive method of erosion control shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Building Official. In addition a permanent irrigation system shall be provided. This requiremeN does not release the applicant/developer frof:D compliance with the slope planting requirements of Section 17.08.040 1 of the Develolxnent Code. Comp~tjo~ Dam: / / / / / / / / / / APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DNISION, (909) 98~-1862, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, publiC paseo8, public landscape area, street trees, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-iNblic facilities (m-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the fogowing rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): u/totaJfeeo. OopL¢, ' An irTevocable offer of ded':-tlon for for all private streets or drive. -foot wide roadway easement shall be made 4. Non-vehicular access shal be dedicated to the City for the folowlng streets: ~/ 5. R I ~z~v~ A;~.;~ ,~ s,;~v,/_F_. o~,.,e'-s ~ ~d~.-~ eciprOCa access easements shell be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and sham be re, ogled concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of building parmRs, where no map is mvoived. sc- zo/N 8 / /__ / / / / o Private drainage easements forcross-lit drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. The final map shah clearly delineate a lO-foot minimum building restriction area on the neighboring lot adjoining the zero lot line wall and comain the following language: "l/We hereby dedicate to the City of Rancho Cucamonga the fight to prohibit the construction of (residential) buildings (or other structures) within those areas designated on the map as building restriction areas." A maintenance agreement shall also be grar~ed from each lit to the adjacent k~i thro"'ugh the CC&R's. 8. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the final map. 9. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City whamver they encroach onto private property. 10. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane. a parallel street tree maintenance easement sham be provided. 11 · The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site proparty interests necessary to construct the required public improvements, and il he/she should fail to do the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to subrt~ttal 04 the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required forthe improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developers cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement ol the appraisal. M. Street Improvementl f , AIr public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, pass}s, landscal:md areas. etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavemeN, drive approaches, sldewm, street lights, and street trees. v/ 2, A minimum of 26** fool wide pavement, within a 40 -foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all hail-leotion streets. 3. Construct the following perimeter street irnixovement8 including, but not limited to: J /___ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / STREETNN4E cuM& A.C. ~ O~NE smEEr STREET C, OMM aEDt~N B~ GUnER PVMT WN.K APPR. UGHT8 'nqEE8 TRAI. ~LANO TRAIL Orc.t....,-d.,/,/,/v/v/,/ P eto,,v-'v/v/v/v/v/v/ sc- lo/~ 9 v/ Notes: (a) Median islam includes landscaping and inigation on meter. (b) PavemeN reconstnjclion and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) ff so marked, side- walk shall be curvilinear per STD. 304. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall 4. Improvement plans and construction: , -.. Street improvemeN plans including str;et trees and street lights, prepared by aregis- tered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreemaN executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improve- merits, prior to final map apCroval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to any work being pedormed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shell be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. PavemeN striping, marking, traffic, street name signing, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Signal conduit with pull boxes sham be ir~talled on any new construction or reconstruction of major, secondary or collector streets which'hersect with other major, secondary or collector streets for future traffic signals. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1) AJI pull boxes shall be No. 6 unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pullrope. e. Wheel chair ramps sham be installed on all four corners ot iNersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. Exiting City macis requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all timas with adequate detours during cortstn. mtion. A street closure permit may be required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be. refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewals. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family lots. h. Handicap acces, ramp design shal be as specified by the City Engineer. i. StreetnamesshallbeappmvedbytheCityPlannerpdortosubmittalfor~rstplancheck. 5. Street i~emenl plans per City Standards for al private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Pdor to any work being parlormeal on the I:xt- vate streets, fees shall be paid and construction parmils shall de obtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any other permits required. 6. Street trees, a minimum c4 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /__ / / / / / /.__ sc- 10/94 10 v/ 7. Intemection line of ~e destgm shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conforrnance with a. On collector oc larger streets, lines o~ sign sham be plottot] for all project intersectiorm, including driveways. Walls, signs, and slopes shall be located outbide the lines of sight. Landscaping and other obstructions within the lines of sign shall be aplxoved by the Cily Engineer. b. Local residentiN street intersections shah have their noticeability improved, usually by moving the 2 +/- closest street trees on eacb. slde away from the stast and plan,:l in ~ street tree easement. 8. A permit shah be obtained from CALTRANS' for any work within the following right-of-way: 9. All public intpmvements on the following streets shall be operationally complete prior to the / / / / / / / / / / N. Publl~ Mll~te~Nt~e Areel 1. A separale set ol landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Pubic Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map apprw al or issuance of building permill, whichever occurs fimL The tolowing ql~!lC q)l ~s, medians, paseos, easemenls, trails, or olher areas are required to be annexed inlo the Landm Maintenance District: -~ v/ v/ 2. Asignedconsenlandwaiverformtojoinand/orformtheapi~,q~kte L. andscapeandl. ighting Oistdcts shall be filedwith the City Engineer pdofiofinal mapappeu, aJor isaulnceol building permits whichever occum first. Forumion costs sial be Ix:ate by the davalop 8r. 4. Parkway Indscapbtg on the following street(s) shall conform to fie relull of the resetlive Beautmcation Master O. Drainage and Flood Comml ixoteclionmmumshdlael;a~,t.lmJasceftleedbyareglstemdCIviEnOlneer and aR:mve~lNClyEnglme. v/ It shal be the ,;flvlfal~lfl ftllXXmltlty tO have the cunlfit RRM Zone designadon reffeved from the Ixotect amt The .devel~pafs ~slall lcx'q3an,d necns-.y refxxte, pin. and hyeologlc~f~b';u, ic ca~ua~me. A Comitional L. ett~ o4 Map Revision (CLOMR) shal bl otXNnld from FEMA ixlx to finll map ~ or tsmjm ol 13utll:lng laffntl, ~ N~url firll. A LMlet ol MI~ ~abtllan (LOMR) ~ beismjedl3yFEMA Pdorto~ori,~ovc.,mrlwn:wlNIn::t~~l~ AfifaJdrlktlgeslLKlysh/Iblmabfftledloml:laR:m:wedbyNCJlyEn0kleef map al3xoval o~ the issuance ol buildin0 penre, whichever ~ tim. NI drainage facilities shaJ be insraged as requked by the CIy Er~r. __/ / sc- t0/94 11 4. A penTlit from the County Flood Control Dtstrk:t i8 required for work within its right-of-way. 5. Trees are prohibiteel wilhin 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe mewlufildflollTIIm~'oullrld~oltmaKultroetnjnk. :, 6. Public storm drain easements shae be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a Sump catch basin on the public street, -_/ / / / / / P. Utllltlel ~ 1. Provide separate utility sewices to each par(~!l including sanitary sewerage ~,i~n}, Water,I / gas, electric power, telephone, and cable I'V (alq underground) in accordance with: the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided aj required. / 2. The developer shall be resp~ible for the relocallon of existing utililles as necessary. I / !// 3. Water and sewer plarm shal be designed and conmructed to meet me requirements of the / / Cucamonga County Water Di~ict (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Oimrk:t, and the Environmental Healh Depmtrnent of the County ol San Bemardino. A lelter of compliance from the CCWD io required Ixior to final map alq)mval or ioouance ol permits, whichever occurs first, Q. General Requlrmnent~ rand Approvmlm one parcel prior to i~uance el building 2. An eaement for a joinl use ddveway shall be provided lxkx to finad rnapaplXoval or I I issuance of building perTMs, wh'.Chcvar _o,~__,m tim, for:. 3. Pdor to aPlxoval o~the final map adepod shal lx postecl wilh the City coveting the estimate cost o( 'ar,c~:dioning Ila assessmere under Anesm,,ent DMdcI among the newfly creme parcels. 5, Permira shal be oOlalne~ from the loh vAt aOenci~ for work wthin their right-el-way: _./ / I I I I 6.A 81gnld(x)NBl IndwllvllonllloJoin Ind/ortomllhe law ~ CommuMy FaciUties(XadashalbemedwlhtheCityEnglnee~WiortoflnalmapalSxovalorthe Oevelol:ar. 7. Prlx Io mmizalion ol any :hva~q;eam imaM, sumclenl k,~we:,j.1 pl.m shal be corn- the salMaclion oi the City ~. Phae on Ihe al~ov~ ternalive APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THI FEIt;_ ,, f ~ (9(I) N7.44M, FOR C~ItJANCl WITH THE FOLLOWINQ CO NDfflONB: 1. Melo fiooe Comn~ F~cill~ i requkemms shah ~ m this pmjecL sc- io/H 12 ~ / 5. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be L~ CO (2 A. A previous fire flow, conducted gpm available at 20 psi. gallons per minute. revealed A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire depadmenl personnel prior to water plan approval. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed'by th~ fire department personnel after constru,ctlon and prior to occupancy. 3. Fire hydrants are required. Ali required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operahie priorto delivery of any cornbuslible building materials on site (i .e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any, will be determined by this departmenL Fire District standards require a 6" dser with a 4' and a 2-1/2" outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meat this standard. Contact the Fire Safely Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction,evidence shall be submitted to the Fire District that temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection system. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required'~or all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. 7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: Per Rancho Cucamenga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. /other ,ulo / / / / J / / /. / / Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking, plastics manufacuring ,spray painling, flammable Iiquid~ storage, high piled stock, elc. Conlacl Fire Safety Division to delermins il sprinkler system is adequate for proposed operalions. 8. Sprinkler system monitoring shal be installed and operational immediately upon completion of sprinkler System. / 9. A fire alarm system(s) shall be requked as noled below: /Per Rancho Cucamonga Rre Protection Disldct C)r~nance 15. Califomia Code Reguialionl Tie 24. NFPA 101. .. Other 10. Roadways within project shall cornlNy with the F~re Districts fire lane standards, as noted: /All roadways. Other / / / / / / sc - 1o/94 13 ,~ / 75'-// / / 11, Fire department access shell be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. ~ /. 12. Emergency secondary access shall be provided in accordance with Fire District siandards. L / 13. Emergency accesS, shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 26 feet wide ._J / at all times during construction in accordance with Fire District requirements, 14. All trees planted in any median shell be kept trinl,rn. ed a minimum of 14'6' from groundup so / / as not to impede fire apparatus. 15. A building directory shall be required, as noted'bee: / /. Lighted director within 20 feet of main entrance(s). __ Standard Directory in main lobby. __ Other 16. A Knox rapid entry key vault shell be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of pumhase shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordedng information. 17. Gated/reslricted entry(s) requ ire installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering inforrnatl~m. 18. A tenant use letter sham be submitted prior to final building plan approval. 19. Plan check fees in the amount of $ heve been paid. An additional $ shall be paid: / Prior to water plan approval. Prior to final plan approval. Note: Separate plan check fees f~' fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any coe~sultanl reviews. will be assessed upon submittal of plans. 20. Special parmils may be required, depending on intended use, as noted beN: __ A. General Use Perroll shall be required for any activity or operation no~ spedfically described below, which in the judgemenl of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditicne hazardous to life or property, C. D, E. __F. G, He Storage of readly contuatible material. Places of assembly (except churches, schools and other non-profit organizations) Bowling alley and pin refinishing, -~' Cellulose Nitrate plastic (Pyroxylin). CornlNstible fibers storage and hendling exceeding 100 cubic feet. Garages Motor vehicle repair (H-4) Lurntar yards (over 100,000 beard feet). / /. / /. L___ [ sc- 10/94 14 <:~ ( I C 5'-rl M. N. O. /P. Q. R. S. {"T. U. V. W. Tire rebuilding plants. Auto wrecking yards. Junk or waste material handling plants. Rammable finishes. Spraying or dipping operations, spray booths. dip tanIs, electrostatic apparatus, automobile undercoating, powder coating and.organic peroxides and dual com- ponent coatings (per spray booth). , Magnesium (more tha 10 pounds per day). ~ Oil buming equipment operations. Ovens (industrial baking and dn/ing). Mechanical refrigeration (over 20 pounts of refrigerant). Compressed gases (store, handle or use exceeding 1 O0 cubic feet). Cryogenic fluids (storage, handling or use). Dust-producing processes and equipment. Flammable and combustible liquids (storage. handling or use). High piled combustible stock. Liquified petroleum gas (store, handle, transport or use more than 120 gallons). Matches (more than 60 Matchrnan's gross). Welding and cutting operations: to conduct welding and/or cutting operations in any occupancy. sc- 10/94 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA1VIONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 4, 1995 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - A subdivision of 66.5 acres of land into 12 parcels in the Mixed Use Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN 227-151 - 18 and 24. