HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978/10/25 - Agenda Packetn
4
r
C9n�
cnn JO
q-+
2
0
r
c
N
LA
V
cz
f
t.
r
�r
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING aMmisSION
AGENDA
Wednesday, October 25, 1978, 7:00 p.m.
Community Services Building
9161 Baseline, Rancho Cucamonga, CA
I. Pledge of Allegiance
II. Roll Call
Commissioner Dahl Commissioner Rempel
Cocm:isFioner Garcia Commissioner Tolstoy
Commissioner Jones
III. ,Approvz.1 of Minutes
IV. PuFlic Hearings
Conditional Use Permit No. 78-01 - The development of a Neighborhood
Commercial Shopping Center to be located on the northwest corner of
19th and Archibald - Request submitted by Vanir Research Company
Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -02 - The development of a Neighborhood
Commercial Shopping Center or the southeast corner of 19th and Archi-
bald - Request submitted by Robinson - Jensen Development Company
C. Zone Change No. 78 -01 - To change the zone from R -1 (Single Family
Residential) to A -P (Administration - Professional) for 1.629.acrea
located on the south side of Baseline between Garnet and Beryl Avenue -
Request submitted by Coral Investments Inc.
�D. Variance No. 78 -01 , request to vary from the requirement of a 70'
wide corner lot to 60' for property located on the southeast corner
of Arrow Route and Comet - R -1 zone - Request submitted by Merle Bauer.
E. General Plan - Industrial Issues
V. New Business
F. Director Review No. 78 -21 - The development of a retail hardware and
wholesale lumber store to be located on the south side of Foothill
Blvd. just west of Rochester Avenue - C -2 and M -1 zones — Request
submitted by .Richard DeWitt
ry `tGa Director Review No. 78 -24 - Request to develop an air conditioning
repair and storage facility in an M -1 zone on property generally
located on the east aide of Layton Street, south of La Mesa Drive
and adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad - Request subm tied
by Ruben T. Luna
0
PLAm-=G ommusum Arm*
October 25,•1978
Page 2
Ho Director Review No. 78-33 - Request for the addition of an industrial
Food Factory and Warehouse to the existing Frito Lay Plant in an M -2
zone generally located on the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and
4th Street - Request submitted by Frito Lay, Inc.
M irector Review No. 78-34 - The development of a professional office
img to be located on the *oath side ol'Baseline Avenue between
Garnet and Beryl Avenue - R -1 zone (A -P pending) - Request submitted
by Coral Investment, Inc.
Director Review No. 78 -36 - Construction of a 19.200 square foot indus-
trial building located on the northwest earner of Fern and Industrial
Tone - M -R Zane - Request submitted by S. "Buster" Filpi.
Director Review No. 78 -37 - Request to develop an industrial building
in an M -2 cone generally located on the north side of Jersey. Avenue
one half mile east of Raven Avenue - Request submitted by Crowell/
Leventhal, Inc -
Parcel Map No- 4744 - 12.5 acres of land located at 7789 Sierra Vista
into two parcels - R- 1- 12,000 zone - Map submitted by R b B Development
Company
J:la n nin g Consultant Contract
nicatioIs
Modifications to a proposed neighborhood - shopping center located on the
southeast corner of .Carnelian and 19th Street— Request submitted by
T b S Development
VII:. Adjournment
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 20, 1978
TO: Planning Caamission
FROM: Jack Las, Director of Community Development
SUBJF•CT: RmMINDmt OF SIGN ORDIRMCE smy SESSION
Please remember that we have a study session concerning the sign ordinance
on Tuesday, October 24, 1978 in the Library -C onference Room. Ii: sbould
be noted that,tbe meeting time has been cbanged to 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 P.m.
the same day, same location. Staff will be sviLilable to answer any
questions the individual Planning Commissioners may have concerning any
provisions of the proposed sign ordinance.
Respectfully submitted,
LDW
JACK LAN, Director of V
Community Development
,TL-.um
0 STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 25, 1978
T0: Plowing Commission
FROM: Jack Lam. *director of Commun.':ty Development
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 78 -01 - The development of a Neighbor-
hood Coamerci:sl Shopping Center to be located on the northwest
co"ex cf 19th and Archibald = -Request submitted by Vanir Research
Company, and CCNDITHRAL USE PEWIT NO. 78-02 - The development of
a Neigbborbood Commercial Shopping Center on the southeast corner of
Y9th and Archibald - Request submitted by Robinson - Jensen Development
Company
The Planning Division Staff recommenda the continuance of public hearings for
both of these projects to the November Be 1978 Planning Commission meeting.
Both of these projects are iuvolved in a major general plan issue that must
be resolved by the Commission prior to consideration of the site development
plans. Staff has contacted each of the applicants and has discussed the
necessity fez resolving the General Plan issues prior to considering the
site development plans for each of the centers. .Both of the applicants
have agreed to the continuance to the first meeting in November.
RECOMUMATION: -The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Commission
continue public hearings on CUP 78 -01 and COP 78-02 to the Movember•B. 1978
Planning Commission meeting.
Respectfully submitted
JACK LAM. Director of
Community Development
JL: =
0
. STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 25, 1978
TO: Planning Cammission
FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE N0. 78 -01 - To change the zone from R -1 (single family
residential) to A-P (Administration Professional) for 1.629 acres
located on the south side of Baseline between Garnet and Beryl
Avenue - Request submitted by Coral investment, Inc.
BACKGROUND: Joe Panasiti, representing Coral Investment, Inc., is requesting
approval to change the zone from R -1 to A•O on 1.6 acres of land located at.
9093 Baseline (Exhibit "A!9). The applicant has submitted an application for
site review for the development of a professional office complex which is also
on this Agenda for the Planning Commission's review.
The proposed General Plan indicates this area for development as mixed uses.
The subject site is presently zoned R -1 and is vacant. The surrounding zoning
and land use is as follows:
. Zoning Land Use
North R -1 Single Family Residential
South R -1 Single Family Residential 6 Vacant-Land
East R -1 Vacant
West R -1 Church
ANALYSIS: The proposed zone change is consistent with the proposed General Plan
and the site is suitable in size and shape to accommodate the -uses permitted In
the proposed zone. The uses permitted in said zone are compatible with adjacent
land uses and future development in the immediate area.
The Environmental Analysis Staff has reviewed this project for significant
adverse impacts upon the enviromment. Staff has found no significant adverse
impacts as a result of this project. Therefcre, a draft Negative Declaration
was published in the newspaper for public review.
CORRESPONDENCE: A notice of public hearing was published in the Cucamonga
Times on October 12, 1978. In addition, notice of said hearing was mailed to
property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. No correspondence
has been received in regard to such notice.
RECOMKENDATION: The Plaaaing Division recommends that the Planning Commission
following the public hearing, approve Resolution No. 78 -18 and forward such
. recommendation to the City Council for approval.
Respectfullj, submitted,
Y f,VN YIY., ✓
Commun4ty Development
RESO�LFTION NO. 78-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAKONCA PIAMUM
COkDi]:SSION APPROVIIR; DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 7E -33
ALT.OWDNC TEE ADDITION OF AN INDUSTRIAL FOOD FAC-
TORS AND MaMOUSE TO THE FRITO I" PLANT IN AN
M-2 ZONE GEIOIILmly LOCATED ON TES NOBMWAST CORNER
or _SJMEALD AVMX AND 4TH STESET
WHENF.AS, on the 22nd day of September, 1978, a complete
application was filed for review on the above described property; and
wmKn^, on the 25th day of October. 1978, the Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above des-
cribed project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
resolved as follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the site indicated by the development plan
is adequate in sire and shape to accommodate the
proposed use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences,
parking, loading, landscaping and other features
required by the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the improvwaaenta as indicated on the develop-
ment plan are located in such a manner as to be
properly related to existing and proposed streets
and highways.
3. That the improvements so shown on the development
plan are consistent with all adopted standards
and policies of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
SECTION 2: That this project wM not create significant adverse
impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued on
October 25, 1978.
SECTION 3: That the Planning CcsM118sion sets the following condi-
tions on tha above described project:
PlanninR Division
1. That all provisions of the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning
Ordinance be complied with.
2. That the site be developed in accordance with the
approved development plans on file in the Planning
Division Office.
3. That special landscape treatment subject to Planning
Division approval be provided along Archibald
Avenue.
0 0
4. That a detailed landscapa and irrigation
plan be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Division prior to issuance- of
building permits.
5. That all roof mounted equipment be screened
from view from adjacent properties.
6. That all provisions and conditions of the
Foothill District be complied with.
ineerinx Division
7.
At the time of development, grading and drain-
age plane prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer
shell be submitted for review and approval of the
City Engineer.
B.
Serer and water plans shall be coordinated with the
Cucacouga County Water District prior to development
of the individual parcels.
9.
Street lights are required along Archibald Avenue.
The developer of each parcel shall submit all
necessary plans for installation to the Southern
California Edison Company.
10.
Surface drainage from the site to the street shall
be by a parkway drain, per City standards to outlet
flows auto adjacent streets.
11.. Access shall be limited to tvo points along Archibald
Avenue.
12. The designer shall in no case create a potential
flood hazard to proposed or adjacent developments.
13. The design should not gather waters by artificial
means and discbarge them onto other (lower) proper-
ties in greater concentration than would naturally
be discharged nor should it dam or obstruct the flow
of surface waters from other (higher) properties
that naturally drain across onto the property in
question.
14. The designer may be required to obtain or provide
drainage easements and construct improvements.
0
0
0 0
AppWw ARD ADaPM THIS 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1978
Berman $®Ipel, (`.haliarn
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning COM'rission
I■ , Secretary of the Planning Comiaaion of the
City of Rancho Cueasonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution vas
duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cueaawnga at a regular meeting of the Planning casaisaion
held on the day of , 1978, by the following vote
to -wit:
AYES: CCkMOSIONERS:
190x5: COt4fISSIOMS:
ABSENT: 0CMISSIONERS:
0
0
0
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 25, 1978
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Commouity Development
SUBJECT: DIRECTOR REVIEW N0. 78 -34 - The develoment of a professional
office building to be located on the south side of Baseline
Avenue between Garnet and Beryl Avenue - R -1 zone (A-P pending)
Request submitted by Coral Investment, Inc.
BACKGROUND: Joe Panasiti, representing Coral Investment, Ire.. is requesting
approval to construct a 16,550 square foot office building on 1.629 acres
located at 9033 Baseline (Exhibit "A "). The project site is presently vacant
and located adjacent to a church. As the site is presently zoned R -1, the
applicant has submitted a zone change to A -P (administrative-professional)
in conjunction with this application and which is also on this Agenda.
ANALYSIS: The site development plan as proposed by the applicant is con-
sistent with the Zoning Ordinance and the proposed General Plan.
The development plan indicates access to the site by the driveways from
Baseline. The Engineering Division is recommending that the most easterly
driveway be eliminated in.accordance with the access policy for major
arterials such as Baseline. .In conjunction with this alteration, the
center driveway should be widened -to 35 feet.
A professional office complex of this size requires 83 parking stalls. A
total of 90 parking spaces have been provided. With the elimination of
the driveway, an additional two parking spaces can be provided.
The development of the site will provide many landscaped areas. The plan
indicates the use of mounding along the front of the property. Staff recom-
mends that in conjunction with the mounding that a meandering sidewalk be .
used to enhance the overall design of the project. Also, staff recommends
that the 5' high wall an the east property line be reduced to V in height
within the front 25' of the property.
The front elevation of the building indicates an early California. design
with mission tile roof, roof -sawn timbers, and stuccoed arches. The appll-
cant-has not provided building elevations for the east, west and south sides:
Staff recommends that such elevations be submitted to the Planning Division
for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
• The Environmental Analysis Staff has reviewed the project for significant
adverse environmez.tal impacts and has not found any as a result of this
project. VAerefore, a draft Negative Declaration was published in the
newspaper.
DIRECTOR MMEW 210. &36
Rage 2
$E2O2i!q)=(D8: The Placming Division recommends tbat the Planning Comm
mission approve and adopt Resolution No. 78 -20 based on the conditions and
findings listed tberein.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK LAM, Director-
Camonity Development
JL:Im
:. 1 /' ,
THE 1 = :. 17' .M OF 1'117: r' BUILD
/,:\. GZIUM=T LOCA72D 11; ra:
a'.'T AVEWR n:i. RAIY .1■ FAST OF •a: a:u •41,•' > "� /`
WHERFAS, on the 25th day of September, 1978, a comple pplication
s:
va filed for review on the above described property; and
WHEREAS, on the 25th day of October, 1978, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above described project.
HOW, THEREPd$E, the Rancho cucamsoaga Planning Commission resolved
an follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the site indicated by the development plan is
adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed
use, and all yards, spaces. walls, fences, parking,
loading, landscaping and other features required by
the 7.oning ordinance.
2. That the improvements as indicated on the development
plan are located in such a manner as to be properly
related to e4 sting and proposed streets and highways.
3. That the improvements as shown -on the development p)an
are consistent -with all adopted standards and policies
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
SECTION 2s That this project will not create sign' tent adverse impacts
on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued on October 25,
1978.
SECTION 3s That the Planning Commission sets the follow1mg conditions
on the above described project:
1. That all provisions of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Zoning Ordinance be complied Kith.
2. That the site be developed in accordance with the
approved plans on file in the Planning Division office.
3. That a detailed landscape and irrigation plan be sub -
pitted to and approved by the Plasusinng Division prior
to issuance of building permits.
4. That a decorative block wall replace the chain link
fence adjacent to the entrance gates. An Elevation
plan of such walls shall be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Division prior to issuance of build-
ing permits.
S. That all roof mounted equipment be screened
from adjacent properties with materials con-
form" to the architectural design of the
building.
6. Yhst sign plans must be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Division prior to installation
of any signs.
7. That entrance driveway Vldtbs be a minimum of
thirty feet (301).
a. That a trash enclosure capable of holding two
(2) bins be provided at the rear of the
Landing.
9. That any outdoor storage be screened from view
of adjacent properties.
10. That all provisi'ms and conditions of the Poor-
hill Fire Distrret be complied with.
ineerinx Diviei in
11.
At the time of development, grading, drainaga,
and street plans prepered by a Registered Civil
Engineer shall be su::- aitted for review aril approval
of the City Engineer. Hydraulic calculations and a
topographic map will be required to support the
sizing and location of drainage structures shown
on the plan.
12.
Sewer and waxer -plans- shall -be coordinated with
the C13emsongn County - Water- District prior to
development of the individual parcels.
13.
At the time of development curb, gutter, drive
approaches, and A.C. Hateh -up paving shall be
provided along Jersey in conformance with the
City-of Rsveho Cucamonga standards.
14.
Surface drainage from the site to the street
shall be by a parkway drain, per City standards
to outlet flow into adjacent arrests.
15.
The proposed site is subject to periodic inundation
due to 100 year storms. Flood protection sseaaures
caeprised of the raising building pad elevations.
construction of walls, berms. and protective roles
on drive approaches shall be utilised to insure
protection from 100 year flood. Prior to final
approval precise protective measures shall be
approved by the City Engineer•
0
0
0
RESOLUTION NO. 78-18
n
u
A RBSpidlTIJM ON TIM RANCHO COCAMONGA FLAWING
COMaSSION FOR TEE ADOPTION OF ZONE CHANGE NO.
