HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978/03/22 - Agenda Packet�;-���=
i
;. .
�'
i .
,. -
--
-
.:�>>
.�
��'�.:
:.
„` ,;'
' CITY COUNCIL 11EARItig DATE: March 22, 1978 "AGENDA ITEM NO.*
NOUTINE ITEM
NON-ROUTINE ITEM
- ItANC110 CUCAMONrA E.
CITY COUNCIL TIME OF ITEM
AREA: West Valley / Rancho Cucamonga
FTIL /INDEX NO: S.A. W86 -66
PI1IPO.SAL: L. '& D. Neighborhood Shopping Center
ImNriON: NW corner of Carnelian and 19th Street
APPLICAPir: Douglas & Kathleen Hone and Douglas Gcrgen
ENGINE3W- ARC117TECT: Capilouto & Snapp
16 PUIILIC 1IFARING NOTICES SENT ON 3-7 -78
RITORT Pi:r:PARrn BY: Frank Molina
FICID INSPECTION 'Ij•n4:
DAZE OF INSPI•)CI`ICN;
PAXEL SIZE: 3.55 acres
•+•+�.ry
FxnrrrIG L z) USE: Vacant Field
'
r1ISTING ZONING: C -1 -T
J4��K uhi
�7•
SURROUNDING LAND USE A14D 'ZONING
NORr11: Citrus Groves
Zoned R- 1- 8500 -T
EAST: Graded Field
�X1J &LJCN
%� a
R -1- 8500 -T
SOVPR: Residential & Commercial
Zoned P. -1 & C -1
ITE
�3
IJEST; Graded Field
v
Zoned R- 1- 8500 -T
r
Z
GENERAL PLAN NJD DESIGNATION:
DCKY:_
8
Chaffey Community General Plan designates
site as Neighborhood Commercial
'1'1111 ENVIRONMENTAL REVTEW COMMITTEE 01I 2 -22-78
TIIAT 'I'IIIS PROJECT IJOULD DETERMINED
ENVIRONMENT. ' FrIh:F CT ON
711E
Su i o: C Nm-Su� No Calnunt
City S111ere of Inrluence: N/A
Water I-crvice: Cucamonga o. a
Sewer Service: ino as.in —
�✓ S'l'AFT IiflC•'C 11MH)ATTON; APPROVAL with attached conditions
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
r .,
t
Staff Analysis:
Applicant is proposing to establish a restaurant in conjunction
with a Neighborhood Shopping Center. On September 19, 1977,
the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors approved a
zone change for this site from an R -1- 8500 -T to a C -1 -T zone
classification. On February 15, 1978, the Rancho Cucamonga
City Council approved a Minor Subdivision for this site in
order to create five (5) commercial. lots.
The Location and Development Plan has been reviewed and com-
mented on by the Subdivision Review Committee members as
the-project relates to development criteria set forth in
County Ordinance 2179. The development has received an
AFFIRMATIVE response to all the Primary Considerations (F-'.re
Protection, Circulation and Drainage) and an AFFIRMATIVE
response to the majority of the Secondary Considerations.
Based upon the above considerations, the Subdivision Review
Committee recommends that the Rancho Cucamonga City Planning
Commission APPROVE Site Approval Index No. W86 -66.
The 3.55 acre site is relatively flat sloping from the north
to the south. The four (4) proposed buildings will occupy
30,200 square feet, approximately 208 of the site area.
Landscaping will be provided on + 22,000 square feet, approx-
imately 14% of the site area. The rest of the site will he
paved for paring (214 stalls) driveways and street improve -
ments for for Carnelian Avenue (44 foot. right -of -way) and
19th Street (44 foot right -of- -way).
The Chaffey Community General Plan designates the site as
Commercial - Neighborhood. Property to the east and south of the
site are being developed as commercial projects and would
be compatiable with this development. North and west of the
site, residential projects are being developed; however, block
walls, landscaping, position of parking stalls and lighting
away from these sites and the Foothill Freeway are all acting
as "buffering" agents between the commercial and residential
developments.
Developmental standards used for this project have taken into
consideration
the need
for neighborhood commercial services
in the Rancho
Cucamonga
area, the access points onto Car-
nelian Avenue
and 19th
Street, handicapped parking stalls,
landscaping,
adequate water
capacity, reservation of sewer
capacity and
provisions
made for the future Foothill Freeway.
yr
/1Z•
.Ci l
• 5
• •
Proposed Findings:
Based upon the above analysis, Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission make the following findings:
1. The site for Site Approval Index No. W86 -66 is :1equate
in size and shape due to its relative flatness and its
ability to accommodate the required setbacks, walls,
parking and loading areas and landscaping as set forth
by the County "Zoning Code, "T" Standards and the County
Departments regulating this development.
2. The site for Site Approval Index No. W86 -66 has adequate
access due to it being bounded by Carnelian Avenue (2.access
points) on the east and 19th Street (1 access point) on
the south. In addition, Carnelian Avenue is being improved
to a 49' foot right -of -way street and.19th street is being
improved to a 441 foot width right -of -way street.
3. The proposed neighborhood commercial use of Site Approval
Index No. W86 -66 will not have an adverse effect on abutting
property or the permitted use there of due to the compat-
ibility with the properties to the east and south and the
"buffering" techniques to be used for those properties to the
north and west. in addition, the Environmental Review Com-
mittee issued a Notice of Negative Declaration stating that
this development would have a "non- significant effect" on
the environment.
4. The proposed neighborhood commercial use is consistent with
the Chaffey Community General Plan, which designates the
site as Commercial - Neighborhood.
5. The lawful conditions stated in the approval are deemed neces-
sary to protect the public health, safety, comfort, con-
venience and general welfare.
6.' The applicant has submitted a letter from an authorized
representative of the sewering agency assuring that the
entity can and will accept for disposal sewage generated
on the land under consideration after its improvement.
Recommendation:
Based upon the aL•ove listed findings, Staff recommends that
the Planning Commission:
1. Adopt the Notice of Negative Declaration and instruct the
. secretary to issue a Notice of Determination.
2. Approve Site Approval Index No. W86 -66 to establish a
Neighborhood Shopping Center, subject to the attached
conditions.
1
Douglas & Kathleen
L. & D. Plan Index
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
lit & Douglas Gorgen
No. WBG --66 (Rancho Cucamonga)
Building permits shall be obtained and construction diligently
pursued to completion within one (1) year (or 18 months if in
con unction with tract) from the date of the initial Planning
Commission approval, unless extended by the Planning Commission,
or termination proceedings will be initiated. Requests for time
extensions shall be received by the Planning Director, in writ-
ten form, at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date,
along with the required fifty (50) dollar fee.
•10 Building permits shall not be issued for purposes applied for until the
,11 following conditions have been met:
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
5o
52
1. 52
53
54
55 .
�56
A commitment shall be obtained, in ;•:riting , from the saWering
agency. Said commitment shall indicate that the agency has the
capacity to furnish said sewer service to the subject project,
and that all the necessary arrangements have been made with
said agency to supply such service. A copy of the commitment
shall be filed with the Planning Director.
A revised Plan shall be submitted including the following:
Planning Department:
Carnelian Avenue and 19th Street shall each be permitted
to have a maximum of three (3) access drives; one access
drive shall be devoted to delivery docks. All access drives
shall be no closer than 150 feet from the southwest corner
of the subject property, xeasured along their respective
property lines. In addition, all access drives are to be a
location and width standard approved by the County Depart-
ment of Transportation. Said access drives shall be at least
100 feet apart.
A six (6) foot high decorative, masonry wall along the north
and west property lines, reducing in height to three (3)
feet at the setback area along 19 th St.and Carnelian Avenue.
Applicant shall coordinate the location, height and struc-
tural detail with the grade or adjacent properties. Details
and cross sections shall be shown on a revised plan.
- Location and design of monument and planter signs.
- Tree planter wells between parking rows, as indicated on
the attached development plan, or an acceptable alternative
landscape plan.
- Adequate automobile stacking space at driveways.
- Pour (4) copies of a landscape plan.;.for the planting and
permanent irrigation system for the development, including
setback areas and parkways, shall be submitted.to the.Dir-
ector of Planning for review and approval, to include,
the following:
k
Douglas & Kathleen Hone & Douglas Gorgen
L. & D. Plan Index No. W86 -66 (Rancho Cucamonga)
1
..Z
3
4
5
6
7'
8
9
10
11
.12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40 .
41
' 42
43
44
45
46
47
48 .
50
. Sh
b 53
3,.' 54.
1. Minimum of five (5) percent of the total site landscaped.
2, street trees, minimum ten (10) gallon size on forty (40)
foot centers shall be planted along Carnelian Avenue
and 19th Street and shall be maintained, pruned and
the parkway kept free of weeds.
3. All back -flow devices, mechanical controllers and volt-
age boxes to be located on the plans and screened with
suitable landscaping.
4. Each planter at the ends of parking rows provided with
a minimum of one specimen tree.
Conditions, covenants and restrictions shall be submitted to
the Planning Director for approval. Said Conditions, Cove-
nants and Restrictions shall be recorded in the office of the
County Recorder prior to the issuance of building permits.
Said C.C. & Rs shall include provisions for the following
conditions of approval:
1. The site area, landscaping, buildings and trash areas
shall be kept in a neat, clean and orderly manner. The
storage of.boxes, equipment or refuse outside buildings
shall be prohibited except in areas of designated and
approved for such purpose.
2. A sign criteria shall be established designating the
following:
a. Number of signs per tenant,
b. Illuminated location, type and intensity,
C. Type of sign and quality of construction,
d. Maximum square footage, location on building, precise
height of individual sign panel,
e. Color of background and style(s) of individual letters.
3. An architectural criteria shall be established desig-
nating the following:
a. All mechanical equipment to be placed on the roofs
shall be screened from view from any surrounding
areas. The use of a screening device shall be ap=-
proved by the Planning Director.
b. Any mechanical screening device shall be consistent
with and designed as an architectual element of
the buildings.
- Monument, planter and /or free standing signs shall be ap-
proved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of
permits to construct said types of signs.
4"7.421 pow. 12/77 .
ti
Douglas & Kathleen Hoz& Douglas Gorgen
L. & D. Plan Index P1o. W86 -66 (Rancho Cucamonga)
1 - One set -of complete building elevations shall be submitted
2 to the Planning:Department. In addition, said plans shall
3 show the location and height of riechanical equipment and
4 proposed screening device.
5
ti - All buildings shall be setback a minimum of 75 feet from the
7 centerline of Carnelian Avenue and 100 feet from the center -
8 line of 19th Street; further, no buildings shall be constructed
9 within these minimum setback areas.
10
11 subject property shall not be occupied and /or used for purposes applied
12 for until the following conditions have been met:
93
14
The -water system and fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance
15
with the requirements of the.State Health and Safety Code, the
16
California Administrative Code, and plans approved by the govern -
17
i.ng fire protection authority.
18
19
The sanitary sewer system of the project shall be connected to
20
the sewering agency's facilites.
21
22
Planning Department: -
23
24
All exposed slopes shall be stablized, - _.ndscaped and maintained.
25
26
Graded slopes shall be contour- gradp'1 and limited to a max-
1
27
imum slope ratio of 2 to 1 or as recommended by the Soils
28
Geologist.
29
30
All interior driveways shall be a minimum 35 feet in width.
31
32
All interior driveways shall be covered with a minimum of 2
33
inches asphalt - concrete paving, property striped to effect
34
orderly use and circulation.
35
36
All interior driveways shall be covered with a minimum of 2
37
inches asphalt- concrete paving.
38
39
The planting and permanent irrigation system(s) shall be
40
installed per approved landscape plan.
41
42
Sidewalks shall be provided throughout the project including
43
all.peripheral streets.
44
45
Street lighting shall be provided throughout the project in-
46
cluding all peripheral streets. All lights provided to i1-
47
luminate off - street parking and loading areas shall be so ar-
48
ranged as to reflect light away from adjoining residential
49
development, as well as streets and highways.
50
51
Utility lines shall be placed underground in accordance with
52
requirements of County Ordinance No. 2041.
' ^ -.53
s a
roSS
j4-24"Y,48X
-
ROV. 12/77 -
A
' Douglas
& Kathleen & Douglas Gorgen
L. & D.
Plan Index No. W86 -66 (Rancho Cucamonga)
1
All mechanical equipment installed on the roof shall be screened.
2
The screening device shall be considered as an architectural
3
element and designed to blend with the buildings_ Higher
4
parapets for the purpose of screening should be considered.
S
Said screening device shall be approved by the Planning Director.
6
7
Trash areas shall be enclo3ed with a decorative masonry wall,
8
six (6) feet high and solid wood or metal gates.
9
10
All signs shall be in accordance with Section 61_027(c)(3)
11
of the San Bernardino County Zoning Code. Plans shall be
12
submitted to the Planning Department, West Valley Planning
13
for.approval prior to the issuance of permit-. for signs.
14
1s County Firewarden:
16
17
Fire flow shall be a minimum of 3000 gallons per minute (GPDI) ,
18
at the minimum residual pressure of 20 Pounds Per Square
19
Inch (PSI), for a duration of 2 hours.
20
21
Calculations substantiating that the required fire «low will
22
be provided shall be submitted to and approved by this depart-
23
ment prior to any installation. The calculations shall be
24
developed and signed by a Licensed Civil Engineer.
25
26
All fire protection water mains shall be a minimum 8 & 12
27
inch Inside Diameter (ID), and shall be installed in accor-
28
dance with the Cucamonga County Water District "Standard
29
Specifica *_ions (current revision) for Installation of 16 -inch
30
Diameter and Smaller Water Mains, Valves and Appurtenances ".
31
32
Fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with specifi-
33
cations of the Foothill Fire District (copy attached).
34
35
Fire hydrants shall be installed at locations as indicated
36
on plan(s). A copy of the approved, signed plan(s) shall be
37
provided for fire department files.
38
39
Persons installing fire hydrants and fire protection water
40
mains shall notify this department for an acceptance test
41
upon completion of installation. .
42
43
County Transportation Department:
44
45
Construction of a mountable curb along the northerly boundary
46
of the northermost parking areas (8 and 9).
47
48
Installation: of two special guide signs. to read "DELIVERY
49
VEHICLES ONLY ", the sign to be white on green with 4 inch
50
letters. Final design and location to be approved by the
51
Traffic Division of the Transportation Department.
52
53
54
.
56
.
`. i,' ta$4u7ie1 w.:: 12177
Douglas & Kathleen Hd!!'& Douglas Gorgen
L.. & D. Plan Index No..W86 -66 (Rancho Cucamonga)
1 County Flood Control District-
2
3 Carnelian Avenue shall be designed as a water--carrying street.
4
5 Adequate provisions shall be provided to prevent.street flows
6 from Carnelian Avenue entering the site. Such provisions could
7 include adequate site elevation' or a masonry block wall.
3
Adequate provisions shall be provided along the north boundary
", 10 to conduct the local drainage flows from the north, around or
through the site.
'13 Adequate provisions shall be made' for dewatering the site.
1.14
;15 Any grading and /or improvement plans should be submitted to
16 this office for our review.
17
18 The conditions enumerated above are continuing conditions. Failure
19 of the applicant anal /or operator to comply with anv or all of said
20 conditions at any time shz;ill result in the revocation of the permit
21 granted to so use the property.
22
23 A faithful performance bond in an amount equal to the estimated cost
24 of uncompleted required improvements, plus the cost of administration,
25 shall be posted with the Transportation Department and /or the Building
26 and Safety Department if the required improvements have not been com
27 pleted at time the occupancy permit is sought.
28
I 29 Prior to any occupancy, a Certificate of Final Completion shall be
130 issued by the Department of Building Safety, after which, an appli
31 cation shall be submitted to the Department of Environmental Health
32 Services for Certificate of Occupancy.
33
35
36
37
38
39
`40
# -41
1#
42
4
3
44
:r
45
46
47
48
.
