Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979/07/11 - Agenda Packet - (check)S � WILL TFITS PROJECT: YES NO J` .r .. _ 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? 2. Create.a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 3. create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.) ?. 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? 5: Remove any existing trees ?. How many? i 6. Create the need for use or disposal of 7 potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammablessi or explosii =s? Explanation of any YES answers above: T- V IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data,and .' information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evallation can be made by the Development Review Committee. Date ' �" t _ . , $ignatur �f/U�� Title (zt T. ,{{ `(S4 DATE: July 11, 1979 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commisaiou FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO 79-OIF - City of Rancho Cucamonga Clarification of mixed use category more specifically designate what is allowable within the mixed use category. ABSTRACT: Iv the recent past the Commission has had much concern with the allowable uses in the category of mixed use. We have clarified that when office use is pro- posed in the mixed use area that would include such uses as restaurants, fast food, bakeries, stationary, blueprint shops, donut shops, delicatessen, banks, savings and loan, financial institutions. If the applicant chooses to develop multiple family, the range of density has been indicated from five units to thirty units` per acre. The Commission may wish to further elairfy the designation of density in the mixed use category when multiple family is chosen. It would be our sugges -ion at this. point in time that the Commission does not substantially change the meaning of the mixed use category but perhaps consider for the September General Plan amendments the elimination of the mixed usei category and the introducticn of an office professional category. This would'remove any misunderstanding as to the Commissions' intent for a particular area. it is our belief that the mixed use category developed as an out growth of the San Bernardino County Code which allowed multiple family to be developed in the AP zone.; RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission defer any action on changing the mixed use category until the September General Plan Amendment:. Resp �ubmitted, 1' 1 w_. R CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment ..Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where.the project application is made. Upon receipt of.this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. WirlWXft' MI/i7fi'AWiMJiffiT1IAV.orJ =kVVfl 12A2/A41� NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON O BE CONTACTEp CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: ry 79 BE OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO,) LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE ANDi.; FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: yS:v•., DE3CRI ON OF PROJECT �1t1!t - ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND­SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND 'PROPOSED AUILDINGS,.IF'ANY: DESCRIBE THE•ENVIROMIENPAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFOR ^LATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES,. AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS) Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series, of cumulative actions, which although individually.small, may as a whole havD significant environmental impact? fr 4 p S ,'.. i t-a i 1 � :., }�✓ i lei 1 � �••�Ft t � = ( t r t.•i C'irt1.W r WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)! 4. Create changes in the existing • >oning or general plan designations? 5: Remove any existing trees ?..How many? .-4 6. Create the need ,for use. or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION- I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted ; before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Date: July 11, 1979 To: Planning Commission From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development Subject: WAIVER OF CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR TRACT NO. 9458 - Request for waiver of condition for irrigation of public rights- of-way (parkways) within the tract boundary for the tract located at Baseline and Center ABSTRACT: Staff has conversed with the applicant regarding the Commisoions' request for a tradeoff between not requiring the condition that "parkways on all lots and aide yards for corner lots adjacent to a street shall be land- scaped and provided with a permanent operating irrigation system prior to the final clearance issued by the County Department of Building and Safety ", and adding more "hardscape" landscaping along Baseline. The applicant lu►s informed us that the County had indicated the condition would be waived shortly after they had received approval of their tract. Therefore the cost of meeting that condition of approval was not included in the development of the tract and with the sales of homes. It is the applicants opinion there is no trade - off, that the condition should be waived, and was proceeding with the assumption that the condition was waived. As we see it the Commission still has three alternatives as outlined in the previous report: 1. Deny the request and require the developer to install permanent irrigation systems in the parkways within the interior tract. 2. Modify the condition to require the developer to install a PVC 3/4" schedule 40 pipe underneath the parkway for future connec- tion for an irrigation system that would be supplied by the owner of the house. 3. Waive the requirement for the installation of an irrigation system within the interior parkways of the tract. RECOMMEMATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission choose one of the alternatives outlined above. Respe t 1 bmitted, JACK LAM, Director o£ Community Development I rf JL:BIO;:nm ITRI "Nu Y' 1617 Westcliff ❑r. Suite 211, -Newport ©each; C.a. 92660 June 12, 1979 : Gb) .:i ! Y OF RANCHO CUCA ONGA CON.MUMI' DEVELOPMENT ,66T. J! J.N 14 1979 AM PM City of Rancho Cucamonga 7A900ilhVi1ASi NIS 98320 Baseline. Alta Lome, California Attentions Barry Hogan Res; Tract 9458 Baseline at Center Dear Mr. Hogant Pursuant to our telephone conversation of June 12, we are hereby requesting your waiver of the interior streets parkway landscaping requirements imposed by the county approximately two years ago. The landscaping requirements then imposed by the county on tracts being processed were subsequently eliminated, however, other than a verbal "don't worry." this write ;r received no written confirmation, as our Tract folders were in boxes going to the city, etc, etc. Our landscape bond renewal on this tract occurs June 22, 1979, and since it appears that we cannot get on the planning commission agenda prior to the 28thci* June, we are hereby requesting that you allow release of the landscape band, and in return, we will post a cash bond pending our hearing. A letter to that effect will allow the bond release. It should be further noticed that the parkway along Baseline Street has been fully sprinklered and landscaped. Very truly yours, H & S DEVELOPMENT CO. Peter R. Hubinger General Partner PRH :jh I z: I 3 , • ` .. r y r ' F r? it;t . r•1 �r • • f' a. %r }Z�� •k'P•(��rJ�1T��y:1�h�r� r. r. • ;•i.•• i! ` -� t w}' '• � F�, J �. �'i! � +wir.�FSF1�_1.1ai�w�� ►i/.j`111 h. •� � ,. r ; r +� • • •, . '.alb � �! ". • �. /1i YGO� TRACT N4• 9458 5/prerxer ?SNtr7s IN THE UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY OF COUNTY. OF SAN BERNARWASTATE OF CALIFORNIA _ _ _._______.. ..w n......o nr ler B. 5rrr/av t. T. J.9•.P•)W, $C.A1, " ,r�• . �1 +nl' 31 wj V w 'r I war s. Prcoeos a sNY q.:,..•..... -- _ ...,...... arkwals a<t,MO ,*, F6 �l I �_• R.srrae arcirr � : �« •).. +'`•�� �� (I � -r • w � ,� + I ;, '.:� J.1 •TI % „•: ri/e7 'il `:a.:.]y' GfeSir ' . [ .•] jY zri l zi Zt c y ^I �'�� � I [ ! li I! • VII IO'f•f W � /,•y i•r, IIL 1 Yp. n'.w ,.,n .” r•r. I t If=s ,I J.iD F,' a• .vy +7 23 =I ]:: rlarr • r + F: 1 t Iii 2z_," PC%i /tti�L i \ I +r30 ; rrr•/r' L {.prj/,IZ lef V {f O 3 •,1 � yi �l¢I 1�,�Yt,^ _ r w/,�. ^— Q . 13 + 14 I•. % wg9r' +.IIV• r,/L.I' ��/ 1.], � J m+rluv0 'A - Iy� ♦NN N.r•..v^•r• is 19 fa +;.t1 • •� . i T �l1y'i4y+ /5 1' l4 /NI, /YI N• 32 W., w d � Ct'•J Y V • .�•1 O ;Y "I•� +Y H 2 y , Z t:;] cr V ' Nd!•/]lf'v ! /D. lI � ±]Al Nrwy f•/r +wa R caeca X11 � ':�rrir is .�,': ..... .. ._ _ cu.J/• rasa asl: _ _—__ �._ __ �:�� .. ;,�; � � - - y /!l27 =� itf7lf' rraOr.aafr tr.r. r/,•f _ `I •Y. /k.r/rl L•li ','�'1•.Ar V.ra.r ]•p/r NY••Y . I ' fri r/ \9P^.MI x4r /P' r••dp •yw rv\ /p r'rA rlLLrr / r 1: �M�%Ai7!%/MMg1i.YMY /N kJrID, ': . rra"KPfry ;W7� /♦ 7/CR/p!f< Strr /,. - • pp�d,,�rl1 pa/ <I 30 ;i L•i r /•/ /•• I pursal I `�a I ,I•� I ' 4 �)f. I 111r �1 +nl' 31 wj V w 'r I war s. Prcoeos a sNY q.:,..•..... -- _ ...,...... arkwals a<t,MO ,*, F6 �l I �_• R.srrae arcirr � : �« •).. +'`•�� �� (I � -r • w � ,� + I ;, '.:� J.1 •TI % „•: ri/e7 'il `:a.:.]y' GfeSir ' . [ .•] jY zri l zi Zt c y ^I �'�� � I [ ! li I! • VII IO'f•f W � /,•y i•r, IIL 1 Yp. n'.w ,.,n .” r•r. I t If=s ,I J.iD F,' a• .vy +7 23 =I ]:: rlarr • r + F: 1 t Iii 2z_," PC%i /tti�L i \ I +r30 ; rrr•/r' L {.prj/,IZ lef V {f O 3 •,1 � yi �l¢I 1�,�Yt,^ _ r w/,�. ^— Q . 13 + 14 I•. % wg9r' +.IIV• r,/L.I' ��/ 1.], � J m+rluv0 'A - Iy� ♦NN N.r•..v^•r• is 19 fa +;.t1 • •� . i T �l1y'i4y+ /5 1' l4 /NI, /YI N• 32 W., w d � Ct'•J Y V • .�•1 O ;Y "I•� +Y H 2 y , Z t:;] cr V ' Nd!•/]lf'v ! /D. lI � ±]Al Nrwy f•/r +wa R caeca X11 � ':�rrir is .�,': ..... .. ._ _ cu.J/• rasa asl: _ _—__ �._ __ �:�� .. ;,�; � � - - y /!l27 =� itf7lf' rraOr.aafr tr.r. r/,•f _ `I •Y. /k.r/rl L•li ','�'1•.Ar V.ra.r ]•p/r NY••Y . I ' fri r/ \9P^.MI x4r /P' r••dp •yw rv\ /p r'rA rlLLrr / r 1: �M�%Ai7!