HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979/10/10 - Agenda Packet.�1
� : I
le
111 I
1111 rt 111 i 11 tt 1..1
141 I.
1 Ii
w
r
CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AOENDA
Nednooday, October 10, 19799 7100 p.m.
Carnelian Elementary School Multipurpose Room
7105 Carnahan, Rancho Cucamonga, Ca.
I. Pledge of Allegiance
I1. Roll Call
Comminsioner Dahl X
Conmissionor Garcia X
Commissioner Jones X
ACTION III. Approval of Minutes
Approved 5-0 August 22, 1979
Approved 5 -0 September 269 1979
IV. Announcements
V. Consent Calendar
Commianioner Rempol. X
Commissioner Tolrrtoy X
VI. Public Hearings
A. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 79-0311
Continua to
10 /24 /79 CITY OF RANCHO MAMMA - Definition of Alternativo Areas -
5 -0 Request to amend the Gcnoral Plan in the vicinity of Haven
t, and Foothill for ± 3,000 acres to clarify the intention of
- the al*_ernativea as prenently listed on the General Plan.
iK
D. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -03C -
^.ontinue to 10/24/79 ARNOLD ANDERSON - A request for a change from the prosont des
fLr review and clari- nation of high density residential to commercial for property
ficetion 5 -0 located on the northwest corner of Turner and Arrow.
' C.
NEGATIVE, DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -03F -
Continue to 10/24/79
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Clarification of Commercial A;`.ter-
-for ravie:+ and clari-
natives to clarify the meaning of commercial centers In all
fication 5 -0
areas designated as commercial on the Interim General Plan
map.
" Recommended Adoption
of Administrative- D.
NEGATIVE DECLARATION nND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -03B -
Professional General Plan
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Clarification of Mixed Use - To .
designation -
more specifically designated what is allowable within the
Land Use designations
Mixed Use Category.
scheduled for 10,24/79 mtg.
5 -0 Approved E.
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -03D -
`;;
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAfONGA - A change from the. present designalin .
5 -0 Approved
lion of Low Density Residential to Medium Density. Residentia1L.
for property bounded by Red Hill Country Club Drive, Tapia
4'
Via, Rancheria Drive and San Bernardino Road.
'iL
���
))1 '
.. - •,��
11.
P1AnninH �- mission Agenda
October 1.0, 1979
Pago 2
(Dahl left meeting at 9100 p.m. due to illneso)
Deny Amendment - I P.
Retain existing general
plan designation of Low
Density Residential
4 -0 -1 (Dahl absent)
0.
Approve
4 -0 -1 (Dahl absent)
N0. 79430 -
.w.na��- 1YA.IYpV YL�;�u9VCRiA - A mango from the praeanC Oa gna-
tion of Low Density Rusidential to Medium Density Residential
for prroperty located between Hallman and Amethyst fronting
on LnVine, Lomita and LaGrande Streets.
AMENDMENT N0. 79 -On -
■u ..,u•Y�+.._.Y�,1,nvcti +n - A cnango from -tTia prasoc es gc -
tion of Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential
for property beginning at a point 660' want of Haven on the
north side of Baseline and extending approximately 670' along
Baseline and extending north to the Pacific Electric Railroad
right -of -way covering approximately 20.6 ncrca of land.
VII. Old Business
VIII. New DuaLiess
Approved nursery no
a permitted use within
the C-1 zone
4 -0 -1 (Dahl absent)
{{. ZONING DETERMINATION NO. 79 -03 - d {ONE - To determine
whether or not a nursery is a per ttod use within the
C -1 zone.
IX. Council Referral
X. Director's Reports
Denied and directed I. DIRECTOR REVIEW N0. 79 -26 - LONGLEY - Request for
applicant to cease 6 desist phasing of conditioius.
operation immediately
4 -0 -1 (Dahl absent) J. GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS REPORT (Oral)
report XI, Public Comment - Anyone wishing to comment on any items not
P listed on the Agenda may do no at this. time.
XII. Commission comment
XIII. Upcoming Agenda for October 24, 19791
1. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 79 -05 - Planned Commrnity
Douolopmento
2. Site Approval No. 79 -18 - Boulevard Development
3. Site Approval No. 79 -17 - Salter
4. Parcel Map No. 4773 - Kortepeter
XIV. Adjournment - The Planning Commission has adopted Administra-
tive regulations that set an 11;00 p.m. adjournment time.. If
items go beyond that time, it shall be heard only with the con-
sent of the Commission.
9
I'
CITY OF RANCHO CUC.AMONOA
PLANNING 00ruiISSION
AGENDA
Wednesday, October 10, 1979, 7fOO p.m.
Carnoiian Elomontary School Multipurpose Room
7105 Carnolian, Rancho Cucamonga, Ca-
I. Pledge of Allegiance
II. Roll Call
Comminsioner Dahl
Commissioner 0lrcia
Commissioner Jones
III. Approval of Minutes
August 22, 1979
September 26, 1979
IV. Announcements
Colmnissi.oner Rempal,
Commissioner Tolatoy.
Consent Calendar
V Pub ? LC Hearings . s
NEGAIZIE DECLARATION AND RA
PLAN ENDMENT N0. 79 -r)7N
— \CITY OF 11t:*1CR0 000AMONGA ofinition of Alternativa Areas -
equost to 4140nd tho G enoral Pion in the vicinity of Haven
and Foothill for _ 3,000 acres to clarify the intention of
the alternatives as p ;ftsently listed on the Genernl Plan.'
B.
C.
C._
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENt ^.' PLAN AMENDMENT V6. 79 -WC -�
ARNOLD ANDERSON - A request for'„•.oange f_*m thr pray# ;i decig-
nation of high density residential'tu - ommorcial for Y�i,!nerty
located on the northwest corner of Turner ord Arrow..,,
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 79 -03F
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Clarification of Commercial Alter-
natives to clarify the meaning of• commercial centers in all
areas designated as commercial on the Interim General Plan
map.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Clarification of nixes uec - .�
morn spec.fically designated what is allowable within the
Mixed Use Cut egory.
I
E. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 79 -03D
CITY OF RANCFIO- CUCMIONGA - A change from the pros ent,deaigna
ties of Low Density Residential to Medium Density: Residential
t, for property bounded by Red Hill.Country Club Drive, Tapia
( Vin, Rancheria Drive and San Bernardino Road.
tf' 4 01 I I • ,
. _ �1•Il�d
1
r, f•
Colmnissi.oner Rempal,
Commissioner Tolatoy.
Consent Calendar
V Pub ? LC Hearings . s
NEGAIZIE DECLARATION AND RA
PLAN ENDMENT N0. 79 -r)7N
— \CITY OF 11t:*1CR0 000AMONGA ofinition of Alternativa Areas -
equost to 4140nd tho G enoral Pion in the vicinity of Haven
and Foothill for _ 3,000 acres to clarify the intention of
the alternatives as p ;ftsently listed on the Genernl Plan.'
B.
C.
C._
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENt ^.' PLAN AMENDMENT V6. 79 -WC -�
ARNOLD ANDERSON - A request for'„•.oange f_*m thr pray# ;i decig-
nation of high density residential'tu - ommorcial for Y�i,!nerty
located on the northwest corner of Turner ord Arrow..,,
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 79 -03F
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Clarification of Commercial Alter-
natives to clarify the meaning of• commercial centers in all
areas designated as commercial on the Interim General Plan
map.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Clarification of nixes uec - .�
morn spec.fically designated what is allowable within the
Mixed Use Cut egory.
I
E. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 79 -03D
CITY OF RANCFIO- CUCMIONGA - A change from the pros ent,deaigna
ties of Low Density Residential to Medium Density: Residential
t, for property bounded by Red Hill.Country Club Drive, Tapia
( Vin, Rancheria Drive and San Bernardino Road.
tf' 4 01 I I • ,
. _ �1•Il�d
;Y
1
t,.
;1
1,
r'
r,
'r
y..
;i
- 'Planning Commission Agenda
October 10p 1979
Page 2'
e V.
p, XWATIVLr DLCLARA'1. SAND OLN6RAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79-03G'-
gy A change from the proncnt c aeitpia-
tion of Low Density Residential t,) Modium Density Residential
for property located between Hellman and Amethyst fronting
on LaVino, Lomita and LaOrande Streets.
0, NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND O9NERAL PLAN AMANDMUNIT NO. 79 -031 -
ciTY OF RANCHO C - A Grange rom as pr`esen as g: -
tion of Low Density Renidentinl to Modium Density Residential
for property beginning at a point 660' west of Haven on the
north side of Baseline and extending approximately 670' along
Baseline and extending north to the Pacific Electric Railroad
right -of -way covering approximately 20.6 acres of land.
VII. Old Business
rIII�, �iew.pusineso
IfRt�k ZOt NO DRTWINATION NO. 79 -05 - NONE - To determine
�� Wlr ther or not a nursery is a permit d use within the
'961 zone.
r
IX. Council Referral
X. Director's Reports
( DIRECTOR REVIEW N0. 79 -26 - LONOLLX Request for.
// phasing„of conditions.
J. ORO'WTR MANACO1EJU STATUS REPORT (Oral)
XI. Public Comment - Anyone wishing to comment on any items not
listed on-the Agenda may do so at this time.
XII. Commission Comment
XIII. Upcoming Agenda for October 24, 1979:
1. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 79 -05 - Planned Connvanity
Dodelopments
2. Site Approval No. 79 -18 - Boulevard Development
3. Site Approval No. 19 -17 - Salter
4. Parcel Map'ilo. 4773 - Kortepeter
XIV. Adjournment - The Planning Commission has adopted Administra-
tive regulations that set an 11:00 p.m. adjournment'time. If
items go beyond that time, it shall be heard only with. the con -
ti'. sent of the Commission.
,
c�, 1
lyrF (r-0.' +.1 �',�f .: •1 1 ..:� 1 � _ _. fit' +
.t
7.W/ �' 1 F � • 1.'tjYj
31W rONVMILD
ti
1 r Ai.
:r'• it .r,.. � aft u�CsiiiS�d`��'
L�W �••��••wu...... lAV N V11 V17
61J)
y • � r
3hN II1M•II
�2 co 7M141rnnlauv •'
+ 4\ w
{ f I I 3Ar UIIVA7tIlA �
,y� w
n r
0 a
CITY OF IWIC110 CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 22, 1979
Regular Mooting
CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
was hold in the Carnelian Hlomuntary School Multipurpose Room, 7105 Carnalian,
Rancho Cucamonga, on Wednesday, Augunt 229 1979.
Meeting wan called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Rcmpol who led the meeting
with the Pledge of Allegiance.
* * * * *
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Laura Jones, Peter. Tolatoy, Merman Rempel
A13SENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jorge Garcia (excused)
ALSO PRESENT: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development; Barry Hogan, Senior
Planner; Michael Vairin, Associate Planner; Bill Hofman, Planning
Assistant; Lloyd 1}.%bba, City Engineer; Ted Hopson, City Attorney;
and Deanua Durkart, Cecretary
A * * * *
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Upon motion by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Rempel (Commissioner
Jones abstained due to absence.at that meeting) approved the minutes of the
Special Study Session of July 16, 1979 as submitted.
* * * * *
ANNOUNCEMENTS
1. Jack Lam reminded the Commission and public attending that on Wednesday,
August 29, 1979 at 7:00 p.m. at the Carnelian Elementary School Multipurpose
Room, a full presentation of the William C. Lyon Community Plan will be pre-
vented at a joint Planning Commission and City Council meeting. .
2. Jack Lam stated that the Planning Commission Draft Design Review Ordinance
has been distributed and copies are available in the City Planning Division
office. A future meeting date will be set.
3. Mr. Ken Willis of the BIA spoke regarding the signing of off -rite subdivision
directional signs. Mr. Willis stated that the bidding from three licensed
contractors took pince in City'llal.l and those present were himaelf, a member
of the Planning Division and a'member of City'Administration. The 'BIA Sign
Committee, Jim Smirl, Chairman, '-went over the bids and specifications and the
.tj.,• lowest bidder was chosen. Three'items have yet to be met: 1) agreement on
Cr;
® 0
the header panel and agree on a logo for the cityl 2) agreement for atruq-
turo locations; 3) all subdividers,tnaka orders for sign panels at opecifictl
locations. •
Tito actual erection of the structures is slated for 5 to 6 weeks but the
signs could possibly be up in three weeks. Tito cost to tite DIA for a uniform
off -site directional subdivision sign program is the same no tite coat of a
bootleg operation. Tito City has requested seven service panels listing City
services and other community services.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion was made by Commisnioner Jones, ouconded by Commissioner Tolstoy and
unanimously carried to dpprove the following Consent Calendar itomt
A. Tentative Tract Map Extension Request - Deer Crack
A * * h *
PUBLIC HEARINGS
An Ordinance and No atiw Declaration astnbllshintC a Crowtlt Mnrtngement Plan
Jack Lam stated that tite discussion of the Growth Management Plan was continued
from tite July 25, 1979 special meeting of the Planning Commission atd that the
discussion would continue from where it left off at that meeting. The Commission
had considered the Growth Management Resolution and the Residential Assessment
System up to Affordable Housing Section. A revised resolution was handed out to
the Commission reflecting the changes made at that July 25, 1979 meeting.
Jack Lam stated that tite Affordable Rousing Section as presented in the Growth
Management Plan is intended to be a cornerstone for the provision of affordable
housing in the City. Mr. Lam further stated that there are a multitude of affordable
housing issues that are not addressed in the Growth Management Plan which will be
discussed in the coming months when the Housing Element of the General Plan is con-
sidered.
Mr. Lam briefly summarized the revisions made at the July 25, 1979 meeting. The
placement of the mandatory criteria at the tail -end of the system instead of the
beginning was the major change. The mandatory criteria requires the developer to
obtain certification from the C.C.W.D. and the affected school districts. A
developer, however, can submit an application and proceed through the point rating
system. A condition of final approval requiring certification from the districts
would be placed on each application.
Mr. Lam presented the affordable housing section of the Growth Management Plan.
Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the audience.
Mr. Ken Willis of the B.I.A. stated that he was 100 % in support of the concept of
affordable housing as staff has presented it. lie stated, however, that the renter
occupied rates should be increased by 10% to reflect higher interest rates which
make it more difficult for davelopers to provide fair market value housing.
Planning Commission Minutes
-2-
August 22, 1979
I
Kay Matlock of Lewis demos, stated Clint she agrees with the D.I.A. on rent
nchuduies for detached housing; however, because Section 8 Housing allows a
7% interest rate, for builders, the proposed rent schedule for rental units
other than attached etould.ramain as proposed. 8110 also stated thmt utilities
should not bu deducted because they are figured with the rates to make up for
the high cost of financing.
Mr. Ed Webb, a property owner in Rancho Cucamonga, stated the following observa-
tions: 1) that t11e illve&tora have suffered undue hardship no a result of the
moratorium; 2) that mandatory criteria in an undue hardship on builders facing
them to work with the school districts to got a project approved. Ile fuels the
City lino given t11e school districts control of residential planning in the City
and that thin responsibility should be given to the Planning Commission and staff.
Commissioner Rempel atnted that our purpose of the Growth Mallagement Plan was
to encourage developers to work with the school districts to help eolvo the
impaction problems and that the City is not in a position to solve those problems.
Mr. Willis stated that the DIA is in favor of the mandatory criteria and by placing
them at t11e and of the system, the amount of development can be assessed to dater -
mine the amount of public facilities that will be required. Ile further stated
that the BIA and many developers in San Bernardino County have been working closely
with the school districts already to solve the problems of the school impaction.
Mr. Bill Lawrence stated that Section 8 provisions allow developers to apply for
10% to 20Z increased interest rates, thus, increasing the rental rates 10% would
be in keeping with Section B.
Mr. Nate Rosenberg, Inland Counties, stated that 16 points should be allocated
for Affordable Housing instead of 6 points. Owner occupied should receive 6
points and rental unite should receive a maximum of 10 points. Ile further stated
that the way the plan is now, there is very little incentive for developers to
provide rental unite. Ile stated the 3.5 factor sets affordable housing at $52,000
and that large segments of thle population cannot afford $52,000 homes. Ile recommends
that the affordable housing factor of 3.5 should be revised to 2.5 and that the City
should set aside a number of sower connections for affordable housing so that they
can not be refused.
Ralph Lewis of Lewis Homes stated that changing the factor tb 2.5 would f.,.ue
developers to build affordable homes which resemble barracks.
Mr. Lam then presented thle Master Planned Development Section. There are six
points maximum if the project is raster planned.
Commissioner Tolstoy aulted that shou'.dn't there be a definition ns to the size of
the development for a Master Planned Development in the Resolution.
Mr. Lam stated that 500 acres as a minimum is defined in the Zoning Ordinance.
Chairman Rempel stated Ile also felt the definition of a Master Planned Development
size should be in the Resolution.
Planning Commission Minutes
.Y.
-3-
August 22, 1979
Mr. Lain reviewed Orderly Dovolol,mnnt
Point limit and stated I, felt that the were ,
. they wen lot f oxplieions and threshold
Y self explanatory.
Cliairimn RemPkil 'nuked for any Other comments.
Jeff on 2do kn Energy ho [e1C the need of establishment of minimum
Section 2d, Enargy Conservation.
Points to
COmminaioner Tolstoy naked flow many Pointe for a minimum.