78-01 TO ORDINANCE Ito. 17 BY CRAMGD G TIE ZONE
FRQi R -1 To A-7 FOR 1.629 ACRES LOCATED AT 9033
BASELINE - ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 208-011 -66
WMWA , an the 26th day of September, 1979, an application was filed and
accepted on the above described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 25th day of October, 1978, the Planning Commission held a
duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Govern -
pent Code.
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Ccsaiasion has made the, following
findings:
1: That the subJer_t property is suitable for the uses permitted
in the proposed zone in terms of access, size, and compati-
bility with eziating ].and use in the surrounding area;
2. The proposed zone change would not have significant impact
on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and
3. That the proposed zone chuuwge is in conformance with the
proposed General Plan.
SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this
project will not create -a significant adTetr.e impact on the environment and
has issued a Negative Declaration on October 25, 1978.
NOW, THFREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That pursuant -to Section. 65850 to 65855 of the California
Government. Code, that the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recomends approval on the 25th
day of October, 1978, Zone Change No. 78 -01.
2. The Planning Camiiaaion hereby recomsends.that the City
Couucil approve and adopt Zone Change No. 78 -01.
3. That a Certified Copy of this Rraolution and related
material hereby adopted by the Planning Comission sball
be forwarded to the City Council.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TEI DAY OF OCTOBER, 1978.
PLANNING COI'RflSSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Sy,
Berman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution
was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission held on the day of , 1978
by the following vote to-wit:
AYES:
NOES: COMISSIONERS:
ASSENT: CaKKISSIONERS: .
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 25, 1978
TO: Planning Commission
FROF1: Jack lam, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: VARIANCE NO. 78-01 - A request to vary from the requirement of a
70' wide corner lot: to 60' for property located on the southeast
corner of Arrow Route and Comet - R -1 zone - Request submitted
by Merle Bauer
BACKGROUND: Mr. Bauer is requesting approval to vary the width requit -nent
of a corner lot from 70' to 60' for property located on the southeast corner
of Arrow Route-and Comet (Exhibit "A "). The applicant is proposing to split
a lot with an existing dwelling unit located on the east portion of the site
The site is in an R -1 zone which requires minimum 7,200 square foot lots,
70' in width for a corner lot, and 100' in depth. Surrounding properties
are zoned R -1 and developed with single family dwellings on minimum size
lots. As shown on Exhibit "A ", the location of the existing house makes
it impossible to provide the required 70' in width for the corner lot. She
applicant mould like to divide the lot to provide a 60' wide corner lot at
7,800 square foot and a 70' wide interior lot at 9,100 square foot.
ANALYSIS: The intent of requiring 70' on a corner lot is twofold; 1) to
allow maximum visibility at-the intersection; and 2) so access will not be
close to the intersection. in this -instance, both of these.concerL5 can
be handled to meet the intent of the ordinance. A condition can be placed-
on this project to require that the plac43nent of any structure on this site
maintain a minimum 35' front yard setback. This will provide adequate visi-
bility at the intersection. Further, an additional condition to require that
access be taken from Comet Street will alleviate access concerns•
As this Variance request is a unique circamistance because of the placement of
the existing dwelling and that the immediate area is developed at similar
densities, Staff feels that the necessary findings can be made if the above
conditions are required. -
(DRRESPONDENCE: A public hearing notice was published in the newspaper and
notification was sent to property owners within 300' of the subject,property.
To date, no correspondence has been received.
U
R
0
a -
0
c
0
VARIANCE NO. 7"1
0
RECaMMEIMATION: The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Commission*
after the public hearing, approve Resolution No. 78 -24 based on the findings
and conditions listed therein.
Respectfull submitt
SACK LAN, Director of
Community Development
JL:om
0
ID
0 0
16. The designer shall in no case create a poten-
tial flood hazard to proposed or adjacent
developments.
17. The design should not gather raters by arti-
ficial means and discharge them onto other
(lower) properties in greater concentratim
than would naturally be discharged nor should
it dam or obstruct the flow of surface raters
from other (higher) properties that naturally
drain across onto the property in question.
18. The designer may be required to obtain or pro-
vide drainage easements and construct improve -
uents.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1978.
PLANNING COMNISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
By:
Herman Reapel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
1, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution Was
duly and regularly introduced, passed. and adopted by the Planning Commission
held on the day of 1978, by the following
vote to -wit:
AYES: OOWISSIONERS:
NOES. COIMSSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMSIONERS:
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 25, 1978
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jack. Lam. Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: PARCEL MAP NO. 4744 - 12.5 acres of land located at 7789 Sierra
Vista into 2 parcels - R -1- 12,000 zone - Map submitted by K 6 B
Development Company
BACKGROUND: K 6 B Development Company are requesting approval of Tentative
Parcel Map No. 4744 (Exhibit.'we) - MA.ARVIISMat is RrOposing to divide .
tt.12.5 acres into 2 parcels. Parcel 1 presently contains 1 dwelling unit
and Parcc true an avoca groves. A tentative Tract Map has been
submitted for the division of Lot 2 into approximately 36 lots. The division
of Parcel 1 from this land is in conformance with the submitted Tentative
Tract Map.
ANALYSIS: The subject property is proposed to be divided in a manner consis-
tent with the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. Further, the map as
proposed, meets the standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's
Subdivision Ordinance. The Map as submitted does not violate the City resi-
dential moratorium as there is only one buildable lot being created as a
result of this Parcel Map. Environmental Analysis of this application was
done at the Tentative Tract Map stage and is not required for .thia Parcel
Map.
RECOMMENDATION:'-The Planning Division recasasends that the Planning Commis-
sion approve and adopt Resolution No. 78-19 based on the findings and condi-
tions listed therein.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK LAM, Diseceor o
Community Development
JL:nm
•
s .
r .
RESOLUTION N0, 78 -19'
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CDCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING PARCEL NO NO. 4744 TO
DIVIDE 12.5 ACRES LOCATED AT 7789 SIERRA VISTA
INTO TWO PARCELS.
WHEREAS, on the 15th day of September. 1978, a formal application
for action on this project was filed with the City; and
WHERFAS, on the 25th day of October, 1978, the Planning Commission
held a meeting to consider such a request.
NON, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMOMA PLANNING
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the proposed map is consistent with the appli-
cable general and specific plans of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga.
2. That the design or improvements of the proposed sub-
division is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
3. That the site is physically suitable for the type
of development.
4. That the site•is physically suitable for the proposed
density of the development.
5. That the design of the proposed improvements is not
likely to cause-substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife
or other habitat.
6. That the design or the type of improvements is not
likely to cause serious public health problems.
7. That the design or the type of improvements will not
conflict with eastments acquired by the public at
large for access through or use of property within
the proposed subdivision.
SECTION 2s That the Planning Commission sets the following conditions
on the above described project:
Fsgtineering Division
`FC
!' 1. A P&wcel Map shall be recorded on the proposed land
�. division in conformance with the provisions of City
.:. Ordinances and the State Subdivision Act.
r
2. Prior to recordation a staking deposit shall be sub-
mitted to assure wma=entation in conformance with
San Bernardino County Surveyor's Standards.
APPROM AND ADOPTED ISIS 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1978
PIMNING COHNISSION OP THE CITi OF RANCHO =ANONGA
By:
Herman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Cosmission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the day of , 1978,,.by the following vote to -wit:
AXES COMMISSIONERS:
NOBS: CCHNISSIONBRS:
ASSENT: CM24ISSIONERS:
0
CT.'XY OF RANCHO CVCAMOB.A
MEMORANDUM
i.
TO: planning Coamsission
FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Con tz ity Development
SUBJECT. FLANS= CONSULTANT.CWTRACT
DATE. Octobar 20, 1978
YJ.
Attached is a copy of a contract to retain John Slsyney Associates for
the preparation of a Zoning Ordinance. The contract basically Sets
the time frame for the preparation of the Ordinance. Toils is enclosed
for your review and comment.
Respectfully submitted,.
Community Development
JL: no
0
f
John Blayney Associates
Urban and Regional Planners
John A. Blayney, A. I.P.
Robert W. Glover. A. I. P.
Michael V. Dyett.A.I.P.
septeatber 8, 1978
91 C E I V E 0
TO Jack Lam'�13 Hoffman
CITY OF MT
FROM: John Blayney
SEP 12 1978
SUBJECT: Zoning ordinance
AN {91i�1n {�1i12ts1¢I 1H
---------------- w --------------------------- � �� - ---
A draft agreement between the City and OVA is enclosed' It is
March 14.
in accord with my letter commitment
to Ken Hunter on
(copy also enclosed).
Following is a rough agenda fox our
meeting on September 13.
the following
I'll be there about 10:00 AM and am also available
talk about and you have the tiros.
morning if we have more to
i 1. Urgent problems under present ordinance. s Possible tneed
difor
an interim ordinat.ae or crui kY
2. Major defects in present ordinance to be corrected;
a. Standards
b. Procedures
c. Organization
3. phttent of commission and Council involv-3ment in new ordinance;
points of involvement.
4. Extent of City staff participation. At what points do you
want to review? Status of existing land use information.
S. Schedule for preparation of text and saps adoption.
6. Broad philosophy -- how tight or how loose? now much specified
vs. how much discretionazy review (negotiation)?
177 Post Street. Suite 750
San Francisco. CA 94108
;. (415) 421 -7735
Jack Lam, Bill Hoffman -2- September 8, 1978
7. Sow administer design standards? Design revie=,s board --
professional or lay? Planning Commission? Staff?
S. What decisions to be made by staff, Commission. Council, or
possibly by hearing officer who may or may not be a staff
member?
9. Relationship of zoning ordinance to subdivision ordinance,
sign ordinance, General Plan, specific plans? ?chat else?
10. Approaches you do or do not wish to consider.
PUD -- should all undeveloped land be handled this way?
Conditional or contract zoning -- as means of preventing
build up of vacant conmercial land inventory resulting
from zoning for projects that do not get built.
Performance standards.
Transfer of development rights -- (adventurous).
Incentives -- probably denuity increase in exchange for
lvw- moderate hovsing and/or open space.
Separate standards from use list (building block . dea) .
11_ First cut list of districts, if we have time.
JAB.aw
/.1 c : 43A.A.h li Y
This Agreement for professional services, date: and effective,
is a contract between the City of Rancho Cucamonew. a municipal corporation
of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "City*, and John Bhtyney
Associates, a California corporation, hereinafter referred to es "Urban Planner."
REMALS
A. City desires to r'tain technical and professional services for the prepara-
tion of a caning ordinance.
B. City has selected Urban Planner to work with the City staff and to assume
responsibility for completing the Zoning Ordinance draft text and map
in accord -with the terms and conditions set forth herein.
THEREFORE; -CITY AND URBAN PLANNER AGREE AS FOLLOW&
A. SCOPE OF WORK
Urban Planner shall prepare, perform and complete the following professional
services:
1. Prepare work program and scheduler
Product: Work Program
71ming. End of third week
2. Review current ordinance and prepare memoranda on proposed changes
In standards, procedures and organization.
S. Prepare draft of interim regulations, if deemed necessary by City staff
and Urban Planner, to be considered for adoption prior to completion of
new zoning ordinanm
prepare proposed outline of new ordinance for review by City. Outline
will indicate proposed organization and procedures and will contain a list
of proposed districts and outline standards.
Product: Propaaed zoning Ordinance Outline
71minp End of second month
5. Prepare draft of proposed zoning ordinance ir, ?zrm for public hearings
and adoption.
Product: Proposed Zoning Orydinance
Timing: End of fifth month
6. Prepare proposed zoning map in form for public hearings and adoption.
Product: Reprodueible zoning map
Timing: End of sixth month
7. Incorporate changes in propo--.&d text as requested by Planning Commission
and/or City Council (one revision).
Product: Proposed Zoning Ordinance (revised)
Timing: One month after receiving instructions on changes to be made,
but not later than four months following submission of draft
IL MEEWGS
Urban Planner will attend up to ten (10) public meetings, including City Planning . .
Commission or City Council meetWgs or public hearings and community meetings,
provided that If the maximum fee shall have been reached, attendance at meetings
held more than four months following submission of draft tent or meetings in
excess of 10 shall be charged at hou ly rates plus direct casts.
C. CITY PARTICIPATION
City shall designate an individual who shall be respon-dble for administering
this Agreement. Authorizations by City as referred to in this Agreement shall
be by this individual or his designated deputy.
City shall have the following responsibilities:
i. scheduling all public meetings.
2. Reviewing Urban Planner's work and responding to requests for comments
in accord with the work program and schedule agreed upon.
3. Provide reproducible zoning base map at 1" = 500' or smaller scale selected -
by City.
4. Provide current existing land use map at 1" = 5001 showing the use of each
parcel. The map shall be available for Urban Planner's use not later than
the end of the third month.
D. TIME SCHEDULE
Urban Planner will adhere to the time schedule under "Scope" provided decisions
allowing work to proceed are reached at the times specified in the schedule
to be agreed upon. The time schedule may be. altered by mutual agreement
of City and Urban Planner.
IL PAYMENT
Urban Planner shall bill City monthly for work done and direct costs incurred
during the preceding month, and City shall pay within 80 days of receipt of
billing-
Personnel-and direct casts shall be billed in accord with the following schedul4
which is subject to revision, July 1, 1979:
John Elayney, Partner $55 per hour
Robert W. Glover, Partner $45 per hour
Michael V. Dyett, Partner $45 per hour
Other Professional Staff Hourly salary times 2.75
Direct c:narges incurred by Consultants in the performance of services specified
by this Agreement shall include purchase of maps and photographs, printing
and reproductior_ costa, travel and subsistence, long distance telephone, delivery
costs, and any fees, insurance, permits, and licenses applicable to this Agreement
only.
71rro spent travelling Is not charged when a full day is worked on this project.
Secretarial services are included in professional hourly rages.
Urban Planner will provide camera -ready art suitable for reproduction, or will
provide copies at cost if requested by City.
The maximum fee to • osid by City for services by Urban Planner shall not
exceed $309000, except as provided under Section B relating to meeting atten-
dance.
a
}
F. TERMINATION
City may terminate this Agreement by giving written notice thereof to Urban
Planner, provided that City shall be obligated to pay Urban Planner for sal work
performed and for all direct costs Incurred prior to receipt of notice of termination
by Urban Planner.
G. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
Urban Planner is an Fqual Opportunity and Affirmative Action employer and
agrees to comply with applicable requirements governing equal employment
opportunity.
H. INSPECTION
City, in reference to any request for payment submitted by Urban Planner for
services under this Agreement, shall have the right to examine and audit the
records of Urban Planner to verify such payment.
L AUTHORITY
Each of the parties to this Agreement represents that the person signing on
behalf of such party has the authority to do so.
J. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES
It is understood that the contractual relationship of Urban Planner to City is
that of an independent contractor, and all persons for or under the direction
of the Consultants are their agents, servants, and employees, and not agents,
servants, or employees of City.
i
J i'1
M1.
q.
r
0
City Clerk
URBAN PLANNER
President, John Hlayney Assmiates
Date•
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:
City Attorney
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 25, 1978.
TO: Planning Comsiesion
FROM: Jack Tan, Director of CommnnIty Development
SUBJECT: ModificatYons to a proposed neighborhood
on the shopping center located
au'omitted by T S Development d -19th street - Request
BAQWRODND4 Attached is a letter from T 6 S Development requesting modi-
fications of the previously approved site.plan. .The applicant is requesting
that the ClM scion consider these changes as soon as possible because of the
stringent time frame that they are ,working under. The applicant will have
full color displays at the meeting for the Commission's consideration.
RECQ!lMMDATION: The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Com-
mission review and consider the requested modifications for the center.
Respectfu submitt ,
t
JACK LAM, Director "of
Cowmunity Development
JL:MV:deb -
C�.. i•ic .. -j,a
f'i= I=
ci rY OF RANCHO 'C
k�
CWNMUNCry DEVEIOPI
Oc
•: •'s` -� .cur u'
?� Directorof.• untty, .eve opeoent
'•ems ' City'-of Rancho Cucamunga `a s<4...� .,.
9340 Baseline Unit -A. t
Rancho,-,Cucamonga..-Cal rain
w
Dear Jack: ;5 -..._
40
Since orginally submitting the design drawings for Alta .Loma Plaza,
we have obtained building permits from San Bernardino County for the -
Alpha Beta market and Hardware. We are completing
working drawings for shop buildings C,E, and G.
In developing the design fir these shop buildings, we have made certain
changes from the or approved design:
I. Delete 45 degree corners Rnd wrap tile canopy around corners.
2. Change plan configuration tof -Building "G" so that southerly half
of -east wall _is.-iaoved_25 feet -- west,_..increasing separation -between
this- wall, And--boundry .o*, adjoining - residential.property. .
3. Change --main -exte'Abr' walls -4rom -wood- stud -- and.-- stucco -to `colored
concrete block.-,and sli,,mp- block.: .
4. Delete tile roof on east side. of.Boilding "G".
We feel that the changes one through three are minor and should not
cause any real concern.
The change to concrete masonry in lieu of stucco will result in.a more
solid, permanent appearance and will reduce maintenance problems.
Our justification for the deletion of the the roo on the east side of
Building "G" is as follows:
1. Total area of the on the North and West fa s his building
has been increased.
� ' m
8184 A RLiNG 1 ON AW► 8UrM 21=. RIVER$IpE CA B2�14
9714I888 -142 !
i g .a' - '••�rX. w 1 �s �}a;�.i rl • T .' .r
.-
uM
;' + .i'• .. �
„, ,. rya•.' •(,•+ r• T -w'T {u+ � �`�` ��;� �J �.� .. t.
c� � rLF'Iw. •r �' a r t!i £ ` � r * .! .Ff•K.�
...T • r1+ r+.7lita� ?r` y t .. � .
r . J; Y.% yr• • }+ ]� r
°7. ppearance of,�, e� ast��iall-' as5been :.up- graded by the change
a color..ed•�eoncr"ete�7ock; w:Tapact- otfthismall has?been"lesseued `'
y�'F;;�tiie sfiapge A"n�rt'onfiguratlon which moves t- h
aboualf.•,of
e a G t3way rom he esidence` property.
ndscapingat";the orxheast'corner_.of.rthe building and alongtps
] theEast.property--7ine =wil1 `reduce thi "visability..of this side
:of:•the building fr.oa�-both 19th -Street. and *the adjoining residential
d•% ..- .. •property '�' - °' w � • ..:
Thank you: for your consideration of this request.
We will °have colored elevations in your hands by Tuesday, October 24,
1978.
•
�1
16S
Sincerely,
- Daniel E. 'langh
Vice .president
DET:gr,_
0
r1
LJ
0
NO. 78-20
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION TO APPROTS DIRECTOR REVIEW No. 78-34
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PROFESSIONAL OPFICB
COMPLEX LOCATED AT 9033 BASELINE - ASSESSORS
PARCRL. =BER 208 - 011 -66
WMZRBAS. on the 26th day of September, 1978, a complete
application was filed for review on the above described property: and
WHEREAS, on the 25th day of October, 1978, the Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Cm=Ltasiou held a meeting to consider the above des-
cribed project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
resolved as follows:
SECTION 1• That the following findings have been made:
1. That the site indicated by the development plan
is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
proposed use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences,
parking, loading, landscaping and other features
required by the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the improvements as indicated on the develop-
=ant plan are located in such a manner as to b%
properly related to existing and proposed streets
and highways.
3. That the improvements as shown on the development
plan are consistent with all adopted standards
and policies of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse
impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued
on October 25, 1978.
SECTION 3: That the Planning Commission sets the following con-
ditions on the above described project: ,{
ftineering Division
1. An offer of dad
along Baseline.
of 30 feet
2. At the time of development grading, drainage,
street plans prepared by a Registered Civil.Eogi-
neer shall be submitted for review and approval
by the City Engineer. Hydraulic calculations and
a topographic map will be required to support the
siting and location of drainage structures shown
on the plans.
3. Sever and water plans shall be coordinated
with the Cucamonga County Water District
prior to development.
4. At the time of development, curb, gutter,
drive approaches,.sidewalk, street trees,
trod A.C. match -up paving shall be provided
along Baseline for the entire parcel frontage.
S. Street lights are required along Baseline.
The developer of each parcel shall submit
all necessary plane for installation to the
Soutbern California Edison Company.
6. Access along Baseline shall be limited to one,
30 foot drive approach.
*27. Suitable access to the parcel of land lying
40 south of the proposed site at the southwest
corner shall be insured.
Planning Division
8.
That all provisions of the Zoting Ordinance be
complied with.
9.
That a revised site plan incorporating conditions
of approval be submitted to the Planning Division
prior to issuance of building pe+.mits.
10.
That a detailed landscape and irrigation plan
including wall details and the front mounting
te- hnigaes be submitted to and approved by the
Pluming Division prior to issuance of building
permits.
11.
That there shall be no roof mounted equipment.
12.
That the east, west, and south building elevations
be submitted to and approved by the Planning Divi-
sion prior to the issuance of building permits.
13.
That the 5' wall on the east property line be reduced
to 3' In height within 25' of the front property line.
14.
That all signs be reviewed and approved by the Plan -
ning Division prior to installation.
15.
That this approval shall become toll and void if
Zane Change No. 78 -01 is not approved and adopted
s"
by the City Council. Further, building permits
•
shall not be issued until the zone change is effec-
tive.
i 0.
lb. That the applicant comply with all fire protec-
tion improvements per requirements of the Foot-
hill Sire District.
APPROM AND AXWM THIS 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1938.
PLANHWG COIMISSION OF THE CITY CP RANCHD CUCAMONGA
Sy:
Herman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Ciommisslon of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the day of 1978, by the following vote to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
ASSENT: CCMISSIONERS:
0
DATE:
TO:
October 25, 1978
planning •Commiselan
STAFF
FROM: Jack I=, Director of community Development
SUBJECT: DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78-36 - Construction of a 19200 square foot
industrial building located on the northwest corner of Fern and
Industrial Lane - M-R zone - Request submitted by S. "Buster"
Filpi
BACKGROUND: Mr. Filpi is requesting review and approval to construct a 19,200
square foot industrial building in an existing industrial complex located. on
the northwest corner of Fern and Industrial Lane (Exhibit "A"). The subject
site presently contains 8 industrial buildlaga which have been built over a
number of years by Mr. Filpi. The project which is now before the Commission
is a part of thief ongoing industrial complex. Adjacent sites contain existing
industrial buildings with acne -under construction.
ANALYSIS: The site as indicated on the development plan is adequate in size
and shape to accommodate the proposed use. Improvements will be required that
will properly relate to existing and proposed streets.
Access -to the site is provided by Industrial Lane off of 9th'. Street and Fern
Blvd. Industrial Lane is presently a private non - dedicated access driveway
to this industrial complex. Total - street improvements are 'not presently pro-
vided along Industrial Lane. However, there has been adequate distances main-
talued between buildings•to design and'install• proper street improvements. The
Engineering Division -will be requiring full street improvements only along the
frontage of the subject. property at the time of construction of this building
but that the full street improvements 'je installed along Industrial Lane within
5 years of the date of this approval or when additional buildings are developed
within this-complex.
The proposed building is 19,200 square feet and will require 20, 9'X9' parking
stalls and 4, 10'x20' loading spaces. The applicants development indicates the
use of 16 9'x19' parking spaces and 4, 10'x20' loading spaces. The site plan
indicates that the building will be set back the required 25 feet on both
street frontages; however, none of the street frontages are proposed to be
landscaped which is typically done in conjunction with any industrial, commer-
cial or residential project. Therefore, staff has proposed solutions to the
prcposed building location as shown on Exhibit "B" which will provide the
lam.dscaping along the street frontages and additional parking to comply with the
parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff recommends that the building
be placed as shown on Exhibit "8" JA order to accommodate required parking areas,
0 acceps aisles, and landscaped areas.
Rchibit "C" displays the exterior elevations of the building. The elevations
as displayed indicate a stuccoed building with a cement the roof facade along
the front elevation, brick planters along the•front elevation. and a typical
exposed composition roof on the north aid south elevation.
The Environmental Analyaia Staff has reviewed this project for significant
adverse impacts on the covironamt. After review of the emriromentml docu-
ments, staff ban found no aignificant adverse impacts as a result of the pto-
Jett. Therefore, a draft Negative Declaration was published in the newspaper
for publie.review and ea ®eat.
BgCDI�Id1ATION: The Planning Division recommends that the Plamtiing Commission
approve and adopt Resolution No. 78 -23 based on the firdl.-%a and conditions
listed therein.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK LAN
Ccm=znity Development
• - JL:rim
0
0
RESOLVPION NO. 78-21
A RESOLUTION of THE RANC90 CUCAMONGA FIAMU lAc
CMRfISSIOffi APPROVING DIRECMI REVIEW 110. 78-24,
70 DEVELiMnOW OF AN AM 0ONDIT10KrW REPAIR
AND STOR=% FACI]LITY UOCATSU ON THE EAST SIDE
OF LAYTOS 9n=T, SOOTS OF LA MZSA DRIVE.
wmF1►S, on. the 13th day of September, 1978, a complete
application was filed for review on the above described property; and
WWYAS, on the 25th day of October, 1978, the Rnncbo Cacamon e
Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above described pro5ect.
.HOW, THEREFORE, the Rambo Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved
as follows:
SSCTIOH 1: That the following °findings have been made:
1. That the site indicated by the development plan is
adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed
use, and all yards, spaces• wa33A. fences, puking,
loading, landscaping and other features required by
the Zoning ordinance.
2. That the improvements a:t indicated on the development
plan are located in such a mannor as to be properly
related -to existing and proposed streets and highways.
3. That the improverants_sa_shovu orn the development plan
are - consistent -w1%;h -all adopted- standards and policies
Of the City `of - Rancho-Vuesmonga.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse impacts
on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued on October 5,
1978.
IECTION 3: That the Planning Commission sets the following conditions on
the above describedy. project:
PlanniM_Division
1. That all provisions of the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning
Ordinance be complied with.
2. That the applicant submit &- revised developaeut plan
to the Planning Division office drawn in accordance
with the conditions of this Resolution.
3. That the site of the building be reduced to allow
a twenty five (25) foot front setback. Purther,
that o4z (1) parking space adjacent to the front
office be relocated next to the proposed parking
stalls on the southwest portion of the property.
4. That oil storage be in a completely enclosed
building.
S. That o four (4) foot planter be placed around
the Croat office. Purther. that a landscape
screen be planted along the vest and of the
storage building to provide visual relief
from Layton Avenue.
6. That a detailed landscape and irrigation plan
be submitted to and approved by the Planning
Division prior to law -nee of building permits.
7. That the block wall on the north property line
not exceed 36 inches in the 25 foot front set-
back area.
B.
That 311 inch A.C. paving over native soil be
provided for all drives, aisles. and parking
atolls on the property.
9.
That signs for the project must be submitted
to snd approved by the Planning Division prior
to installation.
10.
That all roof mounted - equipment be adequately
screened from surrounding - properties with mat-
erials that conform with the architectural
design of the -building.
11.
That the building -be limited to one (1) tenant.
12.
':hat a trash bin be placed at a location specified
by the applicant subject to approval of the Plan -
ning Division.
13.
That all provisions and conditions set forth by
the Foothill Fire District be complied with.
Eu
inesring Division
14.
An offer cf dedication consisting of 10 feet along
Layton Avenue Frontage and an appropriate portion
of right- of-way for a cul-de -sac per city standards.
15.
At the time of development grading, drainage, and
street plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted for review sad approval of the
City Engineer. '8ydtaulic calculations will be re-
quired to support the sizing and location of drainage
structures shown on the plans.
16. Sewer and water plans shalt be coordinated with
the cucaron8a County Water District prior to
development of the individual parcels.
17. At the tine of development curb, gutter, drive
approaches, and a ainimma of 26 feet of street
paving shall be provided along Layton Street,
per city standards.
18. Adequate drainage facilities shall be installed
to intercept and conduct on -site drainagoo flows
around or through the site in a manner which will
not adversely affect adjacent or downstream
properties.
19. The designer nay be required to obtain or pro-
vide drainage easements and construct improvement&.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAT OF OCTOBER, 1978
PLANNING C%KISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CDCMONC&
- BY=
Herman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary-of the Planning Commission
I, , Secretary of the Planning Cnoulacion of the City
of Rancho .Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Comission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga at a regular meeting of the Planning Comaiseion t-eid
on the day of 1978, by the following vote
to -vit:
AYES: CC WSSIONERS:
NOES: COHNISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COHMSSIONFRS
'1
! 0
0 STAFF REPORT
DA'L'E: October 25, 1978
TO: Planning Commission ,
FROM. Jack Lam, Dire ^tor of Community Development
SUBJECT: DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -33; Request for the addition of an
Tndustrial Food Factory and Warehouse to the existing Frito
Lay Plant in an M-2 zone generally located on the northeast
corner of Archibald Avenue and 4th Street; Request submitted
by Frito Lay, Inc.
BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: Frito Lay, Inc. desires the addition of a
L 4nn amigre oML_1DdL1sWUlfizod faCro� and warehouse to their existing
Frito Lay Plant. The factory will be used for new processing and packaging
and the storage boil r �s pr e.
ANALYSIS: The Prito Lay Plant faces onto Archibald Avenue which is desig-
nated as a special boulevard on the proposed General Plan; therefore, special
landscaping treatment is desirable at this location. Staff is recommending
the submission of a detailed landscape and irrigation plan for bn prvpeeed -'-
.nd o tnr_inc—lawn..aress- fronts t is urt er recommended that
nuance of building permits.