%/MMg1i.YMY /N kJrID, ': . rra"KPfry ;W7� /♦ 7/CR/p!f< Strr /,. - • pp�d,,�rl1 pa/ <I 30 s' DATE: TO: FROM: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT July 11, 1979 Planning Commission Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE CHANGE REGARDING ICEEPINC OF PICKY GOATS ABSTRACT: Attached please find a letter from the Hunton family requesting that the Planning Commission consider the amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow the keeping of pigmy goats on R -1 lots 20,000 square feet or greater. Additionally, the Hunton's have included a letter from•their veterinarian and a petition from the neighborhood in favor of the Hunton's keeping the goats. The reason this request has come.befere the Planning Commission is by complaint. Upon investigation by the City's Community Code Representative the Hunton's were requested to comply with City ordinance by removal of the goats. from this property. Currently code does not allow the keeping of goats on lots less than 20,000 square feet. Should the Commission wish to consider an.amenament to the Zoning Ordinance for the keeping of pigmy goats on lots 20,000 or greater, then staff should be directed . to prepare such an ordinance and. schedule it, for public hearings. if the Planning Commission does not desire to consider a change in the Zoning Ordinance, then this item will be referred back to our Community Code Representative for completion of action on the zoning complaint. All action regarding the zoning complaints for the keeping of goats have been held in abeyance until this request has been acted upon. rr Resoectfully Submitted, lu Jack Lace, Director of Community Development JL:BKH:cc Attachments: Hunton Letter of Request r t "rS r o -April. 29. 19-h Dear Sir: This letter is a request to have the zoning ordi',nnce for goats changed within Rancho C:ucamunga. TVe live on a 20,000 sq. ft, lot and are only allowed to keep two horses. I have rnised Pigmy Goats for the past three years, The goats are much cleaner than horses, and there is virtually no oddr to a. female or a wither goat. We feel that the zoning requirements for goats is very unfair and should be changed; in fact, they should be the same as Compared to the zoning ordinance for dogs. The goats far surpass dons as to cleanliness and noise. Most people who buy goats ure buying n pet. Goats will walk on a leash, ride in cars, and can even be house broken. A goat's size, in corn - parison with a horse, is even a bigger reason to have the ordinance changed. Our neighbors have no objection to the goats and have expressed their opinions.on the attached petition. I am also enclosing a letter from my vet. It is our sincere hope that you will consider this request for an ordinance change to a2_loiv us to keep these goats as our pets. Thank you for your consideration. c17 e cF ? „r�ci:r, CNA10;0 -UGA L014"MUNITY C'EVELQPMENT DEPT. . vi: ; i 1979 AM P11 718191!QI!!1�111�131`�I�Ifi Sincerely, 0'77 ICrl�f i �lL4t�• 1.y tip - T -PAG'r rvt o im J r� �U �K 1.a L May 29, 1979 To Whom It May Concern: I have been taking care of Mrs. Hunton's animals for aproximately,3 years. They show no ovort signs of clinical disease, and their per--t. are sanitary. Mrs. Hunton has maintained regular 1nnoculatioW for her goats and treats any health problems promptly. Di7S : kb Sinccre2y, 4VI e Don r�gh!eberger'$D.V.1-1. u,,s CENTRAL VETERINARY HOSPITAL EQUINE @ SMALL ANIMAL AIEDICINE 281 NO. CENTRAL AVENUE UPLAND. CALIFORNIA 91786 . _ • (714) 9BI.2855 . DON W SCHNEBERGER. DY.M. ROBERT I. SCHEOMR. D.VAL.P11D L May 29, 1979 To Whom It May Concern: I have been taking care of Mrs. Hunton's animals for aproximately,3 years. They show no ovort signs of clinical disease, and their per--t. are sanitary. Mrs. Hunton has maintained regular 1nnoculatioW for her goats and treats any health problems promptly. Di7S : kb Sinccre2y, 4VI e Don r�gh!eberger'$D.V.1-1. n is rr ' k�"3Y'i '• ��� r�.r ��ty H..'i t' n' !. Yk fl � .1 � ' �f. /'�!'i .. ,� �i � t1i(�� Ile. 111E UryV= -'%57u Yqu RESInPNCC AT 5327 CARO��a.14 i`• •'••• ••••• Or TIM COiNPfAINT AV ALTA t0.+ y�• •••• • ••. IVFIAT tVF. CONSIDER 1OApEST 1/►• AND BEING AWAY "'� "• •..•.,.. PIGlly GOATS WOULD LIKE TD AND CDNDLTIONS OF AN rAIR OF 7110 CIRrl'MSTANCCS LAVED T ANLb1ALS COMh[1►INT wE HAVE OB CE OUR OPfNION TO AND 971E FACILITIES ARE AND WE FEEL'i -4 A V VED T)f$ CAGILITTCS PRESENT A PRDIILEN TO US AS N CLEAN ERy I V' �� AND TD 171E fRINTONS EIGHB(fRg AND ORDCRLY. 771t LL CARED SIGNED; AND WE WOULD LACE TO PTGtly R GOATS UPFpRDTD NOT l� 1 rl r. —iqp?vj AAL6 LatiLvvd�1 bp 4Zpp( pp y n t�ru.,.,.X Aw � jiAN )Ja ALA c1}(LM ��3S t�1+12c��s.�w Sr .9crte- L•n -met �sJ'71���/f �Q ts��nC.l��f711i $239 4.�j�1KL/1w�5T ��frs C..Gh�... Y L l! n ive 'fF' F (: rl T, ►�•,.1_ •. a A +r. ''llt i. ':',� .. r'` r :1.� r , � ' � -! x14,7 \.. `!,� f. F i ,' .r . r i Y p i Kr. 7 , r .• , f1[r {ey /aT• 1� r iK,1 �n • . •r n�'C ri ,'.. •5[� C`r ., 7 v ! Si[ r �'1 - t '1 •i' �% \. � ! , t lri i . l R.\ +7 ♦��I sirr.� e�•..�i, li!`s�[ r�M I' Lf i� i)p F{ � lU \,' {i!`:5i r r!r Sr' .1 i�'�: 1' �,- r�'�t'+ur� r" - �t� {� .._ S..l. ., .�....�..[;F >: *. �C_'••,.r�'�a �. ,Pr. t..., � +' �' �r_�', ,M. ,tr:«• i• .rlr. , r7 .,. � �,• � ... .. h1.` , �1• ----� it ' • �1 ., r. , - M.. i + i r•�l[y \._.. Via.{ •� .l:ri ji 7 ' --a�� -- '-- __S�"'_ —'_� ter. -Y t. �• 1T t ] `Jw �44 �. . - ! y- +•�! -{�aaa ate... �- �` '�,; �+ ,'1 r r ' • / •. . ..— �' ..-may. _ r� _..� � t -' � ' n. ', , i s V( ''Ir `i w•f � r L r' -ss ...k � -.�` ...'.._ rf a -• r 7 �1- •••- •„'i_. ,, .. 1. I ^ � /fir! ')i, .f /-ry �� j7 Fl. • . i i { � S . j•l �.la�• -Ad; r -r iTl .7.•i r v ?' -'. ��' i tr7. . ,• t; . �'�. IL�GC %�jfJ'� � �.(,LL•dGs� C�y:l9�[Q�i, =� �'�[�'� ti r •r. OW ? •`.�. :a r .t t .�/ /t2 J �t < @E�a ✓ n. e� _�.�` tee i�oJ ter': "r7.f ./1 C2Gdlii'�c . � C'[ch {..; -.� G �l�•t -�, c�.�'ci .GAL Lt 'f- d'dt c.c r', C E! P L••�G[CG•'�4rvCr �- ti.l�C� %�C.� , iC.cy <T�'.- CY7�{L!i/•f..Cl,Ct� Qn�G feae,7z i,: 4 °r <.��� �:a' � Grrtr. t r'vr.� • w ;i a 1.7 is L. I I IV IS V71� V Ij R-1 4AS �sr��oN ( C*M ,aL) 131 c --I. I S4FkaoL PRa.pos6D S�'1� CC�2 Hl.. s c CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA INITIAL STUDY . PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of.this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare PF _t 7I of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: 144 M =4 AaA E2 WJ—D1 LA!rA APPLICAN'T'S NAME, ADDRESS, NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: �S�ArM E LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL 110.) LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND''`, FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: ' ;'. .p 0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: al W!rA UE ^1MgZf COMME V=Ca IAt �u�t_at►ac ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND "QbARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: I.OT ACME -A 11 1-7:Z }fi ET DESCRIBE THE•ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY . EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): TA F_ rm � I S A ff t-A-r L IG FF T' 0 Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series- of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? � X6,1 WILL TTI S PROJECT; YES NO Create a substantial change in ground contours? 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial ci:ange in demand for municipal services (police, .fire, water, sewage, etc,)? 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? 5: Remove any existing trees?. How many? 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: la "r•= IMF_aTANT: If the project involves the construction of r residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION- I hereby certify that the statements furnished;; care =y above and in the attached exhibits present t'ne data and information required for this initial evalurition.to the best of my ability, and that the facts, st«.ements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.- I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development Review committee. Date �yf�•ei�� °„Z�e ,�,�� Signature Q'F �rt Title , i .•5 y q{ The followinq information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and.Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple family units: 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model a and ° *• of Tentative S. Bedrooms Price e PHASE I PRASE 2 PHASE 3 PIMSE 4 TOTAL 1 The followinq information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and.Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple family units: 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model a and ° *• of Tentative S. Bedrooms Price e PHASE I PRASE 2 PHASE 3 PIMSE 4 TOTAL v Cr CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT `. DATE: July 11, 1979 T0: Planning Commiasion- FROM., Jack Lam, Di.-ector of Community Development SUBJECT: NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -44 - Fasson Request to add a 12,000 square foot industrial building to the existing Fasson industrial plant located on the north side of,. 9th, west of Hellman. BACKGROUND: The Fasson Co. is requesting approval to add a 12,000 square foot industrial. building to the Fasson industrial plant located on the north side of 9th Street, west of Hellman Avenue in the M -1 zone (Exhibit .. "A"). The building will be used for light manufacturing purposes. This review is for environmental clearance only and does not constitute appt`oval of the, project. ANALYSIS: The site is currently vacant and adjacent to the existing 140,000 square foot Fasson industrial plant. The existing flora and fauna are native weeds and small rodents. No known historical, cultural orscenic aspects are associated.with the site. Part 1 of the,Initial Study indicateg no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the project. Staff has field checked the site and has found no discrepancies with the checklist. Staff has found no other significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration for Director Review No. 79 -44.p Respe tf ly�eubkt 33,E Jp U.--r- Jack , Director of ti Community Development JL:BNH:cc p�to�oSEo S ATE SNUusT�it►�� -� roo QL.tc►lr rNp�tsT4:�Rl� L C(,1 fWr rtADusTakAto 4 VICINITY mkp 5, S S CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIA'L STUDY PART I — PROJECT ,T.NFORMATION SHEET — TO be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is *-de- Upon receipt of this application, the Envix• Atal Analysis staff will prepare Part IT of the Initial Se.udy. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the r-oposed project. PROJECT TITLE: Prismatic APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: (714) 987 -4631 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHON7E OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Robert P. Ruud - Same as above - LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR, PARCEL NO _ ) 1 _Lot 6. Subdivision of Lot 10; Book ZO of Maps Page , - Records of San Bernardino County. LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND',;;':j FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:. Permit to errect and operate - 5ou:h Coast Air quality Management Dictrict. - ij i r R PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Production and treatment of a face material for pressure sensitive tape to be Retro- reflective to light. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA'AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: aai scent to existing 140,000 square foot facility. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANIMALS, AIN CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): Location is in an Industrial Zone. To o, ur knowledge theXe s no_cli tural, historical-of Scenic_ aspects to proposed site. - Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series' of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? our or a uirrerenv oparauinK a,tv &o +..... contained and no present expansion is planned. i from uur same company, z, X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing, noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)! X a. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan-.designations? X 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, £lammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: 15 an: :one per dU of eSX9pgraanin eplvent _ IMPORTAIrr: if the project involves the construction Of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements - furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required, for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be;submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development ; Review Committee. ; }}t �_ ni at �,_�_�o Signaturfe. Title ry CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: July 11, 1979 To: Planning Commission FROM: Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer. SUBJECT: PROPOSED STREET NAME CHANGES Pursuant to a request by'the City Council ,:three streets in the "North Town" area are proposed for name changes. These streets are now designated,24th, 25th and 26th Streets and are situated between 8th Street and 9th Street. This discrepancy in numbering is very confusing to visitors and could result in..a delay in emergency responses. Even though the streets are heavily occupied and a name change will'cause considerable inconvenience to residents and public agencies, the elimination of confusion will outweinht the inconvenience. The names proposed by the Engineering Division. were obtained by the method used for most new street names by developers and the City - extensions of the existing streets most nearly in line with the "new", streets. As the attached correspondence shows, the new name suggestions were submitted to representatives of the affected community and no objections were voiced. The City Council is already concerned about and in favor of this proposal, but is interested in any suggestions-to Commissioners may have. Also attached for your information is the public hearing procedure used. Respectfully su mitted, Ld B. Hubbs City Engineer LBH:PAR:deb Attachments: vicinity Map r Letter from Nacho Garcia dated April 11, 1979 Street Name Procedure IM "E° r?. 7Y '+., Is '�it!.v.+irii...ril,f..+'::at. .:sk.... C•i... 7 t 4 1.r r. + VA' 011 till uuM i ell`„ii :�:r.� Aw. 1, X11 lS11111 v..,a,. ..•C.I Am �ry0h� ►ter: Iuuii.�C��w ■ ■m ■ 1■ ■ ■ul CI:�.'61�~ /II 11111 r�111111110 • n �uulu • ^'�yV� -f� w rw�_r ■iir r '1�.�1 =w� ti. . w .rr' wtr wr'i� -� trr.w f�ACwr�Y� ':) _ rr rr\ E.r_ +rr-r -:= 1 ■may■� V■ �-• rr w 11111 w �""�, - ': E -' ■� r ��IIINIIIIIIIIIIIII r 1111■1 ■ ' 'I . �= 1 '�rUlll■ � ��rrii r� 1 1 11 GOP g 1.�1_� - ... Is 1ur,■ Iiinii7 � r Ill�r w' '•IIIIIIIIII �' �■ _ .� � 11111 � ■n -,,� ■ . - 11111111�� umm�rq 3 m114� �ti: ?�:. �111111111 IIIIIIII = =11 HIM - 'n'��- 11111111111 1111111} Y III fill =yuinrrl r Illllflllll 1111111;_ = IIII Illjl ; '.. . �, r un■n1 � IfIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIU IIIII�IIIIIIIUI'I!IiLUI lill �IIIIIIIII 11111111111 1111111:= =1111�Ip1� ' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN HI IIIIIIIIIIILIIIE 1 IIl ". �iI111II11 - IIIIIIII' M-111111111 IIIIIfIIIUIIIIIIUHII ! ®IIIIINIIIIIIiI�In'�IIIH IIIIIIII=' �!!!!IIh = !11111 1' i t == III111 I I 1 III s ' .• ,11((11111111111 . ;!'1111111111111 ■ 'ti'lllllllll 111 - ..r11111111� 7r- ,I��n511 111111 ril �, nm •uri: . , . r�lluu 'ulna b il'r_I r I'. April 11, 1979 aUGAMON A Nacho Gracia 10364 Humbolt Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 r Re: Street Name Change Mr. Gracia: Nacho, the City Engineer's Office is preparing a package to go to City Council shortly regarding the changing of various street names throughout the City where confusing situations exist. Among those suggested for change are three within your community: 1.) 26th Street changed to Me. Kinley Street; 2.) 25th Street changed to Jersey Boulevard; 3.) 24th Street changed to Feron Boulevard. Do you have any thoughts on these proposed changes? If you.or any.. of your neighbors have any questions, please do not hesitate.to give me a call. Thanks. Cordially, William L. Holley, Director Community Services Department ?,. WLH /es s cc: Attachment: 1 map j James C. Frost, Mayor Paul Rougeau. no att. C.hrono AOL E. k XJ AAI T'O' FICE BOX 193, RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALTFC�NIA 91730, (714} 989 f j f 11 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT' DATE: July 11, 1979 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development 0 SUBJECT: NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SITE APPROVAL N0. 79 -12 - Hone - Request for the development of a professional office building and service station to be located on the southeast corner of Hellman and Baseline within the AP administrative professional zone known as parcel number 208 - 431 -14. REW,TED ITEMS: Minor Deviation No. 79 -11 - Hone /Barmakian ABSTRACT: This is the first application coming before the Planning Commission for a service station with the AP (administrative professional) zone. Additionally, this service station has been designed to be an integral part of the proposed office complex. The constraints of this particular site should be kept in mind in reviewing this application. They are as follows: 1. The shape of the property is triangular; 2. The property is adjacent to the railroad right of way; 3. There is an existing house which has been converted -to an office and proposed to be retained on the site; 4. A minor deviation is also being proposed in conjunction with this application and should be heard concurrently. Approval of Site Approval No. 79 -12 is recommended. DISCUSSION: Existing on site is an 1800+ square foot office which is a conversion of an existing single family home. 16,150 square feet of two -story office building and 1,575 square feet of service station are proposed to be added to the site. There also is an additional 2,400 square foot of future office site proposed for construction ac a later date. Three means of access are proposed to the site. One access along Baseline at an approximate width of 45 feet and two accesses on Hellman Avenue with widths of approximately 35 feet each. The accesses proposed meet the adopted Access Policy of the Planning Commission. The proposed office building will be a wood frame structure. The service station will be steel frame with plastered walls. The existing converted office is a wood k frame structure with plastered walla. Total building square footage provided on i site is 21,925 square feet (including 2400 square feet future office.area) requiring. the provision of 98 parking spaces at present. An additional 12 parking spaces are ' required for the future office area of 2400, square feet. You will note on the plan the applicant has provided the additional future parking spaces at the southwesterly ITEM "Gn �t• ,t STREET NAME PROCEDURE 1. Resolution of Intent to change street names (by City Council) A. Refer to street(s) by name and refer to map on file in City Clerk's Office B. Fix time and place of public hearing not less than 15 days later C. Publish and post 1. Notices posted 300' apart along street 2. Post, publish and mail.10 days before hearing 3. Notices to state passage of resolution and hearing titre and date D. Affioivit for proof of posting 2. Hearing 3. Resolution giving new names 4. Notify agencies and residents 0 end of the property which would meet the City's requirements for parking at one space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. Two monument signs are proposed for the site; both are to be used for the Mobil station. No monument signs are proposed for the office complex. The proposed landscaped conceptual plan indicates a good use of berming, trees and shrubbery to lend to the site a garden office atmosphere. ANALYSIS: We have reviewed the plans and have the following areas of concern. 