Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981/01/26 - Agenda Packet ,,; .1 , ;� r`;, .. � ,; s ., 'iH �f 1', r, `�� ,��� ,) ,,�°�x i� �� .. . ;, �.., .��'. ';r� ' �i t• s ,:,� ;'' : � ����� �� ;,. • .: ,, .� �' .. �'; ;:; �. •',, :'�,•�-. ;� r,ji � � , , ..� •� y ^ :: �. '•. )Il ` ' r. �, � L' � 1 L� �' � 1', 1 �. /J. 1 � , v I � i . 1 i 0 [. l �1�: � i �' . �: �,� .. O �, � j . .. a '� .. i + CITY OP RANa iO CUCAMONGA �o ANNING COT PL W USSI0, I 1977 MONDAY, JMUARY 26, 1981 r; ETIWANDA INTERMEDIATE SCHOUL y; 6925 Etiwanda Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA I. Pledge of Allegiance II . Roll Cali Commissioner Dahl Commissioner Sceranka Commissioner King Commissioner Tolstcy Commissioner Rempel 1• 120 Min. III. Review and Discussion of General Plan Recommendations for the Etiwanda Area The Etiwanda area is the most .rural and undeveloped of..the a tri-communities. Unique features of this area are discussed �,. throughout the General Plan. Highlights of the Planning objectives and policies for the Etiwanda area will be dis- cussed.. Also for discussion will be alternatives which the Planning Commission may wish to consider for the Etiwanda area. Potential revisions to the General Plan for the Etiwanda area will be considered for action by the Planning Commission at their February 2 meeting. 15 Min Break -c 30 Min. IV, Consideration of Recommendations to the Draft Energy Con- servation Element The Planning Commission reviewed the Draft Energy Conservation Element at a meeting held on January 22, 1981. Based upon their discussion revisions to the Draft "nergy Conservation Element have been prepared for Planning Commission consideration. Should the Planning Commission accept the revisions, it is recommended that they adept the Draft Energy Conservation Element. (Due to the late consideration of these revisions, copies of the changes will be handed out at the Planing Commission meeting.) T, i t , Planning Commission Agenda January 26, 1981 Page Two 30 Min, V. Consideration of Revisions to the Draft Community Design Element On January 22 the Planning Commission considered the Draft Community Design Element. Based upon the Planning Commission's discussion, recommendations for revisions to the document have been prepared for the Planning Commission's consideration. Should the Planning Commission accept the revisions, we recommend that the Planning Commission adopt the Draft Community Design Element as revised. (Due to the delay of rsview of the Draft Community Design Element, revised copies will be handed out prior to the Planning Commission meeting.) 30 Min. VI. Presentation of Environmental Draft Impact Report to the General Plan California law on the Environmental Quality Act requires that any General Plan amendment or document requires completion of environmental analysis and necessary Environmental Impact Report. An Environmental impact• Report was prepared for the Draft General Plan. This document will be reviewed by the Planning Commission during the next several meetings on the General Plan. It is required that prior to the adoption of the General Plan, that the entire environmental document will have been reviewed and accepted with any necessary revisions of corrections. VI I. Adjournment 1 ; tiS�1 }f y CITY OF RANCHO CUM CAONG'A �a�`CAA4 1 R 7 gl:A REPORT C j 0 U A DATE: January 26, 1981 1977 T0: Planning Commission FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner BY: Steve McCutchan, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF REQUESTS FOR CHANGES TO THE LAND USE PLAN IN THE ETIWANDA AND PLANNED COMMUNITIES PLANNING AREAS ABSTRACT: Numerous requests for changes to the Land Use Plan have been received. Staff has grouped those in the Etiwanda and Planned Communities Planning Areas for Planning Commission review and comment. Their input will be necessary for preparation of recommendations which will be brought to the Planning Commission at the February 2, 1981 meeting. Those requests for changes in the Etiwanda and Planned Communities Planning Area have been compiled for .your review at tonight's meeting. Staff has included an overall vacinity map, a cover sheet for each individual request, and a copy of the letter submitted by the ap- plicant. The four requests that are Staff Initiated are included under a single cover sheet. ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION: Following is a summary of the requests for Planning Commission review. Staff requests direction from the Planning Commission to make recom- mendations to be considered at the February 2, 1981 meeting. 1 . Frank 0. Strader - Approximately 4 acres north of Etiwanda Post Office on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue. Interim Plan: High Density Alternative Area Draft Plan: Office �1 Request: Commercial To encourage commercial at this location would increase traffic on Etiwanda Avenue and tend to change the entire character of that area. Related commercial uses aro allowed within the designated Office 1, category. i:. r: �1 f; Planning Commission January 26, 1981 Page C 2. Andrew Barmakian - Approximately 10 acres on the Northwest corner of Etiwanda an 3ase Line. Interim Plan: Windrows Draft Plan: Low Residential Request: Commercial Refer to analysis for Item No. 1 3. Elden Bainbridge - Approximately 10 acres on the southwest corner of Etiwanda and Base Line. Interim Plan: Alternative Area Draft Plan: Low Residential Request: Commercial Refer to analysis for Item No. 1 4. Wallace Siegel - Approximately 6.5 acres directly north of the Buddhist Temple west of Etiwanda Avenue. c Interim Plan: Alternative Area Draft Plan: Low Residential d Request: Commercial Refer to analysis for Item No. 1 5. Re inald Bell and Robert C. Flocker - Approximately 7 acres on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue between Base Line Avenue and the rail- road tracks. Interim Plan: Windrows Draft Plan: Low Residential ;? Request: Commercial Etiwanda Avenue's special boulevard character should be preserved and if commercial were allowed, it would increase traffic and change the character of that area. Commercial opportunities in Etiwanda should be more centrally located and should be evaluated through the proposed Etiwanda Specific Plan. ;.; 6. James Thompson - Property located south of Highland Avenue adjacent to the Flood Control Channel and east of East Avenue. Interim Plan: Low Residential Draft Plan: Low Residential Request: Commercial frontage and remainder Medium Density s' (5-14 du/ac) Commercial on Highland would not be appropriate and would require + special design treatment such as frontage road. The medium density may be appropriate, however the problems associated with buffering ?