.�1
The - architectuxal.Aesign of the addition would conform with the existing
design of the plant. LandscapIM &I= Archibald Avenue -and the—existlu
offices in fr t1f. ant e a v s lZ4t&r of the stor
fUL-ZMy in the rear. The applicant has submitted a rendition of e co
plat which will be on display at the meeting.
cess to the plant is now provided from Archibald Avenue. The applicant
propo s ona access drives; one rom c ald Avenue and
one ' iritrx4r.—~Phe Archibald driveway would provide access to
employees and visitors to the plant while the 4th Street driveway would
provide access to major truck traffic. The Engineering Division is recom-
mending that the current access drive from Archibald Avenue into the existing
parking lot be eliminated and replaced by the new drive.
Recoamendations and conditions from the Engineering Division are listed in
the attached Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division recommends approval. and adoption of
Resolution No. 7816 based on the findings and conditions convainad therein.
9. Respectfully submit Nd,
.TACK . o
Comunity Development
o 0
RESOLUTION NO. 78 -22
oA RESOLUTION OF TSE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION TO APPROVE DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -21 FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RETAIL /WHOLESALE LUMBER FACILITi
TO BE LOCATEC AT 11747 FOOTHILL BLVD.
WHEREAS, on the 4t1, day of August, 1978, a complete applica-
tion was filed for review on the above described property; and
WHEREAS, on the 25th day of October, 1978, the Rancho Cuca-
monga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above described pro -
ject.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
resolved as follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the site indicated by the development -
plan is adequate in size and shape to accommo-
date the proposed use, and all yards, spaces,
walls, fences, parkiug, loading, landscaping
and other features required by the Zoning Ordi-
nance.
Euaineerlim Division:
1. At theLtime of development, grading, drainage, and
street plans prepared by a 2egistered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted for review en.` approval of the
City Engineer. Hydraulic calculations and a topo-
graphic map will be required to support the sizing
and location of drainage atYuctures shown on the
plans and those required by development.
2. Sewer and water plans shall be coordinated with
the Cucamonga County Water District prior to
devalops mt of the individual parcels.
2.
That the improvements as indicated on the develop-
ment plan are located in such a manner as to be
properly related to existing and proposed streets
and highways.
3.
That the improvements as- shown.on_tbe development
plan are consistent with - all - adopted standards and
policies of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
SECTION
2:
That this project will not emote significant adverse
impacts
on
the
euviroument and a Negative Declaration is issued
on October
25,
1978.
SECTION
3:
That the Planning Commission sets the following con-
ditions
on
the
above a escribed project:
Euaineerlim Division:
1. At theLtime of development, grading, drainage, and
street plans prepared by a 2egistered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted for review en.` approval of the
City Engineer. Hydraulic calculations and a topo-
graphic map will be required to support the sizing
and location of drainage atYuctures shown on the
plans and those required by development.
2. Sewer and water plans shall be coordinated with
the Cucamonga County Water District prior to
devalops mt of the individual parcels.
0
i.
3.
At the time of development, curb, gutter, drive
approaches, sidewalk, and A.C. match -up paving
smell be provided along Foothill Blvd.
4.
Street lights are required along Foothill Blvd.
The developer of each parcel shall submit all
necessary plans for installation to the Southern
California Edison Company.
5.
Surface drainage from the site to the street shall
be by a parkway drain, per City standards to outlet
flow into adjacent streets.
6.
The proposed site is subject to periodic inundation
due to 100 year storms. Flood protection measures
comprised of the raising building pod elevations,
construction of walls, berms, and protective roles
on drive approaches -shall be utilised to insure
protection fit.a 100 year flood. Prior to final
approval precise protective measures shall be
approved by the City Engineer.
7.
The designer shall in no case creates a potential
flood hazard to propose3 or adjacent developments.
8.
The design should not gather waters by artificial
m(:ana and discharge them onto other (lover) proper-
ties in greater concentration than would naturally
be discharged nor should It dam or obstruct the flow
of surface-vaters from other (higher) properties
that naturally drain across onto the property in
question.
9.
The dealgaer nay be required to obtain or provide
dr page ea aYAcona ct improvements.
too
PLANNING DMSION-
30.
That all provisions of the Zoning Ordinance are
cmnplied with.
il.
That the site -be developed in accordance with the
approved plans on file in the Planning Division.
12.
That a detailed landscape and irrigation plan be
vu witted to and approved by the Planning Division
prior to issuance of buildialr permits.
2. That the proposed fencing on the east and vast pro-
l±rty lines, be reduced to 3' is height within 25'
Of ti.zb front property line.
14. That ; roordinaLren -rrgn program be reviewed and
approved by the Pla=n ng Division prior to installa-
tion.
r�
i 0.
15. That the roof facade be carried around the
. entire east elevation of the -front building.
16. -That the applicant comply with all fire
protection improvements per the requirements
of the Faotbill Fire District.
APPROVED AND AD08TED ISIS 25M DAY OF OCTOBER, 1978.
rLANNINC .COMHj5SION'OF THE C= OF RANCH COCAMONrA
BYO
Berman Rempel. Chalxman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Plaaniag Commission
I, , Secretary of the Planning Comission of the City
of Rancho.Cuesnvuga:•do hereby - certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
and regularly introduced, passed; -and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of RA=ho Cucamonga at a regular meetinp,.of the Planning Commission held
on the day of 1978, -:w tine following vote
to -wit:
AYES: CCHKISSIONERS:
NOES: cowaSSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMKISSIOXERS:
0
i
i
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 25, 1978
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: 'Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78-26; Request to develop an air conditioning
repair and storage facility in au M -1 none on property generally
located on the east side of Layton Street, south of La Mesa Drivb
and adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad - Request submitted
by Ruben T. Luna
BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: Mr. :•ova is requesting approval of a 2,700.
square foot building to be used as .,. storage and repair facility ri air
conditioning units. Repair would be iimited to air conditioner parts,
no manufacturing would take place on this site. Further, all storage
would be within the enclosed building. Mr. Luna proposes to keep two (2)
pickup trucks on the site to be used for repair service at customer's homes.
ANALYSIS: The present zoning for the site is M -1. The proposed General Plan
envisions commercial uses on the site. An air conditioner storage and repair
facility %.uuld be allowable in a C-2 zone.
Staff has reviewed the compatibility of the proposed use with surrounding
land use. Currently, cldi: single- family -homes are -to the north of the
property, To the south, east- and -wart. are the Southern Pacific railroad
easement and a heavy industrial plant. Staff feels that the use would
not create a significant impact to the area in that no manufacturing would
take place on the site. Th: applicant proposes to Lund a 6' block wall
on the north property line to screen the view from the residences to the
north.
The Engineering Division is requiring a ten (10) foot dedication along Layton
Street. This would create a building encroachment of ten (10) feet into the
twenty -five (25) foot setback area. Staff i, recommending reduction of the
building size to maintain the twenty -five (25) foot setback. This would
necessitate the elimination of one (1) parking space adjacent to the office.
An additional space could be placed at the front of the property next to the
propo-ed stalls on the southwest portion of the property.
Presently, the street in front of the entryway is
Division is recommending that street improvements
Street be paved as per City standards. Further,
3 1/2" A.C. paving be provided for the drive and
to replace the proposed slag.
unpaved. The Engineering
be provided and that Layton
staff is recommending that
parking areaa on the site
D=ECTCR M&VnU H0.OL24
Page 2
0
The architectural design of the office building would be pre - fabricated
steel with 1/2^ plywood siding. Staff is recomending that a four (4)
foot planter around the office area and a landscape screening along the
west end of the building be provided to provide visual relief of the
elevation facing Layton Street.
IRECaMMENDATION: The Planniug.Division reco® nda approval and adoption
of Resolution Po. 76-21 based on the findings and conditions contained
therein.
Cammunity Development
JL:nm
LJ
RESOLUTION NO. 78 -23
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO COCAMONGA PLANNING
t OMWSION APPROVING* DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78-36
POR T.G DEVILWANNT OF A 19,200 SQUARE FOOT
INMUSTRiAL BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON THE NORTH -
WEST COBS OF INDUSTRIAL LAME AND PERON
WHEREAS, on the 26th day of September, 1978, a complete
application was filed for review on the above described property; and
WHEREAS, an the 25th day of October, 1978, the Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commissiou held a meeting to consider the above described
project. .
NOW, TEFREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Cossission
resolved as follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the site indi.cated.by the development plan
is adequate in size and shape to acco=odate the
proposed use, and all yards, spaces, valls,
fences, parking, loading, landscaping and other
features required.by the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the improvements as indicated on the develop-
ment plan are located in such a manner as to be
properly related to existing and proposed streets
and higLuays.
.3. That the improvements as shown on the development
plan are consistent with all adopted standards
and policies of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse
impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued
on October 25, 1978.
SECTION 3: That the Planning Commission sets the following eoadi-
tions on the above described project:
Enaineerina Division
1. At the time of development, grading, drainage, and
street plane prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted for review and approval of the
City Engineer. Hydraulic calculations vill be
required to support the sizing and location of
drainage structures shown on the plans. Street
plans should cover the completion of an industrial
lane to Ninth Street.
2.
Sever and water plans shall be coordinated with
the conga County Water District prior to
development of the individual parcels.
3.
At the time of development, curb, gutter, drive
approaches, and A.C. match -up paving shall be
provided on the Industrial Land and F,Ir Blvd.
fronting the proposed building. The Industrial
Lane sball be constructed to 215 feet north of
the centerline of Peron Blvd. on the south curb.
Feron shall be constructed to approximately 280
feet from the centerline of Industrial Lane.
V ��&
The owner shall enter into an agreement with the
City for the completion of Industrial
providing
Lane with a 5 year period or in conjunction with
further development*
5.
Surface drainage from the -site sball be by a
parkimy drain per City Standards to outlet flows
into adjacent streets.
6.
The designer shall in no case create a potential
flood hazard to proposed or adjacent developments.
i.
The design should not gather waters by artificial
means and discharge them onto other (lower) pro-
perties in greater concentration than would naturally
be dischaziled nos should it dam or obstruct the
flow of surface waters frow other (higher). proper-
ties that naturally -drain across onto -the property
In question.
8.
The designer may be required - -to : obtain or provide
drainage easements and construct improvements.
Planaing_Division
9.
That an provisions of the 74mlAg Ordinance are
complied with.
10.
That a revised site plan drawn to include all
conditions of approval be submitted to the Planning
Division prior to the issuance of iiailding permits.
11.
That a detailed landscape sad irrigation plan be
submitted to and approved by the Planning Divisioa
prior to the lseuaace of building permits.
12.
That the building location, landscaped areas, and
parking be provided according to the alternative
plan as shown on Exhibit "H" of the Staff Report.
LJ
�i,4
13. Any roof mounted equipment shall be screened
from vier from adjacent streets and properties.
14. That all signs be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Division prior to installation.
15. That a trash enclosure consisting of a.6' high
masonry wall and view obstructing gates large
enough to accommodate two (2) trash bins be
located an the project site.
lb. That fire protection improvement& are installed
per requirements of the Foothill Pyre District.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY 01 OCTOBER, 1978.
PLANNING Cao=S][(M OF THE CITr OF RANC90 CLTCA14CMA
By:
Herman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST•
Secretary of the Planning Commission
1, , Secretary of the Planting Coonisaion of the city
of Rancho. OwAi ennga, -do.. hereby. certify that the foregoing' reaoiutlon was duly....
and regularly- introduced, passed;-.and :Adopted by-the Plamting-Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga =at- a regular meeting of'-the - Planning`Comadssion held
on the day of 1978, by the following vote
to -wit:
AYES: COMISSIMMMS:
NOES: COMISSIORERS:
ABSENT: COMUSSIONERS:
0
0
STAFF
:;ATE: October 25, 1978
TO: Planning Commission
'FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Comlxmtiy Development
SUBJEM DIRECTOR REVM NO. 78 -37; Request to develop an industrial
building in an M -2 zone generally located on the north aide of
Jersey Avenue one half mile eaut of Haven Avenue - Request sub -
mitted by Crowell/Levemthal, Inc •
BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The Crowell /Leventhal Corporation is requesting
approval of a 14,600 square foot Industrial building in an M -2 cone at the
above described locatin ^.vr"U proposed use of the building Is manufacturing
pry d use is in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance and compatible with
the proposed General Plan which designates this site an major industrial.
ANALYSIS. The applicant is proposing tu&ace his build on t front
a The applicant intends to
. develop the rear portion at a future date. Staff has determined that the
proposed project 'is designed a t futur d could bo Incor
porated into an integrated development plan foz the site.
Street by a ten
landscaped strip. This-
s to- lace- a-tive (D' 'roOL irncx -aav -(sc
front and sides of the building;, t recoam,ending t t a detai e
landscape and irrigation plan be submitted to and approved by the Planning
Division prior to issuance of building permits.
The architectural design of the building is a 01 rna��-ry rift-tin
MULI_ylth stucco. a applicant proposes a plywood roof facade along
he from ev only�vith rough sawn wood trim plant -one around the
doors and vindows. The applicdnt proposes chain link fence next to the
entrance gates. Staff is recommending replacement of this chain link
to
Tvo.(2) driveways, each twenty -six (260) feet in width, would provide
access to the property. Staff is recommending that the driveway widths
be increased to thirty (30') feet. Staff further recommends that a
trash enclosure be provided at the rear of the building.
40
DIRRCTOR H8V=W NO. _ 78-37
Yale 2
Additional Planning Division conditions and conditions of the Engineering
Division and lroothill Fire District are contained is the attached Resolution.
RRCOW4MATION: Staff recommends approval and adoption of Resolution NO-
78-17 based on the findings and conditions contained tbereia-
Respectfully uubmitted.
CommunAty DevelopMnt
7L: um
9
0
RESOLUTION NO 78-24
0
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO COCAMONGA PLANNIM
CM21ESSION TO APP$M VARIANCE; NO. 78-01 TO
VARY THE WIDTH OF A CORMM LOT PECK 70 PEST
TO 60 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH
EAST 0DRNHH. OF ARROW ROOM AND CaKET STREET.
WHEREAS, on the 25th day of September, 1978, a complete application
was submitted for the above described project.
WHEREAS, on the 25th day of October, 1978, the Planning Coma"slon
held a duly advertised public bearing to consider the above request.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Conamiasion resolved
as follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the granting of such variance will not be
materially detrimental to the public safety or welfare
or injurious to the property, or improvements in the
-►tinny and district in which the property is located.
2. vhst the granting of such variance will not adversely
affect the General Plan or its objectives.
3. That because of special circumstahoces• applicable to
the subject property such as -but not limited. to size,
shape, topo,jr'aphyr existing use -of land-and/or.struc--
tures, location or- .surroundir4s;-the strict applics-
tion-of the Zoning Code would resultAn' practical
difficulty, unnecessary hardship or results inconsis-
tent with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning
Code.
SECTION 2: That the Planning commission sets the following conditions
on the above described project:
1. That any future dwelling maintain a 35' front yard
setback from Arrow Route and 25' from comet.
2. That no access be provided on Arrow Route.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED TUT 2579 DAY OF OCTOBER, 1978.