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Related files: General Plan Amendment 95-01 B, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 and Conditional Use Permit 95-11. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the subject project by adopting the attached Resolution. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Refer to the attached Planning Commission Staff Reports. Approval of the Tentative Parcel Map and Conditional Use Permit is subject to approval of the General Plan Amendment and Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment, as indicated in the attached Conditions of Approval. Respect~ ~ William J. O?qeil City Engineer WJO:BAM:dlw Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Reports dated September 13, 1995 and September 27, 1995 Resolution of Approval CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: September 27, 1995 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer Betty A. Miller, Associate Enginee TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - A subdivision of 66.5 acres of land into 12 parcels in the Mixed Use Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN 227-151-18 and 24. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Related files: General Plan Amendment 95-01 B, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 and Conditional Use Permit 95-11. At its regular meeting on September 13, 1995, the Planning Commission continued this item and all related items to allow the applicant sufficient time to complete the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) to the satisfaction of SANBAG and City staff. Because it was not known at the time of preparation of this report (and the advertising deadline) if the TIA will be accepted by SANBAG and City staff in time for the Planning Commission to take final action on September 27, this item has been advertised to be forwarded to the City Council for final action. In addition, the Commission directed the applicant to work with staff to clarify a number of issues raised by the developer during public testimony at the September 13 meeting. Staff met with Lewis Homes and the majority of the issues have been addressed. The resolution has been updated as appropriate. Engineering Condition l d was revised to allow the 18-inch corrugated metal pipe crossing Foothill Boulevard to be abandoned in place with a slurry fill, Engineering Condition 2 was clarified to indicate that the driveway shall align with the future Masi Drive as currently designed, and Engineering Condition 20 was revised to allow the developer to submit a request for a refund of a portion of in-lieu fee for the future undergrounding of existing overhead utilities on the opposite side of Rochester Avenue. Other Engineering conditions were discussed, but wording remains as originally proposed. The applicant may still wish to address several conditions. An additional exhibit has been prepared to show the phasing of public improvements as described in the proposed Conditions of Approval. It is attached as Exhibit "D" after the September 13, 1995, staff report. Also attached, as Exhibit "E", is the Terra Vista Planned Community Street Improvement Implementation Policy. This policy only addresses construction of the main perimeter streets. The proposed Conditions of Approval for Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue do comply with this policy. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENT PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 27, 1995 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Tentative Parcel Map 14022 through adoption of the attached Resolution and recommend issuance of a Negative Declaration. Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civil Engineer DJ:BAM:dlw Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 13, 1995 Improvement Phasing (Exhibit "D") TVPC Street Improvement Policy (Exhibit "E") Resolution of Approval CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: September 13, 1995 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVEI~OPMENT CO. - A subdivision of 66.5 acres of land into 12 parcels in the Mixed Use Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN 227-151-18 and 24. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Related files: General Plan Amendment 95-01 B, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 and Conditional Use Permit 95-11. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map as shown on Exhibit "B". B. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 11.30 acres Parcel 7 1.15 acres Parcel 2 3.97 acres Parcel 8 1.33 acres Parcel 3 1.09 acres Parcel 9 1.16 acres Parcel 4 1.11 acres Parcel 10 1.35 acres Parcel 5 6.66 acres Parcel 11 10.11 acres Parcel 6 7.94 acres Parcel 12 19.~4 acres Total 66.51 acres C. Existing Zoning: Mixed Use (Commercial, Office, Residential), Terra Vista Community Plan D. Surrounding l.and Useand Zoning: North South East West Vacant Vacant, approved Conditional Use Permit Vacant and Single Family Residential Vacant j PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PM 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO September 13, 1995 Page 2 E. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations: North - South - East - West - Low Medium and Medium Residential, Terra Vista Community Plan Industrial Park, Subarea 7, Industrial Specific Plan Office and Low Residential Mixed Use (Hospital, Office), Terra Vista Community Plan Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and slopes to the south at 3 percent. The existing pavement on Foothill Boulevard accommodates four traffic lanes. The east side of Rochester Avenue, is complete, allowing two traffic lanes, and the intersection of Rochester and Foothill is signalized with curb and gutter on all four approaches. The master plan storm drain in Foothill Boulevard currently extends from Day Creek Channel through the Foothill/Rochester intersection. Church Street has been completed full width from Milliken Avenue to Orchard Avenue. ANALYSIS: The purpose of this parcel map is to create 12 parcels, eleven of which correspond to the shopping center master plan being reviewed at tonight's meeting as Conditional Use Permit 95-11. The only development proposed at this time is the Home Depot store on Parcel 1, which is referred to in the CUP conditions as "Phase one development". The Conditions of Approval specify that all frontage improvements along Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue shall be installed upon development of Parcel 1, along with the portion of Poplar Drive fronting Parcel 1. Orchard Drive will be completed between Foothill Boulevard and Church Street with any additional shopping center development. The balance of Poplar Drive and Church Street between Orchard Avenue and Poplar Drive will be installed upon development of Parcel 12, the future multi-family residential parcel. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The applicant completed Part I of the Initial Study. Staff conducted a field investigation and completed Part II of the Initial Study. No adverse impacts upon the environment aro anticipated as a result of this map. Therefore, issuance of Negative Delaration is appropriate. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding property owners and placed in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Posting at the site has also been completed. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PM 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO September 13, 1995 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all input and elements of the Tentative Parcel Map 14022. If after such consideration, the Commission deems appropriate, then the adoption of the attached Resolution would be in order. Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civil Engineer DJ:BAM:dlw Attachments: Vicinity Map (Exhibit "A") Tentative Map (Exhibit "B") CUP 95-11 Site Plan (Exhibit "C") Resolution and Recommended Conditions of Approval I. CITY OF RANCliO CUC~ TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMqUMITY STREET II~ROVE)!ENT II~LE)EIITATIOI POLICY · Projects within Tetra Vista shall be required to construct street improvements as follows: Streets adjacent to projects shall be constructed full width to include curb on the opposite sides. Streets shall be extended (full width) off-site far enough to provide two means of access. Projects within the individual Development Areas shown on the map below shall construct the specific street segments designated as follows: AREA 1 2 .--)4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 STREET SEGNENT Foothill - Haven to Spruce and Haven - Foothill to Town Center Foothill - Haven to lqilliken Foothill - Haven to Rochester Rochester - Foothill to Poplar Rochester - Foothill to Church Rochester - Church to Base Line Base Line - lqilliken to Rochester Base Line - lqilliken to lqountain View Same as adjacent area depending upon where access is taken. lqilliken - Foothill to Base Line Spruce - Foothill to Elm lqost of this area is already conditioned or developed. Haven - Church to Base Line Note: Projects that cross area boundaries (at corners in particular) shall construct all segments required for each affected area. LEGEND m Area Boundary ~ Area N~ber · I · · CC llTLE = lVPC Sf. l -p. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NUMBER 14022, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ROCHESTER AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-151-18 AND 24 WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 14022, submitted by Lewis Development Co., applicant, for the purpose of subdividing into 12 parcels, the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, State of Califomia, identified as APN 227-151- 18 and 24, located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue; and WHEREAS, on September 13, and continued to September 27, 1995, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing for the above described map and recommended the approval of the application by the adoption of Resolution No. 95-46. WHEREAS, on October 4, 1995, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public heating for the above-described map. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development. , That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or public health problems or have adverse effects on abutting properties. SECTION 2: Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 2 That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the Califomia Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public hearings the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. SECTION 3: Tentative Parcel Map Number 14022 is hereby approved subject to the attached Standard Conditions and the following Special Conditions: Engineering Division Foothill Boulevard shall be constructed as follows, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, subject to modification by and approval of Caltrans, upon development of Parcel 1: ae Full improvements on the north side from Rochester Avenue to Orchard Avenue, including right mm lanes for Orchard Avenue and all project driveways and a bus bay at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue. b, A landscaped median between Rochester Avenue and Orchard Avenue with left turn pocket lengths to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 3 C, Thirty-two feet of pavement on the south side of the median, transitioning to existing pavement west of the Orchard Avenue median break. Remove, or abandon in place with a slurry fill, the 18-inch corrugated metal pipe which crosses Foothill Boulevard. . The developer may request a reimbursement agreement for permanent improvements south of the centerline, including half of the landscaped median costs, from future development as it occurs on the south side of the street. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Construct the main shopping center entry off Foothill Boulevard upon development of Parcel 1. A street type driveway shall align with and mirror the width of the future Masi Drive, as currently designed. Install a traffic signal, which shall be operational prior to the release of occupancy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement for one-half the cost of the signal from future development as it occurs on the south side of Foothill Boulevard. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Should the Foothill Boulevard improvements and signal referenced in Conditions 1 and 2 above be installed by development to the south, this development shall reimburse its share of those improvements. Install Rochester Avenue improvements upon development of Parcel 1. Provide a pavement transition on the west side of Rochester Avenue north of Poplar Drive to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The bus bay indicated on the site plan shall not be constructed. Obstructions such as walls and landscaping, shall be located such that lines of sight between tracks in the angled service exit onto Rochester Avenue south of Poplar Drive and Rochester parkway trail users are maintained, to the satisfaction of the City Planner and City Engineer. Modify the existing traffic signal at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue as needed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer upon development of Parcel 1. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 4 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Install Poplar Drive, full width except for parkway improvements on the north side, from Rochester Avenue to the north property line for Parcel 1, upon development of Parcel 1. Construction traffic for Parcel one shall take access to the site from streets other than Rochester Avenue; otherwise, the Rochester frontage improvements shall be installed prior to the issuance of permits. Install a traffic signal at Rochester Avenue and Chervil Street with development of any parcel beyond Parcel 1, or earlier if warranted. Install Orchard Avenue, full width except for off site parkway traffic signals at the intersections of Foothill Boulev~d with Orchid Avenue ~d Milliken Avenue ~ Ch~ch SUeet. ~e developer shall receive credit against, ~d reimb~sement of costs in excess of, ~e Tr~spomtion Development Fee Br both signals, in coffo~ce ~ City policy. If the developer fails to submit Br said mimb~sement agreement ~tMn 6 months of~e public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of ~e developer to reimb~sement shall teminate. Extend the master plan storm drain in Foothill Boulevard from Rochester Avenue to west of Orchard Avenue and install a local storm drain in Orchard Avenue as required by the City Engineer. Extend the master plan storm drain in Rochester Avenue from Foothill Boulevard to north of Poplar Drive and install a local storm drain in Poplar Drive as required by the City Engineer. Structures within the storm drain easement north of the Foothill Boulevard fight-of-way, like the bus shelter and monument signs, shall be designed such that concentrated loads are not placed on the storm drain. "No Parking/Stopping" shall be posted on all public street frontages. The minimum commercial drive approach width is 35 feet at the right- of-way (except as approved by Caltrans along Foothill Boulevard) and the maximum approach radius is 20 feet. Transitions to lesser widths on site should be smooth and easily driveable, especially for truck service drives. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 5 16. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated cost of operating all street lights during the first six months of operation, prior to building permit issuance or approval of the Final Parcel Map, whichever occurs first. 17. An in-lieu fee for one-fourth the cost of constructing special pavers within the Foothill Boulevard/Rochester Avenue intersection shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1. The fee amount shall be based on the square footage of the intersection. 18. Development shall comply with the Terra Vista Park Implementation Plan. 19. Parkway landscaping along the Rochester Avenue frontage, and trail amenities required by the Tetra Vista Community Plan Amendment, shall be compatible with the landscaping theme developed on the east side of Rochester Avenue, to the satisfaction of the City Planner and City Engineer. 20. An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical) on the opposite side of Rochester Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length from the center of Foothill Boulevard to the center of Poplar Street. Upon completion of the installation of utility facilities, the developer may submit a request for a refund of any portion of said in-lieu fee for work performed which may be attributed to the ultimate undergrounding of existing overhead facilities on the east side of Rochester Avenue. The amount of reid shall be reviewed and determined by the City Engineer. Building and Safety Division The 60-foot non-buildable easement around the in-line buildings shall exclude all projections, overhangs, and canopies which protrude from those buildings. .2. Prior to approval of the final parcel map, the CC&Rs shall address the following to the satisfaction of the Building Official. a, The omission of property line wall and opening protection as required for independent buildings. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. PARCEL MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. October 4, 1995 Page 6 Approval of buildings affected is based upon the "unlimited area" provisions of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building Code· c. Easement restricts expansion of the affected structures. The outer easement line is to be considered a property line for adjacent buildings. e, Easement and CC&R language cannot be changed without approval of the Building Official. PlanningDivision Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 14022 is granted subject to the approval of General Plan Amendment 95-01B and Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01· CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO./,-/02. 7_ Those items checked are Conditions of Approval. A. Dedications and Vehicular Access , Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way for the perimeter streets (measured from centerline):. qq tom. feet on ~L---A ~,~ (~ ~'a~, ~ ~ ~ ~¢vocable offer of dedication for roadway p~oses shall be made for ~e private s~ee~. Comer property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 5. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following sU'eets, except for approved openings: V/' 9. 10. Reciprocal access easements ensuring access to all parcels shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the final parcel map. Reciprocal parking agreements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all common roads, drives, or parking areas shall be provided by C C & R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the final parcel map. All existing easements lying within future right-of-way are to be quitclaimed or delineated on the final parcel map per the City Engineer's requirements. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final parcel map. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree easement shall be provided. 12. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements and, if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall at least 120 days prior to submittal of the f'mal parcel map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. This condition applies in particular, but not limited, to: Street Improvements All public improvements, (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc. ) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be cons~ucted to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. A minimum, of 26-foot wide pavement within a 40- foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half-section streets. 3. Construct the following missing perimeter sweet improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name Curb AC Side- Drive Street Street Cornre. Median & Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Bike Other Trail Notes: (a) Median [sland includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement consauction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) Is so marked, sidcwaik will be cur/ilincar pcr STD. #114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of consauction fee shall be provided for this item. 2 4. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans including street trees and street lights, prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. b. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's office in addition to any. other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic, street name signing, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed on any new construction or reconstruction of major, secondary or collector streets for future signals. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCIL ECR or any Other locations appmved by the City Engineer. Notes: (!) All pull boxes shall be No. 6 unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pullrope. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all comers of intersections per City Standards Or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiting consUuction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate demurs during consUuction. A street closure permit may be required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. ConcenWated drainage flows shah not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. S. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City Engineers office in addition to any other permits required. 6. Street trees, a minimum of 15 - gallon size or larger shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. 7. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger street, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. A Permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any work within the following right-of-way. 9. All public improvements on the following streets shall be operationally complete prior to the issuance of building permits. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final parcel map approval. The following landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails, or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: . V/" 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final parcel map approval. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. 4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beauti~cation D. Drainage and Flood Control I. The project (or portions thereof) is located within a Flood HaT-rd Zone; therefore, flood protection measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 2. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from the project area. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA, prior to occupancy or improvement ~ceptance, whichever occurs first. 3. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final parcel map approval. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 4. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 5. A permit from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District is required for work within it's right-of- way. 6. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. .' 7. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of blockage in a sump condition. 4 7 MI lqoZ E. Improvement Completion 1. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the f'mal parcel map, an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the Developer and the City will be required for: 2. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, an improvement certificate shall be placed upon the Final Map, stating that they will be completed upon Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electrical power, telephone and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health DeparUnent of the County of San Bernardino. 3. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. 4. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. General Requirements and Approval, I. The tentative map approval is valid for the 24 month period following the approval d~te. Time extensions may be granted by the PlanningCommission, if requested prior to the expiration date. 2. Final grading plans for each parcel shall be as required by the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of grading permits. 3. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Resffictions (C C & R's) approved by the City Attorney is required prior to approval of the final parcel map. 4. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final parcel map approval for: 5. Prior to approval of the final parcel map a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District . among the newly created parcels. 6. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first 6 months of operation, prior to final parcel map approval. 7PM 7. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans 'shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to aisure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map. 8. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan Drainage Fees shall be paid prior to final parcel map approval. 9. .Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right-of-way. 10. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the Law Enforcement Community Facilities District shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final parcel map approval. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 11. Prior to recordation of the final parcel map, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment ofa Mello-Roos Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing district prior to the recordation of the final parcel map. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final parcel map for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. 12. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall apply to this project. 13. Pursuant to provisions of California Resources Code Section 2 1089(b), this application shall not be operative, vested or final, nor will building permits be issued or a map recorded, until (1) the Notice of Determination (NOD) regarding the associated environmental action in filed and posted with Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino; and (2) any and all required handling charges, are paid to the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino. The applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a stamped and copy of the NOD together with a receipt showing that all fees have been paid. !n the event this application is determined exempt from such filing fees pursuant to the provision of the California Code, or the guidelines promulgated thereunder, except for payment of any required handling charge for filing a Certificate of Fee Exemption, this condition shall be deemed null and void. Rev. 8/1/95 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: October 2, 1995 TO: Mayor nd Members of City Council Jac am, AICP, City Manager FR rad Buller C~ty Planner S : NME~TAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-11 The attached Planning Commission staff reports were inadvertently left out of the October 4 agenda packet. They were to have been an exhibit to the City Council staff report beginning on page 187. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. BB:gs CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: September 27, 1995 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAl, ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAl. USE PERMIT 95-11 - LEWIS DEVEI.OPMENT CO. - The proposed development of an integrated shopping center totaling 495,736 square feet on 47.33 acres of land with proposed phase one consisting of a 132,065 square foot Home Depot home improvement center in the Mixed Use (Commercial, Office, Residential) District of the Term Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151;18 and 24. Related Files: General Plan Amendment 95-01-B, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01, and Tentative Parcel Map 14022. (Continued from September 13, 1995). At its regular meeting on September 13, 1995, the Planning Commission continued this item and all related items to allow the applicant sufficient time to complete the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) to the satisfaction of SANBAG and City staff. Because it was not known at the time of preparation of this report (and the advertising deadline) if the TIA will be accepted by SANBAG and City staff in time for the Planning Commission to take final action on September 27, this item has been advertised to be forwarded to the City Council for final action. In addition, the Commission directed the applicant to work with staff to clarify a number of issues raised by the developer during public testimony at the September 13 meeting. Staff met with Lewis Homes and the majority of the issues have been addressed. The resolution has been updated as appropriate. The wording was clarified on Planning Conditions 4, 9, 19, 42, and 46, Planning Condition 30 regarding tree replacement was deleted, Planning Condition 18 regarding outdoor displays was deleted in favor of Planning Condition 38, and Planning Condition 32 regarding the Design Guidelines was deleted in favor of Planning Condition 11. Other Planning conditions were discussed, but wording remains as originally proposed. The wording was clarified on Engineering Condition 9, Engineering Condition ld was revised to allow the 18-inch corrugated metal pipe crossing Foothill Boulevard to be abandoned in place with a slurry fill, Engineering Condition 2 was clarified to indicate that the driveway shall align with the future Masi Drive as currently designed, and Engineering Condition 20 was revised to allow the developer to submit a request for a refund of a portion of the in-lieu fee for the future undergrounding of existing overhead utilities on the opposite side of Rochester Avenue. The applicant may still wish to address several conditions. j PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 27, 1995 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 95-11 through adoption of the attached Resolution and recommend issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. BB:SH:mlg Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 13, 1995 Resolution of Approval " Its7 5 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: September 13, 1995 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner ENVIRONMFNTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-11 - LEWIS DF:VELOPM!