•,'; and transition should raise some concern. l 1 Planning Com^ission January 26, 1981 Page 3 7. Rath Kleinman - Approximately 20 acres south of Victoria west of the Devore Freeway. Interim Plan: Windrows Draft Plan: Low Residential Request: Neighborhood Commercial or High Density Residential (25-30 du/ac). Commercial would not be appropriate adjacent to residential areas. Higher density residential could be a consdieration adjacent to Freeway and rail service, but may tend to change charactc , of area. 8. Carl Schiro - Approximately 15 acres north of Foothill between the Devore Freeway and Etiwanda. Irterim Plan: Service Commercial and Low Residential Draft Plrn: Medium Density Residential (5-14 du/ac) Request: Commercial Presently, only the frontage along Foothill is zoned commercial . Commercial here and on adjacent requests could create strip com- mercial . A neighborhood commercial designation is located on the southeast corner of Foothill and Etiwanda. 9. Michael Scarlata - Less than 1 acre north of Foothill between the Devore Freeway and Etiwanda Avenue. Interim Plan: Service Commercial Draft Plan: Medium Residential Request: Commercial Refer to analysis on Item No. 8 10. Victor Di Carlo - Less than 1 acre north of Foothill between Devore Freeway and Etiwanda Avenue. Interim Plan: Service Commercial z Draft Plan: Medium Density Residential Request: Commercial { Refer to analysis on Item No. 8 11 . Sebastian Masi - Approximately 25 acres on the southwest corner of Foothill anRochester. Interim Plan: Industry Minimum Impact Draft Plan: Industrial Park Request: Commercial Related commercial is allowed in Industrial Park. Both the Sedway/Cooke and Blayney Plans are consistent. Introduction of commercial center or retail uses would disrupt integrity of industrial park area. `.: Planning Commission January 26, 1981 Page 4 12. Andrew Barmakian - Approximately 13 acres lout! of Foothill between Turner and Haven. Interim Plan: Mixed Use and Medium Density Residential Draft Plan: Office and Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) Request: Medium Density ;5-14 du/ac) on rear portion of property. A copy of the Assessor's map for the area in question is attached. Reference is map to stub streets. The low density is a logical extension of area development and the higher density would be iso- lated and inappropriate. 13. Raveen Kanakvechaant�- Approximately 22 acres located at the nortFeast cocorner of Base Line and Rochester. Interim Plan: Low Density Residential Draft Plan: Medium Density Residential ARL Request: Commercial Site is too large for commercial development and is not the best location to serve the surrounding area. The inclusion of com- mercial here would constitute a spot designation. 14. Don De Verka - Approximately 8 acres on the northeast corner of Rochester anif Foothill . Interim Plan: Alternative Area Draft Plan: Office Request: High Density Residential (25-30 du/ac) Either the existing or requested designation would be appropriate. The office designation would tend to be more compatible with existing single family housing to the north. Respectful submitted, i ar H g i Cit�j Planner BKH:SM:jr r t .�. EUCLID AVENUE 11 so A Yc Ems' = r. N 11It !1 I �+: . z aI> eas1�,�. VI/IEYARp AVE." CUCAMDNGA CR./ CARNELIAN ST. �IZirn G 2 ? HELLMAN AVE. ARCHIpALpAVF. x {1(Q o = TURNF_P HERMpSAT T t >n L {? HAVEN AVE. A i p', \• 1 n c+ E y mom rao Fffo �'� II rT N / l {)\may " ����•mm r Yy U x 1 I _— RDCHEST ER AVE." c i; � � ' 1 � / vb Ila Ito ETIWANDA AVE. •F I o x �S h Ijm p0 V IIT mTIZ s ttm It r c a •rr- 4 11 10 a C m 9 FL 2 ti o CHERRY AVE.. m o II 9 I 11 � S 1 .a r4'1 0 VERY LOW REGIONAL _ 2 DU/,4C COMMERCIAL 1. - •'•° ® ni°s .: LOW come OFFICE E".2a6o' r 2-4 DU/AC Am - INDUSTPIALqp �•, LOW-MEDIUM PARK 58:: � •':'.:: � � :: DUI-AC :•� ® ..... �•°• �ff} GENERAL � rerer rr rrrer :•,.'t MEDIUM VV///////�I • • ' ° INDUSTRIAL r e e r r . . . . o :: reorrrrrrrbr • • :• • 5-14 Du/AC i/ in GENERAL IND)JS. . . r �mwr mwmwewisbwawb • r � i/� MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED 15-24 DU/AC HEAVY ° . ° . . ° • ° HIGH INDUSTRIfL °.T : :-• f' 25-30 DU/.4C HILLSIDE ° `•` ° ° � RESIDENTIAL •:°°:: �' = COMMERCIAL � • • • • ° • " " _ °° - ` OPEN SPACE '.•:.:, _ COMMUNITY _ - w COMMERCIAL FLOOD CONTROL NEIGHDOHOOD � UTILITY CORR. -� b--= -�. COMMERCIAL INTERIM PLAN DRAFT PLAN Winoirows/[sigh Density Alternative Area Office REQUEST: Commercial ANALYSIS: fo encourage commercial at this location would increase traffic on Etiwarida Avenue and tend to change the entire character of chat area. Related commercial uses are allowed within the designated Office category. 3 RECOMMENDATION: J, APPIICAt17: Frank 0. Strader APu 227-181-38 ITEM NO. 1 1 i 1 January 8, 1981 Planning Commission Chairman City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, Calif. Dear Sir : Because of conflicting scheduling, I have been unable to attend your meetings regarding the proposed general plan of the city. My wife and I are owners of unimproved property on Etiwanda Avenue just north of the 0- S. Post Office. The San Bernardino County Assessor ' s Office Parcel number for this parcel. is 277-181-38. AML So that you may be informed of our desires for hat our ing on this property, we respectfully r-quest property be zoned commercial. we feel a larger proposed regional center may otherwise absorb potential commercial development in the area. If you wish to entertain any dialogue in this matter, you may contact us after 5:00 P . M. at 714 628-3707 or, write us at 6535 Hayes Ct. , Chino, Ca. , 91710_ Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Yours truly, Frank O . Strader ov OMMU R�I�EHO OPMFNt pEP7• 1,4 19b! PM MA �� �� � 6��aC °.. �•� tl ;4. lr 'lj; yt r' L 1. jwm" / J wY I+�,`r.,al ra.+� J•�� _ r rL f a i• • y ' O•j a J _ 1. � �l Y.' E7nvANDA it � r •' g (�ii �•s P � .Q� w+J 1 V — ...L W :2jrl ey— R too Y.... _ .. �. _ I ,f..M1• 1/4 nrc. wr c o #c Fwft clrr cb �- h pp d3 5 Y MAY ♦: ..9' 1. 1 s tV r � v VVV 6 zz 1.G'Cf}'rUN MAP VERY LOW REGIONAL `... 