1. Compatibility of architecture; 2. Landscaping around the existing office; 3. Signs for service station. Compatibility of Architecture - Three buildings are proposed for this site. The main structure on the site will be the garden office center, a two -story wood frame structure with a tile cap and diagonal wood siding accentuated by white pilasters. There will be a Mobil service station, a metal frame structure, with wood siding some the cap work; and the existing office structure a spanish style converted single family residence. We feel that the garden office center has brought out the basic elements of the existing converted office, such as the use of the tile cap, white stucco, wood siding and wood railings. However, the Mobil service station needs additional delineation to blend. It is our opinion that the free standing canopy of the service station should be modified. A the cap should be added and the supports widened. The corner ele- vation that displays wood siding should display the same detail wood siding, i.e., diagonal as does the garden office center and additional white vertical pilasters should be added on the corner elevation. also a red tile cap should be echoed on the service station. Landscaping around the existing office - It is the intent of the applicant to change the front entrance of the converted office to take access from the center. While staff has no problems with this proposal we do, however, feel that additional landscaping should be added around the office to soften the lines of the office. As the plan currently indicates, there is not enough landscaping proposed around the existing office. Signs for service station - The applicant proposes to locate two monument signs for the sole use by the service station. The Sign Ordinance sets forth standards for service station signing and standards for signing of centers. There in a basic question that is raised by this proposal. Was it the intent of the Planning Commission to allow a service station designed in conjunction with a center two free standing monument signs in addition to the free standing signs allowed for a center for a maximum total of 4 signs? Or was it the intent of the Commission that the standards for service station signing were for individual parcels not designed within a center such as the service stations that the City has on Foothill? These questions must be answered by the Planning Commission. Perhaps a compromise of one free standing sign for service stations designed in conjunction with a center could be allowed. ^� r r ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Staff has field chocked the site to.verify the'lnitial �Mt Study... There will-not be a significant environmental impact as•a result of the protect. We recommend the issuance of's Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 79 -51 approving Site Approval No. 79 -12. Reap ctful a omitted* Jack . Director of Community Development JL:BKH:cc Attachments: Initial Study Resolution No. 79 -51 SITE iNffROUAL MO. 79 -►2 ANP MINOR MIAT10N NO, 79 -11 E r 1r" - f` CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET -- To be completed by applicant Environmental Asses sment'Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where t':e , project application is ir�Lde. Upon receipt of .,his application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and t ?ke action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three dLterminations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and.. Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an Anvironmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: Rancho Professional Center ' APPLICAWWS NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Attn: Gaylaird Christopher Bannakian -Nolff & Associates ' 99'C" Street, Suite 201, Upland, CA 91786 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Mr. Doug Hone, 7333 Hellman Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 IM •) LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) '': 7333 Hellman Avenue Parcel No. 208 - 431 -14. ti LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND'..i FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: uj Building Permit. , u_ h,y ; `i PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 1. Two story office building- -wood frame construction, stucco walls. 2. Service station. Steel frame with stucco walls. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: Land = 2.01 Acres. Existing Buildings n 1800 sq. ft. Proposed Buildings— Office 16,150 s.f, SBrvirp Si]atinn a 1R7F en. f+ DESCRIBE THE ENVIF.ONMENTAL SETTTNG OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY.. PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): Gradual slope from north to south.existina trees arg confined to area surrounding existing ood frame structure Ot h fi d to native shrubs and grasses. Animals confined to native birds and rodents. Existing wood frame, stucco building will remain with minor alterations. Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series- of cumulative actions,' which although individually small, may as a whole have significant: environmental impact? Y .. No. t X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.): X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? .' WILL TifIS PROJECT: X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as YES NO toxic substances, £lammables or explosives? X 1. Create a substantial change in ground " Various other small fruit contours? +rno� will hav o he removed X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.): X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? 2 X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, £lammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: " Various other small fruit +rno� will hav o he removed I IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the °arm on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished: above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best; of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by th A lopm nt Review Co it ee. bate Signature ' ,y it Chris opher.. z•f Title ssoc ate Oesi no ry6l RESIDED7TIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: T. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple family units: 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model 0 and F of Tentative S. Bedrooms Price Rance PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 15'4. 0 f •a RANC140 PROFESSIONAL CENTER 0 RESOLUTION NO. 79 -51 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING SITE APPROVAL NO. 79 -12 LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HELLMAN AVENUE AND BASELINE AVENUE IN THE A -P ZONE WHEREAS, on May 18, 1979, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above described project; and WHEREAS, on June 27, 1979, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for th, above described project. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made: 1. That the site is adequate in size and shape. 2. That the site has adequate access. 3. That the proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting property. 4. That the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan. 5. That the conditions listed in this report are necessary to protect the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare. SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued on July 11, 1979. SECTION 3: That Site Approval No. 79 -12 is approved subject to the following conditions: Applicant shall contact the Building Division for compliance with the following conditions: 1. Existing buildings shall be made to comply with the current building and zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be demolished. El Applicant shall contact the Planning- Division for compliance with the following conditions: 2. The service station elevations shall be redesigned to _. d incorporate the use of the tile cap on the canopy, more ; substantial supports, -tile cap on the building, the same t direction of wood siding and additional white plastered �µf+ , ii 12. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high masonry wall with gates pursuant to City standards. Location to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. 13. All roof appurtenances, including air co,.:ditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets to the satisfactlon.of the Planning Division and Building „ Official. 14. Approval of Site Approval 79 -12 is granted subject to the approval of Minor Deviation 79 -11. ,y h i i Di ision for com laince Applicant shall contact t e Sng near ng v p Ya with the following conditions: 15. Dedication of the pilasters. Redesign_ehall be submitted and approved by the.Planning Division prior to building permits. following, streets: 3 additional feet on Hellman:' Such redesign shall *be' consistent with the main attucture, ,.. 3. Parking lot lights shall be a maximum height of 12' 16. Corner P/L radius and directed away from all property lines, adjacent streets and residences. 4. Parking apace$ shall be-double striped. 5. Parking lot trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size. 6. Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance with Comnrehenaive Sign Ordinance and stall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of such signs. 7, J 7. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits. 8. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris, 9. A Master Plan of the existing on site trees shall be provided to the Planning Division as part of the final grading plan to determine which trees shall be retained. 10. Street trees, a minimum of .15 gallon size or larger, shall be installed in accordance with the Master Plan of street trees for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 11. Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plan on file in the Planning Division and the conditions, ,'• contained herein. 12. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high masonry wall with gates pursuant to City standards. Location to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. 13. All roof appurtenances, including air co,.:ditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets to the satisfactlon.of the Planning Division and Building „ Official. 14. Approval of Site Approval 79 -12 is granted subject to the approval of Minor Deviation 79 -11. ,y h i i Di ision for com laince Applicant shall contact t e Sng near ng v p with the following conditions: 15. Dedication of the following missing rights -of-way on the following, streets: 3 additional feet on Hellman:' 16. Corner P/L radius Will be required per City standards.' 7 L 7, J r!� 17. Prior to any work being performed in the public right - of -way, an encroacta2ent permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other . permits required. 18. Approved street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer shall be required, for all street Improvements, prior to issuance of encroachment permit. 14. All street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to occupancy. 