49
_'
(;iii COUNCIL HEAR1140 bATEI March 22, 1978
AGENDA ITEM NO._t�-_
ROUTINE ITEM
NON- ROUTINE ITEM
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
TIME OF ITEM
CITY COUNCIL
AREA: West Valley / Rancho Cucamonga
PILE /INDEX NO: Zone Change / W97 -85
PROPOSAL: Zone Change from R -3 to C -1
DMATICN. S /:: Arrow Route, apProx. 332 feet_
E/ o Archibald, .Rancho Cucamonga'
APPIJCAWi- Chino Basin Municipal Water District
FNGINF2WAMiI7T)Cf
40 PUBLIC IIENMG NOTICES SENT ON. 3 -7 -78
u RT Pw- -.PARFI) BY: Douglas Payne
FIBID INSPECTION TEAM:
DATE OF r4SPECTIm
PARCEL SIZE: 5.5 acres
F- <ISTING LAND USE: Chino Basin MWD general offices and vacant land
FOISTING ZONING,: R -3
AA?R0W .¢IXtTE
SURROUNDING LAND USE AI4D ZONING
NOIYTH: Commercial and Residential
Zoned C -1 & R -3
EAST: Residential
sr. t
Zoned R -1
i
SCILMI: School
d
WEST: Tentative Tract 9405,
- /;e .00
Vacant, A -1 & C -1
GDM4AL PLAN AND DESIGNATION:
Valley Portion, County G.P. / Urban Areas
V
THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ON 1 -18 -78 DETERMINED
THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD fIAVE A NON - SIGNIFICANT' EFFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT. -
City Sphrre of
Water Service:
Scwer Service:
STMT RECOfTffNOATION:
PLANNING COiM1ISSION ACTION:
.1
Staff Analysis
Requested is a zone change to the C-1 district on an irregular
shaped 5.5 acre site, generally located on the southeast corner
of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route_ The C-1 zone district is
requested to permit an expansion of the parking area for the
Chino Basin Municipal Water District (CBMWD) general offices,
as well as for other future commercial uses_ A neighborhood
service center is proposed on the nor- :heast portion of the site.
The project boundary is described as follows: beginning with
the southeast 604 feet by 633 feet corner of Archibald Avenue
and Arrow Route, excluding the 204 foot by 332 foot corner lot
and the interior lot that fronts on Archibald, approximately
350 feet south of Arrow Route. The resulting irregular shaped
area is the subject site. The site is comprised of four (4)
parcels, all under CBMWD's ownership.
The project site is vacant and zoned R -3 with the exception of
one parcel improved with CBMWD's general offices. This portion
is located on Archibald, approximately 204 feet south of Arrow
Route. This parcel is presently zoned C -1.
Further review of the zone change requires analysis of the
total 604 foot by 633 foot corner as a whole. It is defined
on the south by an elementary school, on the east by a single -
family subdivision and on the north and west by major arterials.
The corner is vacant with the exception of the CBMWD's offices
and a building housing the Assistance League of Upland. Both
uses have individual access drives on Archibald Avenue. :'here
is an interior street which enters on Arrow Route as well as
into the two residential streets of the adjoining subdivision.
A seventy '(70) foot building setback on Archibald Avenue has
been established by the two improvements. As for on -site
parking, both uses have separate It is Staff's opin-
ion that when the area develops, whether commercial or residential,
it should be coordinated with the adjacent parcels.
To the south of CBMWD's general offices on the interior lot
excluded from the site is the Assistance League of Upland.
The Assistance League is a service organization which was
granted a site approval in August 1963 to establish a community
girls club. The Assistance League site is presently zoned R -1
and is surrounded on the south, east and north by the project
site. it is Staff's opinion that, should the requested zone
change be approved, it would be appropriate to include the
Assistance League property in the decision.
Staff Analysis. (coast.)
In general, most of the commercial uses permitted in the C -1
zone district, if adequately buffered, would be compat.ible
with the Elementary School on the south. The situation is
somewhat different for the east portion of the site, since
many of the permitted C -1 uses would be incompatible with
the adjacent single - family neighborhood. Further, the .impact
of commercial activity will be greater on the adjacent homes
silice there is common frontage. In Staff's opinion, m?nimal
traffic generating uses with appropriate buffering should be
the only type of commercial uses permitted on the eastern
portion of the site.
Findings as Recommended by Staff:
Based on the analysis stated above, the following i4.ndings
are recommended:
1. The proposed zone dis trice is consistant with the "Urban
Area" designation of the General Plan as long as the
permitted commercial uses on the eastern portion of the
site is compatible with the adjacent single - family residen-
tial neighborhood; if the development of the entire corner
is coordinated; and if adequate buffering is installed.
2. The subject zone change application has not been filed
1oncurren`ly with the development proposal.
3. The site, in coordination with the entire corner, is suitable
for many of the uses permitted in the C -1 zone district
in terms of access, size of "parcel, density, relationship
to similar or related uses, and other considerations deemed
relevant.
4. The proposed change of district classification, modified
to exclude uses not compatible with single - family resi-
dences, is reasonable and proper at this time, and with
appropriate buffering and exclusion of non - compatible uses,
it will not adversely affect adjoining properties as to
value or precedent and will not be detrimental to the area
or adjoining properties.
5. The need for an expanded parking area as well as a proposed
neighborhood center has warranted this zone change.
6. The proposed zone change modified to limit the commercial
uses on the eastern portion',of the site to those uses that
do not generate excessive noise and traffic and to include
appropriate buffering requirements, will be in the interest
of furtherance of public health, safety and general welfare.
0
Recommendations
Based upon the stated findings an�� tysis, Staff recommends
APPROVAL of thn C -1 -T zone dis tri.c,, .:,. the subject site, in-
cluding the parcel housing the ALii., +. a League of upland.
Further, Staff recommends the folly :r_ "T" standards-
1. A location and development plan to be reviewed and approved
by the Planning Director prior to any further development
of the site. said plan shall incorporate design consider-
_ ations far the entire southeast 604 feet by 633 feet corner
of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route. Design considerations
shall include but not be limited to the location of drive-
ways, parking areas, sidewalks, walls, loading areas, land-
scaping, proposed signs, lighting :fixtures, proposed struc-
tures and irrigation improvements.
2. The permitted uses on the easterly portion of the site
('parcels adjacent to the residential subdivision) shall
be limited to those C -1 zone district uses that will be,
in the opinion of the Planning Director, compatible with
single- family residential. uses.. Uses not permitted shall
include those uses that generate excessive noise and traffic
and are open during hours other than 7 a.m. to 6 p.m.
3. Appropriate buffering and screening shall be installed on
the southern and eastern boundaries. Commercial uses
located on the eastern portion shall be aesthetically
compatible with single - family residences.
4. A masonry wall six (6) feet in height shall be installed
around east project boundary. Said wall will be reduced
to four (4) feet in height within front setback areas.
All walls shall be designed and constructed to provide
visual and physical. relief along the wall face.
S. That all trash enclosures and loading areas be screened
from view on Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route.
6. That all buildings be setback a minimum of seventy (70)
feet from the centerline of Archibald Avenue, further that
no buildings be constructed within these minimum setback areas.
CITY COUNCIL IMARI 4ATE: March 22, 1976
i,;' AGENDA ITEM NO._- • .
rt ROUTINE ITEM
NON- ROUTINE ITEM
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
TIME Of ITEM
CITY COUNCIL �-'-
ARrA: Nest Va 1 ley /Rancho Cucumonga .
PILE /INDEX NO: 2C /B5 -49
PIUPOSAL: Zone Change A -1 -5 to RI- 20,000
JDCA1'ICN: N/s of Almond Street, Approximately 385.90' E/o Carnotlan St.
APPLICANT: Gertrude Hartman
LNGINEr- ZVARCJl1=r:
63 PUIILTC llEAR lG NC/CIC ES SWr ON
OR'
lUTP PRr.VARI]] By: Doug Payne-
rIELb INSPE]CfION TEAM: OAIF. OF INSPEcTICN:
PARCEL SIZE: 22 AC
F.CISfING L1\P) USE: Vacant
' CITE
XXTSTTNG ZONING: A- 1-5
SURRC M)ING LAND USE AND ZONING
_-
NOit:['H: Vacant, MI
_
EAST; Citrus, Tentative tract 9656,
, -�VIE
R1-20m
SOUL'tl. Citrus and large lot homes
-- ^'- " " —""' ' = = ='
R I —20m
WEST: Citrus, A -1 -5
L..IM...- ., a euo• -
L.
•~
L; PLAN AND pF5IGTlATION: C h a f f e y College
�•~_•
'4r�IERAI,
�� � � •x. � -"
l
G -P. /up to 1 .F DU /AC
_
i�s�oe s^ :no
Tllr ENVIROt*1.ENTAt. REVT17W committee ON
THAT TItiS PROJECT tVOULD t,AVL•
_IL�2Y -7/ DETERMINED
A nunsign ____t L•I'FECT ON 7.IIE
ENVIRONMENT.
5u) Yn l�l�
Non-Su •I port 110 CrnTnznt
(7 /Vl/l)bf01dU AAYJ'� py:
Slater .Sr-r -vice:
Sewor Service --
SfAIT- RF)CCt-tlT J1)ATIMt
PLA ?:NING COMMISSION ACTION:
STAFF ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting a zone change to R- 1- 20,b00
to permit construction of single- family equestrian oriented
homes. The applicant status that offer:, for the site have
been received from interested developers. No development
proposal has been submitted.
The site Is located on.a sloping bench at the base of the
San Gabriel Mountains. It is bounded on both the east and
west by natural drainage courses that originate from the north.
The site slopes southerly at approximately 1;%.
The site itself does not front on a street. It is; however,
part of a larger parcel that has access on Carnelian Strawt.
Carne:ian Street is located approximately four hundred 1400)
feet to the west of the site. To the east, a proposed rest -
dential development, Tentative Tracts 9656 and 9650 could
provide a second access pol'nt. Both tentative'tracts are
unapproved at this time and have been included In the group
of tracts continued until September I, 1978 by the City Council.
These tracts were continued to review the City's service
capabilities.
As mentioned, the site is a portion of a larger parcel.
Recently in January of this year, a land division No. 77 -0271,
of the larger parcel was approved. the subject site Is the
easterly portion of one of the two lots c- riated. Condition
of approval fnr :..v tare division requirea adequ:,',;, rn-sites
dral..ige easements to be dedicated to the County.
The City Is in the midst of preparing an interim General Plan.
The plan is scheduled for completion July 1, 1978. A zone change
at this time to a zone which permits a density at the upper
range of the present general plan, would interfere with the
planning process. It is possible that a lower density for the
foothills may be desired in terms of service availability and
community input.
FINDINGS
Based upon the analysis, Staff recommends the following findings:
1. The proposed zone change +o R -1- 20,000 is consistent with
the 'Residential:
for by the Chaffey
at the upper range
2. An interim General
3. A zone change at t
Interfere with the
Plan.
1
up to 1.6 DU /GA' designation, called
College General Plan; however,; It Is
of said general plan.
Plan.wlll be completed by July 1, 1978.
nis time would be premature as it will. G
processing of the interim General'
w.
s:
Page #2
March 22, 1918
Gertrude Hartman
4. The zone change application has not been filed concurrently
with the development proposal.
5. Until access Is provided frc.n development projects.on
the east, the site Is not suitable for •she uses permitted
In the R-4-20,000 zone district in terms of access and
density.
6. There are no conditions since the -ixisting zoning became
effective, sufficient to warrant this zone change.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based upon the findings and analysis, Stu ' If recommends that
the Planning Commission continue their decision on the
requested zone change to a date after the adoption of the
interim general plan.
9
CITY COUNCIL 11EARINILIJATI.7: 3/22/74
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4
� �
*ROUTINE
ITEM
NON- ROUTINE ITEM
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
TIME OF ITEM
CITY.COUNCIL
AR):.A: West Valley /Rancho Cucamonga
F118 /INDEX NO: Zc /41 -82
PIOPOSM,: Zone change from Cl to C2
TLXIATION: E/s Grove, extending btw San Bernardino Ave & Rancheros Dr.
APPLICANT: Francis -More
LT``I11GINC:gT%ARCIIIT[X.T:
T PU13LIC IWARING NOrICES Burr ON 3/ % ( W
luTtotrr PREPARID BY: Douglas Payne
FIrID INSPDCrION 'n-Wl:
DATE OF INSPECTION:
PARCEL SIZr: 3 Ac
F%ISCING LAIIO USE: Vacant
EXIS1TNG ZONING: C -1
SURR(tMING LAND USE AND ZONING
NORI'lt: Res & Comm, R -3 & C -2
iN
EAST: Church,.vacant land
5w�
and apratments,R3 & C -1
w
a
SOUTH: Duplexs and sing, fam.
4 - lie RI
R -2 and R -1
- •Z-AN-
517E pglVr
WEST: City of Upland/Mobile Home
,y
Park,R3 and Comm.Professional
o,
GUIERAL PLAN AND DESIGNATION:
U
Valley Portion
County GP /Urban Areas
TItr ENVIRONMIIiNTAI, RFVTEW Committee nN
12/22/77 DETERMINED
TIIAT TIITd PROJECT WOULD EAVG A NON- SIGNIFiCANI_f FPFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT. -- "
° - --
City SJIIE %+ , or
Water 0j.-rvicc:
Sewer Service:
STAFT 11FLI MTttTVATIM:
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant is requesting a zone change �o C -2 (general
Commercial) on the 3.05 acre site, to permit a bank and related
development or mobile home sales. It should be noted that bank
and similar commercial uses are permitted in the C -1 zone district..
The site is presently zoned C -1.
The site is located on the southeast corner of San Bernardino Road
and Grove Avenue. Further said site extends south to Rancherias
Drive and east with an access drive to Red Hill Country Club Drive.
Both San Bernardino and Grove are secondary arterials. Dedication
for Grove is requested by transportation..
The C -2 district is a general commercial classification. This
classification permits many uses that are unappropriate and in-
compatible with residential uses. The site is located
adjacent to many residential neighborhoods. On the south are
duplexes and apartments. To the west is a mobile home park and
northwest an 100 unit senior citizen housing project. There are
single family residences between the site and general commercial
uses on foothill found on the north. Jro the east are a church
and apartments.
Another aspect of this case is that the City's General Plan is in
the process of being revised. It may be inappropriate at this time
to approve a zone change that could later interfere with the
planning process for the General Plan. Finally, staff knows of no
charge to warrant the rezoning of the site to general commercial.
FINDINGS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF:
1. That changeing the site to general commercial at this time
would be premature since the City of Rancho Cucamonga is in the
process of preparing a new general plan.
2. The subject zone change has not been filed.concurrent with the
development proposal.
3. The zone change to general commercial is not reasonable and
proper at this time, and will adversely affect adjoining res-
idential property as to value or precedent and will be detri-
mental to the area adjoining residential properties.
4. There are no condition since the existing zoning became effective,
sufficient to warrant the C -2 zone.
S. The proposed zone change will not be in the interest of further -
anca of public health, safety and general welfare.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the findings and analysis, staff recommends that the
Planning Commission NOT APPROVE the C -2 zone chaange rwquest for the
site. However, if additional information is presented or issues
,r, clarified in a manner that the Planning Commission wishes to approve
;::
,.,
�r, `_ .