2 DU/AC COMMERCIAL j ' `...r , . . . . . . . . . r . = . . . . . . . . . . . ^�;. �. . . • J . .. . . . . r e . i OFFICE . . Y . . . . . . . . . t. LOW . . . w INDUSTRIAL • _ •w'e - LOW MEDIUM PARK 5-8 DU/AC -• ri GENERAL MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL :: : .':•' GENERAL. INDUS. . . _ " .....•.. ,e• .•..... MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED .. .,:: ..r.. • • • • 15-24 DU/AC rrerrrersirei ::::. HEAVY oeraarraeeiie . . . . . � • . eariweaororra •• • • " • NIGH INDUSTRIAL ` • • •` • 1 :- °:• ® • err er iieeieii • • . • • e • _ ..,. e •, a� o_ r, e e e o• 25-30 DU/ACC HILLSIDE iMM RESIDENTIAL •'•=•%• COMMERCIAL `•`%%% Q OPEN SPACE ••'•' `::: ^ ' COMMUNITY • •`%%`=— ✓� - � .;;•e• �:.•.•::: � COMMERCIAL � FLOOD CONTROL _ ® ;;.;; •::.•:.• � •; � NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY CORR. COMMERCIAL INTERIM P DRAFT PLAN Windrows _ Low Density Res. (2-4 du/a. ) QUEST: Neighborhood Commercial ANALYSIS: Refer to analysis for item No. 1 4 RECOMMENDATION: w e APPLICANT: Andrew Barmakian APO 227-111-10 & 26 ITEM NOS 2 BAR KIAN Bg 1� �° OLFF AND ASSOCIMIES ARCHrrECIS December 4, 1980 Barry Hogan City of Rancho Cucamonga 5340 Baseline Rd. Alta Loma, CA 91701 Dear Barry: I am writing to express my concern for the zoning of two parcels of property in Rancho Cucamonga. These deal with the proposed use desig- nation aed therefore I am requesting tc have this designation changed prior to the adoption of the general plan. PARCEL NO. 1 : This parcel is described as 22.5 acres on Beryl Avenue, the exact address would be 6928 Beryl Avenue. We are requesting a medium density residential use of 5-14/DU's per acre. We believe as a result of the unit size that we have designed for this site that the 10 units per acre that we are proposing will not result in a crowded site. PARCEL NO 2 am requesting that the NW corner of Etiwanda and Baseline '--be-zoned -fo`r'a neighborhood shopping center. Property on the four corners of Etiwanda and Baseline, I believe, should never be developed with two units to the acre. Property contiguous to high impact traffic arteries must be treated accordingly. Property, especially on the four corners of Etiwanda and Baseline, will be subject to heavy traffic. I would appreciate being heard at the next planning commission meeting on the general plan and land use plan. I would appreciate discussing this with you over the telephone or in person prior to the next meeting. Would you please call me? truly yours, „. U*NDREWRMAKIAN Cal uOF I:^• +l'0 ,';�AS„OPI�A Architect, AIA �pMir1t)NiIY 1iE�E!pPMI'NT DEFT. AB :gj PM �ig`g�l0ill�lZi1i2�3�4►sib p� MI Archibald Avenue,SuiteM, Rancho Q=arnonW,Cafkniia,91M = (794)98&4M- An9 km i amiakiarrArcWdect,AlA/Larry Wblff•Architect, M N T �J N r i N N m Wd m V • �m N '• �? ,_- .• .:. yin '%iA --}R ETIWANDA . '. AVENU, t SII m vz � QA :y •+ \ It .y A a \./\ 741i i •i 0.� ..! P +J= i` J v '�"aV 'A' r}mot..,. >.,, I.r.•} . ., r I w� !. ! rf k� ti .. �� ;1 4 • . .r '�. . :_ \{. �jy' f •. , C' - � 'ice .•, K✓�', M( .s �..5'Ir l`�•,�CY• � c. ! JYI 17� t_ a nit 1 f;,.I�J ✓. J -r• � rY A=�. _ I f Ir.`•. .Ty. \A•."r<: UI ,:�' `{'}µ N i.4, t]✓ � t L- I yy . rV i•� r r. .. (q1y A\b f� �•rt..M � f.. ♦ .1t T'1 }!n /. � � r"�.-.:(i ` '��,t F I„J':.�yy .1� C7 !Y "L' < 1+1`I Y .Y • 1 -� }� i� C N } r .1 rM k '+`T••Nrr�• •{Y��� f`iw:• 3�,�-'!'�\ �,t"•' •4�,frtLr � ..L .t.'•... t Ll;. . -I Jw1?. � � h f'!•_. ,'�'oLr.�MT.i_.' : \ I• TfNi' .y11t�C'.a�MT. 4,Ihw.�M1NiI/.4']N�"�"4... '.Z.�.�t V` ' r. .. . . . . . �TJN VERY LOW REGIONALk " '" • • '"" j:.::::::X. .... ` 2 DU/AC COMMERCIAL ' 1• •w• LIE LON, ;•; OFFICE U 2-4 DU/AC Y"•"• • " • • • . . •:. :`: •" INDUSTR,,.Aq • • • LOW-MEDIUM "lam PARK 5-8 DU/AC GENERAL MEDIUM fCQ INDUSTRIAL r 5-14 DU/AC a GENERAL INIUS. MED. HIGH RAIL SERVEI 15-24 DU/AC HEAVY .• HIGH ..aa INDUSTRIAL • • e r. r r • r • r •• "�•�• 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE now mass a ••;•;o;c� .i ooreurrereror .. . . . . 4-•—_.J RESIDENTIAL . r a r s r r r r e e o r o 0 0 . . . . . rrrrrrrrrrrre • " • • • • • tBig COMMERCIAL' r e r r e a a r r r r o r o • • • • •• • ' r . . . . r . • ':_` OPEN SPACE xr' COMMUNITY X ::• • x� COMMERCIAL • • • • • • • " '• ® FLOOD CONTR )L NEIGHBOHOOD  UTILITY COR !. ::�= :•'• • ::: a COMMERCIAL INTERIM PLAN " " := — DRAFT PLAN Alternative Area Low Density Res. (2-4 du/a. ) REQUEST: Commercial V ANALYSIS: Refer to analysis for Item No. 1 40 t RECOMMENDATION: I ;I I APPLICAiJT: Elden Ba'4nbridge AP1z 227-181-20 r I ITEM No. 3 General Contractor o N Real Estate Broker VRP0?N'ti 1052 North Tustin Avenue Anaheim,California 92807 714/630-8472 October 30, 1980 Planning Department City of Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, Ga. 91730 Gentlemen: I represent Rollin Smith who owns the lO acres of commercially zoned property at the Southwest corner. of Baseline and Etiwande in your City. He has owned this property for sometime and has had plans to develope it commercially and now we understand it is in- cluded in the Victoria plan which would change it to a low density zoning. We feel this is grossly unfair to the land owner and he would like it to be withdrawn V am the master plan study, if that is possible. If this is not possible, he would demand that his property remain commercially zoned. We feel it is a definite conflict of interee. when the William Lyon Company comes in with a master plan that eliminates other peoples commercial property and puts the commercial property where it is to their benefit. He would appreciate any consideration that you can give us in this matter. Sincerely, Elden W_ Bainbridge it EWB:mc 1 � � � o "�': a ;q�^•R".air '/ � • �2 y> � rx � rrf' se..•t r� S. �� F .>;r.. ' „.hz •.K m� L .�. la'¢ � I '.t 'rF'M. 4� i -Y�•.R�I Vim. - ••ET(wAtYDAB '� ,u i--•, _ Y �O -• ® Ile Ot .. J • 1 �� i�l 01 ti t � � .� . O � Way' �� � � ry�``�•8 V• - �r + •. •, � EAST ya src.�c= •,i<vq-- _ c--_^'SyY _� --. -_' -+4YENUE x� r •.�, ;� N" units ti ;• - •y i pyy�YyQy iy.y 'G ' ` — —Aa.• y. � ,ti'MRI:J •:•Yts w1i..p•�L/-'M.�yy,•i - r, ��r .p .°. ( -^( VERY LOW REGIONAL laws: .T`� ...'J 125�sa COMMERCIAL � LOW OFFICE raaw 2-4 DU/AC f% pope •::w i•:•`::::: • w> •'F' INDUSTRIAL Y • • ! Y e • • • • • " ^ " " • " " " LOW-MEDIUM PARK 5-8 DU/AC • w (�TJT/� GENERAL MEDIUM ///i1 INDUSTRIAL r 5-14 DU/AC GENERAL INDUS. MED HIGH RAIL SERVED 15-24 DU/AC • i ® HEAVY . . . . HIGH INDUSTRIAL r o r a w a a o a a w w + ::• 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE d r c .. . e . ! RESIDENTIAL w r w a w w w r w w a r . < Y . . . ordwwdrawdw . • .. .