Jeff Scoranka nta ted that two Points should be the minimum,
Jeff Comnlauioner Tolstoy nuked a if file two point minimum applies to any pro•tl",,
coneorvaticnshoulddbehmnnItems A gad B would be at lease 2
an energy collector. Y and it would be up to the homoonrn�oen °rgy
Commissioner TOleto Purchase
y stated that he did list think that 2 Points is a hardship,
Ken Willis expressed the BIA's din
vation. The coat -we Measure with minimum Points for Energy
Placed for st orientation does not do well with design maximum cooling stimulate heating Connor of tfle roof g and tree 8n criteria. Windows
autonutic increasepto�thPre- plum ed for adoption to Planting will shade tfle sunny
conaeivation builoin �� the amount ofs$300.00 °and wheaters h will be an
energy conservation standards andnifatha�nces is that builders
also stated that if we have Y are not °mct now meet new
talk about affordable housingi�m points it willmincreaseldsr doesn't build. }le
the cost and we try to
Ralph Lewin stated that he endorsee Ken Willis. To set o minim
builder and to get more points.
W° would push the
Doug "one statdd that eevaral energy
the formation of an Energy Conservation Committee• been
may not be scheduled. llo suggested
develo
lmeutns�houldagetrlmore weight. for that
orderly
8
Jeff Sceranka stated that energy suffici.enC hems. should be
Passive and active design systems and then we me not have to
that energy is more important than fire constructed as such
at a convention, the U.S. Protection and establish P- ecedent
sufficient housing epartment of Ens Parke. He also stated that
8 ie available at the r9Y had a seminnr and stated that energy
Ken Willis disagreed that same coat.
effective. The disagreed any affordable housing Csn be the same cost as energy
On September pi parts is he far behind that the State Energy Committee is having a ttdn ° °d 2S, the BIA op Y
and technical application of solar energy, Southern California forniY seminar regarding passible techniques
Ralph Lewis stated that Lewis flomas is looking into solar energy.
Commissioner Tolstoy had a question referring to the stub -out regarding Plumbing and that a clarification needs to be madei
8 the pre-
Planning Commission Minutes
-4-
August 22, 1979
.
Ken Willis stated that the coot is not for the stub out but the labor involved
and they are totally in nupport of having it inntalled, but would it bit taken
advantnge of. Fred Paul paid $125 for a 3iolar water hinter and 2 out of 16 buyers
bought. slits Industries in Fontana built houses for 955,000 and none of the buyers
wanted a solar hosting device, that woo included as an option.
Comminsioner Tolstoy stated he felt the piping should be there.
Mr. Willis stated that lie has no complaint with the existing proposal. Each
additional rayuirement adds additional cost to the home and lit would 111.0 to
bring facto and figures to the next mooting.
Mr. Lewin stated that Southern California does not need double paned windows
and the pre - plumbing for solar heating in more complicated.
Chairman Itempal stated that cacti developer would be losing out by not being
master planned and will have to receive some of the other points since they
will have only 79.
Commissioner Dahl addressed staff on Fire Protection in regard to the point spread
for response time.
Mr. Lam stated that we have prepared a map that will be available at the next
meeting.
Dill llofman stated that Station O1 has ran thuir tests runs and Station 112 runs
have yet to be completed.
Upon Motion by Commissioner Toletoy, seconded by Commissioner Dahl, the public
hearing on the Growth Management Plan is continued to the Planning Commission meeting
of September 12, 1979.
AYES: DA1tL, JONES, TOLSTOY, RI -IPEL
NOES3 NONE
ABSENT: GARCIA
Chairman Rempal called a recess at 9305 p.m.
Meeting reconvened at 9:15 p.m.
* * * * *
REVISIONS TO SITE APPROVAL NO. 78 -03 - ED YOUNG,- The development of a nursery
day care facility to be located at 9816 Base Line within the R -1 zone.
Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends
that the Planning Commission deny the site plan revision based upon the concerns
outlined in the staff report and instruct the applicant to develop the site in
accordance with the approved site plan.
Commissioner Dahl excused himself on this item on the basis of a conflict in interest.
August 22, 1979
I::_)'•'' planning Commission Minutes -5- Au 8
4,:
Chairman Rempol naked for quenti no from the Coimnianion of the staff.
Commiosioner Tolntoy questioned the Ancreano in the number of, children ,.from
40 to 48.
Michael Vairin stated that the parking standard in for every five students,
one parking space in required and that with 36 students, one more apace would
have boon required so the limit was not at 40. tic also stated that the state
law requires one teacher for every 12 students. So there are 8 stalls for the
number of children and 3 for the number of teachers.
Chairman Rampol opened the public hoariug.
Mr. Young stated that there is no problem with thn parking since out of the
36 students, 10 students come from 5 families.
Comminnoner Tolotoy asked that if you would increase your students to 48 would
you have to add another teacher.
Mr. Young stated that the amount of personnel is not being increased as a result
of B more children.
Chairman Rempel asked about the landscnpo plan and that the site be developed
in accordance with Exhibit "D" stated in Resolution No. 78 -30.
Commissioner Tolotoy asked if he can comply with the original plan marked Exhibit
nDn.
Mr. Young stated that there is landscaping which is currently in existence.
Chairman Rempal stated that the parking wag allowed for 40 students, not 48.
Chairman Rempol asked about emergency situations and emergency vehicles accessing
the building.
Mr. Young stated that there is five feet of concrete between the hedge and parking
to act as a buffer. I went to Michael Vairin's office and spoke to him about the
parking in that fashion. It doesn't prohibit emergency situations.
Chairman Rempel stated that the site has not been developed in accordance with Exhibit
"D" stated in Item p7 of Resolution No.78 -30 and suggested that Mr. Young work with
staff.
Commissioner Tolotoy stated that he did not think the site was developed as in
Exhibit "D ".
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that this site Was adequate in size and chapa but it
was his opinion that with any additional children it would not be adequate size
and shape but in fact unsafe. My opinion is that :he site should stay as previously
designed.
Planning Commission Minutes -6- August 22, 1979
Mr. Young stated that tl:e DepartmanC of Social Services find" tl:e site safe and
adeyw:te. There line never beau turn than four pnre:tt:s on the nita nt one time.
Commissioner TolNtoy stated that when your student body changes it could
be a different case.
Mr. Young stated that it would be just no. good.
Mr. Lam stated that tl:e item before tl:e CommiaaieI.t tonight is to allow or not
allow Mr. Young additional pnrking spaces.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Tolstuy to deny
tl:e request for additional parking.
AYES: JONES, TCLSTOY, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: DAHL
APiSENT: GARCIA
PARCEL MAP NO. 4773 - KORTEPSTER - Request 'for clarification of conditions
imposed on subject parcel map located 050' east of Etiwanda Avenue and 930'
north of Summit Avenue
Lloyd Ilubbs, City Engineer, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends
that the Commission request the applicant to have street impr•"vement plane
prepared in conformance with the conditions of approval and that ti;+ -e plans
indicate right of way dedication requirc,mento and project cost estimates for
improvements and that the applicant deal closely with the EngineeriLly Division
in an attempt to obtali offers of dedication on each pat:el affected by the
improvements. Also financial arrangements be explored with each property owner
with tl:e goal of obtaining improvement: of 23rd Street.
Chairman Rempel asked for comments from tl:e applicant.
onrhisTbehalf. m,She4statedAtheu19741Supreme,Courtrcasefof MunsKvbCeStenman pnd
that the City ca a net force Mr. Kortopeter to (10 what he legally cannot do.
Mr. Hopson stated the conditions of Parcel Map were appropriate with Policy No-
79 -07.
Mrs. Tannenbaum stated that the questions of possibility or impossibility hne
been met and therefore we would like the Commission to direct us on what to do.
Commissioner Jones asked if the street has to be 26 feet wide of paving.
Mr. Hubbs stated yea, that is a minimum.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if this situation can be worked out?
Commission;: Daul stated that the item be referred back to staff and the Commission
be advised as to the progress.
August 22. 1979
Planning Commission Minutes -7-
0
Mr. Lain atated that the plans still have to be done.
Mra. Tanunbnum stated that the price to Bove the pinnn drawn. up in $1000 to
$2000.
A motion wan made by Commissioner Dahl and neconded by Commissioner Tolotoy to
continue this item to the September 26, 1979 nnating witti the intent of atnff
working with the applicant to reeolve the situntion.
AYES: DNS., JONES, TOLSTUY, REMPHL
NOES: NONE
ASSENT: CARCIA
* A A A A
Chairman Rempol called a recess at 10:30 p.m.
Meeting reconvened at 10:40 p.m.
A A A A A
TRACT NUMBER 9472 - BOULEVARD DEVELOPMENT - Request to waive a condition of
approval for Tract 9472 located on the north side of 19th Street west of liar-
moon Avenue.
Michael Vairin reviewed the staff report. Staff is recommending that the Cominis-
lion waive the condition of Tract 9472 which prohibits the construction of dwelling
units on Lot" B -11 and 26 -36 and replace the condition with the following condi-
tions:
1. That an awareness statement be incorporated into the white report
for the subdivision which would state that purchasers are buying
in a subdivision adjacent to an existing poultry ranch and because
of the proximity of that ranch, there may be associated nuisance
factors such as the. increase of flies, noise and odors. This suats-
ment would be required to be signed by the purchases of each unit within
the subdivision tract. This statement is required to be prepared by
the developer and submitted to the Planning Division for review and
approval prior to final inspection of- any of the units in the subdi-
vision.
2. That minimum 15 gallon trees be planted along the east side of the tem-
porary block wall along Mayberry Street which would be on the poultry
ranch property and would create a visual and phyaicrl buffering area.
Such trees shall be a minimum of 15 gallon size and shall be planted,
beginning 30 feet, from the property line along 19th Street and going
north, 15' on- centers to the existing eucalyptus windrow.
Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if this pertcins only to the lots in qu %stion.
Planning Commission Minutes -8- August 22, 1979
It,
Michael Vnirin ntated that it applies to the aatixe nubdivitiion,
Conuniuuioner Jones quoutioned the signed statement by ouch purchssor.
Mr, Hopson stated that it is a violation not to got n final signed receipt
and that the statement will be dolivsred to the people iu the oubdivioion.
j' Chairman Rempel asked for cormants from the audience-
Pat Kapp, Civil Engineer for Boulevard Davelopment stated he concurs with the
staff report and will answer any questions.
�. Chairman Rempel quentioned tl:e 15 gallon on 15 foot centers and folt that
?' trees of that size planted that far apart would not act no a buffer.
Commisuionor Tolntoy stated he line the name concern and felt that nomu type
of shr:l)bory should be planted between the trees.
A Motion was made by Commissioner Tolutoy and seconded by Cununienioner Dahl
that tl:e recommendation with the addition of the shrubbery and that the names
of tl:e plants be submitted for approval.
AYES: DAHL, JONES, TOLS'rOY, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: GARCIA
ZONING ORDINANCE DETERMINATION NO. 79 -04 - PETER rOPOpp EVANGELISTIC A5Soaxr1ON -
A request to develop an Evangelistic Center on 7 acres of land located on the
northeast corner of Ramona and 19th Streets
Barry llogan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends that
the Commission review three options and issues and direct staff to the action
deemed appropriate by the Commission.
Chairman Rempel asked for any comments from the audience.
Dale Lang, Barmakion Wolff nnd'Ausociates,otated that this in not typical church
related activities or facilities no used by the Popoff Outreach Association and
that they are looking for a determination an whether or not the use is permitted
in the R -1 zone.
peter Popoff stated that there would be a church on the premises along with other
church related activities.
Commissioner Tolatoy asked if the determination is just for a church.
Chairman Rempel asked if the community will attend the church services.
Peter Popoff stated that there will be a sanctuary and a congregation of 100 to
150 people.
planning Commission Minutes -9-
August 22, 1979
,
0 0
Commissioner Dohl stated thnt in his opinion Chin use in a church.
Comimminnionar Tolotoy utnUd that the nrlditional increase in ntAff to 40 people
in the R -1 zone that• it is going to be more than a church.
Clmirman Rampol atnted that it in thin devolopment's primary function tv reach
thu local people and for outreach beyond the community, the basic use is going
to be a type bf buninana that I think in approprinto for the, area.
Commissioner Tolutoy stated that anything a church dean In fine, but its primary
function in for outreach, other activities and mailing fuectionu don't belong
in the area.
Commissioner Jones ntated she doesn't ties a problem, the activities era church
related.
Commissionor Tolutoy stated that lie felt a church of this typo ahould be located
in an A -P, C -1 om: C -2 zeno and not an R -1 zone.
Mr. Lien stated that thin datermination could not a precedent for other requeatn
of thin type in the future.
After lengthy discussion, n motion wan made by Commissioner Jones and seconded
by Commissioner Dahl that the Commission find that the proposed use Ui similar
to the activities of a church.
AYES: DAIIL, JONES, RIMPEL
NOSS., TOLSTOY
ABSENT: GARCIA
Chairman Rempal stated that for the meeting to be continued a motion in necansary
since it Is past the 11:00 p.m. policy.
A motion was made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Jones to con-
tinue the meeting. Unanimously carried.
SC•LECTION OF SPECIFIC GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR SEPTEMBER MEETING
Jack Lam reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Rempel asked the Commission for questions of staff.
Commissioner Tol'stoy stated that the density factor on property located between
Hallman Avenue and Amethyst Street fronting on LaVine, Lomita and LaCrande Streets
needs clarification.
Chairman Remmpel asked for clarification on Item 3, to amend the northeast corner
of the intersection of South Grove and Eighth Street between the AT&SF railroad
tracks encompassing the Allure Dairy property from commercial to high denaity.
Planning Commission Minutes
-10-
August 22, 1979
0
h 11oilon was Lhov made by Cotmninaiuner Dahl, and eocundad by Commisuionor Jonas
dN folluwet
item 9: Ar„otvl that crea located between llellaian Avenue and Amothyst
Strcot fronting on Lavina, Lumtta .ind LaGrundo Streets from low dmteity
residential to medium density residential.
Putther investigation by staff on the following:
Item 3: Amend the northeast corner of the intereactlon of South Grove
and Eighth Street between the AT&SP railroad tracks encompassing the Allurn
Dairy property from commercial to high density residential.
Item G: Amend the southeast corner of Eighth Street and Archibald Avenue
near the willows School from low density residential to industrial.-
Item 5: Amend the northeast corner of lliahland Avenue and Archibald Avenue
from low denaity raoidential to medium or high density residential. The
lands are currently used for a chicken ranch.
AYES: DAHL, JONES, TOLSTOY, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: GARCIA
*fin +r
Upon motion by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Jones and unanimously
carried, it was voted to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting of August 22,
1979. Meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
;r
JACK LAM, Director of
Community Development
August 22, 1979
Planning commission Minutes -11-
it
0
CALL TO ORDER
CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONOA
PLANNING COMMIRSION MINUTES
September 260 1079
Regular Meeting
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamongu
was hold in tl►e Carnelian Elementary School Multipurpose Room, 7105 Carnalian,
Rancho Cucamonga, on Wedneaday, September 26} 1979.
Meeting was cnlled to order at 7105 p.m. by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting
with the Pledge of Allegiance.
RCLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Jorge Garcia, Laura Jones, Peter Tolatoy,
Herman Rempel
ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
ALSO PRESENT: Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; Michael Vairin, Associate Planner;
Dan H endrycks,, Associate Planner; Ted Hopson, City Attorney;
Paul Rougeau, Assistant Civil Engineer; and Nancy McAllister,
Secretary
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Upon motion by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Tolatoy and unani-
mously carried,' the minutes of August 8, 1979 were apptovrJ subj act to'the
following change:
Page 4, 6th paragraph, should read as follows: There being no
further comments from the audience, Acting Chairman Tolstay
closed the public hearing.
Upon motion by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Jones and unani-
mously carried, the minutes of September 12, 1979 were approved as submitted.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mr. Hogan requested that the following two items be added to the Agenda 1a►der
Director's Reports:
Greenrock Nursery Statue, Report
Growth Management Plan Status Report
e
CONSENT CALENDAR
Commissioner Dahl stated ha had n question concerning Item "As of the Consent
Calendar. Ile ankud if all street dudications have beau mot• along Center Avenue.
Mr. Paul Hougonu, Assistant Civil Engineer, stated additional street dedications
will be required sit Canter Avanuo and an interior street may also be required.
The applicant will bu required to submit n Parcel Map on subject property.
A motion was made by Cummianionur Jones, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and
unanimously carried to approve the following consent calendar item:
a. Negative Declaration for Director. Review No. 79 -55 - Data Design Lob.
b. Negative Declarntion for Parcel Map No. 5515 - Kati Chase
c. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 4511 - Sebastian Filpi
PUBLIC HEARINGS
-- -- vm.u.nu •...u. owl rr.uclna1 IvV. 17 -UJU AKNULU ANUERSUN
A request for a change from the present designation of high density residential
to commercial for property located on tine northwest corner of Turner and Arrow.
Don Handrycka, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report in detail. Staff
recommends that the Commisaion deny General Plan Amendment No. 79 -03C for the
following reasons: 1) Two alternative commercial areas are located within
1/2 mila from the proposed project site; 7) That tine proposed Service Commercial
activity is not compatible with the medium and heavy density residential land
uses adjacent to tine site.
Comminnioner Jones stated there are two alternate shopping centers mentioned in
the staff report. It would seem much more logical to have n commercial shopping
center in the area where the greater density is located.
Mr. Hogan stated staff has not encouraged small corners such as this to develop
as commercial. We have encouraged a consolidation of commercial uses in neigh-
borhood centers that service greater arena and don't proliferate commercial
throughout the city in many smaller centers. It is staffs' opinion the proximity
of service commercial along Foothill should service this area for the present.
high density residential, in our opinion, is more proper than commercial for
this site. Staff would caution the Commission should they consider approval of
this request, that it might start other requests in other arena of the city and
tend to diminish the desire for shopping centers.
Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing.
Mr. Arnold Anderson, applicant, stated their thought for the center is one which
would take care of the needs of the people in the apartments adjacent to the
property. There is a need for a small market and there is a need for a car
wash as the residents in tine apartments are discouraged from washing their cars
in the parking lots of the apartment complex. There is a large number of people
within a quarter mile of this particular corner and commercial development would
satisfy the need of tine people in the area and would cut down on driving time
required to go to other areas. lie asked that the Commission favorably consider
this request as they are anxious to get started.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- September 26, 1979
ConunionIntier Jone,v ankeo Mr. Andarnon if the coin operated car wash wore cote-
nidered, would it be possible to,denign it, in such it way that it not be visible'
from the street.
Mr. Anderson stated it would be desirable from n commercial standpoint to have
the car wash visible; however, it could be situated to where it would be more
concealed from visit of the street.
Chairman Rempal stated the Commission does not want to got into the design of
the center at thin time an it would be considered by the Conminnion at a later
date for review of the site plan if the General Plan Amendment should be approved.
Mr. Anderson stated he might point out On nearest coin operated car wash is located
hear Grove and Foothill Blvd. 11terefors, there in a definite need for this type
of operation in this location.
Mr. Dan August stated he is representing Mr. Dan Sonleneno who owns property
immediately south of the proposed amendment on Arrow and Turner. lie stated
Mr. Sonleseno line owned his market in this location for 51 years and Ilan always
bean zoned comnarcial. It is not likely that lie would want to change the commer-
cial zoning of his property in the future. lie would like to in tits future put
in for a zone change on the parcel to C -1. It is his opinion that the corner
is in keeping with commercial and there would be no reason to change it now.
There being no furth-ar comments from the audience, Chairman Rompel closed the
public hearing.
Commiusioner Jones aske� if this amendment required that the residents in the
area be notified.
Mr. Hogan stated in regard to this request, the adjacent property owners were
notified by certified moil. lie noted, however, that the apartment dwellers
were not notified but the owner of the property was notified.
Commissionor Tolatoy stated he has reviewed this request very carefully as he
feels the decision on this item is going to signal other people to ask for the
very unme thing. It is his opinion there should be a shopping facility somewhere
in this vicinity. There is a center designated on the general plan at Archibald,
a piece of property at the southeast corner of Archibald a%Nd Arrow already has a
fast food restaurant, and property on the northeast corner lies a gas station
developed on it. On Haven where the other designation is located, there is a
problem and he is not sure he wants a commercial center on haven at this location.
Mr. Anderson stated the commercial center ought to be where the people are and
certainly it would be a good idea if there was a center closer to the residents.
However, he also has a problem with this particular location an it is small and
it is his opinion a larger center should be developed. Staff in their findings
for denial of this request should have added that the property is really too
small a piece for the use intended. At this point he would like to vote against
this and ask the staff to study this area to find out where a larger censor might
go in to serve the whole area better. He objects to small centers as they cause
problems.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- September 26, 1979
�t
Dan Ilandryeka, Associate Planner, reviewed tiro staff report. Staff recommends
adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 79 -93E changing the present designntioo
of medium dnnaity rosidential to low density residential 'for property'locatad
on the northwest corner of Baseline and linen. ila indicated a single family
residential subdivision tins been developed bn nubject property; therefore, th,ls
amendment in merely ndminintrativo.
Chairman Rempol opened the public honring.
Theru being no conanosto from t1:e audionce, Chairman Rompal closed the public
hearing.
A motion was made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Tolstay
to approve General Plan Amendment No. 79 -03E as submitted.
AYES DA11L, TOLSTOY, GARCIA* JONES, RI2IPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENTt NONE
NECA9'IVE DECLARATION GEN ERAL PLAN Mtt vurtunr nu. iy -wu - .•�+.
CUCAMONGA - DefinitioAND n of Alternative Areas - Request to amend the General Plan
in tite vicinity of Haven and Foothill for ± 3,000 acres to clarify the intention
of the alternatives as presently listed on tho General Plan.
harry llggan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recoomends that
the Planning Commission rocnmmend approval of General Plan Amendment No. 79 -0311.
Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff.
There being none, Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing.
Mr. Doug lione, 7333 Hellman Avenue, stated all the property in the area of the
v._ alternatives is not owned by the Planned Communities being proposed. Ila owns
property in this area and one of the possibilities they have been studying is a
mobilchome park in the area.
Mr. Rogan stated a mobilebome park development could occur in a low density area
as long an it meets the density of 2 to 5 units per acre. The alternatives have
no status at this time and when development comes in for that area, the general
r.: plan will have to be defined as to what the area is going to be. If the Commis-
sion wishes to entertain a change for the property along Highland Avenue, he would
suggest that the Comnission continue this amendment for further review. The alter -
native area will come to the Commission once the community plans are approved. The
entire alternative site will vary depending an development plans that the Commis-
sion and Council approve.
Mr. Doug Gorgen stated in reference to the density for a mobilehome park, one can
not be developed in a low density residential area but require between 6 and 12
units per acre for any .type of economic utility. lie requested that the Commission
leave the flexibility in this area so that a mobilehome use can be considered in
the area.
-5- September 26, 1979
Planning Commission Minutes
r
Chairman Rempol stated in reviewing tho'commarcial sites shown on the gonarnl
plan, one of thpm in adjacent to the industrial area which ha doer not fall is
an appropriate area to have a neighborhood center. The other site, avan „at the
point of the general plan hearings wan already half developed, one - fourth would
not land itself to contnarcial center and the other one - fourth lion gone into a
business industrial complex. An far as developing a total complete markut with
all kinds of stores in thin araa, it is his opinion thin would alsu have ii:s pro -
blems due to the fact there in not that largo a residential area to draw from at
t thin time.
Commissioner Dahl, stated he would like to concur with Chairman Rompel. Ila stated
it in his opinion tlue proposal by Mr. Anderson in needed id thin area. This plan
would be further reviewed tinder site plan approval if the General Plan Amendment
is considered favorably.
Mr. Ilopnon reminded the Commission thin request in for a General Plan Amendment at
thin time. Mr. Anderson in not bound to the uses indicated nor is tlue Comminainn
bound to allow him those uses in the event that the Amendment in approved for
commarcial land use.
Mr. Hogan stated there neems to be two issues in regard to this matter. There
in tl:e issue of alternative commercial sites and the need of a small center in
that vicinity. We do have as one bf our general plan amendments clarification of
alternative sites. It may be wine to continua this amendment until review of the
alternative sites amendment.
Commissioner Garcia stated it in his opinion there is definitely a need for some
type of marketing establishment in the subject area. Ila would, however, like to
nee a little more research and support data from tlue applicant in terms of the
actual need for a commercial center. More review of the entire issue as a whole
io needed prior to any decisions being made on thin amendment.
A notion was made by Commissioner Garcia, and seconded by Commissioner Dahl to
continue General Plan Amendment No. 79 -03C to the next regular meeting of October
10, 1979 and direct staff to work with the applicant to provide additional informa-
tion regarding the proposed project.
AYES: GARCIA, DAHL, TOLSTOY, REMPEL
NOES: JONES
ABSENT: NONE
Commissioner Jones stated she is opposed to the motion as it in her opinion this
in a good use as a neighborhood convenience center and that the amendment could
be approved tonight rather than being continued to the next meeti,.ug.
NEGATIVE DECLARATION :NU GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 79 -03E - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A change from the present designation of medium density residential
to low density residential for property located on the northwest corner of Base-
line and Haven.
J' .
September tember 26 1979
1! Planning Commission Minutes -4- P
Yl
i
1,
® 0
Mr. Mogan Indicated if the alternatives are left no they are now shown it will
still' require it general plan amendment in the future.
Mr. Cary Frya otated Ito is in agracment with staff that Alternative It could be
deleted no it would not in any way alter their development plans for the area.
Mr. Doug Gorgon asked that any action taken on his property be continued in
ardor that ho can review it with staff prior to any decisions being made.
Chairman Rempel again stated a general plan amendment in the future can not
be avoided. There is no designation in thin area at the present time that
would allow the development of 15 to 30 units per acre.
Mr. Hogan stated one way in which Mr. Gorgon
a general plan amendment in the future would
plans for those areas, we would expand it to
the .land uses are compatibl6. The City does
problems in developing his property but at t1
we are trying to solve the problem.
may avoid the application fee for
be when we bring back tho'comnunity
include the perimeters to make nuro
not �,nt to cause any property owner
Us point in time it is in limbo and
There being no further discussion from the audience, Chairman Rempnl cloned the
public hearing.
Commissioner Garcia stated it is his opinion this amendment should be continued to
the next regular meeting for further review.
A motion wan made by Commissioner Garcia and seconded by Chairman Rempal to continue
review of General Plan Amendment No. 79 -0311 to the next regular Planning Commission
meeting of October 10. 1979 for further study.
AYES: GARCIA, REMPEL, JONES, DAIIL, TOLSTOY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Chairman Rempel called a reccas at 8 :50 p.m.
Meeting reconvened at 9:05 p.m.
ECLARATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 79 -05 - CITY OF RANCHO
- An Ordinance establishing standards and review procedures for
mmunity Developments.
Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reported in light of the fact the Commission recom-
mended substantial changes in the Planned Community Ordinance staff would recommend
that this item be continued for four weeks to the October 24, 1979 meeting in
order to facilitate changes ir the ordinance and adequate time for public rev.'.ew.
Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes
-6-
September 26, 1979
1 r
a
There buing no discussion from the audience, Chairnnnn Rempol closed the
public hearing.
A notion wan made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Jones
to continue Zoning ordinance Amandment No. 79 -05 to the October 24, 1979
matting as recommended by staff.
AYESt DARL, JONES, GARCIA, TOLSTOY, REMPEL
NOL'S1 NONE
ABSENTt NONE
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND DESIGN REVIEW ORDINANCE - An Ordinance establishing
e Design Ruview Coann'ttou and eritaria for archituctural review of devolop-
mento within the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends
that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 79 -61 and forward such recom-
mendation to the City Council for their consideration.
Conuninsioner Jones indicated that Section 6 -A, the first sentence should be reworded
a: it is not correct.
After review of the sentence, it was the concenous of the Commission that it
read an follows: Where a project application has been acted upon by the DRC,
the applicant or any interested person who is aggrieved by the action msy file
an appeal to the Planning Commission.
Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing.
There being no comments from the audience, Chairman Rempel closed the public
hearing.
A motion wan made by Commissioner Garcia and seconded by Commissioner Jones to
approve Resolution No. 79 -61 subject to the following change:
Section G: Appeal - The first sentence should read as follows:
Where a project application has been acted upon by the DRC, the
applicant or any interested person who is aggrieved by the antion
may file an appeal to the Planning Commission.
AYES: GARCIA, JONES, DAHL, TOLSTOY, REMPEL
y' NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
DEER CREEK PARK TAX CREDIT - A request for park tax credit for Tract No. 9582 -1.
Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends
that the Commission recommend to the City Council that no Park Tax Credit be given
to this development based upon the criteria set forth in Ordinance No.B.
Planning Commission Minutes
-7-
September 26, 1979
Mr. Tony Zeno, ruproaenting Door Creek, stated their bridle trails laid to two
oquare mllen or mare of public land owned by tl:e flood control di.ntrict on tile,
east. Thin area will continuo-to be tined an open apaco in the future. That;
area, plus their parkways will provide recreation in the Dense of the ordinance
an adopted. Doer Crack provides recreational arena for their residents, end
therefore will not require tl:e one of tiny other pork facility that tl:e City may
have or may create in the future. It is their opinion name uquitable refund
ul:ould be considered as no prior or current tract within the entire city could
qualify an they do. The job that lion boon done by Deur Crock in unique and
qualifies for further consideration by the City.
Mr. Doug Ilona stated according to the wording of the ordinance hin judgment
would be that Dear Creek in entitled to n refund. If tile. Comminsi.on in not
in agreement with the ordinance than the ordinance should be nmandad; however,
nt thin time, lie does not feel the Commission or Council has any alternative
but to give some typo of refund to Deer Creak.
Commlasionor Dahl stated it in hiu opinion that bridle trailo are a recreational
facility and should qualify for a refund. if lie was to 'datonnine the percentage
of the refund to be allowed, he would look at somewhere between 15 and 20 percent.
Ile would further like to ask that the Council restudy the ordinance fot clart fica-
tion. As it stands at the pr000nt time, a refund should be considered.
Chairman Rempel stated lie would agree with Commissionar Dahl. Ile also added that
if all the equestrian developments in our area were to put a trail syatcm com-
parible to what Deer Creek lino we probably would not be using part of Ilaritago
Park for an equestrian facility. ile would agree that 20x credit be considered.
Commissioner Tolatoy stated Deer Creek is one of the best developments in tt:e
City. Tlie way in which the ordinance is written indicates, that some percentage
of credit should be given back to the Deer Creek Company. Ile indicated he would
agree that a 20% refund be considered. Ile does however believe the intent of the
ordinance is different then the way it is written. He believes that what was
really meant was that any facilities thnt are constructed by a developer should
be universal in nature. He does not believe that a bridle system is one which
everyone within the development will use. however, the way the ordinance is
written, he believes Deer Creek should receive the refund. Ile would also recom-
mend that the Council restudy the ordinance for clarification.
Commissioner Jones also indicated the way in which the ordinance in now written
that Deer Creek in entitled to a partial credit.
Commissioner Garcia stated a partial credit should be considered; however, it
is also his opinion the ordinance should be restudied for clarification.
A motion was made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Tolatoy to
recomcuend that the City Council consider a 20% park tax credit for Tract No.
9582 -1.
AYES: DAHL, TOLSTOY, JONES, GARCIA, RENPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
A motion was made by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Tolatoy and
urianimously carried to request that the City Council direct staff to restudy and
clarify the intent of Ordinance No. 8.
Planning Commission Minutes -8- September 26, 1979
t.
J
* * A A *
OREENIIOCK NURSERY STATUS
Barry slogan, Senior Planner, stated . could like to review the ntatus of the
Greenrock Nursery for the Commission. Approximately six montho ago, the Com-
mivaion allowed the Grecnrork Nursery to operate out of the 19th Street site
with the provision that they coma back to tile. Commission for the relocation
of the situ in the proper tons. lie have received a preliminary plan from Doug
Ilona and Assoct2tos for the area on the southwout corner of Lemon and Haven
Avenue. Its indicated Mr. Ilona in present tonight and may be nble to comment
furtlier on thot nits.
Mr. Doug Ilona stated they have one' queue- '+ in mind et this time. if the Com-
mission will note, the Bunriae Center the C -1 zone and there is a nursery
in that center. They would hvpa that th. ,atylo now C -1 zone when adopted will
allow for nursery uses. however, there is also the problem that thin new zoning
ordinance will not be approved prior to the date that the nursery will have to
be relocated and they would therefore request that the Commission make a deter-
mination an to whether or not a nursery will be determined an allowable use
within the now zoning ordinance. The suitability of a nursery in thin C -1 zone
in important to then l:efora they spend money to further process their plans.
It was the conconsus of the Commission that a zone d7te.rmination of whether or
not a nursery should be allowed within the C -1 zone be brought back to the next
regular Commission meeting of October 10, 1979 for review.
* * * * A
GROWTII MANAGEME14T PLAN STATUS
Barry Hogan stated n meeting was held last Saturday with the Chamber of Commurce
to run through tracts to gee how they would rate under the point rating system.
There appears to be a need to adjust some of our points and possibly add new
categories or adjust the threshold. lie indicated there was another meeting last
night to run through planned communities, apartment projects and outfill- infill
projects. The planned community and apartment projects made it through tha rating
system without any problems. The other projects did not. Additional suggestions
will be presented to the City Council which will possibly require adjustments in the
Plan. The largest problem seems to be the issue between large developments versus
smaller developments. As further information is put together on this matter,
staff will be reporting buck to the Commission.
* * * * *
Chairman Ranpol requested that the Community Service Building plans be reviewed
as changes seem to have been made in the project to substantially change the
plane from what the Commission previously approved.
* * * * *
Planning Commission Minutes -9- September 26. 1979
`j
'I , L.
/ \ (
7,
�1•II
\I •
,
1 �'ll,
11,
I
�'1'.1
�,
'll. ')
'1 ��1 �
1'�
.1'1
1' , (,
11
.�'
I•
�1
1 /1,•
I
1
w, ,
1' +,,1 1
�
1
•I
♦
'1 �
II /1
I
{ I'
, I
, r 111
_
I I, .,•,
,
11 •,
II,.
1. 1 �' t
'' 1
I
I 1
II
�r
11
♦
1 1�
�
I 1'
' 1 ,
11 1 1 1
1 1
.I
,nl� 1
1,1
�
1
I
l �.I'
, 1
1 1
1 1
�
I
�1 '
I
11.
1'
'I ,
(
,I
1'
1
1�
1 A I I 1
'
I
• I
1
,
,! ,
�
`
1' ,,Il �
1) 1
��'
II 1.
1 1 •
:( ' 1 1
'',1
1 1 �
' I.
1 I. ,'.
r
.II
I'1 , � I,�1 +�
1 1 /.
j'. j „�� 1 1
I'
,�
�,,
,11
1 1 If
.1 �' ,
'' �
1 I''1. •l
l 1
I'•
1
1.
'i
1..
I
1 "'t ''I
” •
I•
• motion •
1 f 1
1 t 1 1 1
Comainnionor
Garcia and
1
1 • 4..I ,
'1 '� rl
it
Lo-adjourn the
Planning
Conunionioll meeting
1..