CITY COUNCIL 11BARM-,DATL•'s . March 22, 1978
I1
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL
- -,AGENDA ITEM 140.__5�
0 ROUTINE ITEM
NON - ROUTINE ITEM
TIME OF ITEM
ARrA- West Valley / Rancho Cucamonga
rim /INDEX NO: Zone Change / W85 -86
PROPOSAL: Zone Change from R -2 to C -2
L•'JCATICN: NE corner of maker Ave. and 9th St., Rancho Cucamonga
ACPLICANr: McCutchan & Associates
TNGINL'ER/ARCIi77'[•1; I';
, 24 PUIII,IC IIFAHING NCJTICES SEND ON 3 -7 -78
RPSr7[1I PIUEPARFD BY: Douglas .Payne
F1F:In INSPErmoN T1•J1M: DATE OF INSPUCPICN:
I'ARCrl, SIZE: 6.92 acres
FXISTING LAN[) USE: Vacant
1-_KT ';TNG ZONING: R -2
9jRJ?WDING LAND USE A14D ZONING
NOMI: Church & Vacant,
Zoned A -1
EAST: Vacant A Commercial (L CATI^Q ! MAP TO 13E PLACED HERE)
Zoned C -2 & C- 2- T(305)
SOUTIi: Residential
Zoned A -1
WEST: School
A -1
CTNEILIL PLAN P14D DESICNATION-.
Valley Portion County General Plan / Urban Areas
THE ENVIRONMENTAL, REVIE4,T COMMITTEE OIL 10 -19 -77 DETERMINED
THAT T11TS PROJECT WOU1,13 I:AVI. J N(SN= SIGN IFTCANT-"'-rI:FECT ON 7`iIE
ENVIRONMENT. — ---
City Sphere of
Water Service:
Sewer Service:
STAFF PILCb11H1,I)ATICN:
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
1
w
Staff Analysis:
The applicant is requesting a zone change to C -2 to accommodate
general commercial uses. A development plan for commercial
use has not been submitted. There is however, a development
plan on file with R -1 development. The development plan, Ten -
tative Tract 9658, was included in the group of tracts continued
until September 1, 1978 by the City Council on February 1, 1978.
Tentative Tradt 9658 also includes property to the north of the
si
site fronts on Baker Avenue, Ninth Street and Madrone
„venue. Both Baker and Ninth are collectors. Madrone is a
local street. With respect to Tentative Tract 9658, the County
Transportation Department has requested that Madrone be realigned
at Ninth Street to provide a right angle intersection.
The site is situated between residential and commercial /light
industrial uses. To the immediate east is a restaurant and
service business. To the south the General Plan calls for
urban services, a light industrial land use category. in
actuality, that is not the case. The type of use developed on
the immediate south is of residential uses. Located further
to the southeast are two warehouses. Fronting on Baker Avenue
to the immediate west of the site is Los Amigos Intermediate
School. The Cucamonga School District has written a protest
against the zone change citing that it could increase the traffic
hazard for the students. To the northwest, on the same side
of Baker, is a church. Further northwest is single - family
residential development. To the north is vacant land and a
grove. As mentioned earlier, the property to the north as well
as the site is included in Tentative Tract 9658, a single -
family residential use.
Staff is concerned with five aspects of the case. First, should
the C -2 (general commercial) zoning be approved, most of the
permitted uses would conflict with the adjacent school. For
example, vehicular traffic on Baker Avenue would increase,
jeopardizing the safety of the school children. Many uses
themselves would have an adverse influence on the children.
Further, noise and general attraction of commercail uses may
be disruptive with the educational process for the children
attending Los Amigos Intermediate School. Second, the appli-
cant has a current residential development plan, Tentative
Tract 9658, filed for the site. A zone change request to
general commercial would be inconsistent with said development plan.
Third, Staff knows of no change since the property was orig-
inally zoned R -2 that would warrant a zone change to a com-
mercial zone. Fourth, the site is adjacent to e.isint C -2
zoning. The consistency of the existing C -2 zoning with the
General Plan is questionable. Neither the existing C -2 zoned
site or the project site fronts on a major or secondary arterial,
t
rr_
Staff Analysis: (cont.)
in fact, their locations are removed from the mainstream of
traffic, Finally, Rancho Cucamonga is in the midst of, preparing
a new general plan. A zone change at this time, at such a ques-
tionable location, would only interfere with the planning process.
Findings as Recommended by Staff:
Based upon the stated analysis,. Staf e recommends the following
findings:
1. The proposed zone change to the C -2 district is not con-
sistent with the applicable general plan.
2. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is in the process of preparing
a new general plan and that a zone change to general com-
mercial at this time would be premature.
3. The zone change application for the general commercial
district has not been filed concurrently with a commercial
development plan. There has been a development plan filed
for single - family residential use, filed under Tentative
Tract 9658.
4. The site is not suitable for commercial activities in terms
of access.
5. The zone change to commercial is not reasonable and proper
at this time, and will adversely affect the adjoining
Los Amigos intermediate School.
6. There are no conditions since the existing zoning became
effective, sufficient to warrant this zone change.
7. The zone change to commercial will not he in the interest*
of furtherance of public health, safety and general welfare.
Recommendation:
Based upon the stated findings and analysis, Staff recommends
that the zone change to C -2 not be approved for the subject
site.
CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: March 22, 1978 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7
ROUTINE ITEM
NON- ROUTINE ITEM
RANCHO CUC LMnyr__n
TIME OF ITEM
CITY COUNCIL
AREA: Rancho Cucamonga
rn.c /INDEX NO: Minor subdivision Application W78- 00461:
PROPOSAL: Create two industrial lots on 6.35 acres
ILVATICN: Between 8th and 9th Streets, approx. 750 feet east of Holloman Ave. /
APPLICAN'P :Albert W. Davis I/
ENGINEER/ARCI(II'EX • p: Donald R. Peters
N/A PUBLIC ! FARING NOTICES SEM' ON
REPORT PREPARFD BY: John Perevuznik
FIELD INSPECTION TEAM: DATE OF INSPECTICN: 3/17/78
Su )ort Nui -Su port No Coam2nt
City Sphere of influence: NONE
Water SerJice:Cucamonga Wa= ftst. AX
Sewer Service:
STAFF FWC f-ZMATION: Approval with conditions.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
0
-
=•"
PARCEL SIZE: 6.35 acres M/L
r +�
" i� +° i•
F.(ISTING LAND USE: industrial Structure
ERISTING ZONING: MR (Restricted Manufacturing)
I S ►� ^s�
v SURRCXINDING LAM USE AID ZONING
+9 0
"
NORTH: Industrialf MR
w) d4)
L(
EAST: Undeveloped MR
SCVI•N: Rural Residential /FSIt
e
�r
WEST: Undeveloped, MR°
p
k
7
c
n L .p
CN
GERAL PLNN AND DESIGNATICN: Valley
portion San Bernardino
County General Plan- Urban
Services (those activities necessary
to provide
and satisfy
the specialty and internal
services needs of Both the urban and
industrial
uses.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
ON
DETERMINED
THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD EKVL AA
Administrati'✓ey exemp FrECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT.
-
Su )ort Nui -Su port No Coam2nt
City Sphere of influence: NONE
Water SerJice:Cucamonga Wa= ftst. AX
Sewer Service:
STAFF FWC f-ZMATION: Approval with conditions.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
0
f , STAFF ANALYSIS:
Application submitted to create two industrial parcels consisting.
approximately of 3 acres each. Industrial structures are presently
located on the site. The existing structures are being sold sepa-
rately and are both currently hooked to sewers..
On August 1, 1977, the Board of Supervisors adopted the Interim
Development Review procedures for the West Valley. These proce-
dures.-also apply to land division applications. As part of these
procedures, the Subdivision Review Committee has to review and make
recommendations on each application. This application was reviewed
by the committee on March 1, 1978 and they recommended that this appli-
cation be approved based on required findings.
FINDINGS:
1. The proposed plat and design of the proposed minor subdivision
is consistent with the applicable General Plan which designates
the site as an urban service area;.
2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development and
proposed density of the development.-
3. The design of the minor subdivision or the proposed improvements
are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or sub-
stantially and a;7oi.dably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
4. The design of the subdivision or the types of ia: movement are not
likely to cause serious public health problems.
5. The design of the subdivision or the types of improvement will
not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large,
for access through or use of property within the proposed minor
subdivision.
RECOMMENDATI01S:
I
Staff recommends approval of the Industrial Minor Subdivision based
on the findings and subject to the following conditions:
1. Sixty (60) foot offer of dedication and sixty (60) foot road
easement required as shown on minor subdivision plat map for pur-
poses of ingress and egress to proposed lots, which expressly
grants to the owner of the subdivision and.any successors in
interest the right to use the easement without limit as to thH`
quanity of vehicular traffic from each lot created by the ownzi.3
or successors in interest.
2. Paving, curbs and gutters shall be installed on offer of dedi-
cation roads. Plans for all improvements must be approved by
the San Bernardino County Transportation Department prior to
installation of said improvements. A cash deposit or bond may
p, r,
be placed with the County Transportation Department to fulfill
l:
this requirement.
a.;:
yNEr
•
3. Twenty (20) A drainage easement requim along the south
boundary as shown on the minor subdivision plat map.
4. A twenty (20) foot radius of return .offer of , dedication re-
quired for rounding the corners as shown on the minor sub =
division plat map.
5. Applicant shall ascertain and comply with the requirements of
the Foothill Fire District.
6. Upon completion of all other conditions, a parcel map of the
proposed division shall be recorded with the County Recorder
pursuant to provisions of the State Map Act. (None: this map
must be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or a registered
civil engineer.) An advance copy of the .parcel map may be
submitted to the County Surveyor to expedite checking, but the
County Surveyor will not accept the linen for presentation
to the County Recorder for filing until notified by the Planning
Director that your Minor Subdivision application is in order
for final approval.
A parcel map is required due to insufficient survey data recorded
with the County of San Bernardino.
7. The following information is to. be supplied to the prospective
purchasers of these lots: In the opinion of the County Flood
Coatrol District, the site is subject to infrequent_. flood
hazards by reasons of overflow, erosion; and debris deposition
from Cucamonga Creek until permanent channel improvements are
constructed. It is recommended that provisions such as site
elevation, grading, and street improvements be provided to
reduce possible flood hazards if the area is developed prior
i
to completion of the Cucamonga Creek Channel.
I
N
LAND DIVISION APPLICATION
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2! 7
4I► � � o
ISs 330 AC.
I�
-LC, O�
EX/57 /1VG SEWCR AND IVATEIt
MAINS ;::FP 72F_CVM75 OF '
C1lCAMC1VGA tea. WA77z 11 D/57.
I
�I
ilk- -lam
J171
EX /Si;%VG /1/OA!- DFDlCR7E!
00' RO-1D. 4PLF -PAVJ: D WITH'.
_ CURL, RND &IT?ER PER
l� :SgN LEIZNARD /AJD CD.
WAD DEFT. 57AND)9RD5.
I
' 3.14A4�
J kS
I ro'
' w
wIti
;
APPLICANT*
. //��//��
Namedl![IdGCY..� 92a ?1i j % I Phone
� Address
OF RECORD:'
Phone ,7/i/ &V l471,,*'
�EYI -TIV, 3LIILOIN6 AND
(D'I ARICINC,.
Oal•• /90 /v P /Pr, %yaoP.
CCLAJOJZ /V?ATLKETL t1 L523 S(D
5 7qfC—T—
T. g S. F. 1<'. k'.
-�-i-I •; t to ix
Map
SmIt
(Office Use Only)
L.D. Np.W �% T
ZONE 111"0
FEE RECEIPT N0- -13&--!dr% 1
Ll J I COUNCII, 11WARING DATE: March 22, 1978 AGENDA ITEM NO.*
OOUTINE ITEM
NON - ROUTINE ITEM
•
RANCHO CUCAMpNGA 'I
TIME OF ITEM
CITY COUNCIL
AREA; West Valley /Rancho Cucamonga
PiI-VI I)EX NO: Tentative Tract 9583 (Revised)
PROPOSAL: Tentative Map: 49 Lots - 49.6 acres
If-CATION: E/s Haven Avenue approximately 100" N/o Wilson Avenue
APPLICANT: Deer Creek Development Company
i7JGINFM,WARp1ITIX�,P: Madole & Associates, Inc.
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES SENT ON
Itl• y)" 'Tr:PA1tFi) By: Frank Molina
FIEI1) INSPECTION ILN7: DATE Or INSPECTION:
PAR M1, SIZE: 49.6 acres
Ir {ISTING LAUD USE: -Vacant Field
I•KIS'TtNG 70N[NC.: 1R -1- 20,000
v SUIW.ARI)1NG 4-d-M USE NJ CONING
NORT11: Vacant Field >
Zoned R -1- 20,000 4
FAST: Vacant Field Hiu51DE RD
Zoned R--1- 20,000
SoUnl: .Vacant Field
Zoned R -1- 20,000 ----•
WEST: Vacant Field b y CHAFFEV
Zoned 2 -1- 20,000 dl COLLLGE
G04EPAL. PINT AND DFSI ,NLITION:
Chaffey Community General Plan designates
site as Residential up to 1.6 DU /AC
.!11: ENVIROtIt•IENIAL. ItT:vlltt•1Committee ON January 3, 1978 U15TERMINED ^
THAT T11TS PROJECT WOULD L'AVI� A'�m signif- 1;t:FEC'T ON TI[E
ENVIRONMENT. -
N
N
r
City SpIx-re 0
Water Service
Scmrr Service
STATT M, MIN IMATICN: Approval with attached conditions
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
5
ti
1
no
Staff Analysis;.
Tentative Tract 9583
wit)) the San Sernardinos originall
December 16 the SCounty plannfilea on November 1, 1976
approved ' 1976 an ber Department. On
Tentative Tract 9583 nardino Counyy plan*
Subsequent consisting of Iii lots cnC80 fission
quent chap
north o£ this yes in the alignment acres.
aPProved site has necessitated of an out
49.6 acres tract The applicant is revision t channel located
The site is posed detisat now requesting or1g=nally .
b:' Havep relatively flat y of .99 dwellin g 49 lots on
Avenue to the w , of to the sauanits per acre.
CountY maintained ro west and wilson Avenue bo
ads in good condition)nue to the 1011th (both
b
The Environmental (both
ment on January
eview Committee-
tion statin Y 3' 1978 and issued reviewed the r °vised
cant Stating that Tentative Tract 9583 Notice of N develop -
located on the environment. would egative Declara-
within a designated In addition, a OFnon- signifi
Pro gnated High Fire Hazard qr,. site is not
Posed Findings:
lann upon t%e above analysis, Staff
planning Comn,;ssion make the foStaff
would recommend that the
1- Tentative Tr g f.ilidings:
Communit act 958ia'swhonsisten the Chaffey
dential Y General P t with
9583P to 1.6 dwelling hunitsgnaLes the site as resi-
Tract � u
dwelling unit�Poses 49 lots on 49.Per gross acre- Tentative
Per acre. 6 acres, a densit .99
2- The site is Y of
denEit Physically suitable for
and the o development due to the the proposed t
handling condition of H surroundin yp and
g traffic flows Haven and .Nilson g land uses
from the tract. Avenues in
3- _; a design are not at Tentative Tract 9583 and
ubstantiallkelf to cause substantial
or the proposed improve_
their habitat Yard avoidably injure fishnvironmental
Declaration tut to the issuance o and wildlifpdandge
a °non -si • stating that Tentativof the Notice of Negative
gnificant effecz11 Tract 9583
4• on 'the environment. would have
The design of Tentative Tract
improvement are not like, 9583 ur type
Problems or cause threat Y t° cause serious proposed
land conflagration to life serious public health
Health Servc due to the incord Property from a w'
site Jr. not wit requxrments and Poration of Environmental
hin a designated High po the fact zard
ire
Ha that the ,
Area.
Sy'
Proposed Findings (continued
5. Tentative Tract 9583, its design, dcnnity and type of -
development and improvements conform to the conditions imposed
by the San Bernardino County Subdivision chapter, the regu-
lations of the County Zoning Chapter and the regulations of
any public agency having jurisdiction by law due to Staff's
detailed research and analysis showing that Tentative
Tract %583 ccnforms with all of the above.