�; r�r w a r COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE COMMUNITY •. ::• �• �� COMMERCIAL � FLOOD CONTROL NEIGHEOHOOD UTILITY CORR. • • ' — . COMMERCIAL DRAFT PLAN Alternative Area Loan Density Res. (2-4 du/a.) REQUEST: Commercial NALYSIS: Refer to analysis for Item No. I. r� RECOMMENDATION: � RPPLICANT: Wallace Siegel* AP-4 227-17i-6 * This request was made in person at a pi ,recent Planning. Commission hearing ITEM NO. 4 No letter was submitted. 1 b • I i : L o .. I rZ 3 � ' W ID46 V ! ' S3 D a 7 N N• � I m i .=1 c � � f •i ii n .�, b ^ � in o . c ro fTl Z o r' ' ,In _ 1 � • T'—'� r--- Z � • rAVEnrue xm �, Lna4 QNcNn QY � Zi --age 4. C1_ a e D4 III rc c ... ._ ten_— . a.rs,44.a+..?]L•piLC.S.'iu'r 4aYh::.'C'C._".w.:.�.. _ . .. .... . . . . . . ..-.....�� � ��..e. .w.4 JIB-.a..r..•. . ..J...::{. 1•F�Y'.�.W 6zz 9zz' REGIONAL sarrre ijVCA-T-704 MAP VERY LOW 2 DU/AC COMMERCIAL •:.• . w•:::e• OFFICE i•::::a::: LOW •�Nw it. . . . . . . . . 2-4 DU/AC e w e w r e e e w S200y� • • • • •• r ' ::• _ INDUSTRIAL y e e e w w e w w w Y e r w w w e e r Y ;;;,;• � __ LOW MEDIUM Y//.1 PARK '• %�= _ 5-E DU/AC w : Y O Y w • w • wwwe GENERAL " w MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL �� •::'•:�::•: J 5-14 DU/AC rrzr�q/�` /� GENERAL INDU:;. : • " ww :: MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED • r""" 15-24 DU/AC �j HEAVY �w I HIGH ll''ll!!1lL�� INDUSTRIAL o 25-30 DU/AC {�'� HILLSIDE �! RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE ! . ....... �� COMMUNITY r'r°i r m a w e`er ° • COMMERCIAL iii---���� FLOOD CONTROL as w o w w w w . r •w y top 0 e;;.1°0: 'r NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY CORR. COMMERCIAL IN M PLAN - DRAFT PLAN Windrows Low Density Res. (2-4 du/a, Y EQUEST: Commercial NALYSIS: Etiwanda Avenue's special boulevard character should be u' preserved and if commercial were allowed it would increase traffic and change the character of that area. Commercial opportunities in Etiwanda should be more centrally located and should be evaluated through the proposed Etiwanda Specific Plan. RECOMM! NDATION: (s 4, APPLICANT: Reginald Bell* and Robert C. Flocker AP° 227-131-24 23 25 26, 27, 20 *Request made a Planning Commission ITEM 1st ® "'hearing. No letter. has been submitted. 1 �11Yd 6y . 5 6226 Topaz Alta Loma, CA 91701 JbL (714) 987-2304 October 28, 1980 City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council and Planning Commission Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Gentlemen: With reference to your notification letter concerning the November 1 , 1980 presentation of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, we wish to protest the proposed change in zoning of ov:• property at 7165 Etiwanda Avenue. This parcel consists of approximately five acres of land which is now zoned C-2. It is located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue just south of and adjacent to the lumber yard and the railroad tracks. Your proposed plan to change this zoning to low density residential would result in great financial loss to us. We feel this is most unfair since we purchased this property more than twenty years ago, waiting for land to appreciate and to realize the zoning potential which we purchased. Your proposed zoning shows favoritism and partiality in granting an outside developer, (the Lyons Company), very high density development on land to the west of our property, while destroying the value of our land by down-zoning it. Furthermore, the proposed plan to keep Etiwanda Avenue a rural country road is absolutely unrealistic in the light of such a development as Lyons is proposing for the area on the west side of the street. The plan to have one half acre lots across the street from such a development would not be feasible as the cost of homes would be prohibitive. The land from Baseline to the railroad tracks should be zoned commercial for the convenience of Etiwanda residents. This will be an area of heavy traffic when the new high school is completed. The railroad tracks, lumber yard and proximity to the Baseline Freeway offramp make this a less desirable housing area. We have no objection to the proposed Lyons development as we realize the advantages of a well-planned community. However, we feel that our property should not be downgraded from its present zoning which is most suitable for that area. We do know that there is a small vocal group in Etiwanda who do not desire any change. However, most of them own only their homes, so are voicing a disproportionate interest. Please consider these objections in a fair and impartial way. We feel that as long time property owners we should be shown some consideration. About a year ago, we sent a letter to the Planning Commission but never received any reply. We will appreciate some notification from your department. Sincerely, Robert C. Flocker Alice G. Flocker c r ,lk / ur IN, Cl 171 j {I So'eit✓� CE gin. O.J 1� /15,01 6226 Topaz /LI Alta Loma, CA 91701 (714) 987-2304 October 29, 1980 Mr. Phillip Schlosser 7874 Buena Vista Drive Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Mr, Mayor. We have attended many meetings of the City Council and City Planning Commission and on numerous occasions have heard you make the remark that you ran for city council to protect the manufacturing zoning south of Foothill Boulevard from encroachment. We admire your stand on this matter as we realize you and many others have a large investment in that area and could possibly be forced out by zoning changes. We too have an investment in land purchdsed twenty-five years ago and zoned C-2 for that period of time. The Proposed General Plan has down-zoned our property to low density residential , which will result in severe financial loss to us. Please refer ti, the enclosed map showing the location of our property. It has always been our inteption to build on this property a small country type market center to serve the residents of Etiwanda when population warranted it. However, with the proposed Victoria Plzn, it now appears that we will be zoned out. As you are well aware, the Lyons Company plan includes four community shopping centers, one of which is within one quarter mile west of our property. Many Etiwanda residents agree that they would like to have a neighborhood center closer than that proposed by the Lyons Company.