20. Surety shall be pasted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney. guaranteeing completion of the public improvements prior issuance of building permits. 21. Construct the following missing improvements on the following streets: Hellman: curb and gutter, A.C.paveaent, sidewalk, drive approach, street trees, street lights, A.C. overlay. Base Line: curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approach, street trees, street lights, A.C. overlay. 22. Pavement striping, marking, traffic and street name signing plan shall be required. 23. An approved grading plan and soils report in accordance with t' a City grading standards will be required. 24. The applicant will be responsible for construction of all on site drainage facilities required by the City Engineer. 25. The proposed project falls within areas indicated as subject to flooding under the National Flood Insurance r ogram and is subject to the provisions of that program and City 0rdinance No. 24. 26. The following north -south streets shall be designed as major water carrying streets requiring a c(vbination of special curb heights, commercial type drive approaches, rolled street connections, flood protection walls, and /or landscaped earth berms and rolled driveways at property line: Hellman Avenue. 27. All proposed utilities within the project shall be 1 d 28. instal ed isadergroun . Utility eadements shall be provided to the specification of the appropriate utility companies and the City Engineer. BY: Herman Rempel, Chairman ATTEST: 4 Secretary of the Planning Commission n t, •�.t (4J 4��iff ' 4 Y .. ..:t . i .- f..W1c�, 29. Developer shall be responsible for the relocation.of existing public utilities, as required. 30. Developer shall be responsible for the installation of street lighting in accordance with Southern California Edison Company and City standards. 31. Water and sewer system plans shall be designed and constructed to meet requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Foothill Fire District and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from CCWD will be required prior to recordation. 32. Permits from other aget:ies will be required as follows: From the San Bernardino County Flood Control. Applicant shall contact the Planning Division for compliance with the following conditions: 33. There shall o: no outdoor display or storage of tires, vending machings, batteries, food items, inoperable autos or other similar items except for the normal display oil and petroleum products at the pump islands. 34.. Should this station be abandoned (out of business) for more than 90 days, the structures shall be removed from the site and the tanks filled or removed to the satis- faction of the Planning Division and Fire-Department. 35. There shall be no washing of automobiles. 36. Any repair of auto shall occur totally within a building and shall consist of oil changes, auto tune up, tire repair and replacement, hose changes and the like. No auto body work or painting is allowed. 36. Any use of the site for towing service will require that the tow truck be stored in a building when not in operation. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF JULY, 1979. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Herman Rempel, Chairman ATTEST: 4 Secretary of the Planning Commission n t, •�.t (4J 4��iff ' 4 Y .. ..:t . i .- f..W1c�, I ';'_ I, JACK LAM, 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 Crvanonga at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of July, 1979,. by the following vote to -wit:, AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ci t f i �r55 � J .t lclyn Date: June 11, 1979 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development Subject: MINOR DEVIATION NO. 79 -11 — BONE /BARMAKIAN Not a Public Hearing) A Minor Deviation for service station set -backs for property located on.the southeast corner of Baseline and Hellman. BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting reduction in the building set- back from 25' to 15' for two places on his structure located on the southeast corner of Hellman and Baseline. , Because of the placement of the structure on the lot there is the same amount of square footage, if not more, with this proposal then there would be if the structure is placed perpendicular to a street. With the landscaping, proposed for this center and around'this particular building, we do not feel that the encroachment on the 25' set -back line would cause visual blight or lower the aesthetics on Baseline or Hellman Avenues. RECOMMENDATION: T►­P Planning Commission approve the request for Minor Deviation No. 79 -1 to allow the applicant to locate his structure at a minimum of 15' to the ultimate right -of -ways on Hellman and Baseline as sb(n m on the plan submitted on file with the Planning Division. RespecIfully apbm tted, r (/ JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:BKH *nm Attachment: Site Plan *Provided.that the footprint of the building is located in: the diagonal placement as indica & :ed on the site plan submitted j as part of this application.' 1 T1. ; ITEM G(1) pct. 0 0 j. L_1 kAz AY 11 roubdzT ...r y.- {.1, �.. -.. i•��`. yr .� t�•LVYaLt .: �. ,J.:y ?6VAL Flo. 79 -12 A P MMV, DeVIATION ND. X9-11 r �kv. /r..h .rlr:�rr. r;(•liir 'tz•i�j,Z, :.zr }•Y.'...,•._,.. JI ' t 'if r:� II \l • L! � r.1 To: Planning Coumaission From: Jack Lam;'Director'of Community Development Subject: ZONE CHANGE N0. 79-07 - BAEMAKIAN&OLFF - Request to change the zone from R -3 to C-2 on property located on the northwest corner of Baseline and Etivanda Avenue The proposed zone change is within the Alternative Area of the General Plan. Became the Planning commission and City Council to this date have not made a decision on ray,of. the three alternativesp the applicant has requested that his item,he continued until such time when an Alter- native has been chosen. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Zone Change No. 79 -05 be continued until such time as an Alternative has been designated by the Planning Commission and City Council. Re ectfully submitted. JACK LAM. Director of Community Development JL:BNH:nm r 4e Kt� . Tint i; CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 11, 1979 T0: Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 79 -01B - William Lockhart - A request to change from the present designation of low density residential (2 - 5 dwelling units per acre) to minimum impact industrial for the property located on the northeast corner of Peron Boulevard and Archibald Avenue. ABSTRACT: The report discusses the items to be considered in reviewing this par- ticular request, i.e., compatibility of land use, the multiplier effect and existing man -made boundaries. After careful consideration of the facts surrounding the request, staff is recommending denial of the request DISCUSSION: The subject property is-more specifically located 500±' north of the A.T. b S.F. Railroad line; 500+' south of the elementary school and Ninth Street on the east side of Archibald Avenue and the north side of Feron Boulevard (see Exhibit 1). Immediately south of the request is an old residential subdivision. The homes are in a moderate state of repair and there are some vacant parcels. Adjacent to the request is a more recent subdivision of single family residential. The current general plan designations of the vicinity are delineated in Exhibit 2. As you can see, the request, if approved, would leave low density residential surrounding the property on three sides. ANALYSIS: There are three items that should be taken into consideration regarding this request: 1) compatibility of land use; 2) multiplier effect of an approval for this request; 3) existing man -made boundaries. 1) Compatibility of Land Use: When two divergent land uses are adjacent to one another, a good likelihood exists for conflict. This conflict can be minimized and sometimes eliminated through good site design. Such items as walls, landscaping, earthen berms, large setbacks and streets separating incompatible land uses can be used to minimize the conflict.. However, where possible land use conflicts should be avoided. 2) Multiplier effect: Should the Planning Commission consider this request favorably, there will probably be additional requests along Archibald Avenue T, and other major streets with similar situations to change their land use. ,,. A demarcation must be made and adhered to in order to preserve the integrity of the industrial area and protect the residential areas existing and master. planned. - �'``' ITEM twill r: 3) Existing Man -made Barriers: In order to' provide a good separation between Incompatible land uses, barriers are generally chosen. In this particular �? case there is a mau -made barrier - -.the A.T. & S.F. Railroad. The railroad acts as a barrier to the intrusion of industrial. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: We have reviewed the Initial Study and feel that significant environmental effects could exist should the request be approved and therefore do not recommend issuance of a Negative Declaration and that an EIR be required. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended, that the Planning Commission deny General Plan Amendmgnt No. 79 -01B. 1 A l Jack Lam, Director of Community Development JL:BKH:cc Attachments: Exhibit 1 and 2 Initial Study „ F , tied ark✓ L V,. i. i d�d:�!).....+. , .. , . 1c...r. Y. a . 'S`fL ... , •. _.,.. i•. _ .. h , M« GENERAL PLAN, A AMENDMENT NO. 7 79 -cif Jr < < '1j i} i , , • 4 � 1 ( �e�r -r � . NC: =tTH 1 6 E-S C, I GENERAL PLAN AMEN DMENT NO. 79 ~ 015 ' , EXMt!T , 2: �k xh i..�. I .:d ..t:; r. .. .. •�. ..J. �,•+.. ..; �. +v - t .. +. r, %•y.vu`i1.� APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: (714) 624 -1671 Idilliam Lockhart 269 W. Bonita, Claremont, Calif. 91711 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY NAME, AD'JRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Same ae above Environmental Assessment-Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the Assessor Parcel No. 209 - 051 -01 project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the AND;: =' project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH 'PERMITS: three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. n. PROJECT TITLE: Light Industrial APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: (714) 624 -1671 Idilliam Lockhart 269 W. Bonita, Claremont, Calif. 