Recommendation:
Based upon the above listed findings, Staff would recommend
that the Planniny Commission APPROVE Tentative Tract 9583
(Revised) subject to the attached conditions.
i
0
Tract
No. 9583 (Alt ama) Page 2 of 8
1 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS:
3
The water system and fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance
4
with the requirements of the State Health and Safety Code, and in
5
accordance with plans approved by the San Bernardino County Health
6
Department and the governing fire protection authority.
7
8
Easements and improvements shall be provided and drainage coordin-
9
ated in accordance with the standards and requirements of the
10
County of San Bernardino and the County Planning Commission.
1,
Sphere a bond is to be posted in lieu of installation of the
13
improvement:
14
15
The domestic water plan and /or sewer plan shall be reviewed
16
by a civil engineer, registered in the State of California,
17
and said engineer, shall determine the amount of bond
18
necessary to install the improvements. This amuunt plus ten
19
percent shall be posted with the County of San Bernardino.
20
21
The presently required certificates on water maps for the
22
water company and engineer must still be placed on the map.
23
In addition, a statement shall be transmitted to the Public
24
Health Department signed by the registered civil engineer
25
for the water purveyor stating that the amount of bond
26
recommended is adequate to cover the cost of installation
27
of the improvement.
28
29
Further, prior to release of the bond for the improvement,
30
the Cucamonga County Water District shall submit a signed
31
statement confirming that the improvement has been installed
32
according to the approved plans and meets the requirements
33
of all appropriate State and County laws pertaining to such
;t4
improvement.
35
36
In cases where tine water agency or sewering agency is a
37
governmental subdivision, prior to final recording o- the
38
tract map, the governmental agency shall submit a statement
39'
directed to the County stating that the improvement has been
A0
installed according to the approved plans or stating that
41
bond in the amount of 110 percent of the cost of installa-
q2
tion of the improvement has been placed with the agency.
43
44
A commitment shall be obtained, in writing, from the sewering
45
agency. Said commitment to indicate that the agency has the
46
capacity to furnish said sewer service to the subject project,
47
and that all necessary arrangements have been made with said
48
agency to supply such service. A copy of the commitmen>* tt be
49
filed with the Planning Director.
50
51
Street lighting shall be provided throughout the tract including
52,
all. peripheral streets.
dr 54
Utility lines shall be placed underground in accordance with the
55 ".
requirements of County Ordinance No. 2041.
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
23
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
a'
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
. 41
f' 42
43
44
45
46
48
49
50
51
52
K, --,54
.tract NO. 9583 (Alt�cr;a)
*STREET, GRADING AND DRA;NAGE REQUIREMENTS:
County Road Department:
0 Page 3 of 8
Road sections within the tract are to be designed and constructed
-to Valley Standards, except sidewalks.
Any grading within the road right of way prior to the signing of the
improvement plans must be accomplished under the direction of a Soil
Testing Engineer. Compaction tests of embankment construction, trench
backfill, and all subgrades shall be performed at no cost to San
Bernardino County and a written report is to be submitted to the
Contracts Division prior to any placement of base materials and /or
paving.
Final plans and profiles shall show the location of any existing
utility facility that would affect construction.
Slope rights are to be dedicated on the final tract map where nR-
cessary.
A thorough evaluation of the structural road section, to include
parkway improvements, from a qualified materials engineer will be re-
quired.
Any existing County road which will require reconstruction shall
remain open for traffic at all times, with adequate detours, during
actual construction. A cash deposit shall be required to cover the
cost of grading and paving prior to recordation of the tract map.
Upon completion of the grading and paving, to the satisfaction of the
Road Department, the cash deposit may be refundea.
All existing easements lying within the future right of way are to be
quit - claimed or delineated, as per County Surveyor's requirements,
prior to recordation of the tract map.
Adequate facilities are to be constructed wherever the road section
crosses any channel improvement or wash area.
The Engineer shall provide a drainage study to include accumulation
and analysis of hydrologic and hydraulic data for existing and pro-
posed drainage structures prior to approval of the plans and pro-
files.
Flowage easements or San Bernardino County drainage ease- ments.will be
required where diversion of runoff from the tract dewaters onto
private property.
All road names shall be coordinated with the County Transportation
Department Trafsic Division.
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
33
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
"'S 4
55,
Tract No. 9583 (a •^.ma)
Page 4 of 8
Trees, irrigation systems, landscaping required to be installed
on public right of way within this tract area shall he maintained by
others than County Transportation Department, and evidence of such '
arrangement of such maintenance with the appropriate County Service
Area shall be presented prior to acceptance of these roads into
County Maintained Road System. the
A drainage study is necessary to determine street capacities and
sections.
Phasing Of-tracts shall be coordinated with proper access.
Realignment necessary of Wilson Avenue at Haven Avenue. Drainage
characteristics of this intersection shall be studied as to
necessity of additional structures etc.
Tract shall be redesigned to provide more curvalinaar roadway pattern
and providing more appropriate drainage characteristics. Discharge
of drainage onto Wilson and subsequent discharge shall be to satis-
faction of Transportation Department.
County Division of Building and Safety:
A preliminary soil report, complying with the provisions of
Ordinance 1928 shall be filed with and approved by the Director of
Building and Safety prior to recordation of the final map.
Grading plans to be submitted to and approved by the Building and
Safety Department.
Obtain a demoliton permit for buildings to be demolished. ondergrounc
structures must be broken -in, backfilled, and inspected before co-
vering.
Submit plans and obtain building permits for walls required.
County Flood Control District:
An adequate reception type channel facility within a 100 -foot
right -of -way shall be provided along the previously approved
Tract alignnm�entTl ichannelgsthe no therecepboundary l Of proposed
acceptable to the Flood Control District. The right- wave3hall
be dedicated to the Flood Control District in fee title. An
additional outlet facility shall be provided easterly of the
reception channel and shall extend to the Deer Creek Wash and
shall be covered by an adequate drainage easement.
Adequate provisions shall be provided along the north tract
boundary to intercept tributary drainage flows originating south
Of the proposed r ception channel and convey them around or
through the tract.
11
Tract No. 9.583 (Alta Loma)
Page 5 of 8
1 Adequate provisions shall be made for handling onsite drainage and
2 dewatering the-tract in a manner which will not adversely affect
3 adjacent or downstream property. A master plan of drainage shall be
4 provided showing how drainage for the overall project will be
5 provided for.
6
7 Those lots adjacent to Haven.Avenue shall be adequately elevated
8 above the top of curb or a concrete block wall provided to preclude
9 Haven Avenue flood flows entering the lots.
10
11 All lots should drain to streets. If lots du not drain to streets,
12 it is assumed the cross -lot drainage will be reviewed by Building
13 and Safety Department and provisions for handling same made under
14 the various ordinances involved.
15
16 Grading and improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the
17 Flood Control District.
18
19
20
21
22
23 Offsite flowage easements may be necessary where it is proposed to
24 outlet the tract drainage to the south.
25
26 County Surveyor:
27
28 Submit two (2) copies of preliminary boundary plat and checking
29 deposit fee for checking prior to advance copy of final map.
30
31 Final map form and content: shall comply with County surveyor's
32 standards and policies.
33
34 All easements of record to be delineated and labeled on final
35 tract map unless quitclaimed.
36
37 *In addition to the Street and Drainage.requirements, other on -site or
38 off -site improvements may be required which cannot be determined from
39 tentative plans and would have to be determined after more complete
40 improvement plans and profiles have been submitted to the County
41 Transportation Department.
42
43 -WATER SUPPLY AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL:
44
45 Prior to recordation of the final map, written clearance for
46 subsurface sewage disposal shall be obtained from the California
47 Regional Water Quality Contro. Hoard, Santa Ana Region.
48
49 The watar purveyor shall be the Cucamonga County Water District.
50
51 Pending availability of community sewers, in:ividual sewage
'52 systems with subsurface disposal may lie conditionally permitted.
53
S4 The subsurface wastewater disposal ,system shall be designed (or
55 redesigned) in accordance with the requirements of the Departments
j " :56 of environmental Health Services and Building and Safety„
Tract No. 9583 (Alta jna) Page 6 of 8
1 Soil testing for the subsurface disposal system shall meet the
2 requirements of the Departments of Environmental Health Services
3 and Building and Safety. Submit test results.
4
5 Emanations shall be controlled so as not to interfere with
6 surrounding land uses! a. Light b. Noise c. Dust
7
a Adequate provisions shall be made for runoff water to prevent
9 ponding and mosquito breeding.
10
11 Because of the slope of the land, if grading or vegetation
12 removal is performed, adequate erosion control measures shall
13 be taken.
14
5 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND ZONING-
6
7 Existing zoning is R -1- 20,000.
8
9 All lots shall have a minimum area of 20,000 square feet, a
0 minimum depth of 100 feet and a minimum width of 60 feet, (70
1 feet on corner lots). In addition, each lot on a cul -de -sac or
2 on a curved street where the side lot lines thereof are diverging
3 from the front to rear of the lot, shall have a width of not less
q than sixty (60) feet measured at the building setback line as
5 delineated cn the final tract map..
G. -
7 Where lots occur on the bulb of a cul -de -sac a minimum
p is less than
lot depth
8 of 90 feet will be permitted. If the proposed deth
9 90 feet, a Plot plan must be submitted to demonstrate that a
U buildable lot area is possible and to justify the lesser depth.
1
2 variable front building setback lines of at least 25 feet and
3 averaging at least 30 feet and side street- building setback lines
4 of fifteen (15) feet shall be delineated on the final tract map.
L
'a A minimum number of one inch caliper, multi- branched trees shall
7 be planted in the parkway for each of the following types of
9 lots:
a) Cul -de -sac lot - 1 tree;
b) Interior lot - 2 trees;
c) Corner lot - 3 trees.
The variety of tree to be provided is subject to County approval
and to be maintained by the property owner.
Adequate size equestrian easements shall be delineated on the
final tract map providing equestrian circulation to each lot.
The width and location of these easements shall be subject to the
approval of the planning Director.
A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions concerning
the use and maintenance of the equestrian easements shall be
submitted for the review and approval of the Planning Director.
Tract No. 9583 (Alt Loma)
Page 7 of 8
1 Three (3) copies of a final Grading Plan shall be submitted for
2 Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of grid -
3 ing permits, where finished perimeter slopes are proposed adjacent
4 to exising development, or when graded slopes exceed five (5) feet
5 in vertical height.
6
7 Graded slopes shall be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1
8 and a maximum vertical height or 30 feet.
9
10 Graded slopes shall be contour - graded to blend with existing natural
11 contours and developed with a minimum radius at intersecting horizontal
12 planes of two (2) feet, (measures one (1) foot from the top or toe of
13 slope) and a maximum horizontal lenght of two hundred (200) feet.
14
75 Landscaping and irrigation shall be provided for all graded slopes in
16 excess of five (5) feet in vertical height. Where graded slopes exceed
17 a 1.5 to 1 ratio and exceed ten (10) feet in vertical height, they
18 shall be covered with Jute matting, or similar, and planted in aesthetic
19 groups:
20
21 Trees (108 - 15 gallon, 408 - 5 gallon, 508 - 1 gallon) -
22 one per each 500 feet of slope area.
23
24 Shrubs (208 - 5 gallon, 808 - 1 gallon) - one per each 200 square
25 feet.
26
27 Ground cover.
28
29 The maintenance of grade-I slopes and landscaped areas shall he the
30 responsibility of the developer and guaranteed until the transfer to
31 individual ownership or until the maintenance is officially assumed
32 by a County Service Area.
33
34 All irrigation systems where required shall be designed on an indivi-
35 dual lit basis unless commonly maintained in an approved manner.
36
37 Prior to recordation of the final map, four (4) copies of a Landscape
38 and Irrigation Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for
39 review and approval.
40
41 Prior to the recordation of the final map, a letter from the serving
42 water agency shall be submitted certifying that capacity for Tract 9583
43 has been reserved for a minimum period of one (1) year.
44
45 Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall agree to
46 either dedicate land or pay fees for parks and recreation pursuant to
47 County Ordinance No. 2126.
48
49 Grading shall be kept to a minimum and shall follow as closely as pos-
50 sible the natural terrain of the site. A preliminary Grading Plan shall
51 be submitted showing finished contour elevations, driveways (grades),
52 garage pads, building sites, cuts and fills.
S3
54;
55
`'14-14447-481 Nov. 14177 -
L
ti
Tract 9583 (Alta' Loma)
Page 8 of 8
# 1 Tracts 9582 and 9582 -1 shall'record
2 Tract 9583. prior 'to or concurrently with
k 3
4
5
6 ---�
7
8
9
10
11
12-
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
' 36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
'46
47
i 49
;50
51
52
53
'S4'..
X56
Rar. 12177
• CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATL: March 22, 1978 AGENDA ITEM NO.
t l ; ROUTINE ITEM
AP
NON- ROUTINE ITEM
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
TIME OF ITEM
CITY COUNCIL
v
AREA: West Valley / Rancho Cucamonga
FILE /INDEX NO: Tentative Tract 9584 -1, 9584 -2 and 9584 -3
PROPOSAL: 9584 -1:47 lots /52.8 ac.; >584 -2:45 lots' /43.9 ac.,9584 -3:52 lots/
InralwiON: E/s Haven Ave., approx. 1650' N/o Wilson Ave. 51.9 ac:
A1'PI.Tcm1r: Deer Creek Development
Fj4GINEER/ARCIII=: Madole & Associates
PUBLIC ]WARING NOTICES SRr ON
REPORT PIL'iPARF7) BY- Frank Molina
FIE.I.D INSPECTION TWWM: DATE OF INSPECrim
PAi=,-rI,sizr: 9584 - 1/52.8 ac,; 9584- 2/43 -9 ac.; 9584 - 3/51.9 ac.
r.xis*ING iAND USE: Vacant Field
LISTING ZONING: R -1- 20,000 1
SURRC R1D1NG JAM USE AIR) ZONING 1
NORTH: Vacant Field
Zoned R -1 -20, 000 N 4 h41LLS10E ao
FAST: Vacant Field
zoned R -1- 20,000
swiv. -Vacant Field ,y,,
Zoned R- 1- 20,000 �1 _ cHarFEY
WEST: Vacant Field c a C_ LLEGE
Zoned R- 1- 20,000
"A [N LN.
Gl= -RAL PLAN AND DESIGNATION: -
Chaffey Community General Plan designates site as residential, up
to 1.6 dwelling units per gross acre
THE ENVIROMMLNTAG RT.VTFW COMMITTEE ON 11 -16 -76 DETERMINED
THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD UAVI; A NON- SIGNIF1_=T- �ErFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT.
City Sphere of
Water (�-_rviw:
Scwer Service:
STAFF RFr0TP U=ATICN: Approval With Attached Conditions
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
y
e
C
i
i
R U.
1r ..
�fl 1t•} `
0
Staff Analysis.
0
On November 1, 1976, Tentative Tract 9584 was filed with the
San Bernardino County Planning De
the 5 3n 'Bernardino County Planninpartment. On Cecember.16
Tract 9589 consisting of g Commission a 1976,
' q 90 lots on 90.5 acres.
PProved Tentative
Subsequent changes in the alignment of - outlet
along the north property boundary of the site et channelilocated _
a revision of the originally approved Tract 9584. In addition tated
tracteintoithree the applicant is also proposing to Phase the
47 lots on three
acre Phases- Tract 95$4 -1 (phase 1
units per acre and one acre sizeplots.deTract 95$488 (Phase 2) contains 45 lots 88 (Phase 2
contaon 43.9 acres with a proposed density of 1.02
(Phase dwelling units per acre and one acre size lots. Tract 9584 -3
3) contains 52 lots on 51.9 acres with a proposed density
of 1.00 dwelling units per acre and one acre size lots.