• utily carried.
wau voted
September •
'
adjourned at
1 1 p.m.
,1.
IteripLetfully submitted,
f
11'+
I fir• I
JACK LAM, Director
mf
Community 1.
1
a '
♦'1
I�11
1
II
II'�
•��
i
1'�i
I; •
1
�1•
IIL1�1
11 I
• r ` 11'
,
„1\
1
1,I
Planning Commission
Minutes
-10-
September 26,
1979
', 9�
1 • , ,'
'1 I:r
( ^. 1
'•i
'
.1,
,1 1
I 1 tF.,
, /11
1 ,�•
I
� ( .I, / 1'
.''
��
•
•ll
1
,
;' y. :! ,
It '' '
,'�
I
j.
� , I�rI1�.L�11
.111/' 1
I 1
� `
1•' i
i`,
/;% 1
, 1 / 1 l 1
1 LI r 1.
1(
I
1
1
t,
i'.
5'
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF WWORT
DATEt October 10, 1979
Tos Planning Commission
FROM$ Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
SUDJECTi GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -0311 - Definition of Altornativo Areas
in the vicinity of Haven and Foothill.
Staff roquosto this item to be withdrawn from the agenda duo to several complexities
that have arioon since the last Planning Commission meeting that we wore not aware
of at the time of initiation. This General Plan Amonrlmont will return to the
Planning Commission after the adoption of the Planned Communities of Victoria and
Terra Viota.
I
Roe o vdly submittodl
//
3A' vL& DirG'otor of
Community Davolopmont
JLsD1U1sDJ1 scc
ITEM "A"
M
.0
i rt\r
i'
b.
i
1�
la
0
CITY OF 11ANC110 CUCAMONGA
6TAtrP REPORT
DA't'Es October 10, 1979
TOO Planning Commission
PROMI Jack Lam, Director of Conenunity Dsve]upwent
0
SUDJECTo GENEIUIL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -03C- ATU40LO ANDERSON
With thu relocation of the Altornativa Naighborhood Commnunity Commercial site to
the intoruaction of Arrow Routs and Turner Avenue in the vicinity of the applicant's
property, it negates the need to file General plan Amendment. The Alternative
Naighborhood Community Commarcial Site in overlaid upon the existing General Plan
designation of iligh Density roaMontial creating an option for the City. It should
be noted that the Planning Commiolsion can be specific in this particular applicant's
land use designation if it is se doeirod. IY the site is bettor suited for multiple
family residential, the Commission could clarify tt.wir intent at this time.
RF.COMMENOATIONt It is recommended that the Commission ularify for the applicant
that thin property is not suited for commernial and should remain multiple family
residential. Should the applicant wish to still pursue commercial dovolopment for
tics property, a market analysis would be advisable.
Sta fso roc
Roop ivsly
JA , it
Community Dov
JL: DKI1 s DJI1 t cc
that Mr. Andurson's application fee be refunded.
,
ITEM "B"
e
ii
�1
® CIT ".0@ RANC110 CUCAMONGA
STAFF 11M .01sT
mm i October 10, 1979
TOE Planning Commission
FR041 Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
SUBJGCTt
WR
BACKGROUND: Tito Land Una Moment of the Interim General Plan presently dooignatos
altornativo neighborhood shopping centers throughout the City. The alternative sites,
as designated on the Plan, are listed an specific aiton rather than gonornl locations.
Tito General plan text opooiflcally lists the location of each of the asterisks as
indicated on the Land Una Map. As a result of the General Plan specifying the exact
location of the alternative neighborhood commercial oentorn, it leaves no floxibility,
croatom speculation rather than development and is arbitrary planning when another
corner or intatuaction a 4 mile away cuuld be developed for the name purre3009. In
addition, specifying exact locations of neighborhood cantors dean not conform to the
® ideal of providing several options no in the case of the regional ce:'tor. In
several inotaneos, staff has boon approached by developers who want to dovelop
neighborhood commercial cantors on corners or areas near an astorisk shown on the
General Plan but have not boon able to pursue the development because of the present
policies within the General Plan.
ANALYSI9s Attached are nix exhibits which display the present General Plan donigna-
tiono and alternative noighborhood commercial aitea. The sites are designated by
an astorisk. In come canon, the alternative neighborhood commercial sites are not
oven feasible boctiuso of existing or proposed dovolopment. Throughout the langt +ago
of the General Plar text, it dincueses the fact that prior to committing neighborhood
commercial zoning to a site, that a market analyses would be required and construction
would have to be subutantially on its way prior to final comtittmont of the
commercial zone. If thin is the case, then it would seem unappropriato for the
General Plan to spocifeally designate the location of each neighborhood commercial
facility. In light of the policies stated within the General Plan, it would be
more logical to designate general areas on the General Plan whore neighborhood
commercial facilities may he appropriate. Then, an applicant may propose a neighbor-
hood commercial facility in the general area of a planned center and appropriate
studies would be conducted to determine if the site is feasible for ouch a develop-
ment. No zoning would be committed until the project is substantially constructed.
No General Plan Amendment would Le required. The General Plan would be changed to
reflect a permanent site after completion of the center. In order to accomplish
this, additional standards and policies -dill need to be created within the General
Plan, such as minimum distancon between neighborhood shopping facilities, the
maximu number of centers per intersection, and the minimum parcel size required
m
for a parcel to be considered viable for the development of a neighborhood commercial
shopping center.
Based upon the above analysis, staff suggests the following changes to the General
ITEM "C"
0
Plan Map:
Exhibit 1 •• Eliminate the aaLarisks on tht) northweat eorneL and southeast corner
of Foothill Boulevard and V.inoyard and retain the asterisk on the southwest corner.
Ex ::ihit 2 - Eliminate the astarialt shown on the aouthaant corner of Arrow Route
and Archibald Avenue.
rahibit 3 - Eliminate the asterisk shown on the northwest corner of Arrow and
Haven and relocate thv astoriuk more centrally at the intersection of Turner and
and Arrow Route. Retain the asterisk on the northeast . -irnor of 71avon and Foothill.
Exhibit 4 • Eliminate the aetorink on the wont aide of Haven.
Vxhibit 5 - Uliminato the asterisk on the uouthwost corner of Rochester and Baseline
and retain they asterisk on the northwest corner of Rochester and nanaline.
Exhibit 6 - Rotnin the asterisk shown on the southwest corner of Highland and
Etiwanda and ro0in only one of the asterisks located at the intorsootion of Etiwanda
and Daeolino Avonuo.
Staff recommends that the following policy changes be made within the General Plan
Texts
1. That the alternative neighborhood commercial asterisks shown on the General Plan
are only general locations and that there is potential for the location of a
neighborhood shopping canter in that immediate area.
2. That no more than two neighborhood controreial shopping cantors would be located
at any one intarooction.
3. That sites fall within the range of I. ato ld acre site in order to be considered
for the davolopmonl• of a neighborhood commercial shopping center.
4. That neighborhood shopping center facilities be located at least a half mile
apart, except for the two allowed at an intersection.
Staff has prepared the unvironmontal assessment for this project and did not find
any significant adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this project.
Therefore a Negative Declaration is recommended.
RECOMMENDATION: It in recommended that the Planning Commission consider the above
staff recomwnandation atnd if approprie te, recommend approval of &aid amendment and
issuance of Nortiva roclaration to Ci%y Council for final adoption.
Res pa ol�y submitted,)
JAC M, DiYolatcir'of �....
Community Development
�. JL:MV:cc
Attachments: General Plan Land Use Maps (6)
Part I Initial Study
M
al �
li.
>;tattvuNnwv e
DeN. GomM eN
. 0100L v tt TY
PIEIGIII• MrxtiO MUSE 1rlttce0
Comm. VSL' V5�
Fe.Mucto MUD.
F
1 U5C LO v. D SITY �j
AG
//VLSeI4:%I-rY
Atu00L LOW
LAW �ENsrrf VD431TY FG
LOW
DERSV"
� Hlax
' . �eNstTY
use.
MEOIUPA M�OWM
oertst-TY DENsrrY
s
a
OEN. DENSITY
OKea Still. tAW114VM
MM Imm-r
INDUSTRY.
YLYIGE
CoMMeRC��-
*lm
14164
pF.►IS n
�I�mm'tir
h LOW
VE-01 T`(
6
MINIMUM
IMPACT
INDUCTW
E�xN1FtIT I
LOW
DeN +ITV
SCIICDL
LOW
OeNSI'r(
$CKIACE
* MMeMIA L
LoW
pt'NSI- y
1 ;11 1r I ; � I 1 J1�: L ..' .II 1. 1 / 1. .• 111, l { 1 1 :'' M •,1 1 I 1/.
l 1 ', ), 11,1� I I 1\ 1 1 .' ' 111' . i ` It 1 I� 1 I •' 1 1� 1 1 fll, .� 1 I I �1,1 '
i
'1• y 1 , I II I I 1� 1,, I .\ 1 I .1\ I I 1 1.
1 1 1.'' 1 � III .' I 1 I , 1 ' ,, �I 1 1 I' �,�\ � I I f, . 1 I•
11 I 1' 1 1 11 '' I '.I 1 I �l 1 11' '. '� I I' ' '•' 1 •
11 1 1 I' , h I '1 , �1' `1 ll. 1 1 •.',1 { 1 1 '1'. a 1 i'' I'•
' 1
I
1, 1 191,,1• I' / I
1,
1
If' 1 dl "� 1• /ll
1'1' '11, w.� II•
' 11
1 Low
/
r•
Y
X11.1• �I ,� I^'
1 1'
$afoot.
V' I f„ '1, � 111'.1 • ,'11
i1 , Si'i
i 1 .11:'� I l • .1
.nnr•Mt
'.
Low ( I ( I
1 •1 l l' ' FAKK I ul
I1'
1 , ,
r. , •�.
1 •11 1 I
•1�1 . i1 �,I 1
. V. MSDIM
1 . •,_ O • � x,1',•1
VWCITY
USA
ftUTL
OLIM 1 , 11•I
t', 1
'li 1
r. n ♦
a 1 1,
1 1
1 t.'i1• '.i � 1 r 1 1,
i.
1 e �1 1 1 1 1' 1 .' • 1 t 1 1 J 1 11 . 1'. t .. 1 1
f. f '11 Il 11 ) 1 Jl 1I• I 1 1 11
.1
1 w 1
1 1 • t O �• 1 1 tl 1 .'l� 1
+ , 1 , t ., f 1 / ♦ ti. , `., r M1. t / 1 1 +'j A ' } ' V • � '. l
_ \1 �
',1 :, 11
'
r
1' ;1 11 1
•I.
1
'
r � Ir
i) 111'; r
'�•1
♦Ili f
1
'li
I
11
� 1
11 r;,� ,• ;
.11;'1
y r
;
I
i, �
1 1 N
I
:,, "II (
rill
1 it
1, ,
1 r
,
1 ,
,.; `I
,•,
1 i /ail tl,• �'�� I
,
1 'I iI I � 1,.
�
.� I '�11•
,
l,l •'
'
1 1 111.
- (
J,;
1
I
'CO
MEDIUM
We
1 � 1'
►
1 r
: 1 1. 1 4
1
\�I11'1,
rll ll�� 1
•1•r
'j�
LOW
r lll�
LOW
'
h 11,11
1.
I
1''1 1
11.1
11,
•.
1
1 I' 1
• 1,``
'111'
i 1!
1'
1 1 r til'
1 1
A�
1
1
r
11
LOW
'1 1
11.
IMPACT
i ,'111/,
14,,'1�
�
1'•���
�
1 II
C QMMUtOAL
`
1'
miteD
•
VI
kk
.,4.
t4e
0.
-'
•�
,
,
,yl
•-
:1 n�
I
1
MNSITY
(•.1�.. }illy'.
�; ;�,
mc-olum •
zz
•
yUtl�.
Usti 61
fit
LOW
'A t•II M,
t
•
I
.•
1..
Km
■
INOVSTKY
',,
' •'r� l , :
A 1;;
1 ; • Z.7
11.1 I
111 { �'" �
p
� � 1 r1 1 N
11 •1 I
�. 1
N 1
f.,
I .1 1 <!• I r
I 1�
i t
i l ( 1� !
i' 17
1, � i I� , S
��
1 1
I'
w j
r ., ,
f l 1
t
(
1
, 11
1 ,
1 I'
•
�� '
��'
'.1 I 1 1
!'.I
� I , .I '..1
{I' ,
1 ,
' I'
,
1 1
r 11 ; 1 r� li I,1 1 1r
.I i I i.'• r{ 11
�
I 1 1
`
11 " '
r 1
Ili
I
r,.
11 p
V \' 1 � , 1 I � r, 1 I ,
11 I
I F7 ( / I '1
1.
11'1
1 �1
, •
; A
111.
��i �p II x'11
•�/ 1'11'
� 1 11.1
. /rl
1 1 .,V .11'I I Illl1,1 �t if 1
1
IJ 4
11'•,
1
�i �
��'1' �'�
�I,
i I'
1
1' 1
1
r.1,1
1 I 1
1 1 r 4 r r �" I I %.� i I 1 l
1
I') ,, +! /I I Ii 111
11 1' �''
,
1I
' ,r
I
it
•�1
1 i
1
1'•II�
r
1'r�
1 1 • 111 r
�
i1,li.
OIf1 1'
rii �yl .
1 .
A Y{ i ' S: " 1 'i � :?'J'!lY•atF' 1. "rlr;l" ,`.it I,,r Jr t:•rt'Itt'M 1.1 �!
., ?!+t lAl 1
) y
I'
,t
,
,i
i
II
�t1J'
1'•�1` .
ci�
L. •I. ��
•
•
11 +
I
LOW
t
r
•
Yig
•.1'u:
1
e,
-5CHOOL-
LOW
�
l
I
' 1,1 �..
. 1 •r
FWmrr 15
II
1
' 1
'
1 1 11 .0
�"'��i
1 1
-' �
•
\'
.' .
'.!'
•
�.'1
n , � < a 1.., r
t ).
• /F r 1
��1
..
�h1
\ I' •'•1' ' 1 'I 1, it l' "I,1 1 ' 1'�In 1 �I1, 1'I' I i t•l ;'1 II, 1. �I'.
11 1� 1Y. 11 'll 1 1 , 1 1 1 I 'i t 1• 1� 1 1,1 I
l \1 I1 ' 'I,r 1'' 1 11 •. 1 II Nr1 ' 1,'' •1 I 1 1 i II,I �,. 1 11 I 1 I 1 I
LOW
Low D01461iy
ol, use
I•Ir I. 1I 1 � 11 11 rr {{It I 1 1 1 L1 i 1 I' I
,1 ,11f t1 : '11,x,'1''' y,i• � 1
I• I
1 , ,
.iif �'illl�. , I �''I,•.
I1 �
1
1 "''�•�; }`:,, tlll�l•�rll�� /I 7ttaffLCi1 1 ��
a, I, '.el .'.►' 1�'.
LOW
1 1 t1
LOW
MEDIM r j „ 1 1,
' .�L.'1i •'''li 1'I'',1J
1 II 9
LOW Mc-oivM
•
wl
I 1
t!
5 r Uwe.
LOW
SITY
1 ,Lt
I
1.'I t 11
y A
1
f lye 1 1 � ' ' 1' I 1 lt +i� ,•n 1 1 I I � 1 111 Il ry Y[ '� '1 I �, I �' � �•.
I' 0
�I
Y , • ` /1 ./f ., 1 1 x.Y1 l . / Ili •1 1,.1 Y 1L 1tl'J ,lll. '1 i 1
`/ 1 1
1 .. 1 f , i� 1 1 1 1•
11•{ .'7 �� . t ,, /I �,,� I .; I 1 ! ( 1'r 1 I 1 1� , 1 1 .' 1 1 1
,''1 1.111 1 It 11 ) ,'111 1,1 1 •fl 1.� .}111; t •. •� 'L J. .' 1..
1 '' 111 1 I 11 •��. 1 1 1 �'!•I YI rrl I� tl .I�'1'�t 1 1,1
11 1 I��i11�4 1 I 6�1 III � �11 ♦ 1 1 11�., 1 1 1 11 1� ��� I 1 lil�
11 1 11 � I '1 f 1•. 1 l ' 11 1' J . 1 'il l � ( 1 I � I, 1 1
6 PY 1
Ch
• I 1 1' 1' � l i p � I
i
i V 1 11
Iglu !b. I1.
1
11'1! ''• 1 •
1 1•
'll,. .,i♦. 1
f Jp
�. i. ''I�.II•' VIPI,1� I tl.,l
I:
•'�. M'I � i� �1.
I11 •• � a I.�' 1 .' '�1•.
111;1 'i
IY'I, i1
i 1 111 11 'I'1.
�1
WINDROW WINDROW
J r
f
I •IIVI •� ,,'r'�1
De LOW AlPITY
1f1�1
I �' • 1 A� �1 f.�, �1
1 If 1
1 JI l
1 1 , • Ihl 11,1
SCHOOL-
11. •1 1 • r',J
WINDROW 111,0
" 1
'11, J' 1,� � i � '.I •
i 1
rl
II f •••1 • '. 1 rJlt,1.1 •L' _. 1 J �• J '1'� .