PLANNIYiG CWHISSIOR OF TEE CITY OF RANCHO CDCAMMIGA
ay:
Herman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the a?lanning Commission
I, , Secretary of the Planning Commisnion of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby crxtify that the foregoing resolution was duly
and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Coa doaion of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission
held on the day of , 1978, by the following
vcte to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:. COMMISSIONERS.-
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 25, 1978
TO: Pig Commission
on
FROM: Jack Lsa, Director of Comm unity Development
SUBJECT: PROPOSED GME$AL PLAN — IMUSTRIAL ISSUES
Aa a result of the many meetings being bald in regard to the General Plan,
time did not alLow the preparation of a written report the inclusion in this
packet. Therefore, a written report on the Industx-ba issuer Will be available
Tuesday afternoon.
Respectf ly submit ,
JACK LAM, Director of
Community ty Development '
JL:MV:deb
1.
c
r
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 25, 1978
TO: Planning commission
FROM: Jack Lm, Director of'Ccmaunity Development
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN - INDUSTRIAL ISSUES
1. Area: Lewis property north of Foothill, east
General Plan Designation: Various
Issue: Various as per Levis communication
Factors: The principal Lewis objection to the land use element is resi-
dential land use designations forth of Foothill. Major deci-
sion factors for such designations was a desire to keep strip
commercial along Foothill to a minimum as well as concentrate
retail commercial in a ',eutral concept at the northeast corner
of Haven and Foothill. 'it is recognized, however, that a portion
of the Foothill frontage could contain high quality administrative
and professional as well as large retail commercial estsbliabments
that have a character unlike strip commercial. Deep landscaped
setbacks and aggregate - parking can be developed.
This, however, is usually dependant upon either large pereeliza-
tion or few ownerships to achieve good design control as well as
- use selection. Since the Lewis land holdings are large, more
specific land use planning can be achieved with a specific plan
which can address development issues at a more critical level
and more precise dell- ioation may be made concurrent with develop-
ment of precise design control. The Lewisos intent to submit a•
proposal to the Planning Commission for specific planning of said
area. If a time frame and specific proposal can be offered, Staff
Would support a "study area" description under each alternate
regional site to recognize private efforts to achieve specific
Planning. but the General Plan designations should remai-: until
a specific plan can be accomplished.
RECOMMENDATION: Retain General Plan concepts until a specific flan is s; ub-
witted.
2. Area: Fast side of Sycamore inn below Redhill Country Club and north of
Foothill Blvd.
General plan Designation: Sigh Density Residential
GENERAL PLAN - IImDDo" ISSUES
Page 2
s •
Issue: The property m o desire commercial designation
Factors: The site In question lacks adequate depth for proper place-
ment of multi- family development. Furthermore, aces to the
site is very critical since any additional access jff of Foot -
bill is very dangerous and highly impractical given the nature
of Foothill 81Wd. It is conceivable that some type of low t2.ip
generating use can be developed on the site. Access of course,
would have to be carefully controlled and ideslly, a joint access
with Sycamore Inn should be developed. The consultant concurs.
RECOpDMMTION: Continuation of service commercilO
3. Area: Southwest corner of Arrow Route and Vineyard
General Plan Designation: Alternate park sit*
Issue: Property owrar desires clarification of proper base land use
designation
Factors: The Planning Commission has previously discussed numerous times
the issue of park location and alternative sites. This area
represents one of the few areas where a park may be developed;
i.e. the Cucamonga area. However, more importantly is the base
designation upon which this park alternative overlays. The news -
paper insert did not show any base designation; however, the large
rendered map shows -low density residential. Residential develop-
ment on a site of this small scale is not appropriate given this
location in relationship to se•suadary_ streets and itr relationship
to the minimum impact industrial. The Planning Consultaint•concurs
and a•ecommends that the base designation should b; a- coutincatian-
o£ mixed use.
RECOMMENDATION: Delete low density residential and replace with mixed use.
4. Area: Industrial areas below Foothill Blvd.
Factors: The Industrial Committee of the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of
Coerce has been meeting with concerned industrial interests
to develop a scope of work for specifics planning in the indus-
trial areas. Specific planning would address issues such as
traffic, access, development standards, landscaping standards,
? drainage. specific uses, setbacks, special boulevard treatment.
etc., depending upon the specific area addressed. This kind of
planning can refine land use relationuhips and deal more directly
witt hose issues at a more critical level than a General Plan
can. The Committee has delineated specific areas and identified
specific issues to be addressed by a Planning Consultant and
soon the committee will be concluding its deliberation and will
submit a proposal to the City. The Committee intends to seek
and oLtain private cunsultants and fiord ouch a study, thereby
The Caaaittee seems to be yrogressing rapidly toward cample--
tion of a scope.of work, and since pecific planning can
• achieve benefits to the City, as well as to those industrial
sectors, the land use plan should recognize as well as encourage
specific planning efforts in the industrial areas since indus-
trial land use represents a substantial portion of Rambo
Cucamonga land area.
ON: Language in the land use elemeav should r�ognize the
er Industrial Cammittee's efforts and encourage specific planning
City industrial areas.
S. Area: Wholesale Lumber, Inc. + Rochester A�anue
General Plan: ',ow Density Residential
Issue: Property owner opposes General Plan Designation
Pactors: Existing on the site is a lumber sales yard with vacant land
surrounding it. Basically the site is isolated. There are
many isolated as well as non- isolated sites throughout the
community where the land wie element recognizes a predominant
land use concept. that does not coincide with existing land uses.
In these instance*„ zoning would recognize these existing uses
as nonconforming. - -If the proposed major -Land use concept is
one which Is' supported, thin it Would be undesirable to spot
zone individual nonconforming sites and tr encourage expansion
or continued longevity through zoning. Over the long term,
existing uses would not be compatible with the overall plan-
ning concept for the area and -,:herefare their continued exis-
tence should not be recognized or, routine. in any event, a
nonconforming use can be continued provided the City does not
,{ adopt an amortization schedule and the use does not expand.
v RECOMMMATION: Retain Gemral Plan designation.
6. :szr: Area bounded by Vineyard, 8th Street, Cucamonga Wash, and City
limit line
General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
Issue: Property owner desires industrial
Factors: 7t is generally recognized by the industrial sector that resi-
dential uses adjacent to industry generally causes incompatibility
that often results in conflicts that are detrimental to industry
as well as residential uses. That is why industry near residen-
tial uses ,anarally desire a division with a - 14ht- of-way as a
nznu41kAL IssuEs
GENERAL PLAN
-
f Page 3
benefiting the
induct iaiai
aesiAting the City as well as
sector. A specific plan with
accompanying
industrial
development standards can provide a unique
advantage to
marketing properties.
I
The Caaaittee seems to be yrogressing rapidly toward cample--
tion of a scope.of work, and since pecific planning can
• achieve benefits to the City, as well as to those industrial
sectors, the land use plan should recognize as well as encourage
specific planning efforts in the industrial areas since indus-
trial land use represents a substantial portion of Rambo
Cucamonga land area.
ON: Language in the land use elemeav should r�ognize the
er Industrial Cammittee's efforts and encourage specific planning
City industrial areas.
S. Area: Wholesale Lumber, Inc. + Rochester A�anue
General Plan: ',ow Density Residential
Issue: Property owner opposes General Plan Designation
Pactors: Existing on the site is a lumber sales yard with vacant land
surrounding it. Basically the site is isolated. There are
many isolated as well as non- isolated sites throughout the
community where the land wie element recognizes a predominant
land use concept. that does not coincide with existing land uses.
In these instance*„ zoning would recognize these existing uses
as nonconforming. - -If the proposed major -Land use concept is
one which Is' supported, thin it Would be undesirable to spot
zone individual nonconforming sites and tr encourage expansion
or continued longevity through zoning. Over the long term,
existing uses would not be compatible with the overall plan-
ning concept for the area and -,:herefare their continued exis-
tence should not be recognized or, routine. in any event, a
nonconforming use can be continued provided the City does not
,{ adopt an amortization schedule and the use does not expand.
v RECOMMMATION: Retain Gemral Plan designation.
6. :szr: Area bounded by Vineyard, 8th Street, Cucamonga Wash, and City
limit line
General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
Issue: Property owner desires industrial
Factors: 7t is generally recognized by the industrial sector that resi-
dential uses adjacent to industry generally causes incompatibility
that often results in conflicts that are detrimental to industry
as well as residential uses. That is why industry near residen-
tial uses ,anarally desire a division with a - 14ht- of-way as a
r ,` ✓ Gmumn PLAN - nWU4 'AL ISSUES
Page 4
minimum buffer between the two distinct land uses. In
this cue, the area is directly adjacent to an area of
predominately resiiiential uses. The site abauld logically
�+ be the continuation of existing land uses on the Ontario
aide of the City limits and intrusion of industrial land
uses into a residential area is undeal"ble and should not
e fostered. The property owner intends to construct indus-
trial uses on said propxty. However, no Site Approval nor
Indus-
trial
permit has been approved for said development. The
owner as well its developer therefore is concerned that indus-
trial use he allowed. However, such uses at this location is
contrary to good land use planning.
RECOMMENDATION: Retain General Plan designation.
s..
.'es ectfu y� submltte .
jAC& LAM, Director of
DATE:
TO:
FRMI:
0
STAFF REPORT
October 25, 1978
0-
plans, Commission
Jack Lam, Director or 4., —unit} Development
SUBJECT: DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -21 - The development
and wholesale lumber store to be located on
Foothill Blvd. just west of Rochester :4v v
of a retail hardware
the south side of
--r t 7 nn zones -
BACKGROUND: Mr. DeWitt is requesting review and approval of a site develop-
ment plan to construct a retalidwholeaale lumber and hardware facilit to
be located at 11747 Foothill ltivd. .The first 300' of the property is zoned
C;._L ,_ -will a ccmmod a, a.,axg Roles oneratlon,
The - accomanodate the
w.oleaale lumbFr and storage operation. The site is presen —Ty used .as a
vineyard as is adjacent property. The proposed General plan indicates
Foothill Blvd. as a special boulevard to.be treated with a landscaped
buffer. In addition, it indicates minimum impact uses along the frontage
with heavier Ind!.strial uses to the rear.
ANALYSIS: The site development plan as proposed is'in -conformance with
the Zoning Ordinance and the proposed General Flan. The site is adequate
in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, spaces,
walls, fences .and landscaped•- areas. -- Str':et improvements,- widening . and.
dedication, will be ng obtained accordi `to the Hditer- Flan of tilghwa*5 far
Access to tine site is provided by one main 35' %ride driveway from Foothill
Blvd. An additional 35' driveway is provided at the east end of the properly
as a service entrance only. The on -s•?,e driveway aisles are wide enough to
accommodate the on -site circu at n.
The applicant is proposing to set the build=g back 100' from the property
lane and has provided a q ;L irnnt lAndaraoed strip across the t=nr�of
the property. Staff is re,_omend that the landscaped strip along the
front o he roperty contain a flood protect on r .e r u rem
. 11 e r .......ft moil by mounding and
prior to the issuance of building permits.
The applicant is proposing to AE!��iately construct three buildingo. The
front retail building will be a one storY ti, tSW square foot building and
the two buildings in the rear will oe storage buildings at 15,000 square
feet. each. The site development plan indicates a total of. 79 parking spaces;
59 for the retail portion of the deva?opmen: and 20 for the storage operatic',
DIRECTOR MMIEW NO. 78--21
Page 2
0
The applicant is proposing to ume ct.ain link fencing to enclose the rear
storage operation and chain link.fencing along the east and west property
lines. Staff recommends tbat 61 chain link fencing and gates maintain a
25' setback from the front property line. In addition, the nursery sales
area located to the front of the proposed reta9l building shall maintain a
minims- of 25' from the front property line and such area shall yS�
Exhibit "B" displays the building elevations as proposed by the applicant.
The building in designed with exterior materials such as heavy shake shingle
roofing, roevgh sawn beams and facias, and rough aawn plywood sheeting. As
Foothill Blvd. is indicated as a special boulevard on the General Plan,
building des4n and aesthetics became an important factor. Therefore, staff
recommends that the roof facade be continued around the entire east elevation.
The Euvironmental Analysis Staff has revicved this project for significant
adverse impacts on the environment and has found none as a result of this
project. Therefore, a.draft Negative Peclara: ion has been published in the
newspaper -for public c=Be+t and review.
REMPRO IDATION: The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Commiasion
approve s ` adopt Resolution No. 78-22 based on the findings and conditions
listed thez_in.
Respectfully submitted
JACK LAM, Director of
Community *Development
JL:zm
6
^� _p -ice_ ♦nu z'.•, r[F�..:.�i.a.. -�n_'r -. _:�. y,R io.�» ...�..`... 1... ,. ..y °''•��'�,�
Lis; *3
.. i
Mh
1r ✓ �
F � -� .>< A° �i [ - : -- - • r. � ` cry � ` ti �^ ' E ' � �-� :
' � � �. t'. : w.• • fr71J fly : p �� ._ � i � [i. Z� '}�}Jf
i 5%1 •� -vc. I w w ...- i v _,'; " yt�N 1a
zv
s. �'
X
-i
9:
19 rA � ! P
'i
i
I
` = z
j
S 1
i'
i
m
0
Ins unr�4Eun�OL
will
�
v
�'
N
r.w rr r
r
M. .
11. i 1 1 1 1 11 1_
p; �
will
�.I
+V+
t
M T
{{ i
Fri
OAIF
wall I
..I• M - - y �`•,
w '
A, .t a _"
Muiii�ivi��
1 • � • 1
ry
��f.c— •
,,,ice;
"?.f,
.ifil
�!l�IIIIIINInII�_
s.
+V+
t
M T
{{ i
Fri
OAIF
wall I
..I• M - - y �`•,
w '
A, .t a _"
Muiii�ivi��
1 • � • 1
ry
3
I�1it
"?.f,
.ifil
�!l�IIIIIINInII�_
s.
+V+
t
M T
{{ i
Fri
OAIF
wall I
..I• M - - y �`•,
w '
A, .t a _"
Muiii�ivi��
!
I�1it
�!l�IIIIIINInII�_
�r
7�i
!
I�1it
�r
RrsoMMwPtet'to�us Or Tft M AN V t N!1
DIV t�A2 ST/l��
r RPM , - •
- e
Rte`
To
- e
it
'
16
. fzt. •.'
11 r +
. ® + -
yp +
1!
0
s
r .mow wo•r r www ^_Vr] 'rC7f "I -A -40
Es
T' Y• —�
�_ Ir
fo:" ,
►iFj�
IIf,R1� I
.1
G
- i
111�%0�
♦n7 1
r.
�1 f
x
1
�
U
• _
Til
• •
�
r
I!
r
1
—cf
�
=
t$ •
S: III
<
•
r
•
K
t
�t
3cc
�M y3C
111�%0�
♦n7 1
r.
�1 f
1
1
•
� w
• _
Til
• •
�
r
I!
r
1
1
1�
1
•
� w
r
1�
i
e
i
f
I
f.
f
Z y €
Y
4 �Y • i� •fP -
f r s
• a iP �'ti
q I
. � a•
I H s E
4 r
fpl•.•q�.flO T.•...���W
A3a�. LvO+�r
• A 3
� r
I
,:
x
W
e
J zl
oa
11.
:1 ®r.