91711 NAME, AD'JRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Same ae above LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.), ' North -East corner of Archibald & Feron Assessor Parcel No. 209 - 051 -01 _ LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGTONAL, STATE . - AND;: =' FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH 'PERMITS: N/A n. t PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Light I dustria ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOCTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 8.925 ac. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): SlightlY sloping site with some seasonal Bass Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series Of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? No ~v WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO �x 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? x 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise,or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5.- Remove any existing trees? How many? x 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: Now coned R -1 We propose 113ht Industrial use zoned M -1 IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the z:ext page. CERT17FICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and " information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand 'that' additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development.-. Review Committee. Date 4/30/79 Signature"E6, .` Title President 4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA 0 STAFF REPORT DATE: July 11, 1.979 T0: Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam. Director of Community Developmenc 0 SUP'ECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -01C - Jack Sylvester - A request for a change from the present designation of Mixed Use and Low Density Residential to all Mixed Use for 75± acres of land located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Highland Avenue. ABSTRACT: The report discusses the recent pant history of this item and the ramifications of this request. It is our opinion that the change to the General Plan in this case is relatively minor with the requirement of the CC & R's. Staff is recommending approval of the applicant's request. DISCUSSION: As the Planning Commission will recall, this property was a subject o'l discussion during the General Plan hearings last year. At that time the Planning Commission indicated that the low deur;ity residential land use designation was deep enough along Lemon Avenue to allow for one tier of lots. The applieput is reque.ting that the Planning Commission indicate his property as mixed use from Highland to Lemon Avenues with no indication of low density residential.. (See Exhibit 1). He has submittei C. C. 6 R's prohibiting vesicular access to Lemon if commercial uses are built under the mixed use designation. However, the C. C. b R's will allow access for multiple family residential. ANALYSIS: We have reviewed the applicant's request and have no problems with it at this time. However, we wish to inform the applica.it that should he choose to develop y' a multiple family project, the design must be made compet' -Sle with the existing sinV e family residential on Lemon Avenue snd further that the traffi.: generated by •s mnitipin family use must rot cause undue congestion on Lemon Avenue. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: We have reviewed the Initial Study and have made a field check of the site. It is our opinion there will not be any significant adverse environmental affects as a result of this proj.:ct and recommend the issuance of a Negative Declara- tion. RECOHHENDATION: It is recommended tart the Planning Commission recommend approval of General Plan Amendment No 79 -OIC to the City Council with the recordation of the C. C. & R' Res ectf y submitted, .• Jack Lam, I Wr4c tor of Community Development Y3 JL:EIQ1•cc ITEM "J" le 5 n` Attachments: Exhibit l - Initial Study 1' J HI 0 I r GEi'�t�A� PLoNN AN eouMS14T N.O. �ocarcor� M/�P _ No�Tq CITY FtF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I — PROJECT INMRMATION SHEET — To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the 0,welopwent Review Committee through the department where the project application.is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Env4ronmental Analysis staff will prepare Part 11 of the Initial Study. The Development %vmew Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting r.t which time the project is to be beard. The Committee will rake one of three determinations: 1) TIte project +ill have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an Anvironmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 31 An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: T- opos„d General Plan .Amendment APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Jack Sylvester 10717 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, Californis 90024 :MME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO I3E CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Associated Ei.¢ineers 316 East "E°- St. Ontario, California 91764 Mr. Frank Williams -(714) %T--! 818 LOr -ATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSL.i;'OR PARCEL NO.) Between Highland Ave. and Lemon Ave. East of Haven Ave. _ Assessor's Parcel No, 201- 271 -53 LISP OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE :AND ` FEDEkAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY'ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: ,^ None n: ` if r�%:� ,: .. to PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: General Plan Amendment to hermit AP or Mixed Use zoLng for existing Property. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EYISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS1 IF ANY: Gruss Acrea a '19.8 DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NEr-FS^'ARY SHEETS): The property -is currently vacant and not in use. The plant life consists of weeds. grasses, abandoned grape vines, and trees used for wind breaks Wild life consists 'of ground squirrels, mice, rabbits, lizards and bird 'oyotes an d boucats traverse the site while foraging, Insect population is normal and in keeping, with adiacent brush areas: The land slopes uniformly from north to south and consists of alluvial ma`erials from Deer Canyon to the north. Is the project, x.>art of a larger project, one of a series' of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? 1. The project is not part of a larger Tprojecc. Ask: r'. seal 1 J WILL THIS PROJECT: %h is YES 190 X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create 4 substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.); X 4. Create changes is the existing zoning or general plan designations? X _ 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? X 6, Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials sunh as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: _Change would permit Mixed Use of Land. IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached ex;;ibits present the data.and g, information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of 'ny knowledge and belief. I further understand that r.. additional information may be required-to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the .Development Review Committee. Date Signature Title �l •ice CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 11, 1979 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN ANF.NDMEHT 79 -OID - City of Rancho Cucamonga - Request for a change from the present designation of low density residential to medium density residential for the property located on the.south side of Foothill Boulevard between Baker and the Cucamonga ti'hannel. DISCUSSION: A portion of this request was a recent subject of a zone change before the Planning Commission from R -1 to R -3. A map (Exhibit 1) is attached indicating the zone change and the land use. A great portion of the property is developed now as a mobilehome park and we have a request from the property owner of the mobilehome park to expand the park. The remaining property is primarily vacant. We feel that the most appropriate land use for that area south of Foothill, north of Arrow and east of Baker to the Cucamonga wash should be medium deuaity residential. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the Initial Study and done a field check of the property. It is our opinion that the proposed request will not adversely effect the environment and recommend issuanco of t- Negative Declaration. PICOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of General P Am d t 79 -01D I Ci C it n en men to tie ty ounc Resp fLal y submitted, Jack Lam, Director of Community Development JL:BKH:cc Attachments: Exhibit 1 - Site Plan "s Initial Study Y Y. W ITEM 1K!' �r. r r - >. .q0... . ^.N2 PTV we -rtm I U UWECT OENER,L P! NN AMeU'DikAeKT NO, "19 -01 J �\ , LOCAMON MAP a 1 1 a A' t:—:XH I P>lT I � x{ 1, 7�r.ly( ( i trr t 6 _l.i�(I�IC�Ja.� .rra�.!:Aj:1yF..�1y,�pC.,. fiy ..i. ft`�•i�if��.r.A F1Flu ♦.l -. c..K...�_ .. A �•{ .. � (�1 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO DE CONTACTED,nI� CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: -1 yy r WAil- lie CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA , INITIAL STUDY PART I -- PROJECT INFORKIATION. SHEET •- To be completed by applicant ASSESSOR PARC • ] 437A Environmental Assessment ..Review Fee: $70.00 •� For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made, upon receipt of this application., the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare REGIONAL, STATE Part II of the Initial Study. T;:e Development Review ' Committee will meet and take action no later than ten SUCH PERMITS: (10) days before the public meeting at which time the Project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an Ar.•ironmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied A'( by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project, PROJECT TITLE: (7 ue cra l 4-i APPLICA2'T'S NAME TELEPHONE: @ 1 1 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO DE CONTACTED,nI� CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: -1 yy r WAil- �!K�- , I/Al CATION OF P OJECT. STREEyTT/ ADD ESS AND •' - I �v �1 ASSESSOR PARC • ] 437A •� LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL, AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: A'( @ 1 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DES RIFT OV OF PRO CTi f1 ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: DESCRIBE THE - ENVIRONPIENTAL SETTING OP' THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANI CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY . EXISTING STRUCTURES A19D THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series, of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole hVe significant environmental impact? AM E 4y '] WILh TIITS PROJECT: YES NO 1. Create a substantial change in ground % contours? 2. Create a substantial change in existing " noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)'.. 4. Create changes in the existing zoning on general plan designations. _T 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? 6. Create the need for use or disposal of 7 potentially hazardous materials such -as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: pKAJU I.�L i+_YZ�!►y IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the-form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished, above and in the attached exhibits present the data and - inform-.tion required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and info_mation presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evi..ulation can be made by the Devclopinent Review Committee. Date_ Signature I' Title. t " T_ iyf U r :1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA . STAFF'RFJ?ORT DATE: July 11, 1979 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 79 -01E - City of Rancho Cucamonga - A request fora change in the present designation of high density residential to low density residential for the prop.:rty located on the south aide of 19th Street between Archibald and Amethyst Avenues. ABSTRACT: As the Commission will recall,. this {tern came before you as a zonr change request and a director review for the development of 189 apartments. The Commission recommended approval of the zone change and forwarded it to the City Council. Further discussion and work was necessary on the director review and that has not been considered for approval to date. The City Council considered the zone change request and subsequently denied that request. The applicant appealed to the City Council for a rehearing of the zone change request which has been scheduled for July 18 of this year. Should the City Council approve the zone change request and the Planning Commission favorably consider General 'Plan Amendment 79 -01E, tais item would have to return to the Planning Commission for a change in the General Plan back to high densit; residential. Continuation of General Plan Amendment 79 -01E to the first meeting in September is recommended. DISCUSSION: The subject property is hounded on the west by single family residential and on the east by single family residential. To the south is an existing mobile - home park and subject property is vaitpsc. North of the subject property is master planned for high density residential and for mixed use. ANALYSIS: There are three courses action the Commission can pursue regarding this matter. One, they could act on the matter now to approve or de-y the request for change of land use: two, continue this item to the meeting of July 25 meeting of the Planning Commission in order receive the City Council's decision on the request for rehearing of the zone change; or three, continue this item to the first meeting in September of this year. RECOMMENDATION: In light of the many circumstances surrounding this request and the need for those pieces of information to be available to the Planning Commission for a decision on the General Plan Amendment, we suggest that the Commission cuntinue Genera Plan Amendment 79 -01E to the first meeting in September. Respec 1 a bmitted, Jack Lam, Director of Community Development ,� SL BKHicc ITEM "L" Attachment Site Plan Xnitial Study •5� f•� J -. v1 11 i I GE�lE .AL Pl.�h� AM r►aM�NT MO. 79-01 E LOCATION Mme' t . q NSt'1 �'Y it+11 [ 1♦ It r - � {F � �!•5._, k. .�_ ! ... .• � y . ._. '`.... ..;._1 J..rrA��' W ..1.}H... s: PART I -- PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET -- To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment ...Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted•to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of .this application, the Environmental Analysis staff *ill prepare part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative DL-slaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving.£urther information concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: j,,1Ui1D1 .1 YI AA&J?t1U/P1'; JQ• X) -Q1 J;j. _ APPLICANT'S NAMEd°ADDRESS, TE� EP-%�NJE,:,� l7:2084W , Sao �U�-f 7 —• NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: _ oiertx 1'E7Ct6 LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STA' FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: x -i ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF - EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: DESCRI13E THE •ENVTRONMENTAL SnTTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCUJDI14G INFOMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS. (TREES) , ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCEPTIC ASPECTS, T1S3:. OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY . EXISTIN� STRUCTURES AND THEIR (UjSE (ATTACH.NE,C.EASARY SHEETS) e AAt dell e_. eAIMq%.,__, a (v. : _.r_. r. ,..._,. Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series' Of cumulative actirns, which all.-,hough individually small, may as a whole ha,n significant environmental impact' N UX k.. WILL THIS PROJECT: YES -NO 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)'. 4. create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations?. T5: Remove any existing trees ?. How many? 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? b Explanation of any YES answers above: 1l1l'ff,�a,ye' P�a%�pT IMPORTANT: if the project involves the construction of residential units,•complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished' above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be.submitted ? before an adequate avaulation can be made by the Developrient; .`.4 Review Committee._ Date b'� "I Signature Titley;5s I9 f ;z CITY OF RANCHO r- IJCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 11, 1979 TO: Planning Commission c`RCM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development f SDBJECZ: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT No. 79 -OIF - City of Rancho Cucamonga - Clarification of mixed use category more specifically designate what is allowable within the mixed use category. . ABSTRACT: In the recent past the Commission has had much concern with the allowable uses in the category of mixed use. We have clarified that when office use is pro- posed in the mixed use area that would include such uses as restaurants, fast food, bakeries, stationary, blueprint shops, donut shops, delicatessen, banks,, savings and loan, financial institutions. If the applicant chooses to develop multiple family, the range of density has been indicated from five units to thirty units per acre.. The Commission may wish to further clairfy the designation of density in the mixed use category when multiple family is chosen.. It would be our suggestion at th,s point in time that the Commission does not substantially change the meaning of the mixed use category but perhaps consider for the September General Plan amendments the elimination of the mixed use category and the introduction of an office professional category. This would remove: any misunderstanding as to the Commissions' intent for a particular area. It Is our belief that the mixed use category developed as an out growth of the San Bernardino County Code which allowed multiple family to be developed in the AP zone. RECObWhMATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission defer any action on changing the mixed use category until the September General Plan Amendment. Resp ct y ubmitted, Jack Lam, Director of " Community Development JL:BKH:cc Attachment: Initial Study z X43• z ITEM 1?M" 1 .1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment ..Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of.this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project, ni J PROJECT TITLE: (1VAAi.VZ l 0ovirl /bva'bldhA.k fi) -74 -Ail F NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO HE CONTACTED CONCERNING TIIIS PROJECT: Est fl.� -W and i LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) PQ /A - LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND; FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: I PROJECT :DESCRIPTION _ DESCRIPTTON OF PROJECT:, dl • i D14- a, h1rA ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND'-SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND 'PROPOSED BUILDINGS#.IF ANY: DESCRIBE THE•ENVIROMMENTAL SETTING or THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFOMINTION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY . EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SBEETS)�_.. Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series- of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole hav significant environmental impact? WILL THIS PROJECT: YES M Create a substantial change in ground co»tours? 1 2. Create a substantial change in existing j . noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage„ etc.)! 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? 