1 � W
Y 11•
II WINDROW
Very
tk
LO W
J
I ;1'•
1 ' .. I . ' t 1 f 1 '' j PI YII•,11 �7 '111 -1 �1 (;. •. 1 f4 /1
1 �: , , J t I1 : •' 1.,1
LIB 1 ;J 1.1'LI 11U• 1 ' �1
YI ♦ } �1 ' t 1• 1.•� 1 1 l •1 1 1 r 1 •• I •' ,� 1 f !' yff.
f r f 1 I f 1{ II Y• '1 1 11 W 11 ` 1{ 1 f 1 f l l 1+ � 111 f f {
♦ s � \1 .y 1 1
1 t s It * 1 ♦. 1•f ! 5,11 i,a '. 1 I .1 I1 f��. 1 \1 � Ii r f 1
1�, ( 1 1 �1 1 r �1 1 IJ �' �♦ h.�l i y.r 1 11ir %mil J♦ a y It f 11 1,.1 .,'
' t 1 �1 Y 1 J t t , /• iY. I f 1 i I { J If 1 I f
1 1 1 1 r 1 r ,� ■� � 1
t'
L 11
CITY OF 1WC110 CUCAMONCA
INITIAL STUDY
6
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - 7b be complotod by applicant
Environmental Assosanwnt Review root $70.00
ror n11 projects requiring environmental review, this
form must be completed and submitted' to the Dovolopmont
Review Committee through the dopartment whore the
project- application is made. Upon receipt of ,this
application, the Environmental Analysis staff will preparo
Part Ti of the initial Study. Tho Development Roview
committee will meat and take action no later than ton
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of
throe dotorminationa: 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: _T<_�t'f_ Cho he-e_
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE:
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE Or PERSON T.✓ BE CONTACTED
CONCEPNING THIS PROJECT: 13 S.Pn►"pr Pla na -ey-
ION or PROJECT (STREET
` f1j"A.0 .- All areas
ASSESSOR PARCEL
LIST OTHER PERb1ITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL STATR AND
FEDERAL, AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERM'TS:
.. 1 -)
1
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - 7b be complotod by applicant
Environmental Assosanwnt Review root $70.00
ror n11 projects requiring environmental review, this
form must be completed and submitted' to the Dovolopmont
Review Committee through the dopartment whore the
project- application is made. Upon receipt of ,this
application, the Environmental Analysis staff will preparo
Part Ti of the initial Study. Tho Development Roview
committee will meat and take action no later than ton
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of
throe dotorminationa: 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: _T<_�t'f_ Cho he-e_
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE:
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE Or PERSON T.✓ BE CONTACTED
CONCEPNING THIS PROJECT: 13 S.Pn►"pr Pla na -ey-
ION or PROJECT (STREET
` f1j"A.0 .- All areas
ASSESSOR PARCEL
LIST OTHER PERb1ITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL STATR AND
FEDERAL, AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERM'TS:
.. 1 -)
PROJECT D1"SCRx!'l'IOro
DESCRIPTION 0 OF PROJL'CTe - CIaNI- FN_g[�
• N
�•tk
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE* IOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
' PROPOSED DUILDINGS, IF ANY: fl ,
DESCRIDE THE 'ENVTROND1L• 1TVAI, SrTTT. 19 OF THE PROJECT SITE
XNCLUDII40 INFORALATION SON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES),
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY
EXIgS,T�I,NG STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS) i
Is the project, part of a larger Project, one of a serico-
of cumulative actions, which although individually small,
may an a whole have significant environmental impact?
_, 2
w . r. x�►. rc etioarcT�
Yist3
NO
1, Create a aubaLantial chnngo in ground
contours?
_✓ 2, Create a subatantinl cthungro in existing
noiso or vibration!
Create a aubstdntial change in demand for
municipal norvicou (police, fire, water,
6011r.ge, etc.)!
Create changes in the existing zoning or
general plan denignationa7.
nomovo any uxisting treer.i How many?
Cronte Lho need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardoun materials such as
toxic substances* flammablas or explosives?
anation of an'! Y& answers
IMPORTANTs If, the project involveu the construct3,-., of
residential units, complete tha Farm on the
next pago.
¢GRTIPICATION- 1 hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
informnL•ion required for t1its initial evaluation to the
best of my ability, and that the facts, statemontu, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of
my %nowlodga and belief. I further understand that
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaulation can be made by the DeviceLopmunt
Review Committee.
Title
rI
0
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DivrEs October 10, 1979
TOs Planning Commission
FROMs Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
SUOJEC'Ps CGNL "RAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -038 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
clarification of Mixed Use.- To more specifically denignato what:
is allowable within tale Mixed Use category.
DACY.GROUNDS At the July 11, 1979 Planning Comminaion meeting, the Commiusion decided
to continuo ration on the clarification of Mixed Use, it wan proposed that the
elimination of the rlixed Una category occur with the introduction of an Administrative -
professional category. Prior to this amendment the Commission amended the zoning
Ordinance to delete reference to R -3 uses in the A -P, zone. Since the exclusion of
multiple family ranide ntial oeeursd in the zoning it follows that the General Plan
designation should be oxaminad to possibly delete reference to the name activity.
DISCUSSIONS In order to fully evaluate the proper determination of the Mixed Use lends
a lint of all properties dosiqnotod ae Mixed Uno in being prepared with recommends -
tionu on each site for either Administrative- professional or Multiple Family
Rasidantial. Ths list includes the followings
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
NE, NW and SE corners of Archibald and Arrow Route.
SE corner Baseline and Cornollan.
S /oida Bacoline 800 foot oast of Carnalian.
S/sido of Baseline 1900 foot cant of Carnalian.
SW corner Hallman and Bacoline
W /sido of Carnelian 600 foot south of Baseline
N /lido of Foothill 900 foot wont of Carnalian
W /oida of Vineyard 300 foot south of Foothill
E /lido of Vineyard 300 foot south of Foothill
SE corner Church and Archibald
S /sido Foothill between Turner and Havan
W /side 11avon between Foothill and Arrow Route
N /sida Foothill 1300 fact cast of Turner Avenue
E /sido of Turner 300 foot north of Foothill
NE corner Amethyst and 19th Street
NE corner Archibald and 19th Strout
Iris corner 'lormosa and 19th
NE & SE corners Hermosa and 19th
NE corner Archibald and Baseline extending beyond
SE, NE corners of Hellman & Baseline
South side of Baseline 90t foot cast of Hallman
North side of Baeolino 000 feet cast of Hallman
W /silo Archibald 400 feat North of Baseline
NVI corner Haven and Lemon streeto to Banyon
NE corner Highland and Havon
the SPRR right -of -way.
Is
ITEM "D"
0
Surrounding land use and historic trends along with physical constraints will be
primary factors in determining whothor a site is bettor suited for professional
offices or npartmonte. Tho dosignation of Multiple Family- Rouldential is nubjoct
to further refinement upon completion of' the dousing Moment of the General Plan.
Staff prepared the Initial Study for this amondmonL• and have determined that no
significant advarno environmental impacts will occur as a result of this amendment.
Part I of the Initial Study is attachod for your review. staff recommends issuance
of a Negative Doolaration,
RECOMMEMDATIONt It is recommended that the Planning Commission formally adopt an
Adtniniotrativa Profoenional Donoral Plan designation.
Tito list of proportion with staff rocommondationq on land use dosignatione will be
schodulod foIssubir, the October 24, 1979 mooting.
ZJACM. c�ly tt1 r
DirWtor of
Community Developmon'i
JLiD1UhWi1icc
Attachmentat Initial Study
July 11, 1979 Minutes and Staff Report
December 27, 1970 Minutes & Staff Report Vol
[ ii
CLTY OV RMC110 CUWWWA
INITIAL STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant
Environmental Annosnmant Roviow Fee: &70.00
f For all projects requiring environmental review, thin
form must be completed and submitted to the Develupmant
Roviow Committee through thu 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 Duvolopnwnt Review
Committee •gill meet and take notion no later than Len
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to ba hoard. The Committee will make one of
throe datorminntiona: 1) The projoct will have no
environmental impact and a Nogative Declaration will bu
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 nppl.icant giving further information concerning
the proposed project.
PROJECT TITLE:
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON O DE CONTACTED
CONCERNING THIS PROJECTS 0 ? M ?
LOCATION OF PROD CT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.)
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:
R11-024,= — DRSCRTPTTfiN
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: -44w-
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUAnE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED nJXLDINGS, IF ANY:
DESCRIBE THE NVIROND MMAT, Si:i'TING Or THE PROJECT SI'T'E
INCT•UDING INFOMLNTION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) ,
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL Oil SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION or ANY ,
EXISTING STMICTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS) i
Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a rsories
of cumulative actions, which although individually small,
may as a whole havGe ignificant environmental impact?
y:
IFI
IMPORTANT -: If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next page.
CrItTIrICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
i.nformntion required for this initial evaluation to the
best o£ my ability, and thnt the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of
my }cnowledge and belief. I further understand thxt
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaulation can be made by the DuveLopmunt
Revicw Committee.
Date �•!]'��� Signatures /�/ {�
. ::,. Title
5
� r
�
NO
1.
Create a subetanL•ial change
in ground
]—
contours?
_f 2.
Create a substantial change
in existing
/
noiso or vibration!
_ 3.
Cruato a eubstnnLial change
in demnnd for
municipal services (police,
Piro, water,
sawago, Otc.)l
4.
Cranto changes in the oxis ,'
ing zoning or
general plan designations?
_ 5:
Remove any existing treasl
How many?
G.
Create the need iur use or
dispuanl of
_
potentially hazardous maLoriale
such as
toxic substances, flammables
or explosivoo?
+
Explanation of
any YES answers above►
a
y:
IFI
IMPORTANT -: If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next page.
CrItTIrICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
i.nformntion required for this initial evaluation to the
best o£ my ability, and thnt the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of
my }cnowledge and belief. I further understand thxt
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaulation can be made by the DuveLopmunt
Revicw Committee.
Date �•!]'��� Signatures /�/ {�
. ::,. Title
5
0 (6,
Chairman Itanpol opened tho public haarltig.
There being no coum:ents from thin oudiruca, Chairman Hempel cloned the publir.
henrinR.
A Motion was made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Cotmnisdionar Jones
to continua General Plnn Amendment No. 79 -019 to the first meeting in
September.
AYES: DA11L9 JONL'S, GARCIA, RINPEL
NOES: MONO
ADSENTt TOLSTOY
GENERAL PLAN /MENDMENT NO. 79 -011? - CITY OF HANC110 CUCMIONGA - Clarification
of Mixed Una •- To more specifically designate what in allowable within the
Mixed Une Category.
Barry Ilognn, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends
that the Commission defer any action on changing the mixed use category
until the September General Platt hnendment.
Chairman Hempel opened the public hearing.
There being no comments from t'ha audience, Chairman Hempel cloned the
public hearing.
A Motion wea made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Garcia
to continue action on General Plen Amendment No. 79 -01F to the September
General Plan Amendment.
AYES: DAHL, GARCIA, JONES, RIMPEL
NOES: NONE
Amin: TOLSTOY
WAIVER OF CONDITION REGARDING LANDSCAPE of interior parkway for Tract 9458
located on Baseline Avenue at Center.
Barry Ilognn, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. This matter wan
continued from the last meeting at the-Commissions' request. A tradeoff
between not requiring the condition that parkways on all lots be landscaped
and provided with a permanent irr ;gction system, and adding "hordacape"
landscaping along Baseline was suggested to the applicant. It was not
acceptable. The Commission has three alternatives as follows: 1) deny
the request; 2) modify the condition to requite a PVC pipe underneath
the pa:-kway for future connection by the owner of the house, or 3) waive
the requirement for the installation of an irrigation system within the
interior parkways of the tract. tie stated the applicant stated that the
County had indicated the condition would be waived shortly nfter 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.
Planning Co®ission Minutes -11- July 11, 1979
IE
LLJ
re 6
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONUA
STAIfF IIEI'ORT
DATRI July 11, 1979
TO: Planning Commission
llto'mI Jack Lam, Director of Conmunity Development
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -OIF - City of Rancho Cucamonga -
Clarification of mixed usu category more specifically dosignato
what is allownble within tl:e mixed use category.
ADSTKAC'PI In the recent past the Commission has had much concern with the allounble
uses in the cntagory of mired use. We have clarified that when office use in pro-
posed in the mixed use area that would include such uses as restaurnnta, fast food,
bakories, stationary, blueprint shops, donut shops, dolientessen, bunko, savings
and loan, financinl institutions. If tl:e applicant clloonas to develop multiple
family, the range of density line been indicated from five units to thirty unite
per acre. The Commission may wish to further clairfy ti:e denignntion of dene,ity
in the mixed 1190 category when multiple family is chosen.
It would be our suggestion at thin point in time that the Commission does not
nubstantially change the meaning of the mixed use category but porhap3 consider
for the September General Plan amendments the elimination of the mixed use category
and the introduction of all 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 none.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission defer any action on
changing the mixed use category until the September General Plan Amendment.
Resp ag ubmitted,
Jack Lam, Director of
Conununity Development
JL: BK11: cc
Attachment: Initial Stuuy
a �
Mr. C11111 elated what other cItIon have dune in
/10111111110 is to encourage• doaillnnrn to denlipt a
fnctnl; the utrout. At tllo denign review ntngu
ho uticournitud. '111 the industrial (truant meet
rear of tie buildings.,
their ntnndnrd ill'] ICY whenever
fac.11ity no that parking in het
when plculn nro dincuuuad till,, can
of'Lila parking In located to thn
Ilnrry Union ntnted it in a policy to provide n variety on special buulovnrdn in
order to provide for divernity and nenthotia appent Mani; I10 otreet. lie
u0q;l;unted thnt the Connll till loll ucl: thin Item to come back to the meeting of
January 24, 1979 to discuss thin matter further.
Mr. Lam ntnted that ha will request the Chmnbur of Commerce to review thane
ntnndardo prior to the meeting of the 24th.
A Motion Willi made by Conminnioner Dahl and secotid0d by Comminnioner Tolntoy to
net thin item for review under Old Iluaineso for the meeting of Janunry 24, 1979.
NOCS: NONE
AUS ENT i J Oil ES
NOTION CARRIED.
TOLSTt1Y, GARCIA, HEMPEL
�__ * * * A *
1 CIAR1PiCATION OF MIXED USE CATEGORY AND STANDARDS roit IMPLL•'NI:NrmoN
Harry llogan reviewed the Staff Report in detail thin being on file in the Plan-
ning Division. It 1s recoem ended that the CommLoaion concur with tie procedure
of nllowing ancillary commercial uses aubJect to Site Approval in mixed tine areas.
Additionally, R -3 zoning in the mixed use area wuuld be for multiple units only.
In order to resolve the conrllctn exinting in tlee A -P and R -3 zones, Staff would
also suggest that thu Planning; Commianlon direct stnff to prepare a zoning ordi-
nonce amendment to solidify tie examples listed above.
Commissioner Tolatoy stated ho thought this would be written into the new zoning
ordinance.
.21
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, srnted thnt In correct; however, we
also need guidelines to follow at thin time prior to the adoption of the new zoning
ordinance.
After general discuss.lon, n motion wus made by Commissioner Garcia and secnoded
by Comml. ns font, r Dnhl to allow ancillary enmmerclal. a ,,en subject to Site Approval
In the mixed tine areas. Addltlounlly, R -3 zontul; lu the mixed one ,,run would be
for multiple units only and A -P for office and ancillary retnll commercial uses.
It was further recommended that the Staff prepare a zoning ordinance amendment
for thu A -P and R -3 zones.
AYES: GARCIA, DARL, TOLSTOY, RITIPEL
IIOES: NONE
ABSENT, JONES
LIOTIOti CARRIED
Planning Commission Minutes
-9-
December 27, 1978
,�
i
t
•.1
0
(V (4p
CITY OF I1ANC11O' UCAM0110A
STAFF REPORT
DATEt December 27, 1970
TO: Planning Comminnlon
FROM: Jack lam, Director of Conmun).• ;y Development
SUBJECT': CLARIFICATION OF MIXED USE MEMORY AND STANDARDS FOR INPMENTATION
IIAChCROUNDt 'file proposed Land Use map indicates arena for mixed une. The
designation no diacuosed in the text of plan indicates thin use to be for
apartments, offices, and institutions (i.e. churches, convalescent homes,
etc.). Itecently u,0 ve had inquiries no to the types of development the City
would permit in the mixed use designation. Past Communion indictttiono an
to the meaning of mixed use are that A =P (Administrative Professional) and
R -9 (multiple residential) zoning would implement the mixed use category.
Problemn occur in the permitted uses of cacti of these zones. Tito A -P unea
list includes not only R -9 but R -2, R -1 and agricultural uses. Tito 11 -7 uses
include R -1. R -2 and agricultural uses. We believe that clarification is
necessary as to the uses the Planning Commission would permit in the mixed
use category.
Upon further examination of the mixed use designation, we feel that office
use generates limited ancillary commercial uses such tie eating establishments,
Print shops, stationary stores and the like. These uses are normally found
in close proximity to offices if not in the same center an the office one.
In order to implement the mixed use designation no intended, we would suggest
that the Commission permit, subject to Site Approval, limited ancillary commer-
cial uses in ttte mixed use area" when they are '.n conjunction with a professional
office center. Because these ancillary uses ,ould be subject to Site Approval
the Commission hna the opportunity to look at each use in terms of how it
would fit in with the center, its relation to the clientele proposed for the
center, and the character of tlw surrounding area.
It is quite possible, in the near future, that applicntiuns could be before
the Commission requesting approval of single family homes or duplexes in the
mixed use area. The Commission should be aware that if and when these appli-
Cations do occur, that it would be staff's position that these proposals would
not be in conformance with the general plan and therefore would be denied.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Commission concur with the procedure
described above allowing ancillary commercial uses subject to Site Approval in
1 I I I. A i T •( i t 1 �\ , �1.
f 41 r i ' 11 1 1 1 11 'l i �.1 i ! �,l l , 1 11 l �'� l ,'r(1 1 11. •,. I t � t ' 1 � I I 1 e1
1 1
..1. 1 f l 1 �• .