Chaffey Community General plan designates the site as
up to 1.6 dwelling units The
per gross acre. Residential
On November 16, 1976, the Environmental Review Committee issued
a Notice of Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract 9584,
stating that this development would have a "non- signifi •ant
effect" on the environment, Though this development has changed
the number of lots requested and ti
mental factors would not have chanq_edt nor awould acreage. and welfare be s same health,
_ ubstantially altered. Public health,
The Phased development has been reviewed by the Subdivsion
Review Committee using the criteria set forth in County Ordinance
No. 2179, though it has been shown that the original develop-
ment was filed and approved prior to Ordinance No. 2179. The
Project Evaluation Review Checklist received an INADEQUATE
response' to the Primary Considerations of High Schools.
this response, the Subdivsion Review Committee recommends that
the Rancho Cucamonga City Despite
Tract 9589 -1 g 1' fanning Commission APPROVED Tentative
This ' 9584 -2 and 9584 -3 subject to the attached conditions.
recommendation is based upon previous filing and
dates of the original development.
approval
Proposed Findings.
Based upon the above analysis, Staff would recommend that the
Planning Commission make the following findings.
1• Tentative Tracts 9584 -1, 9584 -2 and 9584 -3 are consistent
with the Chaffey Community General Plan, which designates
the site as Residential up to 1.6 dwelling units per gross
acre. The proposed densities of the tracts are respectively
.88,.1.02 and 1.00 dwelling units per acre.
n
Proposed Findings: (cont.)
2. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type and
density of development due to the relative flatness of the
site sloping to the south and the compatible surrounding
land uses.
3• The design of Tentative Tract 9584 -1, 9584-2 and 9584 -3
and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and
avoidably injure fish and wildlife and their habitat due
to the issuance of the Notice of Negative Declaration,
stating that this development would have a "non- signifi-
cant effect" on the environment.
4. The design of Tentative Tracts 9584 -1, 9584 -2 and 9584 -3
or type of proposed improvements are not likely '-o cause
serious public health problems or cause threat to life and
property from a wildland conflagration due to the Notice
of Negative Declaration, the fact that the site is not in
a High Fire Hazard Area and the incorporation of Environ-
mental Health Services' requirements within the conditions
of approval.
5. Tentative Tract 9584 -1, 9584 -2 and 9584 -3, their design,
density and type of development and improvement conform 5
to the conditions imposed by the County Subdivision chapter,
the regulations of the CounLy Zoning chapter and the regulations
of any public agerc, ",aving jurisdication by law due to
Staff's detailed research and analysis showing that the pro-
posed development conforms with all of the above.
Recommendation:
r
Based upon the above listed findings, Staff would recommend that
the Planning Commission APPROVE Tentative Tract 9584 -1, 9 -34 -2
and 9584 -3, subject to the attached conditions.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
75
16
17
18
19
20
21
22•
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
3
Tract Nos, 9584
1. 9584-2, 9584 -3 (Rancho Cucamonga)
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS:
Page 2 of g
The water system and
With the re fire hydrants shall
accordance Wirhements of the State Healthbanclln stalled in accorda
Depardaent and Plans approved b3 - the San Safety Code, and th
Easements the governing fire protectionrauthority- Health
aced and improvements shall be in accordance with the standardsra d re
County of San Bernardino and • drainage coordin-
and the and requirements of the
Where a County planning Commission.
imA,rovement: is to be posted in lieu of installation ,of the
The domestic water
by a civil engineer, and /or sewer plan shall be
and said engineer, registered in the St a to of reviewed
necessary gineer, shall determine the amount Of bond
Percent s to -n —all the improvements. This
hall be posted with the Count amount ten
The Y of San Bernardino.
Presently required certificates
water company and engineer still water ma
In addition, a statement shall be transmitted to for the
Health Depaianent signed laced on the Public
for the water fined by the re the public
recommended is purveyor statin tittered civil engineer
Of the adequate to cover the amount of bond
:mprovernent. the cost of installation
Further, prior to release of the the Cucamonga County Water Districted
statement confirmin fOr the improvemen t,
state in g that the shall submit a signed
of all appropriate to the ap5tatedandans and vmeets the been installed
improvement.
Y laws pertaining to such
zn cases where
governmental s the water agency or sewerin
tract map, the ubdivlsion, prior to final recordin
directed governmental agenc 4 of the
Installed according the County stating Y shall submit a
according to the a g that the improvement halm ee
bond in the amount of pproha plans has been
tion of the improvement Percent of the cost
stating that
Provement has been with Of installa -
Street lighting laced with the agency.
all Peripheral streets. Provides; throughout the tract
zncl a'
Utilitl' lines shall be
requirements of County
�iirsx p.., iwr.
u ang
Placed underground in accordance with the
Ordinance No. 2041.
1
Tract Nos,
F. 9584 -11 9584 -2
9589 -3 (Rancho
� *STREETS GLIDING Cucamonga)
3 AND DRAINAG$ REOUIRCb,,'S Page 3 of
County Road Department.
4
5 Road sections
7 to Valley to with'
�. 7 lley Standardsn the tract are
A. 8 An except sidewalks,. be designed and
9 Of grading within the constr�'cted
1p the the road right-of-way
11 of a Soil Test- Plans must be accomplished
prior to
12 struction, trench Engineez, plished the signing
at no backfIII Compaction tests ofnder the direction.
13 cost to San Beznardinoand all sub embank Lion
14 be submitted to t Count grades shall Bement Co.-
15 base materials and /or Paving.
. Divi iornjd a Written repOZterf°rmed
1fi paving, Prior to an is to
17 Final plans 1' Placement of
Utility a4d profiles
18 Y facility that wOUYdaaffehow the location of
iL Pe rights
'Y4 20 Slo construction. anY•existxng
�= 21 necessary, are to be dedicated on the final tract ma
22 A thorou
23 gh evaluation of P where
24 Parkway improvements the structural
25 be required, from road
so
26 a qualified materials tengineer -include 5
27 Vehicular access will
28 (Tract 9 84_1 only). are to be dedic
25 Vehicular atec; on Haven Avenue
30 access rights are
31 An to be dedicated
33 re na"isting County road which Haven Avenue.
33 actual °pen for traffic hick will
34 cost c gradin °nstruction, at all timesreyq�ith Ire adec°nstruction shall
36
upon COnPletion ofd Paving sprao °tot shall be requiredtto during
37 the Transportation Depargrading and pa�,nrdation of the tractVer the
38 P tment, the g, to the satisfaction a of
39 All existing easement casn deposit may be r
40 menbs quitclaimed lYi.ng within t„ refunded.
41 , prior to r or delineated a fut'-
ecorda . ao ce right -of -wa
42 Adequate tion of the tractrmapty SurveYor'syrequire-
43 Adequate faciliti e
44 an es are to be constructed w
46 The Engine any improvement or wash areaPYoVer the road section
and anal shall provide a drainage 47 analysis of hydrologic stud
48 Prof les, ge and data for
draina hydraulic Y to -include accumulation
49 Prior to existin
50 approval g and
51 Flowage the °f the plans and
52 onto be required where a diversion -ino Count
5 private property. of runoff drainage easements
iS. All road from the tract dewaters
Department names shall be coordinated
g Traffic l b
sion, with the County Tra
a
nsportat
�ra�i Re.- ion'
'1 l¢r7�
Tract Nos. 9584 -1, 9502, 9584 -3 (Rancho Cucamd&a)
Page 4 of 9
1 Trees, irrigation systems, landscaping required to be installed
.
3 by others thantCountyyTransportationrDepar anent, andbevidence ;of d
4 such arrangement of such maintenance with the appropriate County
5 Service Area shall be presented prior to acceptance of these
6 roads into the Couizty Maintained Road System.
7
8 A drainage study is necessary to determine street capacities and
9 sections.
10
11 Phasing of tracts shall be coordinated with proper access.
12
13 Realignment necessary of Wilson Avenue at Haven Avenue. Drainage
.14 characteristics of this intersection shall be studied as to
15 necessity of additional structures etc.
16
17 Tract shall be redesigned to provide more curvalinear roadway
18 pattern and providing more appropriate characteristics. 19 D'schar a of drainage onto Wilson subsequent
Department.
discharge shall
20 be to satisfaction of Transportation Department.
21
22 County Division of Building and Safety:
23
24 A preliminary soil report, complying with the provisions of
25 Ordinance 1928 shall be filed with and approved by the Director
26 of Building and Safety prior to recordation of the final map.
27
Grading
Department�e submitted to and approved by the Building and
29 Safety
30
31 obtain a demoliton permit for buildings to be demolished.
32 Underground structures must be broken -in, backfil.led, and inspected
33 before covering.
34
35 submit plans and obtain building permits for walls required.
36
37 County Flood Control District:
38
39 That an adequate reception type channel facility within a 100 -foot
40 right -of -tray be provided aloe the
41 alignment lying along the northerlypboundaryyofpthevpr channel
42 tentative tract. The channel shall be a reception type proposed
43 acceptable to tine Flood Control District. The rightof- wayeshall
44 be dedicated to the Flood Control District in fee title. An
45 additional outlet facility shall be
provided
46 reception channel and shall extend to the Deer aCreekyWashtand of
47 shall be covered by an adequate drainage easement.
.48
.49 Adequate provisions shall be made for handling onsite drainage
%50 and decratering the tract in a manner which will not adversely
,51 affect adjacent or downstream property. A master plan of drainage
52 shall be provided showing how drainage for the overall project'
53 will be provided for.
54
55
x;56
�u�xo�nan
Tract Nos. 9584 -1, 9584 -2, 9584 -3 (Rancho Cucamonga) page 5 of 9
1 Those lots adjacent to Haven Avenue shall be adequately elevated
2 above the top of curb or a concrete block wall provided to pre -
3 elude Haven Avenue flood flows entering the lots (Tract 9584 -1
4 only).
5
6 All lots should drain to streets. If lots do not drain to streets,
7 it is assumed the cross -lot drainage will be reviewed by Building
8 and Safety Department and provisions for handling same made under
9 the various ordinances involved.
10
11 Grading and improvement plans shall be submitted for review by the
.12 Flood Control District.
13
•14 An adequate roll shall be provided at the access street and Faven
15 Avenue to preclude Haven Avenue flood flows entering the tract
16 (Tract )584 -1 only).
17
18 Off -site flowage easements may Le necessary where it is proposed
19 to outlet the tract drainage to the south.
20
21 County Surveyor:
22
23 Submit two (2) copies of preliminary boundary plat and checking
24 deposit fee for checking prior to advance copy.of final map.
25
26 Final map form and contents shall. comply with Couiity Surveyor's
27 standards and policies.
%28
29 All easements of record are to be delineated and labeled on final
3
31 1 �ract,map unless said easements are quitclaimed.
32 *In addition to the Street and Drainage requirements, other on -site or
33 off -site improvements may be required which cannot 5e determined from
34 tentative plans and would have to be determined after more complete
35 improvement plans and profiles have been submitteu to the County
36 Transportation Department.
37
38 County Firewarden:
39
40 Fire flow will be determined by this department upon receipt of
.41 the following information:
A2
43 a. Two (2) sets of plans,
44 b. Structures per acre (density),
.45 c. Locatioa of tract,
46 d. Type of roof covering,
47 e. Number of stories.
48
49 Calculations indicating that the fire flow requirement will be met
50 shall be submitted to this department prior to plan approval.
51
52 Water mains and appurtenances shall be installed in accordance
°53 with the requirements of the Cucamonga County water District.
54
MY-482 NOV. !i/YY
Tract Nos. 9584-1, 9584 -2, 9584 -3 (Rancho Cucamonga) Page 6 of-9
1 This department shall be notified to witness an acceptance test
2 of the water system prior to construction. The test is to be con-
3 ducted in the presence of a representative of this department.
4
5 Fire hydrant assemblies shall be installed in accordance with
6 requirements of this district.
7
8 Fire lanes, where required, shall meet the minimum. standards of
9 this department.
10
11 All streets and cul -de -sacs shall meet the minimum San Bernardino
.12 County Road Department standards.
13
f4 Streets leading to cul -de -sacs or dead ends shall not exceed
15 600 feet in length. In the event that these streets are redesigned
16 it any manner, the 600 foot length s;.all be maintained on all
17 resubmitted plans (tentative or final).
18
19 Trees existing on property are tc be topped to 30 feet and trimmed
20 from the base up 15 feet. All dead limbs and leaves are to be
21 removed.
22
23 Where fire place chimneys are constructed along the north and
24 east tract boundaries, approved spark arrestors will be required.
25
26 Vegetation (brush and grass) shall be completely removed within
27 30 feet of ar.y structure; remaining vegetation up to 100 feet
%28 from any structure shall be cut to within 18 inches of ground
29 level.
30
31 Ace,-ss for fire apparatus shall be provided along the north and
32 east tract boundaries.
33
34 Improved perimeter street access shalt be provided at Nave,: and
35 Wilson Avenues, and the east deadend of hillside Road.
36
.37 WATER SUPPLY AND SEWAGE DISPOS*-'-
38
39 Prior to the recordation of the final map, written clearance _;:r
40 the subsurface sewage disposal shall be obtained from the Cu1if-
•41 ornia Regionll Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region.
•42
43 The water purveyor shalt be the Cucamonga County Water District.
44
`45 Pending thc: availibility of conimunity sewers, individual sewage
46 systems with subsurface disposal may be conditionally permitted.
47
48 The subsurface wastewater disposal. system shall be designed (or
,19 redesigned) in accordance with the requirements of the Departments
50 of Environmental Health Services and Building and Safety.
�; 51
52' Soil testing for the subsurface disposal system shall meet the
5.3 requirements of the Departments of Environmental Health Services
54 and Building and Safety. Submit test results.
I447 -46I Rev. 12/77
9
C
Tract N•a;i. 9584 -1, 95 '�. 84 -3
? .. 95 (Banc)+
1 o Cucamonga)
emanations shall be controlled s Page 7 of 9
2 surroandin c as not to 3 g land uses; a. Li interfere
4 ght b. Noise with
❑eca•use of the slope C. Dust
5 is �'er:o Pe o£ t,ie lard, .1y
b rmed adequate erosion controlrmeasures Vegetation removal
7 G'NERPJ' R=QUIRE shall be taken.
'p MENTS AND ZONING; •
9
10 Existing zoning is R -1- 200000.
12 All lcts shall have a
12 imum depth of mininum area of 20
,too
100 feet and a rinimum width0ofs100re feet
where lots Occur on a min -
S depth of 90 feet the bulb of a
6 thar. 90 feet, a loll be cul- de a minimum lot
7 PlanpmusttbedsubIf
tthe proposed depth is
8 a buildable lot area is posc:ible and mi less
.monstrate that
Variable front build- Justify the lesser depth.
averaging g setback lines Of
P e at least 30 feet and szdE street least 25 feet and lines
Of fifteen (15) feet shall be delineated onbuilding setback map.
I Perimeter Wa113 Or W map.
frontage lots ails required along the rear of
design featureshsuchbe designed and constructed to all double
splf.t block face, s tree planter wells, variable setback visual and columns, or other such features to
dation of physical relief along the wall face.
the final re Provide
Director approval of p' the deve' Prior nn z•ecor,-
the design oPer shall obtain Planning
9584 -1 only). gn of the
Proposed wall (Tract
Street trees of a minimum
on forty (40) foot centers, mIA1Li- branched size
an approved irrigationtrs P
controls shall be system including vandal - hover, as well as
walls are reruiredp djac ed where perimeter or `roof automatic
shall be adjacent to street ri double - frontage
maintained, pruned, and the ght- ofeway, Landscaping
until parkway maintenance is assumed Parkway
The devz Y kept free of weeds
toper shall forma Y a Count S
Area 50, Improvement Zone Aytinitiate a;;nexation torCoCe Area
tenance of the parkwa Provide for the continuinty Service
9589 -1 only). Y improvements prior to occupant g main-
9584-1
(Tract
Prior to recordation of the final tract ma
and landscaping shall be completed or suitable bonds
their completion. p• all required Walls
tation pe Bonds may either be posted with the oTranspor-
partment s Improvement Plans or with the Planning Department.