- We feel that the Lyons Company is trying to create a monopoly on all commercial and high density residential development to the detriment: of many long time L"tiwanda property owners. We do not object to the Victoria Plan as a whole but we do object. to being unfairly treated in this manner. Our property is in an area of other commercial properties which make it most undesirable for low density residential zoning. The north boundary is the lumber yard and the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. Just across the street is a real estate office that has been there for many years. There is a service station on the corner of Baseline and Etiwanda Avenue. This will be an area of heavy traffic when the high school is completed. It is not logical that the property on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue from the railroad tracks to Baseline should be changed from f• its present commercial zoning. We feel that the property owners in this area have not been given fair C,• consideration in this General Plan. Many of the most vocal people at the meetings own only a house on a minimum sized lot, yet they want to use their influence to down zone other peoples property. We think that all property owners in the Etiwanda School District and not just the residents should be �j notified of the proposed plan and given an opportunity to provide some imput as to their wishes for their community. Please consider these facts when the City Council reviews this proposed plan. We know you will do so fairly as you do seem to understand the losses inherent in such a change. Sincerely, Robert Flocker p Alice G. Flocker qW f, !S7 • � f/vas� . � . 4g . a• s: 81n2 . i j J/ :.j.i._t)A .I r_F1' i:.=:c✓n ,.l l9 n� �tnM�a,.� � lid City of Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission November 17, 1980 Gentlemen: We are the owners of a parcel of land on Etiwanda Avenue with a frontage of 540 feet and a depth of 330 feet. This property has been zoned C-2 for the past twenty-eight years. It is located adjacent to and south of the Pacific Electric Tracks on the eastern side of Etiwanda Avenue. Our family purchased this property twenty-five years ago with the express purpose of building a small country-type neighborhood shopping center for the use of Etiwanda residents when the growth of the area warranted such a development. If you will refer to the proposed land use plan of Rancho, Cucamonga, you will i,otice that our property is located far enough away from the Intermediate School as to not cause a distraction or a nuisance to school activities, yet close enough to the center of population to be most convenient for everyone. The proposed General Plan shows our property as low density residential which we feel is unsuitable. Our location is closer and more convenient for the residents of Etiwanda than the neighborhood center location shown in the General Plan at the intersection of East Avenue and the Devore Freeway interchange. This proposed commercial location would cause a severe traffic problem unless East Avenue is widened from Summit Avenue to Foothill Boulevard. With the building of the new high school on Victoria .Avenue, the traffic on East Avenue will become very heavy and dangerous, especially to students traveling to the proposed center at that site unless fully improved. We have visited Woodbridge in Orange County and are not opposed to the Victoria Plan as presented by the Lyons Company. However, we feel that the present and future residents of Ctiwanda living east of Etiwanda Avenue should not be required to travel to the neighborhood centers within the Victoria '; Community for their daily needs. �® We are also among the many property owners of Etiwanda who feel that after one hundred years of being a farming community, this areas' time for development has at last arrived. We should all realize that with the growth that will soon be coming to Etiwanda, the up-grading of all the streets and utilities will be of prime importance. To try to stop this development by attempting to keep the existing streets as they are would be a very costly mistake that would have to be corrected later at a much greater expense. With the building of the new high school all streets will be much more heavily traveled, but especially Victoria and East Avenuzs. Consideration should be given at this time to the widening of these streets and to the installation of sidewalks for the use of the students walking to the various schools. Thank you for your consideration in these matters. Sincerely, Robert C. Flocker Alice G. Flocker C1.[.fti- Nja �w r --�ETIWANDA .Y AVENUE b y J R c c V u •' ' �0.•.q �� Za lg) M t� R y oCu� i i mNyS� Z.a A m- R m � ry�o Oro n 2 i p°tea r GI AVENUE: 4, ` ebb-c � � �`••� —_'��I f'_r �.� N ��11ry1 nn I - . . --��_.... ��w KiN.N:.LMi/L.MI'.�'.-..'.'Y�:.rl�i:.YwlJw•r .ram .7R•f,': J•n�/��...lw A�rw ..yr_v�./'f• bzz gzz - MAP:`. :, :: :'• ' JERY LOW Hr UI UNAL 2 C COMMERCIAL LOW Feao�e OFFICE 2-4 DU/f C __ qW/ INDUSTRIAL — _— _ IELiLl LOW-MEDIUt9 Y//.{ PARK qv 5-8 DU/AC — GENERAL .• _ MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL e GFNLRAL IP!DUS. MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED .... ;; 15-24 DU/AC .... ..... _ HEAVY �' •. — INDUSTRIAL . _—— HIGH — 25-30 DU/AC WILL5IDE COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL _= CPEN SPACE ' COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FLOOD CONTROL NEIGHBOHOOD LA UTILITY CORR. INTERIM PLAN COMMERCIAL DRAFT PLAN Low Density Residential low Density RP&j2-n dui_ REQUEST:_Commercial frontage and remainder Medium Density_(5-14 du/a. ) ANALYSIS: Commercial on Highland would not be appropriate and would require special design treatment such as a frontaae road. The medium density may be appropriate, however the problems associated with buffering and transition shoald raise some concern. RECOMMENDATION: APPLICANT: James Thompson AP4 227-071-12 ITEM NO. 6 U Stab` Farm Insuraince CaMFi3nie5 ttti1. 686 NORTH CAREY AVENUE POMONA. CAUFORNIA 81767 D o, PHONE (71.4) 623-2681 CIiY OF R:'1tiC`IO CULAMO':GFl IN (;OIY�UNITl' DEVE:OPMEtJT DE PT, JAMES THOMPSON. AGENT tt September 26, 1980 AM 7tSlgt1D1711]2t112131415�Ei Tim Beedle, Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 C Baseline Road P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91-730 Lear It% Beedle: Thank you for your time this past week when we sat and discussed the plans for the new master lan for the p P ?