.11;1 ��I'• F .' ,f
..1 '�" ', •' r • arcon. zonlIin lit 1 • t
mixed fur multIplo units only. lit order to resolve t1ja conflicts axinting In the
A-P and 11-3 zoneng Staff would also suggest that the Planning Commission dirac
staff to prepare zoning IJ..
above.
JACK LAHO Director of
Community Development
Y;1 '
q JUG
t
1 I •' 11
` 1
I � •(1
11 !
'1 1
r 1 ,
1 ` .) X11.• , ,�
1 1
1
! 11
1 1r
j1,.I 1 � il�yl
\1 a1
.J p�1•1'1 '��j '
I 1 I
' 1 1( •1 1 1 err " 1 {: •1 � • � r , 1r 1 r 1 . ♦ +1.
"LOCI
� � r., �t y r ' •.., 1 1 ~`1' t '� , a,•'il r(`i 1.�1
! ' -, r_r1 . i„I t i; ! .Y t {'.a 1� 1 f 1.I�11 i 1.. 1', r •
� � 1� 1 • �f 1 1 I y 11 1 � t 1 1 y :` 1 .
IV. .1'
,)( r is /! y 1 ( (... J 1 -, '1,1 `I'' , a fl.. 1 � � 1f •� , '.1 1 t'
.. t, .,d. .•ry 111 �`. r 1. _.. .14
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF nEPUHT
DATE October 10, 1979
11,01 Planning Commission
FROM1 Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
SUDJECTI GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -03D - CITY_ OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
A change from thn prosont doniynation of Low Density Residential
(2 -5 unit a per grona sore) to Medium Donisty (5 -15 units par green
acre) for property bounded by Rod Rill Country Club Drive, Tapia
Via, Rlancheria Drive and Snn Bernardino Road. The site also
includes property a depth of 150' oast of Tapia Via from San
Bernardino Road, south 300 foot.
DACKGROUNDI Tile praponod project Bite covers approximately A acres (refer to
Exhibit 1) . Along the northern property lino, fronting on .San Bernardino Rc'.d are
six now multiple family, two story structural. in various stages of completion.
South of those unit o are two duplex units which appear to have been constructed
over 15 years ago. East of Tapia Via in a motel, coin car wash, and three apartment
® complexes. The remainder of the site in vacant with scattered rooks, rubble and
brush. Adjacent land uses consist of a vacant area adjacent to the Magic Lamp
Restaurant parking lot to the northi a vacant field oast of the motel and car
wash facilityl singly family conventional dwellings to the south and went across
Ranchoria Drive and Rod Hill Country Club Drive. A church exists on the south -
wast corner of Had Hill and San Bernardino Road intoroaction. Refor to Exhibits
2 and 3 for currant zoning and General Plan designations.
ANALYSIS: The project area in presently 60 -701 dovoloped with uses consistent
with the proposed madium density residential designation. The remaining vacant
areas are largo enough to accommodate similar and consistent medium density
d.,volopments. The aroa developed with medium density uses can act as a buffer
between the commercial uses along Foothill Boulevard and the single family uses
south of Ranclioria nrivo.
Staff prepared the Initial study for thin amendment and have determined that no
significant adverse onvironmental impacts will occur as a result of the amendment.
Part I'of the Initial Study is attached for your review. Staff racommands
issuance of a Negative Declaration for this project.
RECORMIENDATION: It is recommended that
of General Plan Amendment No. 79 -03D, as
and issuance o 4bmi-0-tad iva Declaration.
Respectively s JACK LAtd �D le
p Community Development
r•'•,';' JL:DJH:cc
the Planning Commission recommend adoption
shown on Exhibit 4, to the City Council
Attachments: Existing
Existing
Existing
Proposed
Initial
Land Use Map Exhibit 1
Zoning Map Exhibit 2 .
General Plan Map Exhibit 3
General Plan Exhibit 4
study Part I
ITEM "Ea
1
1 +t,
��ji�1l .4T
t
•- ..
rn,�
r
0
1! L
d
L
VVV111
JP
9
f I"•
ov w
P
A411 WOO '111H 031 -n
or uu/
L7, O8a O c
� b
c�a 1
-: -3n►a0
F J'
1 � :
VIdVl -••8• VIA
r
a � p
W �
v UJ
m q / +,: -
oVV � Y
g�.
1
1 N \
sn-10 MI Nn0o '711H
c
1
c�a 1
-: -3n►a0
F J'
1 � :
VIdVl -••8• VIA
r
a � p
W �
v UJ
m q / +,: -
oVV � Y
g�.
1
1 N \
sn-10 MI Nn0o '711H
c
W
U) t
IOU
w.., �) M �u N
ti 1
0'1/1 .... $ ... � Idl11
VJ ... s n
q too
1 1 ^ uc cu C� ^ i r \ ► v
to V F 0 �•1es__ R rn ,�• °� 'J ?� ,,/
^• rrY•rr to %O ,• rli KI 1 Y11
T H � l/
Q yor uNv
too
'
In ` ter'
c or rY /•1 �• ..._... ._ ____ p . u c� t
64) ' ;� � ! �� ''„ � , • �:�� r, � � r
Oni
a g —_ MaO ema AWN= 771H
n .� to t 1
Cv
.._ .... _..--•— °• PSG __.. ... __ 'i
uJ• aJ ..
A611Nn00 ITH 038 -i J
i
cc
�
u _
• . ,
cu
lflr . •. n. `N
CO gas '
CD
d33 v
to
VIA baVl 2- VIA w
AllY' " 9V I l•r
r •J,
o ��77,`� Z
VIA
�a! +� ) •,V I 7 sq, of Ai 1�4. •• n1
Ow tn
\J ;
---
tA
rw A or ti
N . �
N i �Ni M •'
•iJi%r •''
• C � o •pu•..:.. \ N
YY ` N I� .J M lit � u• � \!. �b! V �Ij �'•', Vd AN "to
7 Z Cn � ; 3Mao ema .4a.i.woo -i-w4
e O J (�aT, 1� D J d
W ,
.l IWOO ITH 038- n -...4 -
Ilk
rid N
yjpj, ;I
w
CITY OC RANCHO CUCMIONCA
INITIAL STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be complotod by applicant
Environmental Assessment Roview Foal $70.00
For all projects requiring onvironmenL•al review, thin
form must be completed and submiL•tod to tho Dovaloptnant
Roviow Committee through the department where the
project application in made. Upon receipt of this
application, tho Environmental Analysin staff will prepare
Part iI of the Initial Study'. The Davaloptnont Reviaw
Committee will meet and L-ako action no later than ton
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
Project is to bo hcarrl. The Committee will ma}-.o one of
t1kroo dotormiilnt ions s 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be.,
tailed, 2) The project will linve an dnvironinontal impact
and an Enviromnentai Impact Report will be prepared, or
3) An additional information raport should be supplied
by the applicant giving furl :-,,..c information concerning
tho proposed project.
PROJECT TITLE: 19,P, A, %9•-D� p
APPLICANT'S N1lME, ADDRESS,
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO DE CONTACTED
CONCGR'AING T11IS PROJECT: RA tA/noi Alvin, "
OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS
ASSESSOR
NO.)
LIS`. OTHER PEW -11TS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND
FEDERAI. AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:
1 -1
9
VIA
�,..... ,..iii,...._' _._..__._rc�.Riv...... .._ .
��'a ar �— •� oe ICI ,.J .,•• •r Na'
131110 ASINI100 111H 032! ° q
L
3 O - - ----
�o�
ANIN1100 i vH 0321 -t; --' "
ue' uVi
'7 o Y v° 8
cu
Las
r
f�1 r
lrjJ .•'., � In
U;'
C�
1 I
�L
'
4
I
'• iJ VlI
use
1
*fa
lop
1
..l,i • p.
Oa' cu.
t%
co
'+ t
Z
O
02 N r�
VIA
�,..... ,..iii,...._' _._..__._rc�.Riv...... .._ .
��'a ar �— •� oe ICI ,.J .,•• •r Na'
131110 ASINI100 111H 032! ° q
L
3 O - - ----
�o�
ANIN1100 i vH 0321 -t; --' "
ue' uVi
'7 o Y v° 8
cu
Las
r
f�1 r
lrjJ .•'., � In
U;'
C�
1 I
1 1' J + � 1 r' 1 � I Ir �1- I � , { . 1 � 1 � { � , � � I' I i + • . r � II. � 1 i �, I ' � r :�' 1 ' 1'4 ( I 1 l 1 - t I
I,r )1 rr Y r 1, 1 i r l I• � r1'.. 1- 1 1'h ��Y M! � 1
r 1
1 ♦1 + 1 1 I I it 1 11 1 1 I .. �'
' '11t i. 1�� +11 ,- ' • �rl '},1r r; %� 11 �. �'� rr ' 174 r ri r � 1 ,I '
I rl 1 i �.1 1 I 1 I. , .i /� 1 1', q rr .• 1 I
11 r ,Itl 1'• +,1;; 1 1 1 Ih \, 'i. ttik�'"n.r. r'1 ��Ir.', ' 1' � 1 1 1 1,� i � �� � I �''' �'i' •Irl� r I r 11 11 I ��`
'�11 rii
r 1,.
1 „11 I
2ROJ1,qr- D11SCRI PT ION
rll•1'1 •�1t • , '� tl
DESCRIPTION
/I • n • I• . �Y Ir r r1 ,
{ rl �;� . . r �• ♦ .r � i L•n ;11 1 11
F PROJECT
1 A3 r ,
OF PROJECT • SQUARE FOOTAGE OF t • 1.11,11,
� ,.1.11 i I•I
DESCRIBE• • •
MCLUDING INFOIUMTION 014 rOPOGMPHYt
�.�
OF • • t PROPERTIES,
EXISTING STRUCTURES A • HEIR USE (ATTACI
NECE
r
� 1A r
d: =•i•ief• •I i i f / • '.rill 'fl Wi.
' 1
/ irI/ •y II
ri
/ JAU . . • /�� f / 1.
w • �C •
'11 t.7 Iri�•' 1, �I.
1 ,
Y 7-k�
wk
Is
+ series-
of cumulativn actions. although ind 1 i"1 r
1 11 • . • c have • environmental l �r Ij
1'x11
1 +1 ` '1 X112 1`' {.�. •I.'�1,','�
r �
I 1 y
• 1
1 r 11' J
J r f S. • A I 1• 1 r,.
.l I
1 W i 11 L14 I,. LI ,all + • 1 1 '
{ 51 rt i w1 -. rl t r 1 f r I\ 1: �. i•r t y' •'yr J. 1 1
r l i )� j• 1 1 ,. 1' ) r 1 I y l 1..1„ 1 1 7• 1 r "1' 1 ' 1 1 1 ' ' 1
!,I r rl � r✓ 1"+r 1� ! ,1, ! tl r s :'�' /�l •\ r / • ,.I 1^ r �•. r 1
t.
1 1 1 �>,,� a 1� J A�•', t r P 1 ?} 111 r r \-1 ♦1 .�'1 i .' f 7: t r 1, .y.
"{ y:. t • .1 FI Jr l 1 �1 1 `\ � r 1 1 r� 1 1 1 r 1 \• 1� /�
t i.yr 1 I 1 JIr. � r, ',� 1 ep 1' 1. { � r 1 •'.
1 r � / 1. y,. ,r� n +C� .r _.. _� .�•1_ ., lL L ✓ .iD �'_ � V.' � ,I .1 ... _.. _. .. .. 1. .1 s 1 _. .. P 1 ._..ate ....
1
YI,8 7-c _,%
1. Crent-a a substantial chango in ground
contours?
„^ 2. Create.n substantial change in exin ing
noise or vibration!
3. Create a substantial change In demand for
municipal services ;polico, fire, water,
bawaga, eLc.)i
4. Create changes in the existing zoning or
general plan denignations?
!l�5: Remove any existing travc? How mnn }?
Create the need for use or disposal of
Potentially hazardous matorials such as
toxic substances, flammables or explosives?
Explanation of any YES answers above: p.tei,uec+
IMPORTANT: if the prujoct involves the construction of
residential snits, complete the form on the
next page.
CGRTIPICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
informat:.un 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 Comnittt -e.
Date_S w'� 4. 1979 signature sAA ,,,,^ .'L
Title.r
_.,'3 ,
t,
rr
�r
0 0
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA
STAFF REPORT
DATNi October 10, 19711
TO planning Commission
FROM, Jack Lam, Director of Community DcvulopmanL•
SUOJECTt GRNERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79 -030 - CITY OF RANC110 CUCAMONGA -
A change from tha present designation 01 Low Density Rosidcnhial
(2 -5 units par gross acre) to Medium Density Pusidantial (5 -15
units par gross acre) for property loeal:ud between Iiollman Avanut
and Amethyst Avenue frunting on La Vina, Lomita and La Grande
S "":oeta.
DACKGROUND, Over tho last reconl months, aovoral inquiries from the publi-: have
suggested a desire for multiple family ranidouL•ia.l construction in the general
area. Thin amendment to the General Plan is founded on those requests. Currently,
the area is xonod R -3 (refer to Exhibit 2). The existing land use consist;% of
older single family dwellings with several undeveloped lots and soma developments of
multiple family dwellings, (primarily duplexes and triplo:tos). The area wits laid
out approximately 30 years ago so troos and vegetation are well dovolopedd (Hofer
to Exhibit 1).
AN1U,ySISl Staff crnducted an inventory of the existing land use in the project area.
The project area covers approximately 32 acres, which are broken down into the
following percentage of land useat
Single Family Conventional
Duplex Units (20 units total)
Throe or more Unite (25 units total)
Vacant '
Commercial 2,0%
The existing land use reveals 70% of the ,project area is currently developed single -
family residential. The remaining vacant. lands approximntely 3.3 aesgn, if Jevoloped
at 15 dwelling units per acre, multiple family residential could generate an
additional 49 dwelling units. .Since only 17% of the area is covered by multiple
family dwelling units, it appears that preservation of :ho Low Density Residential
would be appropriate. All of tha multiple family dwellings become legal non-
conforming sites that may continue but not be expanded.
ITEM "F"
t
11� I, I '�. I � 1 � , •,r 1,4.1 I � I ' � , I 1.1 , 'II i1 ,'��Y 1 I Y..• 111
' 11. i�' I 1 1 r 1 I, ' 1 �' 1 �f 1 ", 4 ' i I ,.� / 11 I 1 J' 1 I' 1 1 1 'I � ��, l i' 1'.9 I 1� •,
1'� 4 1' r 1� , • • 11 f ;1 •, . ,, 1 �I , I' , r ♦ r' 11 A� 1 6 1
� , ' 1 , r r ' 1 1 � • r ' f 1 I 1 , . 1 ' . , 1 , . q ! ,I '
1
' I ,. `
►es I'_ II' � !, 1 �•f 1 1 \. 1 1 , I 1�� 1 ,I� If 1 • 1 ' 1�, � 1j 11 I' 1 11
• I , 1 „� 1 I �, l i' , `, , I � '� ; 1 I I 1 r' I I' ' � I � �' '. i f I I Y J I 11 I � `. 1 1 1 r
1 � // i y « . 1 I � ' 1 • i 1'.. ( I , I,. •' r , I � • � :.1 � 1 1 ' I: I ' I ' '' •� � � ; � ` 1 I - .111 r �I ' ' � ' L, 111 1 � � 1 f A
1 �,' .Y ,�, •I ' .I 11 ',,. � 1 ' It I, 'iM :�' 1'I�i 1 i'.11 111 1! �•'' �I I, �; 1,
I . •
,
' •1' • 1 • r • / 1 r 1 I •' ,'
stiown on retained and Ganural Plan Amondmunt No. 79-030 be donind.
111• •I'' '' � ' /•i r� I, I1 i
o
1'
I.fr 1 •
I, 1 �',1•
fly',
JLaI3KIIsDJIhcc
•, AtLachmantue
•1 i'• •
Zoning Map, Exhibit 2
�' .. •; 11111' !�
.• •fl: � II i �.
,yl I 1 ,•
1:1 1 •r ,1
1 A
:i •i
{ 1 1' ,rl :• , ,� r� ,�. ' I I ' '1- 4 .'. 4 41 .1••I• 1 ' ", , '',�I ♦ ' .1 5.
� 4� 1 '. �' f , I. �1 , '.i l I� lNt + 1`1..:11 1 Oi rn l 41. � `. ` {• 11 '',�
.1 Ir �I I
4 �1 t y � .�11 tl .r � 1 %..:11 � � � r , • r..i �1„ la r I �? I
'� n r , ,, ,�r 1 r�t:11 O 1 1 1 / ': 1 :'i • ' •1.
J , 1 +. 1 ♦ ' .� !' ,..; 1 �1 • � ( Q' 'r ti ,f , �' 1 ° 1 1 � 1 r'. � I I 1 j,' r.
� `�lill �1 ; �E• f,11 '+ f' 1 , `'� .ifl 1 ' '. 1+' • 'f r1 ♦, 4 � `.:j 1 '
1 1 '�� 1', ; .i,l � 1 i 1 11 • 1 1. • � I 1 �•
/� 111 ��' I ,`' 1 1 1 1 1 Iliy' 1 t 1 I 'I�• 1 '• I 11i I 111.1'1 11 '111 , 1 1 1 I�IY x'1,11
li
V • ,1 '1'1 �'',1 1�''�' 1 1 (, !1 5�1�1 1, :1 1 "1 I','1 1 11��1 pl, 1 Ihl '1 1 ��
r 1 1 7'1 1 , ' 1 1 Ii •r ' I1 1 I1 1115• '.I 1 1 11 1
I , II ', • 1 ' 1 I 'fl II ` 11., 1 1' ' 1 , 1 1 • 1. ' I• 1i,
1'
1 I•
1' 1 • .1
II!1N'
•r, EMI/ i 11 ,., '' +�,�
��� \� I r �• j � y 11'1 (1
1.11
11 -IVr. C�U l
■
I�r ■r rii 1 1 �1' ^ '.