Adequate size e
j'.. final tract Map questrian easements shall be delineated on
The width and ocationlof these tan• circulation the
subject to the a equestrian easementseshaell bey
pproval of the Planning Director.
�1f. IV?7
Tract Nos. 9584-
1, 9
9502, 584 -3
• (Rancho Cucamonga)
copy of the Covenants Page B of g
2 the use and • Conditions
3. the us maintenance of the a and Restrictions
4 for review and a 9uestrian easements concerning
S PprovGl of the eas shall be sub-
Planning Three (3) copies of a director,
Planning Director review
nal Grading
°f grading permits, whereand a P1Prf.orata bE submitted for
$ adjacent PP1ova1 the issuance
g to existin finished perimeter slopes
tO five (5) feet in verticallaPMent, or when are proposed
height, graded slopes exceed
Graded slopes s
13 and a maaximum vertical sted to a maximum slope 13 height of ratio of 2 to 1
1� Graded slopes 30 feet.
15 natural lOces shall be contour -
16 and developed contour-graded minimumdradiuseatsting
17 secting horizontal planes of
18 foot from the top or toe of slope) feet inter -
�9 length of two hundred P ) and a maximumuhorizontal)
(200a feet.
Landscaping
1 slopes and irrigation shall be
2 P in excess of five (5) feet a provided for all r
3 graded slopes exceed a 3 vertical graded
in vertical height to 1 ratio and exceed ten
Where
4 or similar, g they shall be covered with (10) feet
and planted in aesthetic groups: jute matting,
Trees (lCe _ 15 gallon, 408
i one Per each 500 feet of5 gallon, SCE - 1 gallon)
slope area.
Shrubs square feeetllon, 808 - 1 gallon) - one per each 200
Ground cover.
The mainennance of graded slopes and landscaped
the responsibility of the developer and
transfer to individual he developer area; shall be
official guaranteed until the
Y assumed by a Count P °r until the maintenance is
Y Service Area.
indivi.dualtlot Systems where
manner.
required shall be designed on an
commonly maintained in an appro
Pri ved
or to recordation of the final map,
Landscape and irrigation plan shall be
Director for review and approval.
Prior to rec
four (4) copies of a
submitted to the Planning
water ordatzon of the final map a letter from the serving
water agency shall be submitted certifying that capaci+
9f one 9584 -2, 9584 -3 has been reserved for a
period of one (1) year. -Y for
minimum
Prior to recordation of to either dedicate land or final map, the applicant
pursuant to Count Pay fees for s anre shall agree
Y Ordinance No, 2126. Parks and recreation
M 1 :in
J.
;.i
Y
'xrAct Nos. 9584 -1, 9584 -2, 9584 -3 (Rancho Gucamoa) Page 9 of 9
1 A ten (10) foot wide landscaped buffer shall be developed along
_. 2 Haven Avenue to screen the development from bypassing traffic
3 (Tract 9584 -1 only).
4
5 A preliminary grading plan shall be submitted showing the finished
`6 grade contours, driveways (grades), garage pads, building site,
7 cuts and fills. In addition, grading shall be kept to s minimum
.8 and shall follow as closely as possible to the natural terrain
9 of the site.
10
11 Tract 9582 -1 shall record prior to and /or concurrently with
12 Tract 9584 -1 (Tract 9584 -1 only).
13
14 Tract 9582 -1, 9582 -2, 9583 and.9584 -1 shall record prior to
15 and /or concurrently with Tract 9584 -2 (Tract 95844 -2 only).
16 1
17 Tracts 9582 -1, 9582 -2, 9583, 9584 -1 and 9584 -2 shall record
13 prior to and /or concurrently with Tract 9584 -3 (Tract 9584 -3 only).
19
20 Street "R" shall be redesigned to transition into and align with
21 Street "F ".
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
'40
41
is :42
43
44
45
46
47
49
r 51
r.:52
s;53;.,, .
X54:
ti56: <,
4�
!16l, I.
is
c L�
� a
TRINITY DEvLI.OPMENT COMPANY
110 W FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, SWTF C
RIALTO, CALWO -RnIA x2776
17141 074.1710
March 8, 1978
Mr. Jim Frost, Mayo
Mr. John Mikels, Councilman
Mr. Michael Palombo, Councilman
Mr. Phil Schlosser, Councilman
Mr. Charles West, Councilman
City of Rancho Cucamonga
943U Baseline Road, Unit A
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Re: Sewer Hardship Allocation, "rho AvoraLlo Grove
Gentlemen:
Thank you for hearing my request for 81 sewer hardship allocations
at your meeting of February 14, 1978. 1 respect your decision that
all applications for such hardship cases be hemd and the merits of
each case decided individually. Information on "The Avocado Grove"
('Tracts 9193 and 9262) is attached to substantiate the following
statements:
1. We wouldn't aced a sewer hardship allocation if we hadn't saved
the trees on the property. the property would now be barren,
mass graded and under construction.
2. The tree saving effort was endorsed by all appropriate authorities,
and we proceeded in good faith with those endorsements.
3. Of all City approved projects, The Avocado Grove has probably
the least impact on required services, and that impact is mini -
Inizal by a voluntary contribution of $100,(11)11 for schools and
Sewers.
4. The Avocado Grove's economic benefit to the City is comparable
to a commercial development and better than any other residential
project.
5. Even on a "first come, firs' serval" basin, The Avocado Grove
A, ranks first.
6. The financial costs to the developer are substantlal, if the costs
are to Iv passed to the homebuyel , sales prirrs: will have to `�
increase: $5, (H)tt per house.
�._ S, - - --
W
Sower I III rdshillRllocalion, The Avocado Grove
Marini ti, 197N,
- Page Two
7. WC are seltirng n Substantial precoxient Ilere. The Avocado
Grove project results from a cooperative effort between public
staff, concerned citizens and a responsible developer. If that
effort is igtnored by Council, then responsible investment and
development in this City is discouraged and speculation and
spec_al interests encouraged.
With non- residential sewer applications no longer having; to count
against the 150 milts worth of residential hardship allocation, and
with the information supplied to you by Staff, 1 ash your attention
to this matter at your council meeting of Wednesday, March 15th.
I very much appreciate your attention.
Respectfully submiaw,
' j6seph N. Dilorio
General Partner
JND /Jas
cc: Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Ms.
Richard Dahl
Jorge Garcia
Laura Jones
Ilc:rman Ilempel
Peter 'rolstoy
Dan Wobser
Ken Ilunter
Lauren Wasserman
'rommy Stephens
I,indn Frost
Lloyd Michaels
Peggy "Ziegler
'r
s�
I. REASON FOR MAJUEST
A. Our Case
We deliberately extended, by nearly three months, the time
required to process our project in order to save the maximum
number of mature avocado trees on the property.
B. Our Case vs. Others
According to the analysis provided you in December, 1977,
by the County Planning; Department, of the 450 or so hardship
applications then on file, ail, except ours, clai.nicA to have
been delayed in their processing; by circumstances outside of
their control. Our delay resulted from our decision, backed
by the then appropriate authorities to produce a more environ-
mentally sensitive development. We can prove, beyond a
reasonable doubt, that we processed onr Map expmlitiously
and that had we not taken the time to save the trees, that we
would have received a full and normal sewer allocation. i
understand from the Planning Department Iliat most of the
applications received since December ni-c for unapprovod maps.
yms1' COMB, mRs'r SERVED
A. Our Case
Knowing that our tree saving effort might delay us beyond Ilic
end of the normal sewer allocation, and at the recommendation
of the County Planning Department, we submitted our hardship
application on August 24, 1977.
it. Our Case vs. Others
Our app (cation was in two months prior to any other. If tits
award of sewer allocation were to be brtsed sintf >ly upon when
a particular tract came in for recordation, then by definition,
there would be no hardship category.
[Il. COOD hAI•t'II RELIANCE
A. Our Case
Before we made our decision tosave the trees, we requested
and rcceiveYl from Supervisor Knmansky's office concurrence
W401 our decision and support fen- our rt•quCSt. We later
supplied to tite Planning Department, by the submittal of specific
site plans, evidence of our tree Saving effort. We also dis-
cussed with the Land Use subconmiittec of the Citizens Advisory
Contitiittce our intentions and reccM.N1 thutr support. LetterS
from each of thcsc cndtics supporting and verifying our actions
can be delivered directly to yon.
li. Our Case vs. Others
'here is no compprable sun-Wolt.
.r .
IV. U.'FUliC'1' Oh 'l'I II5 PLtOLLC'1' Ul'UN '1111. CUrvIMUNI "lY
A. Our Case
"1 he voc:ndo Grove is possibly the most environmentally
sensitive project yet proposed for our City. It represents
approximately seven percent of the units approved for con -
struction so far by the City Council, so it's incremental
negative effects are minor. '['hose negative effects are
further minimized:
1. Voluntary Fee Contribution
sonic months ago, we voluntarl1v offered heath a $600
per unit sewer capital contribution and a $boo per unit
school capital contribution, and that if the sewer and/
or school districts could or would not accept these con-
tributions, that said contribution;: totalling; nearly
$100,000 for this project were to go into the City's
General. Fund.
'L. Mininuan Strain on Services
ee-nrembers of the Land Use Subcommittee can attest,
we were successful last year in having some form of
Growth Policy enacted by the County. The Avocado
Crave and a dozen other tracts were ranked by a pro-
point system in an attempt to define which pro -
poticxl tracts caused the least strain on the community
in terms of required scrvlccs. The Avocado Grove
ranker] highest in that particular tc5ting. In this
project, a family of relatively mo Iterate means can live
in an evironntentally desirable neighborhood within
walking distance of schools, shopping, public services
and mass transportation.
If. Our Case vs. 'Others
don't Ire ievc�there its a comparable situation, alihougth we
would welcome such comparison.
V. I�INiWC1Al_, IIARDSIUP
A. Our Case
To elate, we have connnftctl nearly $loo,llo0 to this proicct.
if we proceed, additioi.al land financing; and development costs
Will bring total addeXl costs due• to the tree savi:rg effort to over
$900,011(1. We may or may not he able to retrieve some or all
Of _these 11LI&XI costs from increascd sales prices. We do not
ask that we be given credit for risking thesee funds, but do ask
that we nut IVU penali-rcxl for our fit!aucirl) C01111114111 C111 to better
conumutit,y design:
-2-
Ar
Il. Out• Case Vs. Others
l eau offer specific Proof that we arc setting a critical precedent
here for our entire colmlluility. The real estate industry, and
especially real estate lenders, must ha ::Rows that gootl land
planning atnl cooperation between a developer, concerned citi-
zens and the local government slakes some economic sense.
The Avocado Grove ranks as one Of few projects to Clisplay such
concern and cooperation; as doe only project that stands ready
to back np its commitment to the Conununity by truly connniting
to pay Its allocable share of our int151 critical service probivnis;
as one or the fcw mmicrately priced projects we have left; and
has (lclibet•atcly dclaycxt thiG offort M al)pruval until some form
of a Growth policy has been estahlislivd. Although I lose n
substantial amount of money if this In•olect is not approvcxl,
our new City loses much nlol'C. We Iuse credibility of the
Put-pose cif our incorporation - tint ltx•a! control is nut• hest
hope for environmentally sensitive and economically support -
able growth.
V1. UST; OIL REMAINING SGWL'R CAPACITY FOR RESIDENTIAL VS,
A. Our GIS
I empathize with statements that our rcnutining capacity should
be reserver.] far commercial and industrial purposcs. I lowevel -,
the 150 unit hardship category was set up s,u.ci[:cally for resi-
dential pul•posCS. That certainly was tic understanding of our
Supervisor, our Planning IXII)aament and our Advisory Com-
rllittee. •1110 City Council, in effect, ratified that understanding -
among the 850 units schedulctl fur cunst ruction tinder oar just
adoptal (;ruwth Policy are 150 sewerttil units to ho btalt umler
tie Ilardship Category.
It. Our Case vs_ Others
I hC Avocado Grove, because or its $100,0ilto voluntary conti-i-
bution, has a favorable ecunonlic bem-fit to the City, equal to
tiro range of commercial devclopmenl.rhat would use 81 homes
wortll or s-ewer, at least for a peritxl tlf three to five years.
Because of tint $.11it), 000, phis it's minitlial impact tan services,
the projcel is of sulisttntl ill lly 1x•1101- et•,mnnlic. be•nrfit to the
Gity 111,111 any other residential p o.it-rl.
0 0
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALI-
FORNIA, PROVIDING FOR DIRECTOR.`S REVIEW FOR CERTAIN
BUSINESS AND MANUFACTURING USES, AND DECLARING THE
URGENCY THEREOF.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California;
does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: Director Review. All uses described in Sections
61.027A, 61.02713, 61.029A, 61.0298 and 61.029C of the San Bernar-
dino County Code are subject to review and approval by the Director,
under the provisions of Section 61.0219(n) of the San Bernardino
County Code, except as follows:
(a) Director's review shall not be required for
residential development unless the Dame is *xpressly required by
provisions of the San Bernardino County Code; and,
(b) Location and development plan approval, un-
der Section 61.021(f) of the San Bernardino County Code, shall re-
main a requirement in all cases where the same is required by pro-
visions of the San Bernardino County Code.
SECTION 2: Facts Su_ porting Urgency. The City of Rancho
Cucamonga was recently incorporated, and i_ now in the process of
developing a General Plan which is a necessary prerequisite to the
development of a comprehensive Zoning ordinance for the City.
There is an immediate need to adopt the review procedures described
in this Ordinance to insure that business and industrial develop-
ment which takes place in the City prior to the adoption of a new
General Plan and comprehensive Zoning Ordinance will not be detri-
mental to the public health, safety and welfare.
SECTION 3: Declaration of Urgency. This Ordinance is here-
by declared an urgency measure necessary for the immediate protec-
tion and preservai:ion of the public peace, health, safety and wel-
fare for the reasons stated in Section 2 hereof, and shall take ef-
fect immediately upon its adoption.
1978.
ATTEST:
APPROVED and ADOPTED this
' C ty Cler
day of ff
Mayor of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga
I
i�
0
ORDINANCR NO,
0
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALI-
FORNIA, ESTABLUSHING INTERIM DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
PROCEDURES FOR SUBDIVISIONS AND LOCATION AND DE-
VELOPMENT PLAN APPROVALS, AND DECLARING THE URGENCY
THEREOF.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California,
does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: All applications for subdivisions and location
and development plan approvals shall be subject to the following
requirements in addition to all other applicable requirements:
(1) The following requirements must be met by
every development application before it will be accepted for filing:
(a) It must be accompanied by a letter from
the serving water agency indicating that adequate line and storage
capacity exists or will exist to serve the proposed development at
the time of occupancy.'
(b) It must be accompanied by a report or
a letter from the serving sewer agency indicating that adequate col-
lection system and treatment plant capacity exists or will exist to
serve the proposed development at the time of occupancy or it must
be accompanied by a letter from tha Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board stating that the development, because of type, loca-
tion and /or lot sizes, will not require sewerage treatment.. The
requirement in this sub - section for a report or a letter indicating
the existence of adequate treatment plant capacity shall be satis-
fied if the Chino Basin Municipal Water District provides documenta-
tion stating that additional capacity will be available within
twenty -four (24) months of the filing date, however, not necessarily
reserved for the Particular tract.
(c) If the average slope of the project
site exceeds ten percent (10%), the development plan shall show pre -
liminay finished grade contours and the approximate location of all
proposed structures, provided, however, that this requirement shall
not apply to minor subdivisions where the proposed lot size is one
(1) acre or larger.
(d) The proposed project must be consistent
with the applicable general plan, both textual and mapped. For res-
idential projects, the proposed development must be within the range
shown on the General Plan except as may be modified by textual scope
formulas. The determination of the allowable density will depend
upon the physical characteristics of land, and a lower density with-
in the range may be required in areas of steeper terrain.
-1-
(2) The following service and planning criteria
checklist shall be completed during the staff review process:
(a) PRIMARY CONSIDERATIONS.