5: Remove any existing trees ?. How many? 6. Create the need for use, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YE answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development Review Committee. ry!I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. STAFF REPORT Date: July 11, 1979 To: Planning Commission From: Jack Lem, Director of Community Development Subject: WAIVER OF CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR TRACT NO: 9458 - Request for waiver of condition for irrigation of public rights-of-way (parkways) within the tract boundary for the tract located at Baseline and Center ABSTRACT: Staff has conversed with the applicant regarding the Commissions' request for a tradeoff between not requiring the condition that "parkways on all lots and side yards for corner lots adjacent to a street shall be land- scaped and provided with a permanent operating irrigation system prior to the final clearance issued by the County Department of Building and Safety ", and adding more "hardscape" landscaping along Baseline. The applicant has informed us that the County had indicated the condition would be waived shortly after they had received approval of their tract. Therefore the cost of meeting that condition of approval was not included in the development of the tract and with the sales of homes. It is the applicants opinion there is no trade- off, that the condition should be waived, and was proceeding with the assumption that the condition was waived. As we see it the Commission still has three alternatives as outlined in the previous report: 1. Deny the request and require the developer to install permanent irrigation systems in the parkways within the interior tract. 2. Modify the condition to require the developer to install a PVC 314" schedule 40 pipe underneath the parkway for future connec- tion for an irrigation system that would be supplied by the owner of the house. 3. Waive the requirement for the installation of an irrigation system within the interior parkways of the tract. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission choose one of the alternatives outlined above. Respec t 1 bmitted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Development ITEM "Nn ,l�r. JL BKH:nm r Fy ` 1617 Weetcliff Or. Suite Z11, - Newport Beech. C.a. 92660 June 12, 1579 v h G J G li LA I Y OF Rl+NNO CUCP.MONGA Wslf IUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. J 4 1979 AM PM City of Rancho Cucamonga 'Z1$191101111L'11121MI516 98320 Baseline 3 Alta Lame, California Attentions Barry Hogan Res Tract 9458 Baseline at Center Dear Mr. Hogans -714- 645 -15173 Pursuant to our telephone conversation of June 12, we ara hereby requesting your waiver of the interior streets parkway landscaping requirements imposed by the county approximately two years ago. The landscaping requirements then imposed by the county an tracts being processed were subsequently eliminated, however, other than a verbal "don't worry," this writer received no written confirmation, as our Tract folders were in boxes going to the city, etc, etc. Our landscape bond renewal on this tract occurs June 22, 1979, and since it appears that we cannot get an the planning commission agenda prior to the 28th o' June, we are hereby requesting that you allow release of the landscape bond, and in return, we will post, a cash bond pending our hearing. A letter to that effect will allow the bond release. It should be further noticed that the parkway along Baseline Street has been fully sprinklered and landscaped. Very truly yours, H & S DEVELOPMENT CO. Peter R. Hubinger General Partner PRHsjh I .. ., 14 r` � :.•� • .rte' � .f •' • :' •• '� �• •r S "•} !t • ;�.hr SSim&r Zoe f'T INttr, .�o TRACT NO. 9458 IN THE UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY OF I, COUNTY- OF SAN BERNARDNO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA' 9f.wr A SUeOrvsroN JJ A roC]rO�,N.,.Of Le7 P Si[>•!O l�:! vKy'1 � � s �. r • qq�L••��••a¢ rL> .0POf %I � C TYIWMa ... PaG[ !, 4lCOttMS Pr 4W dtCV•r i__ 1. _,�,1 n • J. R k4.0.0 nr•• . ��- -•- -�• - rn uhf. tfa.Ptw rrf sn ii::.:: •f .. r ...... (� ... no-•. rrer (iv o.c. nv_+rtva . ru • aayrvl.+r✓.f•es � , w•.• :a • w .: I•yxM 'p r M16 NO•MY,.q tYM1r I.ei.'i %ia�. "'� : ::�i ». w•rerr•' Yl /� AP }•N'er've Zi /.,Y ✓(�P raJil •� �_,_ _ _{ .• __ i�•.r tel: - >T „W ,Ff.,��.�_....� 4- +e•R ll•• _ .�r�� rte_ • � ifr •• • �I fnrr :u II I ” B/15E L / /JE � "r•1'• --. !� rr•ew•.w nww•aw Y �• r.. rwu.n �:. 7I `'• ..PeN JJ U• ♦LV_Ir' rf- rwf,pavr CyTpp L I . f•••o Iu 1 u' •P 0 4 fP rrY r •i - Pvaw 1\ 1 Yi r • rf}� Y d1 Y �' � , r ' r i t 4f.�i '°. e o v • j ) •. I I �.^ ,i v f r.�, I• ,� R JlrexR i -f.. .. 9._. ✓rJ'('_r'rLtY� Mt JL• _. -` '�� P •• rl +'t � X I is •Y+.::..�•'`1 ir,'ii:�+ ri,L�'-ui j.;: M.� ril }jr , .c Lj �I f'� ' -I I •' .:f ;T ZG !I� ZS f VPr 2A'rr• e• 11h ,• YJo .. .f .O ^ . ,y : Z I `, tr'! i ` Y , Y• i• t� 1'r. �• _I � � l °• ?l •° Iry Sk 3 •eI : ;':�. ; un o n f.7 t: •� S '. �'.' � o r [ ri77;, Li $9 � w •nw. w ! e7u 11 a w w •3 1'.0 31 ^ n Ii L ft :a t• F • .rrs I so. • It ..F• I I• ;}r %ti=:t. ,..�,i` j /. t 2z >ex !P rra.fr 'o �y' !. , ; io. f N ~ 3 •E •�ifi). r }a.i .yam - d, rrt12 J +k ' }L [ — M�••4 _ f • kT n 'n �1 ,I . -% IVY I Ill- 14 � {.• :-.•• • a '7 i a 7 f' °o rrN df - h •.,.sYr fi ,rnv' � � I.... I' 1� X14 ••• i1 %••wu y a. 44z \..� V. rv. Hj•�L• 1• •i•r•: S`jN.N 1 '1tj_;'� tt {��•i .It gp �'- .r ^r�..er•.• `ti= >� `Lt) /Jt_ L., tit, �.. 1 to —zw cy r I.,J•Ir'.•.. rJn ♦n u/ '.+� Mr.� S a'•LfnfnA '}i 1 � V ; M •^1f ++ i i I.10 •� '_ 1B ;1 ,`l Ni1r`>; et �';Li= 17 r rf'Ay + �5 k ? � I'll. ./i er •r' axw.' •ary • ..• • a rreJ•r r'rs'w rq,>.' jkYI .' Y P t rrJP /fry f 011 f• .� itI PJ ILiP at1 -. ��•. - • '. � a :: .. Np'>2?7 Iirl,f flr/r•calP PU.m)f -•t ! S Sje�'`/ rJYAI, L r21. � �.�i I 1 1 '✓'acv. • /I. rf K.IfrS /+J- N..Y•M �!•i1 '. A5'' 1 rr'.rfN /w�f .yI /C • I /1 rYLrr f r 1 'i) j [M ffm iUil$ Lr�iH%'tTt9 tpairftfrT irf,yr if dPrlP �� 1(. ifn: ftr),ef tfeir, trt u>o etrrrifw v /s.r•r„ . i resin t ce.t rtfr `. cx v. •., r_� .. .:1 .. },: ... .. •: '{;� erg: ' }' b DATE: TO: FROM: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT July 11, 1979 Planning Commission Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE CHANGE REGARDING KEEPING OF PICMY GOATS ABSTRACT: Attached please find a letter from the Hunton family requesting that the Planning Commission consider the amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow the keeping of pigmy goats on R -1 lots 20,000 square feet or greater. Additionally, the Hunton's have included a letter from their veterinarian and a petition from the neighborhood in favor of the Hunton's keeping the goats. The. reason this request has c=e,befora the Planning Commission is by complaint. Upon investigation by the City's Community Code Representative the Hunton's were requested to comply with City ordinance by removal of the goats from this property. Currently code does not allow the keeping of goats on lots less than 20,000 square feet. Should the Commission wish to consider an.amendment to the Zoning Ordinance for the keeping of pigmy goats on lots 20,000 or greater, then staff should be directed to prepare such an ordinance and.schedule it for public hearings. If the Planning Commission does not desire to consider a change in the Zoning Ordinance, then this item will be referred back to our Community Code Representative for completion of action on the zoning.complaint. All action regarding the zoni.ng.complaints for the keeping of goats have been held in abeyance until this request has been acted upon. Respectfully Submitted, Jack Lam, Director of Community Development JL: BKII: cc Attachments: Hunton Letter of Request . AiSri1, 29. � 9'7 Dear Sir: F This letter is a request to have the zoning ordinance for goats changed x•,?ithin Rancho Cucamonga. We live on a 20,000 sq. £t, lot and are only allowed to keep two horses. I have raised Pigmy Goats for the past three years. The goats are much cleaner than horses, and there is virtually no odor to a female or a wither goat. We feel that the zoning requirements for goats is very unfair and should he charged; in fact, they should be the same as compared to tl•ie zoning ordinance for dogs. The goats far surpass doss as to cleanliness and noise. Most people'who buy goats are buying a pct. Goats will :calk on a leash, ri+Jc in cars, and can even be house broken. A goat's size, in com- parison with a horse, is even a bigger reason to have the ordinance changed. Our neighbors have no objection to the floats and have ex pressed their opinions on the attttclied petition. I am also enclosing fo a letter from my vet. . It is our sincere hope that you will consider this request for an ordinance change to all-cm us to keep these goats as our pets. Thank you for your consideration. CIT Y OF ?rii;Cf:fl CLI A[r^oiyGrl COMity'UNITY GEV`_LOP;.1EHi DEP(. 19/79 AF.1 P11 71 A100hUil12130151C i S lv_ /1 A . -'a a u�7 CENTRAL VETERINARY HOSPITAL ` EQUINE & SMALL ANIMAL MEDICINE 281 NO. CENTRAL AVENUE UPLAND, CALIFORNIA 91786 "�. • (714) 991.2855 DON M. SCHNESERG£R, D.V.M. ROBERT]. SCHECHTER. D VAL, PHD ; May 29t 19 79 To Whom It May Concern: I have been taking care of Mrs. Huntonts animals for aproxi.mately 3 years. They show no overt signs. of clinical dieeasev and their pens are sanitary. Mrs. Hunton.has maintained regular innoculations for her goats and treats any health problems promptly. Sincerely, rw� .Don Schnebnrgex�D.Y.',•i. D145 :1,b i S ..1J W 5 1 't •:tF Y f J rhl'rk fci.r •Sc: ;�.v, S','. .t 14l �'� _. �.�r `,�.1'!. .�F . . �` ., r! i •��, c, i µ 1% •.0 u.n UL1471UpgU .RESIPF:A'CE AT 5327 CAROL LI \J 11. or TIIF_ COMPr AGAINST , y ••,j .HINT AV I LOMA •• •• WHAT [JF. CONS IDCR 7gA PIcp AND DEING AWARE "• .,.... AND CON PAIR GOATS WOULD LIKE TO or 7'(IG critr IMSTANcl: LOVED O D 711E OF THE ANIMALS 'R COMPLAINT. WE 1(AVE pD -CE OUR OPINION TO PRESENTAND 711E THE ARE yXpT CLEAN T:iEY A RE VERY ED A(E CI-OR AN ICS TO 111E lNNTONSi U3 AS NEIGHB AND ORDERLY• CARED I1pR AND tiRS AND WE {VOULb LI.ICE 10 PIGMY GOATS SIGHED: 'D ADD OUR SUpFORT NOT AbDRES - ` •�+ S ' �v . y�� � � •���Y•.YY•... I � A r m 5;CL17 P. op -Q6 G - v ova.. 31 Lj If 12L*uQiw 57- /J -L?A- 1J4AuGl4LF-►h /kJ ED ILE 13 LE- 4t- tU4e:h1+1 $2.39 GJI�IrCC/Fw�ST i}ctn CLh.�- ` 01-L w i.� ca C " -,LOA XL it A iLWV' ti o tip: L �L CJ-411SLLIL .144 7w h i I -Oft >>A I ry It ti o tip: a -••a • "e nl+ /Y79 a jF•LC.•rc / . > n d ,c .r `• • vas, eL/E�:e/ .G1�. G� QltcL4•> ..il.zelPtl.ZiQ7-jp, -,P 7Ct =s-t . rx C- �LC.•f["�.'�d•.t� fti.1/�;[.r f �•C..+�'...tY. s- C{/- C.[tlri. � y ' �G�• �G2'tnc..• �h: F tr.�', �'��, C��r�cf Irv. rte. Y (fir. 14, A A: j*41 V'I'm % 61; 'bl 'tb It it . 411, tot 11S