`i r ,C
a'
Nil 1
i�i _■ !or
ism
111 E 111 ■� -
n 7S"4Yfr m
� rrc
,. 1� /111 � � � r■ pii 0 '; ;'11 '
'i': � r.rr"•. �� \_ 1 11111 �' ,1�.
1. 11
mill w q1
r'1, 1 uNU ■C■ .Rfjl = Z� -ter ■■ :��� yw ;.'` ',. 1.
.1 � �0 0 ifi .� C� �IM�1 Cp � 11111 p1 ■� !�!i� •,11,,'•.•1
I', w �� 3 iC 1 :. awl p . • r
,•,: is a
:' ■�� a r
m� Ii r ■ml rii um ■ ... 1 ,
to
I
■ ff' IN w■w■. 1,
Sam III Im = N'■ �� : ; '
�, : 1■un' °r1r'le� ep =:I �i.. .1 ��aU11WUUl �:�: ;•
win Ir101 p _
4 �■1 1 1M ■r10p1 I� "".rr r . C .. i•�IUI=7i.'ji�Ci
• �.i Irr rr rr Ir r ,� C , 3�.�J- .� 1.■1 t
' ■�d P ` -� ......� 0 Ir ."3 ■ ■ . +d1i111/j i ■� "Ir,
1r rr ..
C� .•u �Ir�ia ■ \r r. s �= = ..:'S�. r■ ■'•111 \� i
1
/ 1 I
r '1. 1f1 ,i.' s • }', %1 ♦Ull / fl /,
11 •_, :.� ,.,`.. '� ,Y -, / � �''' ' ! 1 .11111 II•. ( / PY /U 4L n1'�, rl `r1 5 � ,/i 11 )1 P 1
5 1 , ,1 '.:Y „ i 't /4 1 •I 1 15 Y 11 II l�Vl 5 LL U ,' Lh.{ , J fl! \ :'.il q
1 Iilti , 1 I�A 5111 } 11 rl 1 1 E:
1 �'� •y � 1 '• ' 111 � 1� 11 r / 1•- 4 I 1 1
11 7 r 1 �L 1 1 5 r' / r l 1,; 5 ,r 1 x 1 •• ! 1 i , ,� ft
t _a' •Ir I� 1 I, 1 Y' 1 1 �% t , /1 • ', rl , 1 1 l r
n / ',• P. 1 t t 5 t 1•, iI , P' 4 SI ( 1 �I'\ ♦ � .1,1411 11'1 � i 11 , (' �• 1' � j Iii 1,.,J
1 1 "+• 1 I `� r ,.. , � 1 \ 1 Y l '. � • Jh 5 1 ➢ y r � 5 '` 1, 1
11 t I I 1� ,' I I 1 '1 1 V 1 4 i I f t(• 1 Y 1, VAI 1 5 11 , J 1
���,. �.. r. I t g, . i. �• .1. .. 1 .1. .... . „ ... .I. ., 5 �. ,ra, i, 11'.. . �1 .. '\' a .. �..
,•�r1.1, 1,.'.1 t'.J, r r '.!!' I ', I .,.yl. r I�. ,
JI r J
I �-J
kv
C
Ti
:r
' . ,1 , , .:,,� JI ',•417• •,,., MIt 'f
a• 1 v m
��✓ 1 1�J J 1�
s., QC. �� ��, iy� ��1. 1 i 1�' .11� 1 :(•. _f t -1
r .1-: � Ir of �� , I7 , .,: � I . �• ; ..... �,.. _. � C.
•i. , , •was! „ , ,
UN
X.
Ir
t.r ; ty;� °c . iii, �^ , ,' •1 i I._`
ITI
`° a�..
111 ` +, 1, L + j , ; i 11 al, , 1 .. 11 ♦ , 1 ,
f'i• �, 1 111 1' 1 �' I ," I I I I l,' 'I 1 1 1 I 11
1 I 1 1� � � 1 , � 1 1 1 1 � /'' ♦ , 1 1
1' 1 1 I / I. I'1' 1 11♦ (f' 1 I 1 I' 1 i ''l''
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
�' '1/ \� .f 1� 11 1 1 11 �l I I" 1 I 1 '
1j I 1 i , 1 , I.1 11 1' "1 1 ,/' 1 1. II J. 'j 1 1 I�i 1 III 1� • � .�� 4 11 1.. ',�
1,1!1'
ph
11
� � A h r• n
';; . ;, II Allll ► r l;',,';. 1
I 1 '� .�.. n • �, r ..a t;
oil
11 a I� �:»1�4f0l1 ��'� t �, �•� , '1
1 .1
'
I
w
,a 1.
', li'ff fr �' 17x17
4
Ll. < L.
1
11 1I
t I k
1.
1
0
U
0 i
CITY OL RANCHO CUCA140NGA
STAPir REPORT
DATrt October 10, 1979
TOt Planning Commission
Irnom. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
SUUJI:CTt GENEfU1i. PL�����iwn 03'L - CITY Olr RANCItp CUCAMONGA -
A change Pignetioll of Low Densiy Itaodential (2-
unite pium Donoity Roaidont.lal (5-1.5 unite per
ryrons care) Por property beginning at a paint G00 ioot want of foot
on the north lido of Base ina and a tcndinq approxil�ately GRa Prot
along DasoIins and extending north to the Pscific Eleotric Railroa8
right -of -way covering approximatoly 20.6 so ran of land.
OACKOROUNDt During the public hearing for General Plan Amondmavt 79 -03E it was
notnd tnat the above mentioned area was indicated on the existing Land Use Map as
being a Mobila 110mo Park. Since the area is davel.uped at a dons9ty greater than
the Low Density Residential (2 to 5 units par groan acro), staff was directed to
amend the General Plan Land Una Map to reflect thin development. The appropriate
Land Una Designation is Modium Density Residential (5 to 15 units per groan acre).
Staff prepared the Initial Study for thin mnendment and have dotarained that no
significant adverse environmental impacts will occur no a result a? this amendment.
Part I of the Initial Study is attaehod for your review. Staff recommends issuance
of a Negativo Declaration for thin project.
t It is recommended the Planning Commission recommend adoption of
nandmant No. 79 -03I as shown on Exhibit 4.
ttod,
..1.
r1 1•r..
ty Development
JLtBrJ1ID11 :cc
Attachmunts:
LJ
Existing Land Use Map# Exhibit 1
Zoning Map, Exhibit 2
Existing General Plan Map, Exhibit 3
Proposed General. Plan Map, Exhibit 4
Initial Study Part I
ITEM "G"
Sri 1 I. �f •.� , ! w 1i
li 11 '• 1.1 1• � '.� 1 j1 1 �I '•. � 1, '. '.. 111 X11 I f�llYi' '�1
J
1. 1,l, '. ,d, 11 1 1 1 •i 1.,y )t-. 1 '•II 4 11
1 1 � 1,' I I�1 1 ,.' 1, i r 1 • r ili, 11 i1 1 ,1 •'.l'�� 1 ":i�N�'•1 n ' '
�. 1 ' ,1'11 "'�' •.� L1 1 li l��• 11 111'1 1 ''{I 1 (� , ' / '11
I
,I 1
1'
,�� °• � a � (lip
:1 •'
as ,111
11' I. i 11Ij {I1''y IJ
J., ;
/ i� 1 Iu1u1r ,
',''I; v 1 rr■r■r arrhr IIIp 1 1 y11R' gn
oil
I
:1.
I I �'' � � �� �" - 111 � 1 •� 'ii'
w 1 = r
�; • 1'' ,, •� a�:3 ' � t� III, 11 � ,•, l..
1u1
a t r 1 I 1� X11 Ira ,�1� �M 1#� 1 i''.•'.
C;9
■1 lour u ,
id
r
1 i 1) I 1 -�,° ' / + f l \ r ' I 1. 1!� 1' r' • 1 l i I( -,. • ,•.
' '' 1:' `. (�` " ,i Y:.t �, 0 I� } I �'.1_I 11 Itr X11111✓ 11 , .. . l ,.11 1 'I .�
Ir 1' . •� 1 t �{ ���, 1! ! , ) f i 1 • i ) i 1 • 11 L �., , ' ) 1 I
, � � 1 I � �•. 1 '' 11 I � y L I 1•
t 1 r� 1 /r ' � �.j >r • s N r 1 '. ..11 �.• ! 1 , 1
) b 11 'I i' F r•1 Nf ' u r, .t/ 1: , i 1 .i, 1 1� y �
I' f.� I,1 yl � 't � lr ;�. ) '',') l;,l -,1 • r) 1 I I tIL 1_: 1� 1 •�' � �•
1'. 1 1 1 r .1 s '�y,,11 rl • I,�. , •;11 �lyle I YI I .,.1 `, i •I yi,, ,-•
1
1
mc
KA 1•i
,
.� yy
`{
� ±,�
X
NYI.VN
aG
I
1
m.
, ..
n.
Lp
'!.• • �j ,1 ,� ' ;�r��i '.�. •t t ,•I1 11 � ••1•{}r• � •', �, ..• .
Q ,
It
M
QY_
t
+ li ' r 11 I I ll II Lr I i� r
I
•/ I +1 I I Ir 'Ij rl I
lP. I r �, /'.1 I I .' r I I , ' 1 , 111 lill t i.
I II ;YI:
11 ,Y +11 1
P
I 1
1 1 1
I ,111 � ' • ,.
1 ,
1 w u 1
I11
L1 � i r ♦ I 1.
1 ',. ♦ ,y 1 5 1 �.
I
''\ n1 , �
• ■* 1i3 Iuttlrrr � U
� =11 11 11, 111 � 1 � 'Z��1�■■ ■■■■i■■1 ■`!��"i■ ■r ,.,
" Q►�� ►ii'` _ . r 1 1 111 7
' I k.. ''•' ' :��•�: ■roil ; ' ' � , qp�i� �I�1 ,11
owl
' .r 1':r',; � � � ^�� �il� � � 1111 ■1 � �iisi ■� Gw �� 1 ..,:
1 � 1 ■r ■11 r w r. I■ All It11, ■_ „■` r
■r��1 �� 11' i 11 �`■ ■ I.1
' I ,. is «n11r ■rr■ IQ 1� ■1111 ii � ■��`ivi � � I + 1 '
., �, ,r.•• a.t ..
1, � \1111 C■' ► r 1/ �\ I:.�rrn ., ■ ■ri lull r11,� IIUi11 �il ►�. " '' :
►.»�r+�. r r10 ri C / ►• 'IIiI , It ■��1111 UpI ��■ p ■ ■.
311. ING � iiii' � 1111• t � �_ �0�11IH�i � � �� C'I,� T'1+ r ;'
owns
'1 I� 1 I ; . ���' � � ��'�■ C�Qa � ►- •���_ . ��11 �� - .' �' 1 111 11►� A = ■tl �,,. r
=plow `�11� i �= .' \ \,� �' ili 1■i■ . I�IIiU' ■� ■ ■ ■/ C �� ( 1 til
an
MIIIIIIIMM
man
• ,'�. 1 ■1 f•/ � }I� € ■'�`iS 31a��:(firbC 1/`��il�l I ►�! �'�� p r• �!• y , .r ",�'.'
� '' �I � Ci /1. % 1111 .. C =:': •�I �■IA / II .r WI - /tp`
+ + ; , '.ii 111 V 1 �� 111 i ■�� ■' �... nrinl ■■ IIIIItI iriiu rJ
+ ..r slit. ■s L .. Sunun iori% ■u■■w.■ alunlln r
i��,y e.�l .. ■■�. mnru �YUI C � , II
+ f� i' ■��� 1 t■;. ..., or��w nllllll 111
' I�■Ug1��!� ' X1111 111111111 Iii IOII � I �'
YIWIUlm
alb , .. .. marl ■. Z'11111'
+' 1 G. r ■ 1
y1 a
i� ,•� a • I 1171_111 171n +1• ■L
1 , v I .r ltt t I u l +.� �1 • 1 i 1 ZI G L7 41 ..+
1
N� 1 . r 1.., 1 .Ilr }lI 1 1 1 1' +i,r1 � �.,• f li', {r �, , "•' {' � 1\.''L
, + I
, ++ . � '•`..Ir� 1't tV +,, 1, I' �. I 1 1 �.r 1'1 �,IA I 1 1 , , • 1� It • ( ' �1
It
r �td11 f � a .1 111 I . _ ' t , �• �. , r � +'.� I \ r ,.'•, I .rl
Ili ''' ,I; 1 '.`�,!'., 1, .rl �1',� � 1 f\..,,1 'l. 1' I II ''� ','.: • f�l 1, }�1+ Ilr : 1 X11 I ■ ''1•
+� Ir'i� I I' 1 ��f�• 'i' I �' I ' 1 ° 1 I''� V 1i'''J i Vii., r I 1 �11% I '' �I t. ,
� I f ..1, I � I• III �, I I 'r'� 1 �,i 11 1 I I�' ii I .'d / I i
i t 1 �� 1 1.' I 1 �, 1 f 1 l 1, I 1 71 I � I i + ��� '� •� � I i' 1. I� � I� •. ,� 111 6 �, I i i l
. IV � 1 ,y Il rl'r N, Ili" '� 1 l'Ir '.r all `i 11. I l,l. +��r I �,'• {r 1�'1 q i1 I .
Ij " ' •
. ,�' + � r i 1.•x`1
� f
1 1.1
` 1
1 1 • � ir�' � �1 I , ' ,,
r ;1
� , . Wi Itt111nItH1 '• � , ' '.•
I I r Sid, �i11
Ii Yy 0�� 4Qit�llrl �Q�iii�i' OW uunnlll �iiil
I Qii •I 1
:,; � ',1• � M � � et ECG =� • � � aE��;i����� �'�.' ,.,
IN mill .i ■
s36: E ►1� 11 IIOt : o
3 =a
lob
_
• — � �. •w• I r ww
1 ') • C 111 �I�Ii ` I�tl� i
mill ..0 f._ �u• I J�
1 �I' =? :.' r 1 }■ate "� 1� ���� �111G 1 i 5� I
,'; : �ll/ /�1�11 ■11 . 1111 1 . ►�1
t .' ( " ■ \IM -- �� .� �ua l p w Iur�1 In /_ �j��1 Y ■ ■
+ ► " ' ■ ^11� "�Ir =rj�i is /�1�1�1 .'. 1 1�J 11 r � I I%I A5 '.' � r �,
Ion
Big
.' „Irl� I �, � I ■1 111 IIi111 Y-0SI' : —v .��.
p:■:i'�FO lip�t = ►sir f,,. f.:. R nu� ■.Ir.�� nw;
IRIAN
' I'�" I'' 1 �� 111111 =�,�`f�� �- �� -1 'C'�f11����� . �IIIU �I ii1�■ C■ i111,t■ Ciu1 + � I „�,
T' 'l a ',,,1 q u�: 1� 1�� ��11111 i�1�G C ��:.: TriiuNU■u 1 :,
IVt . ■ uum ■ u■ •u a•■ ����IIIIU
o•
a ■■� u■r� %I.i� • 1111 � '�
poll ■!■ eFa, I 1 4
.1 1 C - CIE ■ IIIA111 /11urCG1 =111 rl•
jr u ■i r • C� uum Asa
r most 11
r ,� ■ q� �� ■ ��\ 11 r
\\ 1111111 1 O _ � ■ � .� •■� ■ .� '
r
r ( � r ,' a '• , t 1 �', J•I ,.�,, y .,•i 1.1 '1'JI �1,1 7 ., Ill l f 'r1 : 1 1.' ; '
t • ( J 1 �f. , 7 + �,� J 71 ., . 1 l',? Ilr 1')i�l. 1 rc/+ EJ
1 7 I�1. 1 I l 1 t' •> f( J r r I. r ! I '•.
J • y � ! � ' �` r � o:, f , • yl . I �{ y 1 { ) 5 1 ,t 1 ,� ' 1 f
a .. �• y ,,.� f r'• z, r'. P y• L ,� , ,. } I s f ” 11 f i' 1 ' ;
1 , , r 1 1 • ' I .. 7 , I• 1 i V r ,.
r , ' , t ♦. •• j 1 �`1 , 1 f 'I:. 1 �' rli , 11 `: 1 � �•�
.i . r
TART I '
CITY OF NANCIIO CUCAMONGA
XNITXAL STUDY,
PART I — PROJP:CT INFORMATION SHCET — To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Fees $70.00
For all projocta requiring onvironmontal roviow, thin
form must be completed and submitted to the Davolopment
Review Committee through the dopartmont where the
project application is made. Upon receipt of this
application, the Environmental Analyaia staff will propeAre
Part II of the Initial Study. The Devnlopment Roview
Committoo will meet and take action no later, than ton
(10) days before the public meeting at which Limo the
ptojoct is to be heard. The Committee will make one of
throe datorsninntiona: 1) The project will have no
onvironmentnl impact and a Negative Declaration will be
filed, 2) The project will have an onvironmontal 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
Lbo proposed project. 0
PROJECT TITLES -0--+-'ft-
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE:
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO DE CONTACTED
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: _ Bn ►^ v%t, Amev lh in P11 P
W.
LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.)