� city. Following your suggestion, we would like to make the following proposal for the Planning Committee to take into �i consideration concerning the land usage for the enclosed mapped area which we own. �I Proposal: Since our land has the last access before the freeway, we would like to have the following zoning for our land. 1. We want a portion of the land facing north towards Highland Avenue to be zoned neighborhood commerical because we feel that some commerical property needs to be at that intersection to service the community as is grows and develops into a full grog: coinunity. We feel a need for the small neighborhood stores to pi.ovide the basic needs of a communit;-. There should be some fast food operations , Seven-Eleven type store, plus other shops that would be able to service not on'.y the Rancho Cucamonga community, but also pull money from the Fontana side also. 2. We want the remaining part: of this twenty-five acre area designated and zoned as medium residential thus giving access to apartments or condominiums. The higher density ie desirable because it is close to the freeway and would not interfere with the windrow concept of the community. We would like to be present for the discussions and talks regarding this area. Please notify us of the scheduled meetings . Sincerely, Aft James Thompson a ♦ � '.i � `s Judy Rigglc .u'>- ?1� ,s'l" r` MEMBER: PRESIDENT'S CLUB ✓ i : ..axousW+a.uaii,= +--.;%:'�...SL:� ••�C�r`�P�1�...�.r•+�4y`—,�w. _' .. .;c+ex- _ av'�� ikF ,�` ,arFb+.��•z-+.-cam 4i J �I 1 \P O r1 ZZ NORTH �•� ' ` mz Scale CPT21ERICAL: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY �� RESIDENTIAL: MEDIUM 5 - 15 UNITS PER GROSS ACRE VERY LOW KOMMERCI t .....-. "-`7 1 DU/AC COMMERCIAL — .. — tii7C'`- ` },,71 LOW Memo o•; OFFICE e� orsr� +..camas ' —• d. / C M sox° �r a®. o° oieew� .�.a aio.�au 2- DU A 0 INDUSTRIAL :;: ......... ......... .. . ::: �.•' LOW-MEDIUM PARK —— — —� 5-8 DU/AC -- - mbGENERAL __= O _ MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL ... .• .. MEDIUM �." — ;r 5-14 DU/AC r :•,z:.:::�,.,:. GENERAL INDUS. MED. H1GH RAIL SERVED % a 15-24 DU./AC HEAVY ... �, -" Y`- INDUSTRIAL * HIGH' . v "I . 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL era COMMERCIAL ea OPEN SPACE 1MF.Rf^ ��'CO _ - FLOOD CONTROL NEIGH3014OOD ''jTILITY CORR. - COMMERCIAL INTEP,IM PLAN DRAFT PLAN Windrows Law Density Res. (2-4 du/ac. ) 0QUEST: Neighborhood Commercial or High Der0 ty Res. (25-30 du/ac.) NALYSIS: Commercial would not be appropriate adjacent to residential i area. Higher density residential could be a consideration adjacent to Freeway and rail service but may tend to change character of area. RECOMMENDATION: 1I ' APPLICANT: kalT+h Kleinman AP'' 227-I41-42, 45, 65, 66 ITEM O. � t` •' t4 .tu'v: n.f. ri cc .Tact. Lamy r`trector community Develonment 41 mr rc' !)all 1 , ^haifman c-.: cr6 _f tl:c i:;. y Alanninq c'ammi, nnion c: r.anc. :: i cur&nonga P .O. 130% 1,0 Rancho C.ucaritnga , California 01730 Dear Mr. Dahl an(! Members of the Rancho Cucamonga ri.ty Planri-ng Commission . Since 1^62 , we have owned the Ian(! cn Victoria )Venue , directly acro:n the ;trcct from thy- new propcscfl annc7bo rucamonga lligh School •rhich is scheduled to rnen in i ')fl? ,, We Oppose the propsud 1?aster Plan "windrow" zoning for this land on the basis o£ the following: 1 ) this 1yne of zonin, is not consistent with the zoning across the street from hinh schools in snrrnuncling communities , 2) wi `h the cost of an average home in ^outhkrn calii'ornia rateu ac 5116 ,000 , i.t ' c, ridiculous to corlsi.der . 1 to I units per cross acre across the street from a major high school and near a major freeway in?tersec`ion in Rancho Cucamonga. We request that the Master Plan be chan7e3 to reflect affnr.dable t hotininy and /or neigltborhrod community commercial. zap:>.:y for this vital area of Pancho Cucamonga . In the interest of the citizens and taxpayers of PanchO Cuca- monga as well as for the benefit of the scProol e.istriet and tax base as a concerned property owner I respe-tfully request "SEIGIIBclh1100D COMMUNITY MOMERCIAL" Or "11IGH PrSIDEWTIAL " zoning; to be compatible with the fu.ure High school and freeway ccvelopmer^t. parcnl3 : 227-143 -66 227-141 -44 227-141 -65 227-141 -42 , on Victoria Avenue , across i frcr- t o nev. Rancho Cucamonga High School. ; r ^e `- f_•' c= to attenc: the Planninv Commission meeting on Y.oneev ,, an-2 wnu: '' like to Speak at that meeting. n and ;,g•,tna Y.leinma7 2500 N. Euclid Avenue e Upland , California 91.786 I t, r 0 cl t lam. IO AVENUE 03 EASro T i < Ib co - � w o :a0 .-•I RO1(9D t7 `17 'IW _ —_ _—__.� -- r\?may N . cn • w O i+ O IZy43 R t o \it z 'v .,RX min m� SE Con`5E43f Ii/ OGM' O m ate, m I r. OIN n CL oil t' tr c c i'�joD n V 1 „ m x } . _ a .e. „y�• �.rnr�rM�MVf 1Y:3.'Ai +Y0 -- :•A µ-w.�'.w-.+ _.,. L62Z gzz MAP VERY LOW REGIONAL rf • rir� ofaw • . . : 0 2 DU/AC COMMERCIAL .�� � - warrawwwrwrwo • • • • • of ewwesroofra .:':::. a••: • O ap f ew • ae f w • a :.�.:•:• . . aorrwwowowowo LOW Wpiw OFFICE ' 2-4 DU/AC •' • ' INDUSTRIAL& •;;•;•;• LOW-MEDIUM PARK °•:�:::.::°•" W; 5-8 DU/AC GENERAL • • . .-::__ MEDIUM 4�11.L1J•. ; ;;•" _— INDUSTRIAL .e� 5-14 DU/AC GENERAL INDUS. RAIL SERVED MED. HIGH — - 15-24 DU/AC • HEAVY HIGH INDUSTRIAL 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE •r..== :•.•;•;: n9m RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL - �' • • � • • ' � '-'/ COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE x COMMERCIAL — FLOOD CONTROL i NEIGHAOHOOD UTILITY CORR. INTERIM PLAN DRAFCTO PLANCIAL Service Commercial Medium Density '?eF (5-14 du/ac. ) REQUEST: Commercial ANALYSIS: Presen' ly, only the frontage along Foothill is zoned commercial . Commercial here and on adjacent requests would create strip commercia' . A neighborhood commercial designation is located on the southeast corner of Foothill and Etiwanda. h E . RECOMMENDATION: i f� ". APPLICANT: Carl Schiro 229-031-10 APB_227-221-15, 7 22 1-217-4. 5_ A ITEM NO. 8 CITY OF RANCHO UCAMONGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. DEC 01 1960 14zNi• North Lucid '�veaue An Ontario, California 7i8i3610a1h12j1i2A4j5i6 � I?overnber 22, 1980 Ftancao Cuc^ ,on,;a 721,rinning Commission Ci :y AbL11 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cuca:mor_.a, Ca. Dear. Sirs : Tn loelzln over your nropos.ed. master plan for the City, I, Carl =�chiro, as a property owner in Rancho Cucamonga, am al,nosed. to some of your zonin.