=NT CO. - The proposed development of an integrated shopping center totaling 495,736 square feet on 47.33 acres of land with proposed phase one consisting of a 132,065 square foot Home Depot home improvement center in the Mixed Use (Commercial, Office, Residential) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the nerthwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18 and 24. Related Files: General Plan Amendment 95-01-B, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01, and Tentative Parcel Map 14022. PROJECT AND SITF DFSCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and 7oning: North - South - East - West - Vacant; Low Medium and Medium Residential (4-8 and 8-14 units per acre, respectively) Vacant; Industrial Park (Industrial Specific Plan Subarea 7) Single Family Residences and Vacant; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Office Professional Vacant; Office, Hospital, and Related Uses General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) North - Low Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) South - Industrial Park East - Office and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) West - Commercial Site Characteristics: The site has no significant land forms or any structures, but a few mature Eucalyptus trees are scattered across the property. These trees are proposed to be removed in conjunction with development of this site. The site slopes gently from north to south at roughly 3 percent. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 13, 1995 Page 2 Parking Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage RStiQ Required Provided Home Depot 132,065 1/200 660 565 * (Phase 1 ) TOTAL Retail Shopping Center 495,736 1/200 2,479 2,474 * * Please refer to parking analysis (Section B of Analysis) for further details. ANALYSIS: General: The applicant is proposing to develop a 103,000 square foot Home Depot with a 23,665 square foot garden center and 5,400 square foot house plant enclosure as Phase 1 of a Master Planned Shopping Center consisting of 495,736 square feet of retail space. The intent of the applicant is to receive approval of only the Home Depot and related improvements at this time; future applications with modifications to the Master Plan will be processed at such time development is proposed for future phases of the Master Planned Center, similar to projects such as Terra Vista Town Center and Town Center Square. The purpose of the Master Plan is to establish a concept plan on how the center could be developed while meeting the technical and design criteria of the City. Home Depot is shown near the northeast corner of the site. An 8-foot high screen wall and landscaping are proposed to screen the loading area from view of Rochester Avenue and the future Poplar Drive. The building has also been set back 80 feet from the curb along Rochester Avenue. Traffic Control measures, as required by the City's Traffic Engineering Division, will be installed at the new project driveway along Rochester Avenue, directly across from Chervil Street. With Phase 1 development, the applicant is proposing to take vehicular access from two locations along Foothill Boulevard, two driveways on Rochester Avenue, and one driveway on Poplar Drive. One of the driveways along Foothill Boulevard is for vehicles entering the site only, while the other lines up with the future Masi Drive to the south. The second driveway on the Rochester Avenue frontage is exclusively for large trucks exiting the lumber off-loading area in back of the Home Depot. The driveway on Poplar Drive is designed for large truck access to the loading and unloading areas and for some employee parking. As part of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan Activity Center area for the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue, the project includes a pedestrian activity area at the corner with a fountain, seating, and upgraded landscaping and decorative hardscape, with elements tying together this design with the activity center designed for the Masi project. The proposed Master Plan includes six other major tenants in a line of buildings west of the proposed Home Depot. In addition, eight other pad buildings along Foothill Boulevard are shown on the Master Plan, two of which are fast-food restaurants and one a service station. i 1' D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 13, 1995 Page 3 Again, the balance of the center is shown in concept only; specific development plans will be required at such time future phases are proposed for development. It should be noted that the Master Plan has been reviewed by both staff and the Planning Commission and even though the plans may change when actual development is pursued, the concept of the Master Plan is consistent with the direction given by the Planning Commission at the Planning Commission Workshops. North of the commercial project is vacant and zoned High Residential District. The plans show a 1 O-foot grade difference between the two land uses. The applicant stated that they do not have plans to develop the site in the next five or ten years. The residential design depicted on the plan is a concept to show that proper buffedng and screening can be achieved between the two land uses. Staff would like to point out that new design guidelines requiring extensive buffering between the two land uses are being proposed in the related Term Vista Community Plan amendment. Parking: As noted in the parking calculations for the project, Phase 1 development would be deficient 95 parking spaces as shown on the Phase I Development Plan. To address this deficiency, staff has included a Condition of A,Dproval requiring a minimum of one parking space per 200 square feet for Phase 1 development. Therefore, the Phase lines will require modification to ensure that the additional parking will be provided to meet the minimum number required for Home Depot. As for the Master Plan, the site is deficient 5 parking spaces as shown on the conceptual Master Plan, under the assumption that no more than 15 percent of the total gross floor area will be occupied by food service users. As noted eadier, each phase of development will require design review, thereby insuring that all technical criteda (including parking ) will be provided in accordance with City standards and policies. Planning Commission Workshops/Design Review Committee: The Planning Commission held a sedes of workshops on this project dating back to December 28, 1994. To "forrealize" the Development Review process, the Design Review Committee (Barker, Lumpp, Fong) did review the project on August 1, 1995, but recommended that, because of the significance of the remaining issues, the project be reviewed further by the full Planning Commission in a workshop format. The Action Comments from that meeting are attached for your convenience. At the two most recent workshops, held on August 9, and 23, 1995, the Planning Commission directed the development team to revise the plans to the satisfaction of staff prior to this meeting for Commission consideration. Of primary concern were the following: 1. The vehicular circulation in the parking area south of the Home Depot, 2. The screening of the lumber off-loading and ddve aisle along Poplar Drive. Technical Review Committee: On August 2, 1995, the Committee reviewed the project and determined that, with the recommended special and standard Conditions of Approval, the project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances. The project was reviewed by the Grading Committee on August 1, 1995, and modifications to the design were recommended by the Committee. These changes have been reviewed by staff and deemed acceptable to resolve the concerns of the Grading Committee. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 95-11 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. September 13, 1995 Page 4 Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study. Staff found no significant impact on the environment with the development of the project because proper mitigations on the buffering and screening between the commercial and residential uses and the improved on-site circulation design have been incorporated into the project design. However, the recommendation to issue a project level Negative Declaration is contingent on the Planning Commission's recommending the issuance of a Negative Declaration for the General Plan Amendment and the Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public headng in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices were sent to all property owners within a 300 foot radius of the site as well as an expanded notification area within the residential area east of the site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit 95-11 and the issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. However, this recommendation is contingent on the Planning Commission's recommending approval of the General Plan Amendment and the Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment to the City Co,uncil as well as their final approval. If the Commission can not make a recommendation on the General Plan Amendment and the Community Plan Amendment, the Conditional Use Permit needs to be continued. BB:SH:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" Exhibit "B" Exhibit "C" Exhibit "D" Exhibit "E" Exhibit "F" Exhibit "G" Exhibit "H" Exhibit "1" Exhibit "J" Exhibit "K" Exhibit "L" Exhibit "M" Resolution Site Utilization Map Site Plan (Phase I) Master Site Plan Conceptual Landscape Plan (Phase I) Master Conceptual Landscape Plan - Activity Center Concept Grading Plan (Phase I) Building Elevations (Home Depot) Conceptual Building Elevations for Major Tenants Storefront Promenade Details Cross-Sections/Details Floor Plan for Home Depot Design Review Committee Comments Dated August 1, 1995 of Approval with Conditions ~ 3 1,5 3 H 3 0 ~ .r', p I '1 /~I/31T ~" I/~7T-- !! u.I z 3~N3AY Ill i U3J. S:~HOOU ~'~Prl~tT "F 15"/L. .i:; I- E,Y' Ht/'2 iTl,~.../ 0 , 0 ~. , ' ~ ~ ' , ~ ~. ©©©©©©GO ~ ~x'HIf21T ' DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:20 p.m. Steve Hayes August 1, 1995 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-11 WESTERN LAND PROPERTIES - The development of an integrated shopping center totaling approximately 495,736 square feet on 47.33 acres of land with proposed phase one consisting of a 132,065 square foot Home Depot home improvement center in the Mixed Use (Commercial, Residential, Office) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151 - 18 and 24. Related Files: Term Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 and General Plan Amendment 95-01B. Design Parameters: The vacant site is bounded by undeveloped land in all directions, except to the east, where a single family residential housing tract exists, and to the south a building exists that will be retained for the future Masi PlaTa development as an Old Spaghetti Factory. No significant landforms exist on the property, however, a few mature Eucalyptus trees are scattered across the site and are proposed to be removed in conjunction with development of the site. The site slopes gently from north to south. The project is designed to take its primary access from Foothill Boulevard at the future signalized intersection with Masi Drive. This access lines up with the future project on the south side of Foothill Boulevard. The proposed vehicular access on Rochester'Avenue lines up with Chervil Street to the east. Other driveway locations have been located in conformante with the regulations of Caltrans and the Engineering Division, as applicable. As part of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan Activity Center Area for the intersection of Foothill and Rochester, the project includes a pedestrian activity area at the comer with a fountain, seating, and upgraded landscaping and decorative harriscape, with elements tying together this design with the activity center designed for the Masi project. A master plan for development of the four comers of the Activity Center is included within the plan submittal. Home Depot is shown near the northeast comer of the site. An 8-foot high screen wall and landscaping are proposed to screen the loading area from view of Rochester Avenue and the future Poplar Drive, the building has been set back 80 feet from the curb along Rochester, and traffic control measures as required by the City's Traffic Engineering Division will be installed at the new project driveway along Rochester, directly across from Chervil Street. To the north of the commercial project, a future multiple family residential development is proposed. A lO-foot grade difference is proposed between the two uses with a 10- to 15-foot wide landscape buffer on each project boundary. Even though the residential project is only shown in concept, it appears that it is the intent of the applicant to have two and three-story multiple family buildings internal to the residential site with a drive aisle and parking along the interior property lines to provide an additional buffer between the residential units and the shopping center. The project was the subject of two previous Planning Commission workshops (minutes are attached). Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 187/X DRC COMMENTS CUP 95-11 - WESTERN LAND PROPERTIES August 1, 1995 Page 2 Site Plan: A master plan of the multiple family residential area north and west of the site should be provided to illustrate how the shopping center, as currently designed, will mitigate any potential negative impacts (i.e. land use transition, noise, aesthetics, etc.) related to locating a shopping center adjacent to residential development and how pedestrian connections can be planned from surrounding residential land to the shopping center. The parking area south of the Home Depot should be modified with clearer major through drive aisles that are designed to avoid dead ends in the middle of long rows of parking stalls. The Committee should consider whether the linear appearance of the storefronts has been modified enough to address previous Commission concerns relative to this issue. The four way vehicle intersection north of Pad C should be redesigned to be at more of a fight angle. In addition, the sweeping curve leading up from Foothill Boulevard should be straightened with longer radius curves. Drive-Thru Pads C and E should be redesigned'[o provide longer stacking areas for the drive- thru lanes. Typically, 8-10 car stacking is needed. A significant east/west pedestrian link should be provided along the southern half of the project (i.e. along the main drive aisle) to promote pedestrian movement among the pad buildings. Connect sidewalks at project entries to a logical on-site sidewalk system. Cross-sections of the loading area at the rear of the Home Depot, including proposed screening devices, should be prepared for Committee review, as requested at the previous Planning Commission Workshop. A more elaborate design guideline package (similar to Terra Vista Town Center) should be provided for Committee review. Architecture: The rear (north) elevation of the Home Depot should be significantly upgraded, being that it will face future residential development. Screening of roof-mounted mechanical equipment is going to be of special concern with this project, given the potential grade difference between the project and the future residential project to the north. A design solution for Home Depot as well as other buildings should be considered now because these screens may become an integral part of the architectural design. Provide several sight-line cross-section studies to show equipment in relation to parapet height. Secondam Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Site Plan: The customer pick-up lane in front of the Home Depot should be defined by using special paving to match other uses of special paving within the shopping center. /t37 v' DRC COMMENTS CUP 95-11 - WESTERN LAND PROPERTIES August 1, 1995 Page 3 The landscape buffer between the shopping center and the future residential project to the north should be increased in width and density of planting. In addition, the landscaping on the outside of the screen wall along Poplar Drive should be upgraded. The layout of the parking lot should be revised to minimize vehicular circulation problems in several' areas of the site, which will be highlighted by staff at the meeting. A greater depth for vehicle stacking should be provided at the two westerly accesses to Orchard Avenue· Landscaping should be introduced along the storefront of Home Depot wherever possible. Virtually none is proposed over the-400 foot long front elevation. Architecture: The typical enhanced storefronts should be enlarged and increased in depth to become a more integral part of the architectural design. 2. A more decorative roofing material than galvarffzed metal sheets should be used on all arcades in the promenade area. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: The activity center concept should be carried westward across the Foothill Boulevard frontage to the first driveway, as required of the Masi project on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, and as required by the Foothill Boulevard Design Supplement. All proposed signage should be in balance with the proportions and massing of the buildings. The exterior treatment used on the pick-up canopy and facades of the Home Depot should be carried around to the back and undersides of the elements as well. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee review the plans in light of the staff comments raised in this report. If the Committee feels that there are significant issues remaining that should be addressed by the applicant for additional Committee review, then this item should be brought back for further Committee consideration prior to scheduling the item for another Planning Commission Workshop. However, if the Committee feels it more appropriate to have the artresolved items be reviewed again by the full Planning Commission at a workshop, then the Committee should direct the applicant and staff to schedule another Planning Commission Workshop. Attachment: Planning Commission Minutes Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: David Barker, Heinz Lumpp, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Steve Hayes DRC COMMENTS CUP 95-11 - WESTERN LAND PROPERTIES August 1, 1995 Page 4 The Committee (Barker, Lumpp, Fong) recommended that, based on the significance of the remaining unresolved issues, that the project should be forwarded to another full Planning Commission Workshop to potentially resolve the remaining design issues. The Committee and/or the applicant did offer the following comments at the meeting: Site Plan: Item No. 1 - The applicant stated that, based on the uncertainty of the market, that the preparation of a master plan for the residential area was not feasible at this time. To move along the commercial project, the applicant stated they would agree to a condition of approval that allows staff to develop the design guidelines and add them to the Community Plan for addressing the buffer and the edge treatment between the commercial and the residential developments. Item No. 2 - No resolution was reached between the Committee and the applicant on this issue. Further discussion of this item should occur at the Planning Commission Workshop. Item No. 3 - The Committee felt the linear appearance of the storefronts had been modified sufficiently to address previous Cornmission concerns. Item No. 4 - The Committee felt that the most recent revision to this intersection, with a greater degree of symmetry, would be acceptable with proper signage and striping. Item No. 5 - The Committee recommended that these pads be modified to reflect proper stacking now. Moving the pick-up windows on these pads may allow for the required stacking, to the satisfaction of staff. Item No. 6 - The applicant is proposing to use the Foothill Boulevard sidewalk with sidewalk connections from Foothill Boulevard to the pad buildings to provide the pedestrian !ink to the pad buildings. This would be a departure from previous Commission policy, and the Commission should discuss this in greater detail at the workshop. Item No. 7 - The applicant agreed to finish the sidewalk connections from the public right-of- way to the site. However, the Committee also recommended additional north/south pedestrian connections throughout the project to connect pad buildings with the major tenants. Item No. 8 - Cross-sections were provided at the Design Review Committee meeting showing how the loading areas would be screened. Considerable discussion occurred on whether the screen wall along Poplar Drive should be continued west to screen the areas where macks will off-load lumber and other building supplies, however, no consensus was reached by the Committee on this issue. Additional discussion of this item should occur at the Planning Commission Workshop. Item No. 9 - More elaborate Design Guidelines have been prepared and will be given to the other three Planning Commissioners at the Planning Commission Workshop, and may be discussed at that time. Architecture: Item No. 1 - The Committee felt that the revisions to the north elevation were sufficient to address previous Commission concerns. X DRC COMMENTS CUP 95-I 1 - WESTERN LAND PROPERTIES August 1, 1995 Page 5 Item No. 2 - Secondal::y Issues: The applicant provided line-of-site drawings to indicate that the roof equipment on the Home Depot (including the proposed satellite dish) will be completely screened from all existing development. However, of special concern in this situation would be how the equipment can be screened from the future residential multiple family development north and west of the shopping center. The applicant agreed to conditioning the residential project in the future to not be able to orient buildings to cast their views onto the rooftops of the shopping center. Site Plan: Item No. 1 - The Committee felt that the layered colored concrete to delineate the customer pick- up lane is acceptable, but preferred not to have any paint striping over it. If striping is necessary, a color other than yellow should be used. Item No. 2 - Item No. 3 - Item No. 4 - This item should be discussed further by the Planning Commission at the workshop. The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff on addressing this issue. The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff to resolve this concern. Item No. 5 - Architecture; The Committee felt that the recent inclusion of landscaping in front of the garden center and the house plant enclosure was sufficient to address this concern, understanding the function and heavy foot traffic associated with a Home Depot. Item No. I - Item No. 2 - This item was recommended to be deferred by the Committee to such time when the balance of the shopping center is proposed to be developed. The roofing material for the promenade area should be considered further at the Planning Commission Workshop. In addition to these comments, the Committee also noted that the center focal point element, now proposed as a low profile gazebo-like structure, should be considered further by the full Planning Commission. y CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting May 10, 1995 Chairman Barker called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 8:15 p.m. The meeting was held in the De Anza Room at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROT.T, C~T,T. COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Heinz Lumpp, John Melcher, Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Bullet, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Steve Hayes, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer APPLICANT/DEVELOPER: Gary Luque, Greg Hoxworth, Robert McLendon, Chuck Beechef, and Mike Lasley - Lewis Development Corporation; Gxeg George - Home Depot; Mark Bertone - Madole and Associates; Andrew Feola, Greg Mendoza - Feola, Carli & Archuleta Architects; Frank Coda, Vasanthi Ramahthan, Mark Shenouda - Greenberg Farrow Architects; Mike Sweeney - Land Concern NEW BUSINESS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-11 - WESTERN LAND PROPERTIES - The proposed development of an integrated shopping center totaling 501,324 square feet on 47.33 acres of land with proposed phase one development consisting of a 136,953 square foot Home Depot home improvement center in the Mixed Use (Commercial, Office, Residential) District of the Tetra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18 and 24. Related Files: Tetra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 and General Plan Amendment 95-01B. Brad Bullet, City Planner, introduced the Commissioners to the development team and stated the purpose of the workshop. He noted the status of the related applications and framed the major issues for Commission discussion. Gary Luque, Lewis Development Corporation, introduced the development team and referenced the proposed project timing for the Home Depot. He briefly mentioned his concern with the requirements for street improvements with the initial phase of development. Mr. Bullet suggested that, if the Commission wished to discuss this item, it could be done in conjunction with the topic of vehicular circulation, which is included on the workshop agenda. Greg Hoxworth, Lewis Development Company, elaborated on how this center was different from other shopping centers.in Tetra Vista, in that all of the users are proposed to be of the larger, major-tenant variety and none of the smaller tenants typical of most centers. /87 Z- Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, discussed the neighborhood setting and presented the concerns related to locating this project in the existing neighborhood. Commissioner Tolstoy stated how, in the early days of the City, the Commission was very sensitive to development in the surrounding neighborhood and that is why the area in question was designated as a mixed use site. He said it was felt that mixed use zoning would allow a better buffer to be planned and provided between the site and the existing subdivision of homes and any newly planned developments adjacent to the site. Andy Feola, Feola, Carli & Archuleta Architects, detailed the thought process behind the proposed architectural and site planning concept. Mark Bertone, Madole & Associates, explained the technical aspects of the site grading and drainage situation. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how far the building is set back from Rochester Avenue on the new site plan alternative presented at tonight's workshop. Mike Lasley, Lewis Development Corporation, replied that it is now approximately 90 feet back from the Rochester Avenue face of curb. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned the development team about the proposed trail. along Rochester Avenue. Mr. Lasley reported that a meandering sidewalk would be used along the entire frontage of Rochester Avenue. Commissioner Melcher asked how wide the ultimate right of way for Rochester Avenue will be and how far the proposed 4-story hotel on the northeast corner of Rochester and Foothill will be located from the existing residences. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented a site plan of the hotel indicating it is approximately 125 feet from the closest existing residence. Commissioner Lumpp observed that the proposed location of the Home Depot is approximately 135 feet from the closest residence. He felt that if the building were moved back further from the property line, a traffic circulation problem, similar to that at their Upland store, would be created. In addition, he expressed concerns that the modified plan includes a loss of landscaping against the east elevation of the building and a new vehicular access, which he felt could potentially create additional traffic hazards on site. Finally, he suggested that the best way to lower the profile of the building, as seen from Rochester Avenue, would be to add on elements at a lower, more pedestrian scale, such as colonnades, overhead trellises, etc. Commissioner McNiel objected to the new driveway along Rochester Avenue, noting the traffic congestion would increase. He strongly urged the developers to provide intensified landscaping along the east side of Home Depot and consider further lowering the pad elevation of the building. He asked who would be maintaining the landscaping along the perimeter of Home Depot. Mr. Lasley stated that Lewis Management Corporation will maintain the entire shopping center landscaping. Commissioner Melcher asked for a conceptual design of the abutting residential project to the north in order to get a better idea of how the two uses interrelate (or conflict) with each other. PC Adjourned Minutes - 2 - May 10, 1995 187/b Commissioner Tolstoy asked for clarification as to where the Rochester trail is now proposed. Mr. Lasley described, in detail, the original trail concept and its relationship to the mixed use site and the new concept on the site perimeter acting as an additional buffer between the adjacent land uses. Commissioner Tolstoy noted that with the trail proposed on the project perimeter, an even greater opportunity will exist to provide the type of buffer needed between the two very different land uses. Commissioner Melcher requested that the width of the trail feature be similar to the widthof other greenway trails used throughout Tetra Vista. Commissioner Tolstoy commented that perhaps the Terra Vista Community Plan should be amended in order to address the economic changes related to the "big box" tenant market anticipated for the future. Mr. Bullet asked for clarification on the setback issue, whether the Commission felt the originally proposed location, 45 feet back, was preferred'to the new 90-foot setback presented to the Commission this evening. No consensus of the Commission occurred at this time; however, the Commission did concur that the trail along Rochester should be upgraded~ Mr. Hayes framed the vehicular circulation issue for the Commissioners. Chairman Barker asked for clarification regarding the circulation pattern around the pick,up canopy. Mr. Hoxworth elaborated on the function and circulation around the pick-up canopy, as well as the interior function in the immediate area of the canopy. Frank Coda, Greenberg Farrow Architects, embellished further on the interior function of the area surrounding the pick-up canopy area. Commissioner Melcher observed that truck traffic will be less intrusive if truck traffic is limited to Poplar Drive, as with the original scheme. Commissioner Lumpp noted the traffic problems created near the In-N-Out Burger in the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center, and he expressed hope that resolutions to the traffic concerns could be addressed better in this situation. Commissioner Tolstoy also noted that better stacking should be provided at key vehicular access points rather than at FoOthill Marketplace. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, explained the problems associated with moving the Rochester access point to a location further south along the project frontage. Commissioner Lumpp explained why he felt the parking lot layout in front of the Home Depot works because it disperses traffic and does not create well-marked "speedways" in the parking lot. Commissioner McNiel expressed his concerns with the layout of the parking area adjacent to the Home Depot, noting that a more pronounced access aisle should be provided to connect the Home Depot parking area with the balance of the site. PC Adjourned Minutes - 3 - May 10, 1995 Cor~nissioner Tolstoy noted that most people coming from the north will decide to use Rochester Avenue. Mr. Hayes referenced the linear arrangement of the buildings and asked for Commission input on this issue. Mr. Feola talked about the uniqueness of the project and how the promenade element acts as a focal point for the storefronts. He noted that the movement in the storefronts had been increased since the December workshop. Chairman Barker noted his concern that the solid wall of buildings does not have a penetration (i.e., plaza) and stretches for the same distance as from Target to Ross in the Tetra Vista Town Center. Commissioner Melcher asked how wide the pedestrian walkway is under the trellis. Greg Mendoza, Greenberg Farrow Architects, responded that it is planned to be 10 feet. Commissioner McNiel recommended that some landscaping be introduced in front of the Home Depot as well. Commissioner Lumpp stressed the importance of providing logical and clear pedestrian connections to link the entire project. Mr. Feola explained to' the Commissioners how the movement in the promenade element is substantial, not just straight as earlier commented. Commissioner Lumpp recommended that the treatment in front of the Home Depot be softened in some way to be more consistent with the rest of the project and be carried across the front of the garden center area. He recommended that the architect explore the possibility of moving the Home Depot south to aid in breaking up the linear effect along the storefronts. He again stressed the importance of providing a linear pedestrian connection from the west to east side of the project. Mr. Lasley explained the problems associated with moving the driveways along Orchard Avenue relative to providing a pedestrian connection along the lower-half of the project area. Chairman Barker noted that the project still appears quite linear in two dimensions. Commissioner McNiel requested that the applicant identify the pedestrian connections better for major entrances to parking areas. Mike Sweeney, Land Concern, highlighted the attributes of the storefront promenade feature, stressing that the feature extends over the entire storefront area instead of being concentrated in one specific plaza area. Mr. Bullet asked the Commission for clarification on the pedestrian circulation system. Chairman Barker asked for input from other Commissioners as to whether the pedestrian circulation as proposed meets the intent and goals of the Tetra Vista Community Plan. Commissioner Lumpp felt that it would, with the suggested changes. PC Adjourned Minutes - 4 - May 10, 1995 Is7 Mr. Mendoza presented the proposed revisions to the other site'planning issues raised in the staff report. Commissioner Melcher felt that more room should be allowed for the proposed drive-thru restaurants for maneuvering, parking, and outdoor eating areas. Commissioner McNiel expressed his concern with placing a service station adjacent to the major project entrance. Commissioner Lumpp stated that it would be his preferenceto provide sit-down restaurants and that the service station be provided at the corner of Foothill and Orchard. Chairman Barker expressed his concern with the garden shop on the west side of Major One. Mr. Lasley suggested that this issue be deferred and considered with the appropriate phase of development. Mr. Sweeney elaborated on the proposed activity center concept and the differences between a formal versus the proposed informal design. Mr. Bullet further framed the issue for the Commission, explaining the concept used on the Masi project and how the concepts could be tied together to create some uniformity for all four corners. Chairman Barker stated his preference for the original, more informal concept. Commissioner McNiel stated why he feels the pedestrian activity centers are a good idea. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the applicant could take advantage of providing different levels of activity at each corner within the activity center. Commissioner Melcher clarified that the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (FBSP) requir?s consistency among the four corners within an activity center and that anything else would be in violation of the spirit of the plan. However, he disagreed with the FBSP requirement in this situation, and felt that the original concept of the applicant was highly preferred. Commissioner Lumpp noted that the historic relevance of the corner and its buildings could be taken into consideration with the design of the activity center. Commissioner Melcher felt that the formal design could be applied once transitioning away from the corner to bring in the element of consistency with the Masi project and future development on the other corners. Commissioner Lumpp expressed his support for the unique individuality of the center. Fur. Feola stated that a design criteria package would be developed to ensure that the architecture of the pad buildings would be complementary to the line of major tenants. Mr. Lasley ensured the Commission that such guidelines could be enforced. PC Adjourned Minutes - 5 - May 10, 1995 DD Commissioner Melcher observed that Home Depot does not relate to the rest of the center in terms of architecture. Mr. Lasley explained the architectural differences to the Commission and pointed out the elements that tie the Home Depot to the rest of the center. Commissioner Tolstoy requested that something be done to soften the front elevation of Home Depot. Mr. Coda embellished on the function in front of the Home Depot and stated that maybe the promenade element could be extended to be in front of the garden center and on the east side of the building. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the architecture did not have enough detail. Commissioner McNiel agreed with Mr. Coda and thought that carrying the promenade element to be in front of the garden center and nursery would be a good idea. Chairman Barker felt that the elevations adjacent to existing and future residential development should be studied further. Mr. Feola presented the metal roof and its proposed use to the Commission and asked for comments. Two of the Commissioners did not like its proposed use. Commissioner McNiel noted that he did not object to its use on the surface, but he felt that it would create a precedent for a lack of quality design for the future. Mr. Bullet asked for Commission comments on the central tower element. Chairman Barker did not like the low profile and bulk of the new central element and noted his preference for the original taller, more open and airy tower element. Commissioner Lumpp expressed the need for a significant focal feature (related to the clock tower element). Mr. Bullet recapped the major comments generated from the workshop and recommended that another workshop be held, at which time a better phasing plan for on-site and off-site improvements be prepared. The meeting adjourned 12:05 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Bullet Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes - 6 - May 10, 1995 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Workshop' May 31, 1995 Chairman Barker called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 4:30 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROtn COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Dave Barker, Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: John Melcher STAFF PRESENT: Brad Bullet, City Planner; Dan Coleman,'Principal Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Steve Hayes, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Betty Miller, Associate Engineer APPLICANT/DEVELOPER: Gary Luque, Greg Hoxworth, and Robert McLendon - Lewis Development Company; Mike Lasley - Private Consultant for Lewis Homes; Miller Archuleta and Greg Mendoza - Feola, Carli & Archuleta Architects; Mark Schenouda and Vasanthi Ramahthan - Greenberg Farrow Architects; Mark Bertone - Madole & Associates; Jill Sweeney - Land Concern. Or.D BUSINESS Ae CONDITIONAn USE PERMIT 95-11 - WESTERN LAND PROPERTIES - The proposed development of an integrated shopping center totaling 491,324 square feet on 47.33 acres of land with proposed phase one development consisting of a 136,953 square foot Home Depot home improvement center in the Mixed Use (Commercial, Office, Residential) District of the Tetra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18 and 24. Related Files: Tetra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01 and General Plan Amendment 95-01B. Brad Bullet, City Planner, summarized the issues raised at the May 10, 1995, workshop and the purpose of today's workshop. Robert McLendon, Lewis Development Company, highlighted the revisions to the master site plan. Greg Mendoza, Feola, Carli & Archuleta Architects, explained the specific changes made to the architecture and site plan in response to the previous workshop. The specific issues highlighted were: 1) change in the truck access for Home Depot; 2) moving Staples northward; 3) the new north/south drive aisle west of the Home Depot parking area; 4) the addition of the service station; 5) lining up the handicapped parking with the main storefront entrances; 6) moving the curb cut north on Orchard; and 7) the moving of Major One south to give more curve to the main drive aisle. FP Commissioner McNiel asked if the setback along the rear property line was the same as the original proposal. Grog Mendoza, Feola, Carli & Archuleta Architects, responded that this setback had not changed. Commissioner McNiel inquired as to how many large trucks per day would be dropping off building materials. Mark Schenouda, Greenberg Farrow Architects, stated that five trucks per day could be expected. Mike Lasley, Consultant, highlighted where the screen wall is pulled back from the street and extended in distance on the new site plan. He noted that the screen wall will give an appearance of being approximately 10 feet high from the perimeter streets. Commissioner Lumpp questioned if the screen wall would be long enough. Commissioner McNiel asked if Poplar Avenue would be signalized. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, replied that Rochester and Poplar Avenues will not be signalized. Commissioner Lumpp requested an explanation for the theory of screening the off- loading area from Poplar Avenue. Jill Sweeney, Land Concern, explained how the proposed hierarchy of trees and shrubs would screen this area. Mr. Bullet pointed out to the Commission that there may be a concern with the screening of the off-loading area west of the transformer. He felt that additional cross-sections should be provided to depict the proposed screening in this area. Mr. Lasley noted that a screen wall could be added on top of the proposed retaining wall and that additional landscaping could be used to provide better screening. Chairman Barker was concerned with 'the potential impact of the rear of the buildings on the future residential projects north of the commercial site. Commissioner McNiel agreed with Chairman Barker and added that the rear elevations should still be upgraded, as well as the landscape concept. Chairman Barker reiterated that he is especially sensitive to this concern in this area given the close proximity of the residential areas. Mr. Lasley noted that the screen wall will be 2 feet higher than the loading doors on the north side of the building. Commissioner McNiel added that the east elevation still may need some additional architectural enhancements. Ms. Sweeney explained the changes made since the first workshop on the Rochester trail system. PC Adjourned Minutes -2- May 31, 1995 Mr. Mendoza presented the changes made to the front of the Home Depot including a change in the columns to match the rest of the center, the addition of a wood trellis, and the upgraded design of the lumber pick-up area structure that matches the rest of the center. Mr. Bullet asked how close the pop-out on the building comes to the curb. Mr. Mendoza responded 12 to 13 feet and highlighted for the Commission how the pedestrian walkway would work in this area. Chairman Barker asked the architect to look into modifying the pop-out on the front elevation to be less obtrusive to the pedestrian walkway system. Mr. Mendoza highlighted the modifications made to the pick-up canopy area. Chairman Barker reiterated his earlier concern of how, even with the changes made to the circulation around the pick-up canopy, motorists will disperse in the parking lot directly south of the Home Depot. Commissioner Lumpp liked the parking lot layout in this area and how it forces people to scatter as opposed to denoting drive aisles of major vehicular activity. He expressed the need for the applicant to hold a neighborhood meeting soon in case the neighborhood has different ideas about the project. He felt that the cornices were designed too close together, but that the building should not be raised as a potential solution. Chairman Barker expressed his dislike for the striping in front of the Home Depot and recommended that special paving be used as a potential solution to denote the loading area. Commissioner McNiel felt that a traffic control system should be devised to help internal circulation flow better. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if any flat cart storage is planned to be provided in the Home Depot parking area. This issue was discussed and it was determined that this may not be a good idea given the Home Depot's employee policy on cart returns and that human nature does not lend itself toward using the return areas. Commissioner Lumpp suggested that one large area for cart returns may be the best alternative. Commissioner McNiel referenced the situation at Target where the cart storage is concealed by architectural additions to the building. Commissioner Lumpp indicated his support now to be able to provide a better pedestrian connection between Home Depot and Staples. Mr. Bullet asked the applicant to provide a plan that shows how the plaza area in front of Home Depot and Staples works. Mr. Lasley talked about the proposed sign program and specifically the signage size for Home Depot. PC Adjourned Minutes -3- May 31, 1995 /87/-/f/' Commissioner McNiel recommended that the sign size be reduced and that several alternatives be provided so that the sign-is in proper proportion with the building facade. Two sign alternatives were presented to the commission, One with 60-inch internally illuminated 'orange letters and the other with 72-inch letters. Commissioner McNiel asked the architect to make sure that the pick-up canopy treatment used on the exterior side of the element is carried around to the undersides of the element as well. He also felt that the pop-out area on the front side of the Home Depot was an afterthought and that it should be eliminated or moved to a location that does not interfere with pedestrian circulation. He expressed his concerns with the length of the flat parapet and the minimal depth of the entry element. He noted that some columns should be used at logical termination points to enhance the appearance of the building. Chairman Barker asked for an explanation of the service station area. Mr. Mendoza explained the internal circulation patterns and the functions of the service station. Chairman Barker felt something should be done to provide better balance and symmetry at the main entrance. Mr. Lasley suggested that Pad E could be rotated to be on an angle to match the service station building and harmonize the theme through landscaping. Mr. Bullet mentioned that the spacing and patterning of the Craps Myrtle trees could be tightened up on the project site and pavement patterns similar to those used across Foothill Boulevard could be used to integrate the activity center better with the Masi project on the opposite side of Foothill Boulevard. He noted that the special paving treatment should be extended to the first project driveway to match the Masi project. , , , , Yr ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Bullet Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes -4- May 31, 1995 IL DRAFT - FOR STAFF INFORMATION ONLY PUBT.IC HEARINGS A. ~NVIRONM~NTAT. ASSmSSMRNT AND GENERAL PT.AN AMENDMRNT 95-01B - T.RWIS DmV~.T.OPM~NT CO. - A request to change the land use designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Community Commercial for 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, and the future Orchard Avenue on the west and to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 19.2 acres bounded by the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider Commercial, Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre), and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) - APN: 0227-151-18 and 24. Related Files: Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01, Conditional Use Permit 95-11, and Parcel Map 14022. (Continued from September 13, 1995) B. ~NVIRONMENTAT. ASSESSMRNT AND TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PT.AN AMENDMENT 95-01 - T.~WIS DEVETOPM~.NT CO. - A request to change the land use district from "MOC' (Mixed Use Office/Con~nercial/Residential) to "CC" (Community Commercial) for 47.3 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the south, Rochester Avenue on the east, the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, and the future Orchard Avenue on the west and to "H" (High, 24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 19.2 acres of land bounded by the future Poplar Drive and future Church Street on the north, the future Orchard Avenue on the west, and the proposed Community Commercial designation on the south. The City will also consider "C" (Commercial), "M" (Medium, 8-14 dwelling units per acre), and MH (Medium High, 14-24 dwelling units per acre). The changes include amending portions of the text and various tables and graphic exhibits of the community plan to implement design features of the proposed land use designations - APN: 0227-151-18 and 24 Related Files: General Plan Amendment 95-01B, Conditional Use Permit 95-11, and Parcel Map 14022· (Continued from September 13, 1995) C. ENVIRONMRNT~T. ASSESSM~.NT AND CONDITIONAT. US~ PERMIT 95-11 - T.EWIS DE~.T.OPMENT CO. - The proposed development of an integrated shopping center totaling 495,736 square feet on 47.33 acres of land with proposed phase one consisting of a 132,065 square foot Home Depot home improvement center in the Mixed Use (Commercial, Office, Residential) District of the Tetra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18 and 24. Related Files: General Plan Amendment 95-01B, Tetra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01, and Parcel Map 14022. (Continued' from September 13, 1995) ~NVIRONM~.NT~r. ASS~SSM~.NTAND TENTATIVE PARCEr. MAP 14022 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT ~Q, - A subdivision of 66.5 acres of land into 12 parcels in the Mixed Use Development District of the Tetra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18 and 24. Related files: General Plan Amendment 95-01B, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01, and Conditional Use Permit 95-11. (Continued from September 13, 1995) Alan Warren, Associate Planner, presented the staff report regarding General Plan Amendment 95-01B and Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01. He reported that the Traffic Impact Analysis had still not been accepted as complete. He Planning Commission Minutes -2- September 27, 1995 DRAFT - FOR STAFF INFORMATION ONLY indicated minor issues need to be resolved and the stated the City's Traffic Engineer felt the matter should be resolved by the October 4 City Council meeting when these projects were scheduled to be heard by the City Council. Steve Hayes, Associate Engineer, presented the staff report regarding Conditional Use Permit 95-11 and distributed phasing plans submitted by Lewis Development Co., which outlined three phases of the project. He noted that Phase 1 had been expanded to include the required minimum number of parking spaces. Chairman Barker asked if Phase I includes the service station depicted immediately east of the central driveway off Foothill Boulevard. Brad Buller, City Planner, responded that the Phase i line depicts' the infrastructure which will be built with Phase 1. He indicated that Pads A, B, C, and D would not be built at this time and their pads will be landscaped and treated for erosion control until they are built upon. He stated that an updated, color landscaping plan was posted on the wall. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Gary Luque, Lewis Development Co., 1156 North Mountain Avenue, Upland, thanked the Planning Commission and staff for their assistance and cooperation in moving the project forward. He remarked that Home Depot is pleased and hopes to open in early spring of next year. He reported that Lewis met with staff following the last Planning Commission meeting to discuss the issues they had raised at the previous meeting. He thought the proposed text changes to the Terra Vista Community Plan were satisfactory. He noted that their revised phasing plan includes sufficient parking within Phase I and he thought Planning Condition No. 30 with regards to additional parking should be deleted. He requested that the art piece in the activity center not be required until 180 days after issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for Home Depot. He asked for' clarification that there will only be one art piece in the Activity Center. Mr. Luque stated that the project was originally presented in two phases with Phase 1 being Home Depot. He reported that Lewis had proposed to staff that the construction of Orchard Avenue be triggered by a need shown by a traffic warrant study. He did not think that development of perhaps a fast-food restaurant in Phase 2 should trigger having to construct Orchard Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and ChUrch Street. He said the Planning Commission and staff had indicated they wanted a more concrete trigger than a traffic study. He said Lewis is now proposing dividing the project into three phases and would like to tie construction of Orchard to any construction in Phase 3 or if warranted by a traffic study with development in Phase 2. Commissioner McNiel noted that the Phase i line goes to the back of the main entrance driveway off Foothill Boulevard prior to entering the parking lot and he questioned how it will be treated. Robert McLendon, Lewis Development Co., 1156 North Mountain Avenue, Upland, stated they would put in permanent improvements up to the curb at the south end of the four-way intersection and temporary improvements north of that point. He stated the driveway would be completed in Phase 2. Commissioner McNiel asked if the north end of the intersection would be temporarily closed with an asphalt curb. Mr. McLendon replied that was correct. Planning Commission Minutes -3- September 27, 1995 DRAFT - FOR STAFF INFORMATION ONLY Chairman Barker questioned if problems would not be caused by blocking off the driveway during construction of Phase 2. He thought it would be better to take the intersection improvements further north. Mr. McLendon responded that they would initially improve over half of the intersection. He noted that the driveway pattern to the north may be revised based on future build out and they wanted to allow flexibility. Commissioner McNiel asked if special paving is being used in the intersection. Mr. Buller said special paving is used up to and including the intersection. Mr. McLendon said they would find some way to join it. Mr. Buller said that staff had thought the full intersection would be completed up to the curb line on the north face of the drive lane. Mr. McLendon said they would do that if the Commission preferred. Commissioner McNiel felt that would be better than having two halves which may not match. Chairman Barker agreed. Mr. McLendon said they would improve the intersection to the north radius of the curb. He said the curbs may be temporary, but the grade surface would be improved to its ultimate condition. Commissioner McNiel questioned if there might be a problem with emergency access if Orchard Avenue is not completed with Phase 2. Mr. Buller noted that Phase I includes five points of ingress and egress off public rights of way; two off Foothill Boulevard, two off Rochester Avenue, and one off Poplar Drive. He noted that if Majors 6 or 7 are not started, it would be possible to enter through their open fields. He believed there is sufficient public access. Mr. McLendon stated that the Phase i plan had been routed through the Fire Department and has hydrant layouts, water line locations, etc. indicated. Co~nissioner Lumpp observed that the Phase I line is located south of landscaped planter areas along the north side of the drive aisles. He thought it would be better to install the landscape planters to provide a more aesthetic entrance to Home Depot. Mr. McLendon replied they felt there is a risk that there will be changes in the site plan which would require removal of the planters. Commissioner Lumpp agreed it was acceptable not to install the planters with Phase 1. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. Mr. Bullet indicated that staff would support elimination of Planning Condition No. 30 based upon the revised phasing plan. Commissioner Lumpp questioned if a condition should be added referencing the phasing plan presented tonight. Planning Commission Minutes -4- September 27, 1995 DRAFT- FOR STAFF INFORMATION ONLY Commissioner McNiel did not. He noted there is no timetable for Phase 3. Commissioner Lumpp also felt it should be installed with Phase 2. Commissioner McNiel noted that the western boundary of Phase I is in the middle of a row of parking spaces at one point. Commissioner Lumpp felt the boundary line was drawn in that location because it included just enough parking spaces. Commissioner McNiel agreed that was the reasoning, but he thought the line should come straight south to make exiting from that area easier. Mr. Bullet observed that the Commission had indicated support for requiring construction of Orchard Avenue with an access from it with Phase 2 development, and he asked if the Commission would' consider expanding the number of major tenants that could be built with Phase 2 so that it might be more worthwhile to the applicant to build Phase 2. Chairman Barker stated the phases were outlined by the applicant and he did not care if the applicant chooses to expand Phase 2 so long as sufficient parking spaces are built with each phase. He noted that Phase i was specifically tied to Home Depot. Commissioner Lumpp felt that was a marketing issue and he did not object. Chairman Barker again opened the public hearing. Greg Hoxworth, Lewis Development Co., 1156 North Mountain Avenue, Upland, stated Lewis would have to build more anchorslthan Majors 6 and 7 in order to support the cost of building Orchard Avenue. He indicated they are currently in negotiations with tenants regarding Phase 2, but they would have to delay until they could secure tenants for Majors 3 and 4 if Orchard Avenue is required with Phase 2. He observed that Church Street dead ends at Orchard Avenue and he did not feel there will be many patrons coming south to enter the project through Orchard Avenue. He thought the majority of the shoppers will come from further away than Tetra Vista and they want people coming from outside of Tetra Vista to come on Rochester Avenue or Foothill Boulevard. Chairman Barker asked if they were interested in adding Majors 4 or 5 to Phase 2. Mr. Hoxworth said that requiring Orchard Avenue with Phase 2 would mean it will be a two-phase project. He thought perhaps they could put Major 