1. Schools.
Will the projected elementary and
high school population from this project attend public schools that
will have adequate facilities according to State standards within
eighteen (18) months after occupancy?
2. Fire Protection.
Will the development be provided
fire protection by a local public fire protection entity by the time
of application for building permits?
3. Circulation.
Will the projected traffic from
this project be handled within adequate service levels within a rad-
ius of one (1) mile from the boundary of the project? If not, will
construction of the project help relidve an existing cirulation prob-
lem on a secondary or major route?
4. Drainage.
Will the development be protected
from 100 -yea: flows by the time of application for building permits?
(b) SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS.
1. Priority Land Use.
Does the development include or
is it exclusively a commercial, industrial or public service land
use?
2. Land Use Compatibility_
Is the proposed land use- compat-
ible with the surrounding existing land uses?
3.
available at time of occupancy?
4.
Public Utilities (Electricity and
Telephone).
Will electricity and telephone be
Police.
y
Is the project located within a
geographic area served by existing motorized patrols?
-2-
0
Park and Recreation District?
.s
5. Parks.
Is the project within a local
6. Air Quality Mitigation Measures.
Does the project incorporate any
of the air quality mitigation measures included in tha County's
Air Quality Plan?
7. Energy Conservation Measures.
Does the project include any non-
required energy or natural resource conservation measures?
e. Medical Facilities.
Is the project within five (5)
miles of a hospital or emergency medical facility?
9. Library Facilities.
Is the project within three (3)
miles of an existing library facility?
10. Design.
Does the project include either
one of the follov:Lng:
a. Curvilinear streets?
b. Retention of thirty percent
(308) of existing natural trees or five percent (58) of existing
e:ultivated trees?
11. Design.
0
Does
the project include either one
of the
following:
a.
Common open space?
b.
Finish grading which is con -
tour grading?
12. Housing Needs.
Does
twenty percent (208) or more
of the
project meet any housing needs
outlined in San Bernardino
County's
Housing
Assistance Plant
(3) In its review
of the prcposed project, the
�rU,
Planning Commission shall consider the following:
(a) The results of the detailed "design re-
view" analysis.
(b) The results of the "project evaluat:.on
review checklist ". A recommendation for approval of the project
shall require affirmative responses to all primary considerations
and a majority of the secondary considerations.
The Planning Commission :}ay include suggested
conditions or stipulations in its recommendation.
(4) No project shall be approved unless the fol-
lowing findings have been made:
(a) The proposed project is consistent with
the general plan, both textual and mapped. For residential projects,
the proposed development is within the range shown on the General
Plan except as may be modified by textual slope formulas. The de --
termination of the allowable density will depend upon the physical
characteristics of land, and a lower density wici. _'n the range will
be requireP, in areas of steeper terrain.
(b) Adequate service capacity exists, has
been reserved, or will be available at such time as the project is
completed or within a reasonably acceptable time frame. Considera-
tion cf adequate service capability shall be based on a cumulative
assessment of all projects previously approved.
(5) The applicant must obtain and forward to
the Planning Department the followinq letters prior to recordation
of a map:
(a) A letter f -om the serving water agency
certifying that capacity for that project has been reserved for a
minimum period of one (1) year.
(b) A letter from the serving sewer agency,
if requireu, certifying that capacity has been reserved for that
project for a minimum period of one (1) year.
(6) Grading permits shall not be issued until
after reservation of sewer and water capacity. Where grading is
necessary outside the boundaries of the individual project, grading
hermits shall not be issued until after reservation of sewer and.
water capacity on the individual project, and after Planning Di-
rector approval of the entire grading plan.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby declares that it would
have adopted this ordinance and each section, sub- section, sentence,
cruse, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespect�.ve of the fact that any
one or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, or portions
thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. If for any rea-
-4-
E.,
son any portion of this Ordinance shall be declared invalid or un-
constitutional, thbn all other provisions thereof shall remain
valid and enforceable.
SECTION 3: The City Council finds that:
(1) That the City is experiencing rapid resi-
dential growth which has plaked pressure on various public services,
most notably sewer treatment, circulation and schools.
(i; That there is an imarmdiato reed to adopt
interim develOP-Ment ravima procedures and other short- and long-
term actions for the City in order to coordinate the timing and lo-
,:ation of new development with the provision of public service :t in
accordance with good planning principles.
(3) The study of growth and related service im-
pacts has revealed that problems occur when development is approved
without assurances that critical services will be available at the
U me of ccc,:pancy and that other services will be available within
a reasonable per'od of time frnr: the date of occupancy.
SECTION 4: This ordinance is hereby declared an urgency
measure necessary for the immediate protection and preservation of
the public peace, health, safety, and welfare. for the reasons stated
in section 1 hereof aTtd shall take effect immediately upon its adop-
tion.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of I
1978.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-C.
Mayor of the City-
Rancho Cucamonga
0
1
CITY CQUNCE): IIEARI DATEi March 22, 1978
V • N•
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM Nn. 6
ROUTINE ITEM X
NON - ROUTINE ITEM
TIME OF ITEM
AREA: Rancho cucamon9a /Alta Loma
FILE /INDEX NO: W77-0467P (W 87 -51)
PROPOSAL. zpna Variance to create 2 lots one lot less than the minimum
area require�en'.sanY then Road, approxR6450�Ft.; east +of Carne -"
LJCATICV: yXLhAside of Hod•.cn Fa__ -
APPLICANT: Walter and Gayle White
ENSiI RC1L1=T* None
IO _ PUBLIC HEARING NUCICES SLNT ON �Nnrah A 1 -978
PIT'ORT P14- UlARID BY: John perevuznik
FIEU) INSPECTION TEAM: DATE OF iNspECTICI`lu'-1 i -7D
CMCEL SIZE: 1.48 acres M/L � "aapp. � z' �+ 1 4 i
i'CIS'CINC LArID USE: Single Family Residential ;p =• F: z - 3 •�lG70
E.XIST.IV.; 7CNING: R- 1•-20,000
SUR1";tA)'.NG LAND USE 111•93 'LADING
Undeveloped R••1- 24.000 ' „n•
FAsr: Residential, R -1 -20 ri '•. fl�t�I' ;; +
:70MIl: Residential, R -1 -20 M "v'9• +� ”"
y. A7�59.��
WEST: Undeveloped, R -1 -20 M - =�= y
(=ERAL 1-U' 1 AND OESIGNATICNJ: valley Forcion
San Bernardino County General Plan - f� •�^
'lrban Area
TIIE F.NVIRONPIENTA'_ RFV71'.W Officer ON February 25, 1978 DETERMINED
THAT THIS PROJECT WOLFLO HAVL A icy fican�,— EFFECT ON THE
ENV I RONMC:NT.
L
City Sphere of Influence:
Water SerVicc:_CUC mo:
SCWPr Service: Snotic Tan
STArr P=- CNT4NDATION: NonApproval
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
I
STAFF ANALYSIS
Application submitted to create two lots from an existing
parcel- consisting of approximately 1.48 acres in gross area. One
lot to to approximately 13,300 square feet in net area size (dis-
counting easements) which does not meet the minimum area size of the
R-1- 20,000 zone classification. An 80 foot flood control easement
running north and south is located near the east side of the pro-
perty making hpproximately one-third of the subject site unsuitable..
for a building site. A single family residence with detached
garage is located on the s?te. Applicant in requesting a zone
variance to construct another single family residence-on the
western portion.
on August 1, 1977, the Board of Supervisors adopted the
"Interim Development Review Procedures" for the West Valley.
These procedures also apply to laid division applications. As
part of these procedures, the Subdivision Review Committee has
to review and make recommendations on each application. This
application, initially submitted on a land division, was re-
viewed by the Committee and it was recommended that the proper
application for this proposal was a zone variance because it
didn't meet the minimum requirements of the current zone
classification. The Committee also made a finding that the .
proj�L.•ct did not receive an affirmative response to all the
primary considorations,specifically schbol�. Coffey Union High
School District has an over - capacity student enrollment at Alta
Loma Hiqh School. The County De,artment of Environmental
Health recommends that in sirbani -.Ang areas, the minimum lot
size for subsurface wastewater disposal should be 20,000 square
feet per dwelling unit.
FSNDIbIGS:
1. The granting of this variance may be materially
detrimental to properties in the neighborhood or the
use thereof because there are no parcels in the
immediate vicinity that are substandard in area
requirements of the zone classification.
2. The granting c,f this variance will not adversely
affect, in a m&terial way, the County Genera? Plan,
or its objectives because it is consistent with the
urban area land use designation.
3. That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circum-
stances or conditions applicayle to the property or
to the intended use that do not general:.y apply to
other properties or uses in the same vicinity,and zonl..
(Notes The Topenga Supreme Court decision specifically
requires an affirmative showing that this subject.pro -.
perty differs substantially.and in relevant aspects
from others in the area.) The So foot flood control
easement across the property does reduce the usable
area size of the subject site; however, the parcel
contiguous to the north has the -same problem.
4. This variance is not necessary for the preservation
and use of a substantial property right possessed
by the properties in the same vicinity and zone
district which is requested for the property in
question. All of the parcels in the immediate
vicinity meet the area requirements of the zone
classification.
S. Proposed minor subdivision does not meet the pri-
mary consideration of schools ender the guidelines
of County ordinance 2179.
RECOMMENDATION;
Staff cannot recommend approval of this zone variance appli-
cation as submitted based on the stated findings.
If specific evidence and facts are presented during the
hearing and findings made as to how the school issue can be
mitigated to warrant Planning Commission approval of this
variance, Staff has the following recommendations:
A. The negative declaration be adopted and that the Secretary
be instructed to file a Notice of Determination.
B. The attached conditions be applied to the approval of
this variance.
]. A 25 foot offer of dedication required along the west
boundary (Moonstone Avenue) and a 20 foot radius of
return offer of dedication required for rounding the
corner az snown on the Minor subCivision Plat Map.
2. Curb, gutter and 26 foot paving is required for Moonstone
Avenue and Hidden Farm Road. 26 feet of paving is also
required for Hidden Farm Road -to Carnelian Avenue.
Applicant is advised to coordinate with the legal pro^
perty owners in immediate area. Plans for all improve -
ments must be approved by t'te San Bernardino County
Road Departs ;ct prior to installation of said improve-
ments. A cash deposit or bond may be placed with the
County Road Department to fulfill this requivement.
3. Applicant shall provide a fire protection water system
in accordance with Foothill Fire , district standards and
comply with the attached Foothill Fire District require
ments.
4. Applicant shall forward to the Plannii•.g Department a
letter from the serving water agency re- tifying that
capacity for this project has been reserred for a
minimum period of one (1) year.
FINDINGS (continued):
5. The County Flood Control requires that the 80 foot
drainage easement over the natural drainage course
!' traversing the site not be occupied or obstructed.
6. Applicant shall meet following minimum criteria for
subsurface discharge of sewage:
The following criteria are ordinarily necessary for
the protection of water quality and the prevention of
nuisance in cases of subsurface discharges of sewage:
(A) Depth of soil between ground surface and ground -
water in the disposal area shall not be less than
10 feet.
(B) Depth of soil between the bottom of the disposal
cacilities and groundwater shall not be less than
5 feet.
(C) Ground slope in the disposal area shall not be
greater than 30 percent...
` (D) The percolation rate in the disposal area shall not
be greater than 60 minutes per inch if the discharge
is to a leachfield, and not greater than 30 minutes
per inch if the discharge is through a seepage pit.
(E) Compliance with all applicable local requirements,
including requirements on lot sine and distance
from wells, streams, drainage courses, raservoirs,
adjoining properties, or other points.
(F) All subsurface discharges of domestic wastewater
shall receive tr3atment in a properly constructed
and maintained septic tank, or other solids
removal device approved by the local agency, prior
to discharge.
7. Upon completion of all other conditions, a parcel map
of the proposed division shall be recorded with the
County Recorder pursuant to provisions of the State Map
Act; (Note: This map must be prepared by a licensed
land surveyor or a Registered Civil Engineer). An
advance copy of the parcel map may be submitted to.the
County Surveyor to expedite checking, but the County
Surveyor will not accept the linen for presentation to
the County Recorder for filing until notified by the
Planning Director that your minor subdivision applica-
tion is in order for final approval.
The parcel map is required due to insufficient survey
date ;.,ecorded with the County of San Bernardino.
.,j • .
tf ,
e
i�
i�
a
Ow In the opinion of
"that portion the County Flood Control
the natural drainage site lying within and District,
subject to infrequent course traversing
abutting
over quent flood hazards by the site is
these ' erosion, and debris deposition easons of
Problems, the following is os'" Rn"- To miti,g&
a• A registered civil engineer shoulu investigate
and design adequate drainage facilities to
Cept and conduct the flows around it throw h
site in a manner inter -
adjacent or downstream will not s. -ersel g the
Properties.- Y affect.
b• Than any future building pads be elevated
above
natural ground to reduce damage due to overflows
a,
t
c:. _.. fr [NYI
•rutnNUs XOTHILL FIRE U15TRAk
(911) 007.2030 � 4" —�(
Serving the Communities of Alta Loma •Cucamonga • Etimanda
P. 0. Box 35 — 6627 Amethyst Street / r
Alta Loma, California 91761 ( °�
NovembeA 2, 1977
LU
g , C= . z
San Bettnardino County
P.tanning Depa&tmen.t
west Vateey D.iv.i6.ion
1111 E. Mile, Bu.Uding M1
San Bernard --no, CA 92415
RE: W17 -0467 (WHITE)
ALTA LOMA
Genttemen:
Recommendations and /on nequZAetnen.ts bon the above project arc a6 6oltom:
1. Aft noadLaaya 61tatt meet San 8vatatdino Ccuntj 46tandand6 and the
SWmic and Satiety Etement 06 the San SeAnw,dino County Genehat
P.tan, except that no .Loadway shah be Zesa than 24 beet in width,
exetudi.rtg koa6ide panh,ing.
2.. A rr rninium o6 two (2) po.int6 06 :ingress and egne64& shah be
p1Lovided.
3. A.Ze dead -end roaduaya 6haU inaude a cut- de -bae (m4ni.n'urn 48
boot nad Ls) or appnoved hammerhead. twin- a,towtd, and nc dead -end
noadoay shat -t a %ceed 600 beet in .Length.
4. Ate roadways aha.tt have att- weathex 6ar6acing and ahaX._ be
compacted to withstand 50,000 pounds vehtculak weight.
5. Consideration 6or 6.Ae appnnatu6 ahLee be given in ptann.i.ng peA-
cent o6 street gitade within the det:etopment.
6. A comptete water 6y4tem bon 6.ire paotection shah be .in6taeted
and openab.te prior to any construction in the devetopment. The
dpeci6.ie 6i)te 6P.otu, size o6 wat&L maitt6 and aN.oC'Z .j 06 6i Le
hydrants wiU Le determined by this department upan receipt 06
cotutructCon .in6onmation.
7. Ate 6tarnmabte vegetation on cortbuatibPe grotltth located withi
one hundred beet o6 any buitdirtg or stAue-tuAe ahaU be removed.
Vegeta -tion ptanted ieUltin thirty beet o6 any 6t&uctahe up to
one hundred beet o6 the atnuetune 6ha.te be o6 an appnoved :type
6o,% high hazard areas. An .vv.i.gated greenbelt may be regvined
beyond the above &tipu.tated distances.
San Bennandino Co j Panning `
-Page Two
8. Types o6 hoo6 coveh.ingd, chimney dpanh WfAeAtchd, length 06
nvehn n46, aiding eonathuCt on, etc., dhatt meek appf.i-cabte
sections 04 the Un.i6oron Budf.ding Code and Un.ieom Fiu Code
Got high &:Ae hazand aAeaa.
9. House on baEdZng addne a numbeaing dha t be pnovided in
accordance with San Bennandiuo Cowaty Oadiaiance 2108.