- c'nan:Zes. I an the ormer of -l;hese parcels of land: 220-031-10 Z27-221=22 227-221-15 227-211-04 227-211-03 227-211-05 2770221-07 All t71e above )roT)ert-,r is loc -ted e )^t of 1 15 on the I:ort'i side of Footh;.11 Blvd- ro:c yo,�.rs-somC of t?1is land. bee-�i zo e'l Commerci:;.l anal t'1er:: are several ad:j`�cr-.nt b,l;inesse:; 011 L;.19 property up to Ltilinnda Ave . Accor_d.inm to yo,ir proposed master plan, tvis zoning a clz :nge to resid.int-1- -•1. These l]T2!iZnr':oSes h^ve seTrred t'le eormrrn?l 'Lty o:C Btila�nd^ "'or rl.xny 're'trs 'i11:1, no-f yonr pifinniinc: col?n11.:4ni.on rl^.ri, to CIO In m estimation ttis strip of commercir:,l properties rnrol.l �t s b>>"ier. zone "or. n-r.onosed industrial prop- ertics , which in .-,e develene south. of Foot- In the cOr:nL-ssa.on 11As e?C'nres;ed :i.re ,o le^ve t'�e r" a r,:rnl are^,so ple..-So d.olnot clisturb t".n prese•cL onin- Isle rre satisfied ww . yaa���R�� ''hY'iE�'�MtVV iv}h.bi!X�`A'(b'.. 4. }' .'S:vY. .. .. . ' r.,. ." .. . . • . .. . ,. i F,•4Q.I a '/'Z' .x -ji Jill it no5'J itrinaLs• In closin^ , mag I leave this thought ,,rith vou. hmericC.' w.ns h17�.],'( on_ free enterp7]4. 8e -ms opportunity foc all. I Ippeal to you, the pl-nnint- comnission, not to 1;r Le these nrivile;*es 1!any fromm sm is n , the - 11 busi-iessmen. 'lours trulv,, Carl Sohiro r i o u` 6 _ N N � i � , l 4 � o cn O z ��v sD 0 O 3, w i � S N e E .. ..AVE. j G 7IWANDA n c' nIc w t' �N 1 'nnr q ; r-J/ • ..f' $ , 1� 'i � i r •l Vs �•YI , A •v W ., f0 i! lc,,i1 b4 V'/ IOU 1 /� ` N G sn S 1 � � b _ Qy VJ Si '" �• i n og - 5 sQ �SI� AVE. R- - I 'ETWANDA -----� 1 (Amn O NOO x m N NYi O(1 O V N N ��, I� �� Q J • 9 �I N c� VERY LOW RkG1UNAL '. = •:. o all a�a O . ■ aia•�a :•�::• • 0 t -I 2 DU/AC COMMERCIAL • . LOW OFFICE '.t"+•IOQ7�: 2-4 DU/AC • • • • 0.0 INDUSTRIAL ••"""' ® LOW-MEDIUM PARK 5-8 DU/AC . .. . . .o; - PTA GENERAL • ` ; ::« MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL owwwrwm M GENERAL INDUS. - - MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED - -- 15-24 DU/AC . HEAVY - • INDUSTRIAL r _ 9 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE • • • • • • " RESIDENTIAL • COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE 1a] COMUNITY COMMERCIAL - - FLOOD CONTROL NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY CORR. a-=? COMMERCIAL INTcn_ci r�r�n • DRAFT PLAN Service Commercial Medium Density Res. (5-14 du/ac.) REQUEST: Commercial NALY5IS: Refer to analysis on Item No. B. k RECOMMENDATION: APPLICANT: Michael G. Scarlata APa 227-221-26, 27 ITEM No, 9 77 i November 24, 1980 Ln116 `^r ire City of Rancho Cucamonga CITY OF F�tz�r110 UCAh:vhadl Planning Commission. ppR9NUN1T1' DEVE'OFI�""'T DEFT• 9�40 Baseline Road r� , l► L l ::,' Rancho Cucamonga Dear Sirs, - I am the owner of Parcel Numbers 227-221-27 ,`. 227-221-26 In viewing your new General Plan of Rancho Cucamonga., I would like to make two suggestions. I notice that the cjuth side of Foothill Blvd. is zoned for Industrial. Therefore I believe that C-2 commercial on the north side of Foothill Blvd. would be a good buffer zone.. I am in the opinion that some of the services that L are needed in the area now and the future will be it better served if the north side of Foothill Blvd, west of Rtiwanda Ave. to remain C•-2 commercial. Very truly yours, [Micheal G. Scarlata 1 0 a' 1 \� ` hs I' Aft 1 1 N _ r ' J • Q �1 V r � . u a I Q y N V - isn o r I'• I v O Cb PD 1 1• Jr � rn I cn wo T o Go B PD tD a to u C n • CD NE aro 1 4 bcO• N b J i 6 -.:. • c N AVE. ETIWANDA i p • �C n � V •�k'�i/fir: VERY LOW REGIONAL 2 DU/AC COMMERCIAL . '. . ••:• LOW •;: OFFICE f•=tom"- yrrrrilr �� .•::•:•: e-4 DU/AC �• ■ ww wr 0w r w ■ www w • • • • •�� ® wwwwwwwrwrwww • • • • • INDUSTRIA rwwwrwrr ■ uwww • • • • • • PARK •.; wwowwwwwwomwwo ;:;:•: LOW-MEDIUM . . ® wwrwwwwrowwmr 5-8 DU/AC • • w w Ow ■"w��w w"w"w Oww • MEDIUM GENERAL INDUSTRIAL •;•.• 5-14 DU/AC ; ® / GENERAL INDUS. • MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED • • :. • ••:= = 15-24 DU/AC "" •• • " = HEAVY ® •:• • • • •_ •_- HIGH .•:• :='� :•: INDUSTRIAL 25-30 DU/AC (�� HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL T} • COMMERCIAL `-• OPEN SPACE COMMUNITY COERCIAL •• _f - - - I . '•• • • ••••• ® �� NEIGHBOHOOD UTOODTYOCORRL INTERIM PLAN a- —1 COMMERCIAL DRAFT PLAN Service Commercial Medium Density Res. (5-14 du/ac. ) REQUEST: Commercial ANALYSIS: Refer to analysis on Item No. 8 RECOMMENDATION: i ; APPLICANT: Victor Di Carlo ` AP-` 227-221-23 r...: ITEM NO. 10 12774 'oothill Blvd. Etiwanda, Calif. , 91?�,9(a t; ` i• Decernber 3, 1980;1iY Or COMSJIUi�{iY i,LVF. ld'�'• c+ 7 t .+ �. P_ Commission rancho Cucamonga, A� Dear Sirs: In observing your proposed master plan for 'rancho Cucamonga I, Victor DiCarlo as a property owner in the city am concerned and opposed to certain zoning, changes. am the lard owner of parcel: 227 221 23 I am located east of. 115 on the north side of :-oothill Blvd. This property has been zoned "Commercial" for many years. There are businesses operatinv in this "Commercial Zoned Area" , on the north, south side of .�oothill and east and west of Etiwanda Avenue. A.ccordin-, to your proposed Master Plan, this zoninz shows a chance to residential zoning. These businesses have been operatinr for many years and your zonint plan shows a halt to any future "Industrial Development" , yet one half block away, the corner of foothill and Etiwanda Avenue is zoned commercial and is not yet developed. I feel the properties west of Etiwanda Avenue should remain zoned commercial as it has been for yearn. The Planning Commission has in the past, expressed the desire to leave the Etiwanda area, a rural area, so please do not disturb the present zoni.nc; since we are satisfied with the zoning, the way it stands now. As a citizen, property owner and a "Native Born Resident of Etiwanda for 58 years" 1 feel a right to express my desire and I appeal to you the Planning Commission to keep _'oothill Loulevard east of Stiwanda Avenue at the present zone "Commercial", Ve-y 'truly youT.s, /// - I 1 x1 u � I _ k d u . N p l71 � ro M I w � I 1 .1 �4 :i N y 40 A 4 \ C n ZE CD vOD, Q, Q m; G .I Np a m m C 1 � � nN ErlwamDA - AYE. ; n ti .4 I;.;.:;: VERY LOW a nn _}�fjra�a�` " . EA 2 DU/AC CO^�MMERC'IAL MMM m . . ww •1•:::::::::. LOW rrir OFFICE ryry • • ° ° ' ` ` ` 2-4 DU/AC • I e e e w e e w w ��.�a �+eewel e e1 e1e . • w 1 1 e e Iw w e 1 • • • • ° " INDUSTRIAL ^' • • • • " " ° " " ` LOW-MEDIUM PARK e . . w :::::: 5-8 DU/AC ?:,: .;• w•.:::.