L
�F� �
4
U31
NV
Cf-
9
40
•-0
�F� �
4
U31
co
ui
O
9
40
•-0
co
ui
O
® •• k
PNILnawf>,
111i •.
i ! !• I1
• Y
•� t I M1
i
y
• � t2
• ,t
n
� _
f
Ila
1 ° •`, /__JJ
• L Sa ' y' �l
'J : \..:•'....�,yy:Y �x7.f.'9iiain•..:rl�n:••...: r•7.•.: _.....
'oil w
sr� It
• •Y'; *jam •:
_ ^.:. fy .rte• �w
' } 1 �� a� x�r•��
Ir,rp .,rJ�y�f
i o
a {� � .t �!L!F h3•�
n
1 + r
� • �M1 i t~J} 1=
W.�:
1 X
•4r.
r .L • •' y
.1
}
• : ;�. y..
'
.'!! -•v:_: Vii:.'
•.4.i, � y....l::, ,
,
tyl
`i
•,•.
�U�• "�t:' ^•i.`.;: jam,•_. `}_' .(.a.
(..! . �J.f', a •:e'• : �+!.
.
^!',.ail
r •.•� •' -
t
t'
t.
L :
't a'
t. ♦ } �
1
F S
,
.d� �ll� Lt•_ • t. ��
t
at AQ
3 C
7
` W
� r t
a
i 3? •
I`
~, •• ,
r i
{
d
ivtJ
T 7
Ofivi
Y
Ti;v— :gat
t
A
r
4
f r
i�.
j;
til. 3 z -
rr
y W =
If
Y
7 71
4t. 1
ti
�
z
o
� it e= In
y
r �
r —r
i
r
i
0
•:° . ;� i cue^ i
-
. ! 1 rl
A
r y+r•
-
. ! 1 rl
I/ 0. :1 11. 11 41 1 1_ .
r 1 11 I 1! 1 LO 1 1
I
r
r
.L
.
I/ 0. :1 11. 11 41 1 1_ .
r 1 11 I 1! 1 LO 1 1
a-
•. -n
1...q
r
+•
•001{ \••7:0 1 f• \:�Y1 .\
Y�
a
—
a
tom+
-tom
I --
d
' o
�±r
a
WIN
26
a J
�? c. i
n
V
Y�
a
WIN
26
a J
�? c. i
p
5 .
1
a±
Y
n
V
•
a
—
a
tom+
O
a
•
•
Y
{ w
a
•-
x
7'
;
'.
• _.
-,
4j. a
N
0
+ri
•
•
1
�•
e
p
5 .
1
a±
Y
tom+
x
7'
c
t
0
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
October 11, 1978
Regular Meeting
CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga was held at the Community Services Building,
9161 Baseline Road, Rancho Cucamonga, on Wednesday, October
11, 1978.
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Herman
Rempel, who lead the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Richard Dahl, Laura Jones, Jorge Garcia,
Peter Tolstoy and Herman Rempel
APPROVAL OF Upon a MOTION by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner
MINUTES G4trcia and unanimously carried, it was voted to approve the Plan-
ning Commission minutes of September 13, 1978 as submitted.
STAFF Jack Lam introduced Nancy McAllister, the new Community. Development
COMMUNICATIONS Secretary who replaces Diana Mansfield.
Staff Report was presented by Michael Vairin, which is on file in
the Planning bivision. This was a continued item from the September
27, 1978 Planning Commission meeting, to allow the applicant time to
provide additional information in 'regard to horse densities and trail
systems. He reported that the applicant has provided the information .
requested by the Commission for their review. He reported the Coucity '
Environmental Health Department was contacted and indicated that they
see no problems with the plan as presented. The County will be
'1
STAFF
Jack Lam reviewed numerous dates which he would like the Commission
COMMUNICATIONS
to consider for special meetings in order to meet our goals by the
end of the year:
October 19, 1978 - Finish commercial /residential review of the
General Plan
October 24., 1978 - Planning Commission study session on the sign
ordinance
October 25, 1978' - Industrial land use review (Regular Planning
Commission meeting)
October 31, 1978 - Planning Commission study session on Growth
Management
November 8, 1978 - Wrap up General Plan recommendation to the City
Council (Regular Planning Commission meeting)
November 22, 1978 - First Sign Ordinance public hearing and intro -
duce Growth Management Policy (Regular Planning
Commission meeting)
November 29, 1978 - Growth Management Policy Public Hearing (Special
Meeting)
After some discussion, it was the concensi:s of the Commission to
confirm the meeting dates as recommended by Staff.
PUBLIC
SITE APPROVAL NO. 73 -01 - The development of a public equestrian
HEARING
boarding facility on approximately 5 acres of land located at 5394
Hermosa Avenue - A -1 -5 zone - Request submitted by James McHann P
Staff Report was presented by Michael Vairin, which is on file in
the Planning bivision. This was a continued item from the September
27, 1978 Planning Commission meeting, to allow the applicant time to
provide additional information in 'regard to horse densities and trail
systems. He reported that the applicant has provided the information .
requested by the Commission for their review. He reported the Coucity '
Environmental Health Department was contacted and indicated that they
see no problems with the plan as presented. The County will be
'1
tii�9)•: "r`'r is +"S'• }'3j'xrt r-�n,. r+' ✓+s q.;Y _ 'r'y�t.?m
• 1 t
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -2- October 11, 1978
i
requesting daily clean u within each individual
�I 8 Y P paddock and the j
removal of manure from the site at least twice a week. They will
also require fly -tight storage bins. Michael Vaitin recommended
an amendment to Condition No. 6 in the Resolution to include the
following statement: That there would be daily clean up in the
horse facility to insure control of flies. An additional ?lanning
Division recommendation should be added stating an annual staff
review of the development be required to insure compliance with
all conditions of approval. Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission adopt Resolution No. 78 -09 with the additions as recom-
mended.
The public hearing was opened by Chairman Rempel.
Mr. McHann, applicant, reported they have done a comparison survey
of -their proposed facility and existing boarding facilities and
have found that their density is equal or in some cases less than
other equestrian sites. He stated their plan does require health
department approval and have submitted plans to the department.
He stated that the site is designed for easy maintenance and are
employing the most modern equipment. Animal waste will be removed
every day and stored in a covered metal dumpster. They will also
spray as needed during the fly season. This'will be a top notch
facility and will be maintained as such.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked the applicant if he' would comment on
the trail systems in the area.
Mr. McHann stated he did contact the trail committee a-ad under -
stands there is quite a problem in the City with bridle trails.
There are no.public designated riding trails in the City. The
Committee is researching and locating riding trails now and they
indicated they would like to see an equestrian facility such as
their proposal in this area and would hope to see trails run
through the area or at least. close to it. Any riding of horses at
the present tims is done on private property and along the highways.. .
He feels it mould be logical to assume that trails will be located
in this area in the future.
Commissioner Jones asked how many horses will be trailered into
this facility.
Mr. McHann stated the horses will be kept on the site and he
doesn't see many people trailering horses in unless going for
a ride in some other area.
George Taylor, speaking for Mrs. Carolyn Tate, who owns property
to the south of this proposed facility, stated that she is con-
cerned about the smell and noise from the 70 horses contemplated
as well as dust that these animals will create. He pointed out
that Hermosa is a narrow country road. Mrs. Tate is concerned that
the horse people will trailer their horses in and out to horse
shows and that when the shows are over in the late evening there
will be much traffic on that narrow street. She is also conc•_,rned
that the people coning to exercise their horses on this facility'
J will drift onto her property and cause a nuisance for her. He
stated additional toilet facilities should be required for the
people that board horses and come to visit. She feels that an '
equestrian facility in this area is contrary to the General Plan.
Mrs. Betty McNay, representing owners of property adjacent . and
backing up to the property on Hillside Road, stated they have
this property in escrow at the present time and have a tract
map in the tentative stage, Tentative Tract No. 10046. She asked
if an EIR has been approved for this project. They would like to
PLANNING C.MM1S51UN.M11411
-3- October 11, 1978
request that a condition be added, if approved, stating that
no horses be allowed within 200 feet of the adjoining property
line. It was also requested that there should be a 6' concrete
wall for protection. It would be a good idea to double check
and see what advance Work has been done on the tentative tract
and how this plan will fit in with the road pattern.
Commissioner Tolatoy asked what size lots are in the tentative
map.
Mrs. McNay stated they are all R- 1- 20,000.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he believes this area is zoned A -1 -5
at the present time.'
Commissioner Dahl stated R -1- 20,000 lots are generally horse pro-
perties and allow up to 2 animals per half acre. He stated this
property could be developed for animals anyway. No matter how
many horses are in the area, it would still generate flies. He
stated he does feel the request to keep the horses in areas away
from adjoining properties is a good idea. There should be some
type of setback to keep animals back away from anothers back
yard.
Mr. George Shurbeck, owning property in this area, stated he is
concerned that when the buildings are constructed there will not
be much space to ride the horses. They will be riding the horses
in the streets as all adjoining properties are privately owned,
or they will ride the horses in the mountains which would be a
fire hazard. Also, a lot of the canyons have water pipes which
could be broken up.
Mrs. Gwen smith, owning property next to this proposal, stated
she is also concerned about the lack of bridle trails. and is
concerned about the riding of horses onto private properties.
Also the street is very narrow and could be a hazard for those
riding on the street. Her prime area of concern is for public
safety.
Mr. McHnnn, applicant, stated he would agree there is a problem
with no bridle trails in the area. There are many homes in
this area which are equestrian oriented and there will be many
more in the future. As far as noise and flies generated by this
use, lie doesn't feel horses make much noise. There will be no
loud music or cars racing through the area. Equestrian stables
are a quiet place. As far as smell and f lies, that would depend
on how the area is maintained. They are proposing a top notch
boarding stable. As far as buffer zone, they are surrounded on
3 sides by eucalyptus trees. They will not have any horse shows
on the property. As far as dust, the only dust generated in
the area will be in the riding arena. They are proposing to
install rain bird sprinklers on all corners of the riding arena
and this will be sprinklered regularly to keep down the dust.
A•fonce is proposed on the west and north sides of the property.
This will be a place where the children can come and learn slow
to take care of their horses.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated the eucalyptus trees to the south of
this development are not part of this development and could possibly
be removed.
Mr. McHann stated there is a rock fence in this area which is
either on their property or on the property line.
Chairman Hempel stated it is his opinion that an additional con-
dition should be added that an annual review of this development
be performed to insure - compliance with all requirements of approval.
If compliance is not met, then the approval would be revoked.
;F`
. axe N
PLANNING C"ISSION MI.NUT. -i- October 11, 1978
Michael Vairin stated since there are questions on the density,
if the Commission would feel that 70 horses is appropriate, an
additional condition could be added stating this use shall not
exceed 70 horses.
Bob Smith asked if bridle trails in the area are a part of the
conditions for approval.
Jack Lam stated no , it is not. There are no public horse trails
in the city at all. As he understands, in equestrian group is
now working with the Public Services Department in putting together
a trail system in the city.
Chairman RemRS1 stated the site should be totally fenced.
Bob Hill .from the audience, stated he would like to speak on
behalf of the equestrian center. This type of use is needed in
the community. .It will teach people to take care of their horses
and their proPerty. This facility will be kept clean at all
times. The community will benefit by having thin .Facility.
Chairman Reel asked for any further comments from the Commis -.
Rion.
Commissioner Jones asked if bridle trails are included on the
general plan elements to be completed.
Jack Lam stated the bridle trail system is not being considered
at this tithe on the land use element of the General Plan. The
equestrian group is working with Bill Holley at the present time
In regard to a bridle trail system; howevet, he does not know
at this time how long such a system will take to put together.
Commissioner Dahl stated there is presently an equestrian center
similar to the one proposed on Carnelian between Banyan and Hill-
side. He has talked to two of the families adjoining this develop-
ment whose lots back up to the center_ They both indicated they
have not had any problems with this use at all and that the area
has been very well maintained. They stated it is not an eye sore
but a real plus in their opinion.
Commissioner Garcia stated in terms of density, this proposal
is compatible with the existing equestrian activities throughout
the community. He stated Hermosa is a very narrow street and tie
Is questioning what might happen during heavy rains in this area.
In regard to Engineering Divieion recommendation No. •3 he feels
that Hermosa Avenue should be widened to master plan width and
paved with provisions for drainage now and not bonded for comple-
tion within two years. He stated a buffer zone to protect adjoin-
ing properties should be carefully addressed. The stables should
be designed as far away from the surrounding property as possible.
tie feels consideration should be given regarding exit and entrance
to the property adjacent to the north residents.
Jack Lam stated he might add that this de4 a.opment will try to
preserve the lemon trees on the property.
Commissioner Garcia stated in regard to accessibility, he is not
sat isf led.
There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Rempel
closed the public hearing.
.Commissioner Dahl stated all properties going in that area are
zoned R- 1- 20,000 which allow horses. The advantage of this center
is that it will alloir people to cane here to ride, train and work
with their horses without having to go out onto bridle trails.
r
P t r
r
' PI.AN11ING x :0MMISSION MINUTG5 -r October 11, 1978
Commissioner Garcia stated he does not question the validity
of the project but would like to insure protection and the
proper buffering and aesthetics in relationship to surrounding
properties.
Commissioner Dahl stated he would like an additional condition
added to the Resolution stating prior to development, a land-
scape plan and a plan for buffering the property on the north,
south and west he presented to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would like an additional condi-
tion added that the applicant specify what type of fencing is
to be used to insure fencing is adequate.
Commissioner Garcia stated he would agree with Commissioner.
Tolstoy. This should be left open to the applicant to decide
what would be best for the area with the idea of containing
the animals on the. property and also as a buffer zone to
adjoining properties.
There being no further comments, a MOTION was made by Conmis-
sioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and unanimously
carried to approve and adopt Resolution No. 78 -09 based on
the conditions and findings listed therein, .which are to include
those conditions mentioned above. .
PUBLIC SITE APPROVAL NO. 78 -02 - Request for an Aluminum, Recycling
HEARING Plant I, an M -2 zone generally located on the north side of
Sixth Street between Archibald and Turner Avenue - Request
submitted,by Reynolds Aluminum
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reviewdd the
staff report which is oa file in the Planning Division. He
reported this operation will take place within an enclosed
building. The plant would require eight parking spaces and
the applicant has provided eighteen spaces. He indicated the
applicant proposes to incorporcte noise attenuation techniques
into the plant to minimize noise impact. The applicant has
assured Staff that the noise generated by the plant would not
have an adverse effect on surrounding properties. The applicant
was to submit noise level statistics for their plant located in
the City of Hayward; however, at this time that :Information has
not been received. He recommended that the Commission could
approve this development subject to the added condition that
it bring back to the Commission for review, the noise impact
prior to development or the Commission could postpone this
matter until the next meeting when the noise information is
in fiend.
The public_ hearing was opened by Chairman Rempel.
Mr. Putnam Storrs, representative of Reynolds Aluminum, stated
he thought the noise level information had been sent to staff.
He stated they are confident that they can meet the noise require-
' ments for this facility. 11icy are In tropes that this won't have
to be postponed at this time.
I
Commissioner Garcia stated be Is concerned about the appearance
of the 45' high storage bin proposed.