/.bC,0Lbe+cf -n'F 142 ".p �m Q SiL�e�' DT gas 740, 11�rNIN�,1�Ity�..
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES WI,D THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: ,
'r
7
1
j.
r f .•,'1 1
A•
„
I
PIlOJ)5CT DI:A��7��d,((
,
DESCRIP'!'ION
Or 11JROO
•,�
PNS1Ti
�
Ct
..fir•
Lo
,1
y�
applw,An. t 4N
moo, til
ACREAGE or`�RnJrCT
PROPOSED BUILDINGS,
...
21�'v
y e- 20
rA—orj
r
jd:Li
r L4
eau
. ,
, n
REA AND SQUARE
OTAGE OF EX:STING
PAD
DESCRU E THE
MIRC
XNCLUDING INFORMAT]
hNIMALS, ANY
CULTUF
Or SURROUNDING
PRO)
EXISTING STRUCTURE'
1
j.
r f .•,'1 1
A•
4 1'
11
1
• 1)
lr s ; , ( 1 [• ,� '1 '. ' ,Ir�i �1 , ' f ^� 1111'11 1 i,11`) 111 ,, �� 1 , , �:, v '
1 t.• ' r:, 1� Jet; •'/ � ° vr' ;1 r �� r , `4'' v'r t � ,; '.
1 , 1 ,tr�IH • r� s ri,Flt !'� � ' M••�i � i' •' '.4 ` .,1. , ti r{ � r r �
„
..fir•
Lo
. r
y�
.
...
21�'v
r
r L4
eau
. ,
, n
REA AND SQUARE
OTAGE OF EX:STING
PAD
4 1'
11
1
• 1)
lr s ; , ( 1 [• ,� '1 '. ' ,Ir�i �1 , ' f ^� 1111'11 1 i,11`) 111 ,, �� 1 , , �:, v '
1 t.• ' r:, 1� Jet; •'/ � ° vr' ;1 r �� r , `4'' v'r t � ,; '.
1 , 1 ,tr�IH • r� s ri,Flt !'� � ' M••�i � i' •' '.4 ` .,1. , ti r{ � r r �
WILL TT17:3 PROJIM'r:
M
Create,a substantial chango in ground
contours?
�2. Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vibration?
Create a substantial change in demand for
municipal services (police, fire, wator,
sowage, eto.)l
4. Create changes in the existing zoning or'
general plan deaignationsl
5: Remove any existing treos'! How many ?.
�6. Create the need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, flammables or explosives?
Ecplanation of any YT answers abovo: rrn � cc�eviC[
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, statement•,, 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 submitk-.ed
before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development
Review Committee.
Date 5.,2��t',_ a; /q%9 signature
��� Title,
2 - -13
II
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA
STAFF REPORT
Data: October 10, 1979
To: Planning, Comminnion
From: Jack Lnm, Director of Community Development
0
Subject: ZONING ORDINANCE DETERMINATION NO. 79 -05 - HONE - A retail nursery
within tl►e C -1 zone
BACKGROUND: 'file Planning Commission, at its meeting of September 26, 1979,
heard from Mr. Doug Ilona who requested it determination train the Planning Com-
mission as to whether a retail nursery could be viewed as n permitted une
within the C -1 zone. As the Commission will recall, Mr. Ilona has been working with
the Creenrock Nursery on 19th Street for relocation of the nursery within a
proposed shopping cantor located on the southwest corner of Lemon and Archibald.
Prior to making any final commitments, Mr. None would like to verify that maid
nursery would be permitted in the C -1 zone.
ANALYSIS: The San Bernardino County Zoning Ordinance, which has been adopted
® for interim use by the City, does not specifically list a retail nursery as a
permitted use in the C -1 zone. however, the ordinance gives the authority to
the Planning Commission to approve any other uses within the C -1 zone that may
be similar to those listed in the district• The Commission may be aware that
presently there is a retail nursery located in an existing neighborhood shopping
center. The Sunrise Center located on the southwest corner of Baseline and
Carnelian contains such a nursery. The nursery has been located there for
several years and to date does not appear to have caused any significant pro-
blems. Should the Commission find this use to be similar and permit
it within the C -1 zone, they would still have the authority for review of the
specific site plan for the development to ensure that display of materials and
buildings are located in a manner such that it would not be detrimental to other
uses on or adjacent to the site.
RECOMMENDI.TION: It is recom
retail nursery in similar to
be pertsitt d subject to site
Rc Pcctlul y submitted,
JACK LAM, Di'rectbr of.
Community Development
JL:MV:nm
, .1'
vended that the Planning Commission
other uses in the C -1 zone and that
plan approval.
find that a
such use would
ITEM I'll's
I
t
LAW OYYlcr.n
JONES AND PITTULI.O
A PAU/L,1U'ONA, CAW CO"PNMANON
YIUNt1 W. J011to
M, IIMOIb• FITtULLO
NAMON OOMtt
fNACY LOWMAN IIA0AL%
October 9, 1979
Mr. tacit ham
Director of Community
P.O. nox 793
Rancho CU-Nmongn, CA
D eve Iap tile tit
917!0
0
4O4 NO. •CCONU AVtNUC
UPLAND, CALIFORNIA 01100
ttLCMNON[ 714.0011.11101
Ite; Planning Coulntlnsion Agenda, October 10, 1979- RaconslderntLot, of
Resolution number 79- 40- hroperty of William Longley
De1tr Mr. Lams
1 was referred to your office by Mr. Robert E. 1ougherty, Assistant
City Attorney, who Indicated to me thnt I might obtain it continuance
by contacting you. This letter was written pursuant to n telephone
conversation with your of flee during which I was advised that if this
letter were to resell you by noon on October 10, 1979, it two -week
continuance would be obtained.
During the following two weeks 1 Intend to meet with you and the
city staff In hopos of resolving; any differences between the city
and Mr. Longley. At your earliest convenience I should like to mcat
with both you and Mr. Mogan so that we can take up the contents of
Mr. Dougherty'a letter of September 2E, 1979. Tho subject matter
then can be considered, should the city planning staff desire, tit
the next commission meeting.
Very truly yourn,
JONES 6 PITTULLO
A profeaaio nl Law Corporation
BY Tlt'11Cti�LOWt1AN TIBBALS
TLT /lh
ce:Mr. I41111am Longley
Mr. Howard Weisweaver
Mr. Barry Rognn
t•Ir. Robert E. Dougherty
Mr. Edward E. Hopson
I,
Dater
Tai
F ruin i
!�J
CITY OF IMC110, CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
October 100 1979
Planning Commission
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
Subjecti DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -26 - LONCLEY - Request for Phasing of
Conditions of Approval of Resolution No. 79 -40
ABSTRACT: The week of September 24th the City Attorney omit Mr. Longluy
a letter tc cease and desist the operation of Deaver Building Supplies tit
the site located on the south side of Foothill Blvd. adjacent to the Davore
Freeway. Mr. Longley had commenced operation of tlia use by locating building
materials and a construction check on the site without meeting any conditions
of npproi Staff met with the Manager of the yard on Monday, October 1 and
as a result, Mr. Longley is requesting that the Planning Commission allow him
to continue present operations while providing the improvements per the improve-
ment schedule attached (See Exhibit 1).
It is our opinion that this procedure an allowed would create a dongoroua
precedent for the City and make it next to impossible for the City to insure
that all conditions of approval have been met. The Resolution approves Direc-
tor Review No. 79 -26 sublact to the conditions liuted. No operations are to
commence until all conditions of approval have been met. If the City were to
allow Mr. Longley to continue his present operation, we would have to allow this
to happen for all urea within the City and therefore, would have many commorcial,
industrial, and residential users on vncnnt unimproved property promising to do
improvements at some later date with no guarantee of completion. It is incumbant
upon City staff to make sure that all conditions of approval are met. Occupancy
of a site and commencement of business makes it next to impossible for staff to
hold a project for compliance with conditions. There are many, projects within the
City at the present time such as the Alpha Beta Center which is being held up from
a full opening due to the lack of compliance with complete conditions of approval.
They have the site 90% complete and we are holding occupancy for them. It would be
grossly unfair if the Commission were to allow this request in addition to diluting
all staff atithority in seeking compliance with conditions of approval.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny the applicants
request and dir ct the applicant to cease and desist his operation immediately.
Reaps tfully sumitted,
JACK L rector of--
Community Development
JL:BKH:nm
Attachments: Exhibit 1,, Beaver Building Supply Improvement Schedule
Planning Commission Resolution No. 79 -40 ITEM "I"
m
♦ it
I
I, 1 1 i.1 i 11
1
1 .Ir
',/
I 11,
1I•
�
1 h .x:111
1: I'
i;' 1 II.1
1:1'
I.
I 1 1 1 �
• 1 �
1 I
1 1 1
�.
�' 1'
' 1
1� �
1 1 1 1
1 r ' , I 1
�
�. I 1 ' I '1
\ ,
1
I 11 11 t'� ' 1 P • 4�1
�
1
, 1 1 1
J
1 �" U
i l" 1 .•1' :
y �� 11.
I 1; :1 I
.
l
.11 11 1.
I I' 1 1111 1 1 11 I
1
1� i 1 1 II
1•
1 ..
1
1
.'.
r It I (1
1
{r 1� 1
1.111
it
I',
1 1 I' i
1i '
1 1' 1
�l•'�
'L
`111
1 1 'il 11 1 ' i ,
• i
1 1'll 1
I
i'� '.:r� 11
1•t +
1 11
11 1 � 11 1
11' 1
1
1
I'll 11 11 I i 11' �
,'�
� 1
1 I
1 !II '
i{�'1'
1 11. I
'14
1•
I
/. '
� M'
1 1 1
�
11j..
1 1 . �
I 11 I 1 11
I �I 11
: ,
�n
{,'1�
1 1 ".r I 1 ♦ l 1
11 �..' 11 '1
1 t
11
,,1111 i.11
1 .1 1 ,
� t, il'�'1
:,I i1 ',
'
I, I.'•.
1 :',1 1, 1 ,J' 1 1.. ,
I
' t';
+ '' �' l 1 , �
� 111. ''1
.,1 1 1 I:
,L' 1
'..1 11 1 r l l .,
1
• ,�
�i
y� 1
'Y,' �
1 1 1
w�1..�..
� 1 1, , 1 .,
1 11 : +_.
,.Iv, 1• i 1'. yl 1 1 II �1A w •
l '
•
I' ll'
.,yl,�'.
1
1
li
I
t tY \'1! �, ,i.. I 1 1 i.
1
,';r' 1 A 111'
�. 1 t 1�, �
I �, I
1''
�I •
1
tl' I,r r•�i
1 1'1.'•1.' t'
111`\,
1
',1111
r,
1
11.1
/'111
'I'' •
1'
1
i
' I. �y, r1•
1 ..1
•
,
,r., i:..
11
1 tit
1ri,'.
1�'I I •I.1 . . 'rt I'
.I • •,
I
b
1:
1
,1
1
1
r
'
. �
•
f 11.
•
1
1 •�,, 1
111
,
r
1
t
1 1
•
r.l.
l
1
1
•�
.:
^)♦
I
Y '�i
I.II � 1
1�fr
1 \
I//
� 1
1•r
1 •.� 1•
1
Lit
'
;
i � 1�t "LI ^1I; 1 _I v. 11 Ll
'1 11
1 I
••1
.1
'1; 1�
!
1 .�
1
1 r
1 l 1 1
•'r I !
J r 1 .1. ♦ JI
',:6r1
,1 �. ,♦ }
1. 1
111
1
.'
+
e
�.
f 1 1 1
�
1
, ,. 1 1 1•
•
e 1 i f 1
1
, r
1
RESOLU'T'ION NO. 79 -40
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNIN:
COMMISSION APPROVING DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -26
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF F00THILL BLVD.
ADJACENT TO TIIE DEVOIIE VRVFWAY IN Tilt 0-2 AND
M -1 'LONE
WHEREAS, on the 21r.t day of March, 1979, a complete application
was filed for review of the above described project; and
WHEIRGAS$ on the 11th day of April, 1979, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Coimiisaion held a meeting to consider the above described pro-
ject; and
WHEREAS, thin item was continued for further information and
again heard on the 25th day of April, 1979.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONCA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1:
That the following findings have been made:
I. That the site Indicated by the development plan
Is adequate in uiro and uhaqu to accommodate the
proposed use, and all yards, spaces, wallop fences,
parking, landscaping, loading and other features
required by this section.
2. That the improvements as indicated on the develop-
ment plan are located in such a manner as to be
properly related to existing and proposed streets
and highways.
3. That the improvements as shown on the development
plan Lre consistent with all adopted standards and
Policies as set forth in this section.
SECTION 2:
'That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment
and that a Negative Declaratir,n iu issued presioiisly.
SECTION 3:
That Director Review No. 79 -26 is approved subject to
the following
conditions:
Applicant shall contact the Planning Division for com-
pliance with the following conditions:
1. The area 150' from the western property line to the
first row of parking for the proposed phase I shall
be lnndacaped.
2. The landscape buffer proposed for the building material
storage yard shall have a minimum of 20% of the trees
24" box or larger.
0 0
%woo 3, Ilia ncecan groan in the utoraga yard shall be
surfaced with Bunt reducing matorlal much as
slag, gravel, paving or the like.
4. Building material storage shall not exceed ;he
top of the oast /west fallen for 'n distance u1 50'.
S. Parking lot lights shall be a maximum hulght of
12' and directed awny from all property lines,
adjacent streets anti residences.
6. Parking lot troas shall be a minimum 15 gallon
size,.
7. All tiro -way aids wldtlis shall be a minimum of 24
feet tilde.
S. Any signs proposed for this development shall be
designed in conformance! with Comprehensive Sign Ordi-
nnnce and shall require review and approval by t.io
Planning Division prior to Installation of such sign.
9. A detailed landscape and irrigati -in plan shall be sub-
mitted to and approved by the Platning Division (within
60 days) after the issunnce of building permits.
10. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy
and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash and
debris.
11. Street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon size or larger,
shall be installed in accordance with the Master Plan
of street troeti for the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
12. Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved
site plan on file in the Planning Division and ti,o
conditions contained herein.
13. Trault receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a 6 foot
high masonry wall with gates pursuant to City sL'nndards.
Location to thu satisfaction of the Planning Division.
14. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall
be architecturally integrated and shielded from.view
and the soend buffered from adjacent properties and
streets to the satisfaction of tile Planning Division
and Building official.
]5. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance
with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other
applicable City Ordinances in effect at time of building
v permit issuance.
Applicant shall contnet file 11ul.id1m, Division for compliance
with the following eonditionu:
16. The npIllicamit shall cpmply with the latent adopted
Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code,
Uniform plumbing Code, National Electric Coda, anti
all other applicnblu codos and ordinnneas In affect
at the time of approval of this project.
17. Thin approval shall become null %nd void if building
permits are not innued for this project within one
year from thu data of project approval.
18. Grading of tha uubject property shall be in accordance
with the Grading Ordinance and to Lite untisfaction of
the Building Official.
19. This approval is for phase 1 of tl:e development only.
Applicant ahnll contact the Foothill Fire District and the
Cucamonga County Witter District for compliance with the
following condLtions:
20. Water supply and sanitary sewer facilities mall be
provided to the specifications of the Cucamonga County
Water District and tlw City Engineer with all incidental
fees paid by thy: lcvoloper.
21. prior to issuance of building permits for combustible
construction evidence shall be submitted to tl:e Fire
Chief that water supply for fire protection is avail-
able.
22. Emergency accesa shnll be provided and maintained free
and clear at a minim -im of 24 feet at all times during
construction to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief.
Applicant shall contact tl:e Engineering Division for com-
pliance with the following conditions:
23. Street dedication and improvements shall be in conformance
with the currently adopted Master Plan of Streets and
Ninhwaya and to the specification of Lite City Engineer.
24. All exterior street improvements shall be constructed to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to occupancy.
25. The following missing street improvements shall be con-
structed which include, but are not limited to: side-
walk, driveways, wheel chair ramps, curb and gutter,
street paving, street trees, street lights, and drainage
structures.
26. Street improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted for approval by the City
Engineer.
27. Street striping; and signing shall be installed to the .
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
26. Thu City ruonrveu the right to require reciprocal
�./ easements unaurinn accuss to adjacent proportion �w
as required by, future devolopnant.
29. All domngod off alto public works fncilition,
lucluding parkway trees. shall• be repatrud prior
to occupancy to the natiufae.tion of the Clty
Engineer.
30. All utreut structural nauctlonu 11111111 be submitted
to, and approved by the City Engineer.
31. Grading of subject property shall be In accordance
with plans and a soils report prepared by a qualified
engineer to the notisfaction of the City Engineer.
32. All proposed utilities within the project shell be
installed underground.
33. Utility easements Rhall. be provided to the specifica-
tion-of the appropriate utility companies and the City
L'ngiueor.
34. Developer shall coordinate, and pay for, the relocation
of any power poles or other existing public utilities,
an required.
35. Street lighting shall be installed by the applicant
and the advance energency charges paid.
36. Proposed development falls within those areas indi-
cated as subject to flooding under the National Flood
Inaurance Program and will be subject to tine provisions
of said program.
ter' APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TIl DAY OV APRIL, 1979
PLANNING COAIMI5SION OF TIIE CITY O RANCHO CUCMIONCA
Ilermr Rempel, C ,a• ma:
ATTEST: 1 _..._........i
Secretary of :e Planning Commission
I, JACK LAAI, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Com-
ti.'. mission held on the 25th day of April, 1979, by the following vote to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: DAIfl„ GARCIA, TOLSTOY, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: CM11ISSIOGERS: JONES
3