Authonctjj bon .the above requirements W-W be bound in the Un.i6o4m F Ae Code
(1973 Edi- tion) and Ordi-nanee 01, ad adopted by the FoothtU Fite. Vis:thi.cat.
Additi.onae requinemenfis may be bound .in coded and ordinances adopted by
the ca. .v; t,..,� . V �. . . �-
��,..• v2pw`w..eiin. Vp ru%Ced •
S.i.nce4ety,
EUGENE M. BILLINGS, FIRE CHJIEF
$y`
.�i . •r. .. 4�.. r• jR t'
Benfa;4n L. Mackatt, Fie Mauha.0
F.Ute Pi eventi.on Bureau
EMB:va
cc! Cati6oroua Depaktm; nt o6 Foitut ay
WatleA Wh.>,fe
r1-
k
j
c;;
t
r'.
r,
i
LAND DIVISION APPLICATION
ROINO COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
-' 1 or 2 40
1 I 2G, 466. 22er
ti � ��� �• ( ®dWw�
• ; ;3,37"
� W
a
irl �a EVSr WA7Z"K
� � � 30 � ° /SY/�/p -G6D .4�•
iY /bp�iV 'CARA+ , Ma
lr
.• , r
All
1�.
eo
,d J V,
414 117S
� / 27f • �
Ea7sr, 2••suriv" �•n/
IW H
Map
$tall
APPLICANT: . 1, -1 (Office Use Only)
11ame 417LAone 22-1 x122-22 24
L.D. NO, _ W %7' 0 '71 Address
ZONE 2���ie+600
I=I. OWNER OF RECORD:
Nam tr lllill l t'i Fjl;u17 >1 Phonc
p / FEE RECEIPT NO.
Addre�sli�Qydj�t•Gl+,�. ��._•.�i,s^C_ -rL cSt..�nw �;
Y.P PREPARED $Y: .
I
A
HELLMAN 1' k
AVE.- 1 y'
om
IR
1p
tn
rr r ao a
�
� `
.t.
'� r 1 � i �• � - ru
\\ 4 41 1
N ,
r� o
Is )
it
/o g ,ro� Ore..
1. l�y '!r # u c m
Q yr ;,�. I r 1a L p r S1 t. a i I ��` F 1 -•
.L 2 w •+ ,1 •� T JtIT •� (�{��1 It.. ♦i'rh 440 �) It,
`y'{q .!� ',: � ill fn ..1� 1yp1 Z� � � f t r1 f•,'1' - F1f �.'.. �µ. �. �: %).
f4}?1.�..V'l 'y. _ _ ... ,.`. , `:'� '. grQ• •_ 1. r .i l�'. -. .. . I - _1.._'. ) LJ�-
i
I
i
r
/
,q
dN
�0
x �
Oo
Ol L
.. N
- C 1itPit,I.I4iJ
,1
•1
yr '
.Y
mro
G
C . ,4, .
v
W
N
S
a I 1
r .
1
/ I 6l
1 .I
I !
I
1 I
1 !
! I
i�
f i >�
II'�
!
I 1
i
I i
ol
�w- AVEMUr-- O
i1
IY
MI
F. N.
�tiI Alf n
b
0
N
`9
LA
.,
i ?
i
.Y
mro
G
C . ,4, .
v
W
N
S
a I 1
r .
1
/ I 6l
1 .I
I !
I
1 I
1 !
! I
i�
f i >�
II'�
!
I 1
i
I i
ol
�w- AVEMUr-- O
i1
IY
MI
F. N.
�tiI Alf n
b
0
N
`9
LA
I
1
I
I
_•y
r. •, � �
1
I
I
_
I
Yl�
v.
V -' C�6
I
V
G
I
.Y
mro
G
C . ,4, .
v
W
N
S
a I 1
r .
1
/ I 6l
1 .I
I !
I
1 I
1 !
! I
i�
f i >�
II'�
!
I 1
i
I i
ol
�w- AVEMUr-- O
i1
IY
MI
F. N.
�tiI Alf n
b
0
N
`9
,
. 'fi'i ,;•�`'� { tj. f`" f �i[c � n , t - ,...': 2 ' , ti `Y* 3 i 'T f7
- „�4 ;i ` , � ., it ap ,.
Tentative Agenda
RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
March' 22,' ,1978
7:30�O .m. Call to Order
1. Pledge of Allegiance ,
2. Roll Call: Dahl , Garcia , Jones,_, Remple , Tolstoy
3. Approval of the Minutes
4. Miscellaneous Reperts
Advertised Public Hearing Items
1. Proposal: Location and development Plan for Neighborhood
Shopping Center, Index No. W86 -66
Location: Northwest corner of 19th Street and Carnelian
Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga
Applicant: Douglas & Kathleen lione /Douglas Gorgen
Staff: Frank Molina
2. Proposal: Zona Change from R -3 to C -1, Index No. W97 -85
Location: Approx. 204 feet south of Arrow Route, approx.
332 feet east of Archibald Avenue, (54 acres),
Rancho Cucamonga
Applicant. Chino Basin Municipal Water District
Doug Payne
3. Proposal. Zone Change from A -1 -5 to R- 1- 20,000, Index
No. W85 -49
Location: North side of vacated Almond Street, approx.
385.91 feet east of Carnelian Street, Rancho Cucamonga
Applicant: Gertrude Hartman
Staff: Doug Payne
4. Proposal:
Zo,iz Change from C -1 to C -2, Indes
No. 81 -82
Location:
East side of Grove Avenue, between
San Bernardino
Avenue and Rancheria Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga
Applicant:
Francis - More
Staff:
Doug Payne
5. Proposal:
Zone Change from R -2 to C -2, Index
No. W85 -86
Location:
Northeast corner of Baker Avenue and 9th Street,
Rancho Cucamonga
Applicant:
McCutchan & Ass.ciates, Ir.c.
Staff:
Doug Payne
6. Proposal:
Location:
Applicant:
ry
Staff:
Zone variance to create Iwo (2) lots, one having
less than the minimum area requirements of
R- 1- 20,000 sq. ft., Index No. W8T -51 (M.S. No.
W77- 0467P), Rancho Cucamonga
North side of Hidden Farm Road, approx. 450 ':eet
east of Carnelian Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga
Walter White
John Perevuznik
V
1t ilds 'i hSaG P. A r,f.4e l a'A`y lr - li::• �, eME
P: r �' ; r ` fr SCI,; t i } A(`{'%r�Atyl.
f
Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission Page 2
Tentative,Agenda for 3- 22.7.8 ;
Non -Hear, ..a Items
7. Proposal:
Location:
Applicant:
Staff:
8. Proposal:
Location:
Applicant:
Staff:
9. Proposal:
Location:
Applicant:
Staff:
10. P:'uposal
Location:
Applicant:
Staff:
Create two (2) lots on 6.35 acres, Minor Subdivision.'
No.. h78- 0046I.__
Approx. 750 feet east of Helle.an, between 8th
and 9th Streets, Rancho Cucamonga
Albert W. Davis
John'Perevuznik
Tentative Tract 9583,(revised), consisting of
49 lots on 49.6 acres
East of raven Avenue, approx. 1000 feet north of
Wilson Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga
Deer Creek Development Co. /Madole & Associates, Inc.
Frank Molina
Phasing of Tentative Tract 9584 into ...
A. Tentative Tract 9584 -1, consisting of 47
dots on 52.8 acres,
B- Tent_ ?t: Tract 9584 -2, consisting of 45
lots on 43.9 ages,
C. Tentative Tract 9524 -3, consisting of 52
lots on 51.9 acres.
East side of Haven Avenue, approx. 1500 feet
north of Wilton Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga
Deer Creek Developme:-,t Lo. /Madole b Associates. Inc.
Frank Molina
Tentative Tract 9193 and 9262
Request for.81 Sewer Hardship Allocations (re:ferved
to Planning Commission by City Council, 3/15/78)
East Side of Vineyard Avenue, South of Candlewood,
Rancho Cucamcnga
Trinity Development Co.
Tommy Stephens
Policy Items
1. Consider and make recommendation to the City Council to adopt
an ordinance requiring administrative site review of commercial
and industrial development.
2. Consider and make recommendation to the City Council regarding
amendments to San Be-nardino County Ordinance 2179 (adopted as
an interim measure by the City Council) and the sewer allocation
program.
L t-11A COU14C:IL 11EARING DATLO- March 22, 1970
AGENDA ITEM NO.
`1'4OUTINE_ITEM
•TllE ENVIRONM{:NTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ON 1 -18 -78 DETERMINED
THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD I :077 A NON - SIGNIFICANT I•;FI ECT ON THE ENVIRONMEMT.
a:c
City Sphere of-
Water Service:
Sewer Service:
STAFF RFCCM•WMATION:
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
C
e
I
'
NON- ROUTINE ITEM
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
_•
TINE OF ITEM
^ +.
CITY COUNCIL
AREA: West Valley / Rancho Cucamonga
r)117/INDEX NO: Zone Change / W97 -85
PIUPOSAL: Zone Change from R -3 to C -1
In.:7%T10N: S/s Arrow Route, approx. 332 Zeet
E/o Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga
APPI.ICANr: Chino Basin Municipal Water District
I'NGINfJW* ARCIII7=:
S
40 PUBLIC 11FARING NOTICES SENT ON 3 -7 -78
RiM'OBr PRETARM B1': Douglas Payne
FIP.ID INSPEC.rION TE9M:
DATE OF INSPECPICTI:
PARCEL SIZE: 5.5 acres
FAISTING LMID USE: Chino Basin MWD general offices and vacant land
v
U- NTSTING ZONING: R -3
AF'ROW i?B[CTE
SURROUNDING JAND USE AND ZONING
NORNI: Commercial and Residential
i
'
Zoned C -1 & R -3
WOT: Residential
Zoned R -1
SOLMI: School
R -1
stut)s
s'
Q
WEST: Tentative Tract 9405,
/ / /�/
_.'
Vacant, A -1 & C -1
C04ERAL PLAN AND DESIGNATION:
�
Valley Portion, County G.P. / Urban Areas
v
k
Q
-
•TllE ENVIRONM{:NTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ON 1 -18 -78 DETERMINED
THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD I :077 A NON - SIGNIFICANT I•;FI ECT ON THE ENVIRONMEMT.
a:c
City Sphere of-
Water Service:
Sewer Service:
STAFF RFCCM•WMATION:
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
C
e
I
Staff Analysis
Requested is a zone change to the C -1 district on an irregular
~
shaped 5.5 acre site, generally located on the southeast corner
i
"•
of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route. The C -1 zone district is
" 'i•
requested to permit an expansion of the parking area for the
Chino Basin Municipal Water District (CBMWD) general offices,
as well as for other future commercial uses. A neighborhood
service center is proposed on the northeast portion of the site.
°
The project boundary is described as followsm begi.nning.with
the southeast 604 feet by 633 feet corner of Archibald Avenue
and Arrow Route, excluding the 204 foot by 332 foot corner lot
and the interior lot that fronts on Archibald, approximately
350 feet south of Arrow Route. The resulting irregular shaped
area is the subject site. The site is comprised of four (4)
parcels, all under CBMWD's ownership.
The project site is vacant and zoned R -3 with the exception of
one parcel improved with CBMWD's general offices. This portion
is located on Archibald, approximately 204 feet south of Arrow
Route. This parcel is presently zoned C -1.
Further review of the zone change' requires analysis of the
total 604 foot by 633 foot corner as a whole. It is defined .
on the south by an elementary school, on the east by a single-
family subdivision and on the north and west by major arterials.
The corner is vacant with the exception of the CBMWD's offices
and a building housing the Assistance League of Upland. Both
uses have individual access drives on Archibald Avenue. There
is an interior street which enters on Arrow Route as well as
into the two residential streets of the adjoining subdivision.
A seventy '(70) foot building setback on Archibald Avenue has
been established by the two improvements. As for on -site
,yo-, •i
parking, both uses have separate It• is Staff's opin-
ion that when the area develops, whether commercial or residential,'
it should be coordinated with the adjacent parcels.
To the south of CBMWD's general offices on the interior lot
excluded from the site is the Assistance League of Upland.
The Assistance League is a service organization which was
granted a site approval in August 1963 to establish a community
girls club. The Assistance League site is presently zoned R -1
and is surrounded on the south, east and not•th by the project
site. It is Staff's opinion that, should the requested zone
change be approved, it would be appropriate to include the
Assistance League property in the decision.
y;
y
4 ' r
i - Staff Analysis: (cont.)
In general, most of the commercial uses permitted in the C -1
zone district, if adequately buffered, would be compatible
with the Elementary School on the south. The situation is,
somewhat different for the east portion of the site, since
many of the permitted C -1 uses would be incompatible with
the adjacent single- family neighborhood. Further, the impact
Of commercial activity will be greater on the adjacent homes
since there is common frontage. In Staff's opinion, minimal
traffic generating uses with appropriate buffering zhould be
the only type of commercial uses permitted on the eastern
Port-ion of the site.
Findings as Recommended by Staff:
Based on the analysis stated above, the following findings
are
recommended:
1.
The proposed zone district is consintant with the "Urban
Area" designation of the General Plan as long as the
Permitted commercial uses on the eastern portion of the
site is
compatible with the adjacent single - family resider. -
tial neighborhood; if the
development of the entire corner k
is coordinated; and if adequate buffering is installed.
2.
The subject zone change application has not been filed
concurrently with the development proposal.
3.
The site, incoordination with the entire corner, is suitable
for
many of the uses permitted in the C -1 zone district
in terms
of access, size of parcel, density, relationship
to
similar or related uses, and other considerations deemed
relevant.
4.
i'
The proposed change of district classification, modified
to exclude uses not compatible with single - family resi-
dences, is
reasonable and proper at this time, and with
appropriate buffering and exclusic,n of non- compatible uses,
it will
not adversely affect adjoining properties as to
value or precedent and will not be detrimental to the area
or adjoining properties.
5.
The need for an expanded parking area as well as a proposed
neighborhood
•
center has warranted this z one change.
6.
The proposed zone chahge modified to limit the commercial
uses on the eastern portion'-of the site to those uses that
do
not generate excessive noise and traffic and to include
appropriate buffering requirements, will
be in the interest
Of furtherance of public health, safety and general welfare.
Recommendatinns
Based upon tho stated finding and analysis, Staff recommends
APPROVAL of the C -1 -T zone district on the subject site, in
eluding the parcel housing the Assistance League of Upland.
`•.. Further, Staff recommends the following "T" standards:
1. A location, and development plan to be reviewed and approved
by the Planning Director prior to any further development
of the site. Said plan shall incorporate design consider-
ations for the entire southeast U'04 feet'by 633 feet corner-
of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route. Design Considerations
shall include but not be limited to the location of drive -
"` ways, parking c.reas, sidewalks, walls, loading areas, land -
scaping, proposed signs, lighting fixtures, proposed struc-
tures and irrigation improvements.
,3
r:a 2. The.permitted uses on the easterly portion of the site
(parcels adjacent to the residential subdivision) shall
be limited to those C -1 zone district usev that will be,
in the opinion of the Planning Director, compatible with
single- family residential uses. Uses not permitted shall
include those uses that generate excessive noise and traffic
�r. ". and are open du0mg hours other than 7 a.m. to 6 p.m.
r
Asa
3. Appropriate buffering and screening shall be installed on
the southern and eastern boundaries. .Commercial uses
located on the eastern portion shall be aesthetically
compatible with single - family residences.
4. A masonry wall six (6) feet in height shall be installed
around east project boundary.• Said wall will be reduced
to four (4) feet in height within front setback areas.
All walls shall be designed and constructed to provide
visual and physical relief along the wall face.
5. That all trash enclosures.and loading areas be screened'
from view on Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route.
6. That all buildings be setback a minimum of seventy (70)
feet from the centerline of Archibald Avcnue, further that
no buildings be constructed within these minimum setback areas.
}
1