Mr. Stc -rs stated it does meet requirements of the ordinance. It
is a metal type bin for storage of the aluminum.
Chairman Rempel asked how far this bin is located from Archibald
Avenue.
't
£`WJm
' PIANiiING COMM IS3ION MZNU1 -6- October 11, 1578
�- .
Mr. Storrs stated he does not know the enact distance; but
would guess it is at least the distance of two city blocks.
He feels At would be very difficult to see the silo from
Archibald Avenue.
Commissioner.Garcia stated according to the site plan a chain
link fence is proposed around the development. Landscaping
considerations have to be addressed. He stated he is disappointed
with the appearance of this development. The surrounding proper -
ties must be considered in terms of proper buffering.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated his concern about the front eleva-
tion of the building.
Jack Lam stated the Commission could require articulation of the
front building elevation and consideration of screening of the
front portion of the fencing and re- enforcement of. the condition
in the Resolution that states detailed landscape and irrigation
plans shall be submitted f ok approv --1 prior to building permits.
lie reported one of our staff members did discuss the 'noise statis -.
tics on the telephone this afternoon; however, the refit of the
staff has not been able to review these statistics.
City Attorney stated this Commission must make a finding that
the site plan protects the public health, safety and general
welfare of the community. If thev find this is not being met
they have reason to deny the request.
k
There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman
Rempel closed the public hearing.
Upon MOTION by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner
Tolstoy, and unanimously carried, it was voted to continue
review of Site Approval No. 78 -02 to the special meeting of
October 19, 1978 in order that the applicant give further
consideration and study of the project satisfactory to the
development of the community and properties surrounding this
proposed project.
At this time, Chairman Remeel asked that the General Plan public
hearing be moved to the end of the Agenda and that the other
Agenda ,terms be reviewed at this time.
OLD BUSINESS
MINOR DEVIATION NO. 78 -01 - Magnolia Development - Southwest
corner of 19th Street and Carnelian.
Jack Lam reviewed the staff report which is on file in the Plan-
ning Division. He reported this project was approved by the
County Planning Staff, the project has already been issued
building permits, and construction has already commenced. The
approval lacked proper landscape areas and neglected any considera-
tion for building elevation treatments and proper circulation on
the site. Staff has contacted the developer of the project and
asked his cooperation in making Improvements to the site that
would improve safety and circulation on the site that would
resolve some drainage problems and improve the aesthetics of the
development. The applicant has been very cooperative and staff
feels t1wit the modifications proposed would be a benefit to the
community. Without such modifications, the project would be
built as approved and would detract from the visual character
of the intersection and the neighborhood. lie recommended that
the Planning Commission approve Minor Deviation No. 78 -01 subject
to the conditions as listed in the report.
t
i
"•.!y. }'
PLANNING COMMISSION.MiNU1ES -7- October 11, 1978
Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission to
the staff,
Commissioner Tolscov stated staff should be commended for
their fine work on this as the improvements are a st6p in
the right direction for the community.
Chairman Rempel asked if the applicant is present and would
wish to speak regarding this matter.
There being no comments from the audience, a motion was made
by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy and
unanimously carried to approve Minor Deviation No. 78 -01
subject to the conditions as listed in the staff report.
Chairman Rempel called a recess at 8 :47 p.m.
Meeting reconvened at 9:00 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS Modification of Tract Conditions for Regency Equestrian Estates -
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reviewed the staff
report which is on file in the Planning Division. He reporter
this tract was approved by the County and as a condition of
approval it was required that a standard or approved block
wail or other acceptable alternative be required along the rear
lots of the tract on Hillside Road. The County requirement
was not for the purpose of flood protection but solely for the
purpose of providing screening. Directly behind the block wall
is a bridle trail and behind the bridle trail is a grove of
citrus trees that were preserved on the site. It is the desire
of the developer to have the block wall requirement removed from
the conditions and substitute the wall with split rail type
fencing along both sides of the bridle trail path. Staff feels
that because of the subdivision the alternative of the split
rail fence on either side of the bridle path would be more
appropriate to the surroundings titan a solid block wall. Staff
recommends that the Commission amend the conditions of approval
to delete the requirement of a solid block wall along the
perimeter of Hillside Avenue and instead require a split rail
type fence be constructed )n butte sides of the bridle easement.
Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission to the
sia ff .
Commissioner Jones asked who will maintain the fence.
Jack Lam stated it would be up to the home owners association
to maintain the fence.
Chairman Rempel asked if the applicant was present to make any
comments.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there will be any provisions made
by the Home Owners Association to water the lemon trees on the
property.
Applicant stated the trees will remain on the individual lots
an.: it will be up to each home owner to maintain his own trees.
{ Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would like to suggest that an
irrigation system be Installed to water the trees for each home
by the developer to help insure that they be maintained. In
regard to the .wood fence and the maintenance involved with wood,
he suggested a cement rail fence which looks like split rail be
�.. proposed as it would be easier to maintain and will look nice.
.e
% 7'/j�� "tr �ir�'�`i"N. ` [(, R i•.�_:. �' -a ;i - > > . ;4�i
1
PLANNING C644SSION` tilt S ° -8 • October ll, 1978
r- Commissioner Tolatoy made a motion to delete the block wall
requirement and that an additional condition be added stating
that provision be made for irrigation to the citrus trees on
the individual lots. Further, that the .split rail fence be
concrete instead of wood. Commissioner Jones seconded the
motion..
Commissioner Dahl requested that an additional condition be
°add& .that provision be. provided for each property for access
to the bridle trc.U.
Chairman Rempel stated if the Commission requires the applicant
to go to too much expense over and above what has already been
approved he might decide not to go along with this at all. The
concrete rail fence along with additional irrigation required is'
going to be very expensive to the developer and they will pro -
bably end up ,putting in the block wall as already apprcved.
Chairman Rempel stated he would prefer the split rail fence to
the block Wall.
After some discussion, Commissioner Tolstov and Commissioner Jones
withdrew their motion as indicated above.
Commissioner Dahl stated the applicant has indicated the gates
i'
from the individual lots to the bridle trail would not be a
problem and as far as providing irrigation pipes to the citrus
trees he doesn't feel that would be a major problem for the
developer.
14' The applicant stated he would check with the developer on the
cost of providing irrigation, the gates, and if desired the
cost.of the concrete rail and could report back to the Commis
ulon.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner
Tolstov and unanimously carried to continue review of the modi-
fication of tract conditions for Regency Equestrian Estates
Tracts 9378 -79 to October 25, 1978 in order. for the applicant
to check out the costs of providing irrigation pipes, gates,
and the cost of a concrete rail fence.
x
NCW
DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -30 - The demolition of an existing ser-
BUSINESS
vice station and construction of a new service station facility
located on the northeast corner of Arrow and Archibald.- C -1
£'
zone - Request submitted by Mobil Oil Corp.
Michael Vairin reviewed the staff report which is on file in
the Planning Division. He reported that the proposed service
station is in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance. The site
".,
is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed
development. Staff recommended aptoval of this Director
Review subject to the findings and conditions as listed in
Resolution No. 78 -14.
.,Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission to
the staff.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the median propused by the Engi-
`
neering Department would have a provision for left hand turns. .
Lloyd flubbs, City Engineer, stated yes, it would provide for
a left land turning pocket.
Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the audience.
2t2f. .�N S' 11Y�F Gy -) Jr -. ✓'\ g1•F At • i _.1A lam♦
j PLANNING 0(14AISSI0 N UI -9- October 11, 1978
i
Dave Pollard, representing Mobil Oil, stated the main concerti
that his,company has is the question of the one driveway versus
two driveways. His company has indicated that if the City will
not allow 'some flexibility in -being able to retain the two
driveways'st this station, they probably would not go ahead
with this proposal. They feel the two driveways are needed
for good traffic flow in.and out of the station.
Lloyd Hobbs stated staff is looking at service stations very
carefully as the City would like to set a standard for future
service stations within the City. We want-to look very closely
at these with regard, to access.
Jack Lam stated he would not want the approval of this service
station to sut any poor precedence for future projects..
Commissioner Dahl asked what is the benefit of a median versus
a left turn lane.
Lloyd Hubbs stated the median will permit the left turn move—
ment and force people to go to the intersection to turn., This '
is very beneficial from a traffic standpoint.
Upon MOTION by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner
Tolstov, and unanimously carried to approve Resolution No.
No. 78 -74 subject to the findings and conditions as listed
in the, Staff Report with the added condition that the island
on Archibald Avenue should be implemented and maintain the
tradeoff with'the two access lanes to the service stations. .
NEW BUSINESS DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -28 - Request for a'Light Manufacturing
building in an M -1 zone generally located on the southeast corner
of Arrow Route and Helms Avenue - Request submitted by F.E.
MacDonald for Pneudraulics, Inc.
Jack Lam reviewed the staff. report in detail. which is on file
in the Planning Division. He reported the applicant is
requesting approval of a 3.1,690 square feet manufacturing
building. Ile stated that the proposed development is in
conformance with the proposed General Plan and compatible to
surrounding uses and suitable for the project site. Staff
recommends approval of Resolution No. 78 -10 subject to the'
conditions and findings as listed in that Resolution.
Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the applicant.
Mr. MacDonald stated they have reviewed the staff report. He
stated they do have a question of the Fire Department about
one of the conditions and asked if these requirements can be
resolved with them. The Fire Department has recommended. that
all buildings be provided with an approved automatic Fire
detection system providing for the transmission of all fire
alarms to the Ontario Fire Department dispatching center. He
i stated this is an unusual requirement to place on a development
of this size.
Chairman Rempel stated this item is listed in the Resolution as•
a recommendation not a requirement.
Jack Lam stated tbcse items should be directed to the Fire Dis-
trict office. T•aey have their own ordinances.
Mr. MacDonald stated regarding Engine ericlg'Division recommen-
dation No. 14, he would. assume those improvements would only
be required of the property they are now developing..
Lloyd Hubbs stated that.is.correct.
1M1
N. Ca'�+TyY�nuttki�r`n rya {q�jrx [ ^-• +.s.,� ��.� wn ... :.,. . .......... .. - T t •' Ij-nt� 3.
• r
' `
PLANYUNG COMMISSION
MINUTES -iD -. October 11, 1978.
*;
City Attorney stated it does appear the Fire Department condi-
tion does suggest that the building will be sprinklered although
ti is not made an explicit condition.
Mr. MacDonald stated he would agree the building needs to be
sprinklered. His question is whether or not the fire alarm
system would be required.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commis-
sioner Garcia, and unanimously carried to approve Resolution
No. 78 -10 based on the conditions and findings listed therein.
NEW BUSINESS
DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -29 - Request for a Light industrial
Building in an 14-2 zone generally located on the south side
of 8th Street east of Archibald Avenue - Request, submitted
by F.E. MacDonald for L.V. Hofgaarden.
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reviewed the
Staff Report in detail, this being on file in the Planning
Division. He reported Mr. MacDonald is requesting approval
of an 18,000 square foot light industrial building in an
M -2 zone. This building would be the second of a planned
eight building complex. He recommended that an additional
condition of approval be added to the Resolution which states:
A master plan of development be approved prior to any future
additions. He stated the proposed change is in conformance
with the proposed General Plan, compatible to surrounding
uses, and suitable for the project site. Staff recommends
approval of Resolution No. 78 -11 subject to the findings and
conditions as listed with the addition as indicated above.
Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the applicant.
Mr. MacDonald stated ha is in agreement with the staff report
as presented with the exception of Fire Department condition
No. 11 which indicates all buildings shall be provided with an
automatic fire sprinkler system and an approved automatic fire
detection system providing for the transmission of all fire
alarms tn the Ontario Fire Depar'cment dispatching center be
installed. tie asked if this can be discussed with the Fire
Department.
Jack Lam stated if there is any question regarding the Fire
Department recommendations, perhaps this could be discussed
with than and be brought back to the next Planning Commission
meeting for review. He didn't feel as though this condition
should be withdrawn until a Fire Department representative
could be present to review it with the Commission.
Commissioner Garcia stated he doesn't feel this is an unusual
requirement, and that it should remain as a condition.
Chairman Rempel stated we cannot, as a Commission, rule on the
requirements of the Fire Department.
There being no further discussion, a Motion was made by Commis -
sioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy and unanimously
carried to approve Resolution No. 78-11 subject to the condi-
tions and findings as listed with the additional condition 025
as indicated by staff.
Cif AttorneY stated this wndition will require the automatic
sprinkler -ystem and approved fire detection system as stated
by the Fire Department., He stated this can be further dis-
cussed by the applicant with the F irc Department but it is not.
a good policy for the Commission to require,a condition that
could be altered.
' t .
t
93-;4. _ ! •.
r.Y'••!?°i�"`t(•� �.�R� r'�` i t; = r�FrF?. .Yt _ _ _ _ ... - .: ",'._ _ -. tv^ t�t`i'�s
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -11 -. October 11, 1978
•
Chairman Rempel stated by approving the Fire Department
condition which might not be required by the Department,
the Commission is in a sense writing an ordinance for the
City.
NEW
BUSINESS
C
t°
J', ;
t'
t,
Jack Lam stated since the Commisoion did recommend this condi-
tion, the Fire Department may wis'.! to present their conditions
to the Commission of why this should or should not be required'.,
Commissioner Garcia stated his concern is that the proper fire
protection should be provided. The applicant can come back and
relieve that condition if the Fire Department so recommends.
Jack Lam stated another solution could be considered which is
to word the condition that the sprinkler system•and automatic
fire detection system be required as per the requirements of
the Foothill Fire District.
Chairman Rempel stated he fuels the motion should be rescinded
so that it complied with all requlations and ordinances without,
tying ou= hands or the builders. If they require the building
to be sprinklered it will be sprinklered. A statement could be
added in order that it would not have to come back to the Com-
mission for approval if altered.
A MOTION was made by Chairman Rempel, seconded by Commissioner .
-Tones and unanimously carried to rescind the above motion'.
A MOTION was then made by Chairman Rempel, seconded by Commis-
sioner Dahl, and unanimously carried (Commissioner Jones abstained)''
to approve Resolution No. 78 =11 subject to the findings and con-
ditions as listed, with the following changes and additions:
Fire Department recommendation No. 11 should be amended to read:
All buildings shall be provided with an automatic Eprinkler
system and -an approved automatic fire detection system providing
for the transmission of all fire alarms to the Ontario Fire
Department dispatching center be installed as per Foothill
Fire District ordinances.
A new Planning Division recommendation No. 25 should be added
to read: A master plan of development be approved prior to
any future additions.
DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -12 - The development of a two -story office
building totaling 10,000 square feet to be located at 8030 Vine-
yard Avenue - C -2 stone - Request submitted by Alderfer Ranch
Partnership
-Staff Report was presented by Michael Vairin, which is on file
In the Planning Division. He reported the applicant submitted
this request to County Planning Department prior to the estab-
lishment of the City Planning Division. The County processed
this application and denied it based on the recommendations of
the Flood Control District. The Flood Control District stated
that there were not adequate flood protection facilities as
Cucamonga channel is contained only by an earth berm. The
applicant did not appeal this decision as City Staff requested .
that a new application with full details be submitted to the City
for review and action. After review, Staff finds that the sub-
ject site is subject to flooding. He reported staff feels
that there are pr,esently.no provisions-available to reasonably
protect this site from flood hazards until such time that.per-
manent improvements are installed in the Cucamonga Creek. Staff
recommends that this project be denied without prejudice so that
the applicant may reapply once adequate flood protection facili-
ties are provided for the subject site.
r�"7 r'g7yT, tF{• in`Jr� t��' �� +s �.. 'Ta i a :. - _ _ , ` i
PLANNING CMUISSION MINUTES -12- October 11, 1978
Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the applicant.
Mr. W. Schultz, applicant, stated they asked staff to
put this item on the Agenda in order-to speak to the
Commission because they feel the Commission has granted
development in this particular area at least on one other
occasion. They,feel they have the same rights to develop
their property. They have applied for and obtained Federal
Flood Insurance on this property so they 'are at a loss as
to why the approval of this development would affect the
City's liability.
Commissioner Dahl stated he doesn't feel the circumstances
of this request are similar to those of a previously approved
application in this area. The previous approval was given
for a Mexican Restaurant which Sid not have these same pro-
blems:
Commissioner Garcia stated lie mould agree with Commissioner
Dahl that this request is not similar to the approval of
the Mexican Restaurant because the Restaurant was an existing
structure and this project is a complete new project.
Lloyd Hubbs stated this project was reviewed with the appli-
cant in the Development Review Committee; meeting and the .poten-
tial flooding problems and drainage were studied. If the
applicant can determine that this property may be protected
from substantial floods, then approval could be considered.
It was required that the applicant,provide the city with
a detailed study stating how the site can be protected.
Mr. MacDonald stated a great deal of acreage is involved
around the surrounding area and it would require an aerial
topography which would become very expensive. They would
hope that the city could help establish criteria so some
reasonable approach can be obtained.
Lloyd Hobbs stated the city, at the present time, has a very .
limited staff. The applicant needs to show the city how the
development,could be developed without any flooding or drain-
age problems.
Chairman Rempel asked if a person is able to get flood insurance
on a particular piece of property, does that release the city's
responsibility if approval to develop is given to an applicant.
Lloyd Hubbs stated the Federal. Flood. Insurance Program and the
ability of the City to obtain flood inaurance was conditioned
on passing an or-jinance such as that established in Ordinance
No. 24.:,: p part of the Federal Flood Insurance Program,
they will be aidit.ing the City's review of development in the
future to see that we are complying; with the intent of the
ordInance and if they find that the intent is not complied
with it could jeopardize future liability of obtaining flood
Insurance.
Mr. MacDonald asked if the Commission would consider con-
tinuing this Director Review in order that they may bring
In the necessary data to support this request.
There being no further discussion, a MOTION was made by Com-
missioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy and.unanimously
carried to continue review of Director Review No. 78 -12 to
December 13, 1978 in order that the applicant be given an .
opportunity to gather information regarding *flooding and
drainage of this property:
r
PLhNN]27G
C41MISSION.r LfTES
t
-13- October 11,'1978
NEW D1RECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -32 - The development of a multi-
BUSINESS
r,
tenant industrial complex to be located on the southwest
corner
of Helms-and Ninth Street - N -R zone - :Request .
submitted by G.S.R.
Development
Staff report was presented by Jack Lam, Director of Community
Development, which is
on file in the Planning Division. He
reported the development plan
as proposed is consistent with
the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan.
Further, such a
development is consistent and compatible with surrounding
land
uses. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
d
approve and adopt Resolution No. 78 -15 based on the findings
and conditions listed.
Chairman Rem el asked for comments from the applicant.
The applicant or his representative was not present to
speak regarding this item.
Chairman Remoel stated with the parking as proposed, it
would only•a11ow for 2 cars per unit proposed.
Jack Lam stated under the present OrJivanc.�, they are
legally within
the requirements•of the. ordinance in regard
to parking.'
1
Chairman Rem el stated he feels the parking is totally
inadequate for
this type of development.
Commissioner Tolstov stated he would agree that the parking
Is
inadequate. He also has another concern. He felt the
front elevation
of the buildings'should be looked at very
carefully as they are
not compatible to other developments
in the area, which do not have warehouse doors
exposed to the
front elevation.
Jack Lam stated that there is an alternative to screening
warehouse doors. Since there is a grade difference of at
least 5' from 9th Street and the subject site, the front
landscaped
area could be mounded and heavily landscaped to
screen warehouse doors.
Commissioner Garcia recommended that this project be continued
for
a total review of the site as far as elevations along .
9th Street and parking.
A MOTION was then made by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by
Commissioner
Tolstov and unanimously carried to continue
review of Director Review
No. 78 -32.to December 13, 1978
in order for the'applicant to totally
review the site as
far as providing sufficient parking and to redesign the
front elevations to be in keeping with surrounding pro -
perties.
Chairman Rem el called a recess at 11 :17 p.m. prior to the
General.Plan public hearing. '•
Meeting reconvened at 11:30 p.m.
PUBLIC GENERAL PLAN - Certain
HEARING residential and,,Gommerciil designs-
tions was discussed.
However, reserve area was not discussed
at this meeting.
v. y, .IM
PLANNING COI.1M1SvION'UTFS `P
-1��- October 11, 1978
y:
Jack Lam stated the Commission left off with review of
item 4 of the Staff Report. He reported this item is for
the area on the north side of 19th Street between Ramona
and the commercial designation on the corner of 19th and
Archibald. He stated the General Plan designates this area
as low density residential. fie reported Vanguard apparently has
R -3 multi- family zoning and desires to retain the same. Since
the plan fosters multi- family adjacent to commercial facilities
and since multi- family development can be adequately buffeted
both by the proposed freeway, the commercial facility at 19th
Street, the potential extension of Ramona, and because the, i
site has adequate access, the area can be considered for high
density residential. He recommended that this area be changed.
to high density residential.
Chairman Remoel asked for questions from the Commission to
the staff.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would like to see the whole
area from Hermosa to Ramona high density.
Jack Lam stated there is still land between Ramona and the -
mixed use as well as land between the other side of Hermosa.
We are only 'making a recommendation for that area between
the shopping center and Ramona at this time. We are not
discussing the area east of 'Ramona.
Chairman Rempel asked if any further correspondence has
been received in regard to this area.
Jack Lam stated staff has received only the letter from
Vanguard who is concerned because they have gone through
a zone change and have a plan submitted for a multi - family
residential development in'this area. No other corres-
pondence has been received for this area.
Chairman Hempel opened the public hearing.
Mr. Aon Nottingham representing Vanguard Builders, stated
they are in favor of the staff recommendation.. They are
anxious to go ahead with their,multi- family development
in this area.
There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman
v
Remel closed the public hearing.
There being no further comments, a MOTION was made by Commis-
sioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Jones, and unanimously
carried to approve staff recommendation for high density resi-
dential in the area on the north side of 19th Street between
Ramona and the commercial designation on the corner of 19th
and Archibald.
Area: Hermosa Avenue school locations below 19th Street.
.Tack Lam reviewed the staff report for the Crmmaission. He
reported the Jones Company objects to the location of pro -
posed schools on their property. He stated the School Dis-
trict has examined school site selections very carefully and
indicates that the general locations shown are excellent sites
able to serve a large walk -in area. The School District is
going to proceed with plans to purchase at least one elementary
school site somewhere in this location. He recommended that
the Commission retain General Plan designation for school
site in this area.
LI
PLANNING COMISSION NUTES 1y
_15- October 11, 1978
Chairmael opened the public hearing.
There being no discussion from the audience, Chairman Rempel
closed the public hearing and asked for questions from the
Comasission to the staff. .
Commissioner Garcia stated, as indicated, this is a general
location the school district is talking about and he would
agree that a school should be located in this general area.
There being no further discussion, a motion was made -by Com-
miss:' or Garcia seconded by Commissioner Tolst�v and unani=
school carried to retain the General Plan designation for the
school site as designated.
Area: Park deal nt east of Archibald above Foothill
Jack Lam-reported Marlborough Company is concerned with the
location of the park. site. He reported the arguments concerning
the location of park site has been'debated over and over in
the past. These designations are not necessarily site Spec..ific,..
It designates a concept that some park area near the vicinity
would be desirable from the standpoint of a public facility.:
He recommended that the park site designation be .retained.
Chairman Remoel opened the public hearing.
There being no discussion from the audience Chairman Rem el
closed the public hearing and.asked for questions from the
Commission to the staff.
There being no further comments, a motion was made by Commis -
aioner Tolatoy seconded by Commissioner Jones . and unanimously '
carried to retain the park site designation east of Archibald
above Foothill Blvd. as submitted.
a
COMERCIAL ISSUES
Sack Lam reported if any commercial uses are to be associated
wi.tit existing uses
thought to be important to the heritage or
history of the
community, detailed examination of those uses
should be done to
prior indiscriminately creating commercial
designations. Criteria
and standards for such selections as
well as other planning considerations
must be made before
any such decisions are made. The General Plan
currently
provides for policies that would allow for a zoning procedure
to enable
non - residential uses in residential areas provided
that standards and criteria
are met and other planning con -
siderations have been examined if
and such sites are found
to be in fact important to the heritage or history of the
community. He recommended that the.Genera 1 Plan designation,
until further
study, be retained as low density residential. .
Chairman Rem el asked for questions Eton the Commission to
qte staff. ff;
Commissioner Da stated" if this area should be shown as low
density
residential, ial, would Opici Winery have a legal non -con-
forming use.
Y
P1.ANVI
KG -CO!@ IMO N 2iINUTES'
-16- ..
October 11, 1978
a
Jack Lam stated yes, that is correct. 'Mnst cities have
two options: 1) they can maintain .it as a legal non- C.
conforming use until such time the property changes
.hands or use, demolishes or removes
cities adopt an amortization schedul e that use, or 2) some
e which is normally
15 years at which time the use must sieze. The amortiza-
tion schedule is not very well adhered to in most communi-
ties. However, it would be up to the Commission on which
of the options it would prefer.
Chairman Rem e1 opened the public hearing.
There being no discussion from the audience, Chairman Rem el
Closed the public hearing.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Tolstov seconded by Com-
missioner Garcia and unanimously carried to retain the
General Plan designation of low density residential for
Opici Winery until further study.'
Jack Lam asked that this item be continued to the next meeting
( Octeber 19, 1978) as the applicant can not be ,present at
this time.
It was the concensua of the Commission that this area be
continued for review on October 1g, lg7g.
Area: Thomas Vine and Winer - General Plan Designation
Service Commercial
Jack Lam reported Thomas Winery intends to expand the small
commercial center. He stated the General Plan does' not pro-
hibit this since the designation is service commercial whether
a free standing use or a center. He recommended that the
General Plan designation of service commercial for this area
be retained.
Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing.
There being no comments from the audience, Chairman Rem el
closed the public hearing.
There being no further comments, a motion was made by Commis- one cta
ia: seconded by Commissioner Dahl, and unanimously
carried to rein the General plan designation of service
commercial for the Thomas Vineyard Winery.
Area: Alternative A. General Plan desi
Center Alternative $nation - Regional
Jack Lam reported the Issue is that an individual objects to
regional "flopping center concept as a focal point for community,
and desires more open space. He reported that the community
can support *a regional commercial center which can have bene-
fits both to the community in terms of the availability of
commercial facilities as well as contributions to the community
tax base. Since it is difficult to project precisely into
the future and project precise locations of such a center
proposal it was desirable to show the three most reasonable
l
p PLONIt
1C
COMM16sIo INUTFs
-17- October 11, 1978.
•tip
alternatives for potential center sites and to indicate
a choice in the General Plan rather than to reflect one
site. He recommended that the Commission maintain the
policy position as previously discussed.
Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing.
There being no discussion from the audience, Chairman
Rempel closed the. public hearing.
There being no further discussion, a MOTION was made by
Commissioner --is seconded by C,.mmnissioner Tolst9y, and
unanimously carried to maintain the policy pveition of the
Planning Commission for the rrg tonal center alternative. .
Plan designation - vService Ccxmmerciald foothill. General
.lack lam reported Lucas desires c(xmpercial center designa-
tion on this area. He reported there is no conflict between
this desire and the General Plan designation since service
commercial does not discriminate between freestanding uses
and multi- tenant center.
Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing.
After general discussion, Chairman Rempel closed the public
hearing. .
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Garcia seconded by Com-
missioner Rempel and unanimously carried to keep the service
commercial designation for the area, located on the southeast
corner of Hellman and Foothill.
=mod: cast side of Vine and between Arrow Route and Foothill.
General Flan designation - Mixed use
Jack Lam reported the issue was a desire for commercial uses
rather than mixed uses. Vineyard is a major arterial and a
major entry into the City. It is undesirable to encourage
uses that would charge the character of the street to a commer-
cial strip when there is an opportunity to control development
of the area by allowing only uses which develop less vehicular
turn movements from Vineyard. He recommended that the mixed
use designation be. retained.
Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing.
There being no comments from the audience, Chairman Rempel
closed the public hearing.
Commis sinner Garcia stated mixed use designation is needed
throughout the community. It was his opinion that the mixed
use designation be retained.
After general discussion, a MOTION was made by Commissioner'
Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Tolstay and unanimously
carried to retain the mixed use designation for the area on
the east side of Vineyard between Arrow Route and Foothill.
Respectfully submitted,
r
Nancy MCA ister, Secretary
W sa sr
_ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -18- October 11, 1978
Area: Area abounded by Southern Pacific Tracks Devore
;?
Freeway and East Avenue in Etiwanda - General Plan Designs-
r
tion - Windrow
Jack Lam reported the issue is the property owner feels
property is not conducive for residential development and
instead desires commercial designation. He reported because
of the area's relative small size and buffering from the
transportation corridors and its exposure and accessibility,
service commercial can be compatible on this site. He
'
fecommended that the Commission modify the General Plan to
reflect service commercial for this area.
Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing.
There being no comments from the audience, Chairman Remeel
closed the public hearing.
A MOTION was made by Coimmissioner•Jones. seconded ' by -Commis -
sioner Tolstoy, and unanimously carried to modify the General
Plan to reflect service commercial for the area abounded by
the Southern Pacific tracks,- Devore Freeway and East Avenue
in Etiwanda.
Commi.ssioner Garcia stated the area along Baseline and
Hermosa is shown as mixed use. In evaluating this area
and the land around it, we have a mobilehome park to the
east, residential to the west and to the south. He feels
that that particular area should be changed: to allow more
medium density residential.
After general discussion, a MOTION was made by Commissioner
Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Dahl, and unanimously carried
to change the designation from mixed use to medium density
residential on the northwest, southwest and southeast corners .
'Baseline
of and Hermosa Avenues.
ADJOURNMENT
Upon MOTION by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner
Garcia, and unanimously carried it was voted to adjourn `-he
Planning Commission meeting of October 11, 1978 at 12:17 p.m.
to a Special Meeting on October 19, 1978 in the Community
Services Building to finish the commercial/residential por-
tions of the General Plan.
Respectfully submitted,
r
Nancy MCA ister, Secretary
W sa sr