7 in Phase 1, but noted that would mean they would again have to adjust the parking line. Chairman Barker again closed the public hearing. He asked if the Commissioners still wished to require Orchard Avenue with Phase 2. Commissioner Lumpp said his recommendation stood. Commissioner McNiel felt that not requiring it would create problems for the Rochester Avenue/Foothill Boulevard intersection. Commissioner Lumpp noted that the proposed revised text indicates that residential structures adjacent to commercial uses would require a 35 foot setback from the property line and commercial buildings adjacent to residential uses would require a 20-foot landscape setback. He asked if a 35-foot setback would be sufficient for a three-story building. Planning Commission Minutes -6- September 27, 1995 DRAFT - FOR STAFF INFORMATION ONLY Mr. Buller pointed out that Planning Condition No. 8 stated that approval is for Phase 1 development, as shown on the proposed phasing plan. He said staff would document that the phasing plan discussed tonight is the approved one. He suggested clarification to the wording to support that there will be only one art piece in the Activity Center. Commissioner Lumpp recalled there had been some discussion regarding embellishing the water feature. Mr. Bullet noted the condition reads that the design of the Activity Center shall incorporate features that exhibit the heritage of the historic citrus industry. He suggested these features could be either a plaque or a symbolic gesture in the design and reported that the applicant had indicated a willingness to work with staff. Chairman Barker requested comments from the Commissioners regarding the applicant's request that the art piece in the activity center not be required until 180 days after Certificate of Occupancy for Home Depot. Commissioner Lumpp felt their request was reasonable. He suggested it might be tied to the first building permit for Phase 2. Chairman Barker noted that Phase 2 may not be started for a long time. Commissioner Lumpp stated he would agree with the applicant's proposal for 180 days after occupancy of Home Depot. Commissioner McNiel and Chairman Barker agreed. Chairman Barker asked for staff's response to the applicant's request to tie Orchard Avenue construction to Phase 3 or upon need as shown by a traffic study. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, responded that staff recommends the condition remain as written because staff feels it is a reasonable public improvement for the progress of the development of Terra Vista Planned Community. Chairman Barker noted that a condition could be attached to any additional residential development north of this project. Mr. James agreed that was correct. Commissioner Lumpp felt that Home Depot will generate a lot of traffic and he recalled that the access off Rochester Avenue was predominantly for the benefit' of Home Depot. He recognized that Phase 2 would improve the full entry off' Foothill Boulevard but he thought Majors 6 and 7 in Phase 2 should not be obligated to take access from the north off Rochester Avenue. He felt that' patrons for Majors 6 or 7 traveling south should be able to avoid Foothill Boulevard but also avoid having to enter by Home Depot. He concurred with staff that Orchard Avenue should be built with Phase 2. He recognized that an access link should be created from Orchard Avenue to Phase 2 of the project similar to the driveway connecting Best Buy to Spruce Avenue when it first opened. Commissioner McNiel concurred. He noted that there are already traffic problems during activities at the Epicenter and he thought this center will add to the traffic. Chairman Barker asked if the other CommissiOners felt installation with Phase 3 or earlier if warranted by a traffic study would not be enough protection. Planning Commission Minutes -5- September 27, 1995 DRAFT - FOR STAFF INFORMATION ONLY Co~nissioner McNiel did not. He noted there is no timetable for Phase 3. Commissioner Lumpp also felt it should be installed with Phase 2. Commissioner McNiel noted that the western boundary of Phase 1 is in the middle of a row of parking spaces at one point. Commissioner Lumpp felt the boundary line was drawn in that location because it included just enough parking spaces. Commissioner McNiel agreed that was the reasoning, but he thought the line should come straight south to make exiting from that area easier. Mr. Buller observed that the Commission had indicated support for requiring construction of Orchard Avenue with an access from it with Phase 2 development, and he asked if the Commission would' consider expanding the number of major tenants that could be built with Phase 2 so that it might be more worthwhile to the applicant to build Phase 2. Chairman Barker stated the phases were outlined by the applicant and he did not care if the applicant chooses to expand Phase 2 so long as sufficient parking spaces are built with each phase. He noted that Phase i was specifically tied to Home Depot. Commissioner Lumpp felt that was a marketing issue and he did not object. Chairman Barker again opened the public hearing. Greg Hoxworth, Lewis Development Co., 1156 North Mountain Avenue, Upland, stated Lewis would have to build more anchors. than Majors 6 and 7 in order to support the cost of building Orchard Avenue. He indicated they are currently in negotiations with tenants regarding Phase 2, but they would have to delay until they could secure tenants for Majors 3 and 4 if Orchard Avenue is required with Phase 2. He observed that Church Street dead ends at Orchard Avenue and he did not feel there will be many patrons coming south to enter the project through Orchard Avenue. He thought the majority of the shoppers will come from further away than Terra Vista and they want people coming from outside of Tetra Vista to come on Rochester Avenue or Foothill Boulevard. Chairman Barker asked if they were interested in adding Majors 4 or 5 to Phase 2. Mr. Hoxworth said that requiring Orchard Avenue with Phase 2 would mean it will be a two-phase project. He thought perhaps they could put Major 7 in Phase 1, but noted that would mean they would again have to adjust the parking line. Chairman Barker again closed the public hearing. He asked if the Commissioners still wished to require Orchard Avenue with Phase 2. Commissioner Lumpp said his recommendation stood. Commissioner McNiel felt that not requiring it would create problems for the Rochester Avenue/Foothill Boulevard intersection. Commissioner Lumpp noted that the proposed revised text indicates that residential structures adjacent to commercial uses would require a 35 foot setback from the property line and commercial buildings adjacent to residential uses would require a 20-foot landscape setback. He asked if a 35-foot setback would be sufficient for a three-story building. Planning Commission Minutes -6- September 27, 1995 DRAFT - FOR STAFF INFORMATION ONLY Mr. Buller noted the plan calls for a floating zone of 100 and 120 feet between buildings. He said there would be a minimum of 35 feet on the residential side and 20 feet on the commercial side with the developer deciding on which side the remaining 45/65 feet would be located. He reported that the distance would be measured to the plate line of the habitable structure, not the top of the roof. He remarked that the Commission would be looking at each project. Chairman Barker stated he would not want to live in a building only 35 feet from a commercial site and he felt mitigations would have to be included. Commissioner Lumpp stated he had raised the question because the Commissioner who had expressed concern with the previously proposed 20 feet was not present this evening. He said he just wanted to make sure the issue was addressed and he was comfortable with the proposal. Commissioner McNiel noted that the applicant was requesting a High Residential designation (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 19.2 acres of the project site. He thought the Commission should discuss the appropriateness of the designation in that location. He observed that there is a High Residential designation to the northwest, but a Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to the northeast. Commissioner Lumpp stated it was his understanding that there is a guaranteed total number of units for Tetra Vista which the City agreed to when the Terra Vista Community Plan was approved. He felt that calling for a lower density i~ this location, would mean that another area would receive a higher density. Commissioner McNiel observed that when the plan was originally adopted, there was a certain number of acres for residential uses and that number of acres has been reduced. He asked if the guaranteed number of residential units was tied to a fixed amount of acreage. Mr. Bullet responded that the agreement gives the developer the right to build a specified number of units with incentives if affordable units are built. He said the plan also has the flexibility to allow moving up or down one density range. He observed that the Terra Vista Community Plan is a living document. He noted that if the Commission were to approve the High Residential designation, it would not increase the maximum number of units. Chairman Barker felt that allowing a High Residential designation would result in a higher density in that area which would create the problems inherent with increased density. Mr. Buller said it will raise the intensity of the land use in this location and may mean three stories or two stories above a garage structure. He observed the applicant does not yet have a proposed project for the site and may submit a project with a lower designation in the future. Chairman Barker felt that throughout the City there is a danger of overcrowding, leading to an increase in crime and traffic. He indicated he was not comfortable with voting for increased density. He said there had been previous public hearings where residents stated they do not want High density within the City. Commissioner McNiel felt that if there is an appropriate location for High Residential within the City, this would probably be it; however, he wanted to be sure the applicant was aware it is of concern to the Commission. He thought perhaps the density should be Medium High. Planning Commission Minutes -7- September 27, 1995 DRAFT - FOR STAFF INFORMATION ONLY Chairman Barker again opened the public hearing. Mr. Luque noted that the residential designation adjacent to Tetra Vista Town Center is High and High is also across the street to the north. He felt that the area adjacent to Terra Vista Promenade would be a logical location if they are to have High density housing. He said they currently do not have a project for the area. He remarked they would not build three-story houses because of the 35-foot height limit restrictions unless there is a 120-foot building separation. He said they could possibly have a two-story over a garage product. He was not sure they would ever build it as a High Residential area. He noted that building High density here would mean a reduction of units in another area of Tetra Vista. Chairman Barker commented that both he and Commissioner McNiel had indicated their concerns and he felt it would not be hard to fill the room with concerned citizens. Commissioner McNiel recalled that the Terra Vista Plan allows latitude for increasing or decreasing density designations by one level up or down. He thought that if the area is designated as Medium High, the applicant would still have the opportunity to go to High. Mr. Bullet stated that such a change would require a public hearing to change the designation and it would require approval by the City Council. Commissioner McNiel felt the designation should be Medium High. Mr. Luque stated they would prefer to have a High designation because they feel it is an appropriate location if they are going to have High within Tetra Vista. chairman Barker again closed the public hearing. Commissioner Lumpp reiterated that Tetra Vista has a maximum number of units. He thought that if this area is designated as Medium High, it may mean the higher density would be located in a less ideal location, and he thought that if the Commission felt there is not an appropriate location for High Residential within Terra Vista, then the City may have a financial obligation to the developer because the developer could not attain the guaranteed number of units. He felt that is probably the best location for High Residential within the Tetra Vista Community. He agreed that Medium High is probably a better designation, but he felt that if the High Residential is not permitted here, the units would have to be made up elsewhere and he feared the location might not be as appropriate. Commissioner McNiel noted that utilizing a Medium High designation here would not necessarily mean a High designation would have to be used elsewhere, it could mean that other designations would be increased by one category. He said the developer would also still have the latitude to increase from the Medium High to a High designation in this location. He said that would give the Commission an opportunity to look at it again. Chairman Barker asked the current designation. Mr. Warren stated that it is currently split between Medium and Medium High. Commissioner McNiel and Chairman Barker felt the designation should be Medium High. Commissioner Lumpp felt the designation should be High. Planning Commission Minutes -8- September 27, 1995 DRAFT- FOR STAFF INFORMATION ONLY Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Barker to adopt the resolution recon~nending approval of General Plan Amendment 95-01B with modifications to change the designation to Medium High Residential from High Residential. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: EUMPP ABSENT: MELCHER, TOLSTOY BARKER, MCNIEL - carried Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Barker to adopt the resolution recommending approval of Tetra Vista Community Plan Amendment 95-01B with modifications to change the designation to Medium High Residential from High Residential. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: LUMPP ABSENT: MELCHER, TOLSTOY BARKER, MCNIEL - carried Commissioner Lumpp stated he voted no on both motions because he felt the designation should be left as High Residential. Motion: Moved by Lumpp, seconded by McNiel, to adopt the resolutions recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 95-11 and Parcel Map 14022 with modifications to delete the condition requiring additional parking, permit installation of the art piece in the Activity Center within 180 days after issuance of a Certificat& of Occupancy for Home Depot, and clarify that only one art piece is required in the Activity Center. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: NONE ABSENT: MELCHER, TOLSTOY BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL - carried Mr. Bullet noted that all four items will be heard by the City Council on October 4. , , , , Planning Commission Minutes -9- September 27, 1995