•. � • � GENERAL MEDIUM C/////I IND'JS'fRIAL `+ 5-14 DU/AC GENERAL INDUS. g = MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED 15-24 DU/AC HEAVY ® M INDUSTRIAL HIGH r = 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL _ OPEN SPACE COMMUNITY P COMMERCIAL FLOOD CONTROL NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY CORR. COMMERCIAL INTERIM PLAN DRAFT PLAN Minimum Impact Industry Industrial Park , REQUEST: Commercial NALYSIS: Related commercial is allowed in Industrial Park. Both the ' Sedway/Cooke and Blayney Plans are consistent. Introduction of commercial center or retail uses would disrupt integrity of industrial park area. a W l; 1 (( RECOMMENDATION: 6i :I :i APPLICANT: Sebastian Masi tf AP'-' 229-011-1 21,26 27. 2R S ITEM NON 11 (714) 082.7009 ARL SEBASTIAN MASI ' VINEYARDS P.O. BOX 14 CUCAMONGA. CAUFORNIA 91730 December 2, 1960 City Of Rancho Cucamonga C/o F.r. Steve McCutchanj Associate Planner 0132066rC Baseline Road, P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga , California 91730 Dear FL-. McCutchan; I am putting in writing our feeling of what I was trying to say when visited your office last week. It has been brought to our attention, that the new master plan for the City Of Rancho Cucamonga proposes changing the zoning of Lot 17 situated on the Southwest corner of Foothill Blvd., and Rochester Ave. (orange) From Commercial Use to inlustrial use. As owners of Lot 17 since January 1943, we consider t.3c present zoning as best use and strongly OBJECT. to any proposed change in zoning for the following reason. Commercial establishment has funcioned on Lot 17 for over 60 Years, aproximately 30 years ago (more or less) County board. of Supervisors of San Bernardino adopted a master plan which . dentify Lot 17 as commercial property and the property has been taxed acooraingly. t Since the incorporation of the City Of S!"muu Rancho Cucamonga acommercial Permit was granted to Gorman Lumber Brokerage to operate retail establishment on the west 324 feet of Lot 17 facing foothill Blvd.... Foothill Blvd., is presently 100-feet wide with expansJ pn to 120-feet when development occurs. Development will require us to donate/for highway expansion. It is also our undmstanding that Rochester Ave. is also projected to be a 120-ffet wide, (as was originaly planned by the ea:cly settlers) if this be the case then Lot 17 is idoaly situated for commercial development since uualacxt=d= aeeazs to and from the property will not pose any problems. ' Very truly yours 15 S'EBASMAN, JENNIE L. and JACK M. MASI B SEBASTIAN NASI i •:II ry Y� • y,,, , � .0 e^ �:: i �U�, � -, f ''i,y el{.,l.r. �,+C�.� i 86' KYf il'*�YN k 6• w, w' L t. w. ''l;' S ♦� J ( •�'i ,k+'� �"�+' � ,lilt[< ),t 1r ,�•� nSJ �i n tt R rn�{,�,. „ � •CI''1Sd�� ��� ,ry 1 d +� „ryeiw�`�'41 r + �, 'i:<5'a. �`{� `y,J•V s`1L 4 b��� Y S,� .h+. .n"�" 4r;;�+�' i� �L°? � �!y t ti+Y•"�'- �fSrl�"'� f".+fr ��.� .Mf Ya, �', ,'T�G'4'�, t.' 'V, � �,i TY'Tp l.� .rf,��1� •5 Oj •y:�' t � � ( �` � �}5'LS•i^�t• 'r�u, ,r' 1;?,.y. r "'I��i. '� . '�1. � �1. • I.� ..- t�'LSt'J'a "tA�` a4�4 a..a t rti+nt i�, �'p� ,�'�.f T'}„�.R``'n` j•5�I i ,.r, Ya f!•S'`��'' (' �L�.�"W' 7�'v 'til. 'b .•I ( `.a �'�,}l��jy� ria.;S�� l�'h4i�:S�iy�Y� N7i'� rkr4('{',t r{� y.�L A1,..PW��4��'xVt({'��� 'M �r���ui`y�( '✓ '4`� r . 1 Y' � y�(y /�,;'5r,.1. `L `:5,.,. M, i`3 � 4 hrl' ,. t n L F >,I 1 •h .P,l. . sTVty+t +�i. -kw ♦,J S.+L� Lr ` �"r',�ILN 'I 7VV lih � �A, h �jj4 C'I�ii:�-�y Y. Ih V Y` 1rM �� b F iL 1� W� _hI;>.tii.1. r.,`4/� u: ,e�.;,^T �i1. A if 'e�. �e - •.�. t` �1AiL '��Bvvl. _S 4�'t.,n�::,✓. . _nM.. 4:� y 7 'Cr ':.:•::.' — :::: 1 2 DU/AC 188AW LU 14txL1HL °==• — - LOW • • OFFICE . . ::. Y��•��•o r i i a INDUSTRIAL a s o 0 o LOW-MEDIUM CGCd PARK _ o0 ago 5-8 DU/AC ::• ': p=�.,., GENERAL " MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL 5-14 DU/AC • • • • • ,; GENERAL INDUS. """' • • •• • ......: MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED .. ... ... . . . . . ... ... ... . 15-24 DU AC HEAVY • •.....• •.• . • •• `... Y. 1:1 GH INDUSTRIAL • ••••••• ::::a �. •i' \:::: . . . . . . . . :::... •':• ••?;;;;;== 25-30 DU/AC (—� HILLSIDE •��`�����•�• •'' �'•""�' �—.J RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL_ '•" ` - Golf OPEN SPACE purg '�r COMMUNITY — _ CG;MMERCIAL FLOOD CONTROL . a� J NEIGHBOH00D � UTILITY CORR. INTERIM•PLAN +--=--1 COMMERCIAL DRAFT PLAN Mixed Use & Medium Residential Office x ins. now ity aPt (� a du/ac. REQUEST:_ Medium Density (5-14 du/ac ) on rear portion of property ANALYSIS: A copy of the Asse,!�jr's map for the area in question is attached. Refere. ce is map to stub streets. The low density is a logicll extension of area development and the higher density's i,ould be isolated and inappropriate. RECO11MENDATION: d , ., APPLICANT:_Andrew Rarmakian_ APB_208-3 '=18. 19 '': ITEM NO. 12 BARMAKIAN WOUT AND ARCMECTS UUiT�� December 12, 1980 Barry Hogan City of Rancho Cucamonga 9340 Baseline Road Alta Loma, CA 91701 Dear Barry: I am writing to express my concern for the zoning of a parcel of property belonging to one of our clients. The parcel lies on the south side of Foothill and is known as the Mandala store property. It lies directly across from Socorro's new restaurant project at Center and Foothill. The land use plan has suggested that the front 300-400 feet be zoned as office-professional use. The remaining portion of the property was desig- nated as R-1 4-6 DU's per acre. The owner has asked that I request for them R-3 and 4-15 DU's per acre on the rear parcel since the property to the south of them and contiguous to their south property line also shows that type of residential density. I would appreciate being heard at the next planning commission meeting covering the general plan and land use plan. I would appreciate a tele- phone call from you prior to the date of the meeting when this item will be presented to the planning commission. Sincerely, ANDREW BARMAKIAN Architect, AIA AB:gj 9875 Anhhald X"ue,Sude 101, Rancho CUwmo tga,Cak1 mia,9TM = (714)985-1881 An&M BamialftrArchi ect,ASA/Larry Wolff-Archeteot,AIA t w • - - ec,Tp .a, 44 T N Y Q, a! G• ron' zE I too C r. IA 0 O p I o f m` 1 mamas ok G]plaa to .3� mo W HAVEN AVENUE —4-- . -.. .. m� 4;_ _ _ ____ __ ..__ � ___ •� /'"mil N _ f �`� (I � "7v--+—• • a a s• i3�Ir � '.! a„n, . ... ��s..o•_ 2 1 : a _ :. ::«:. ::: OFFICE ® _ . . . . . . . . . � LOW_ _ •• • . . . . . Y w • _ 2-4 DU/AC �•s �i ii:c:rii::::iiicii:::: �11� INDUSTRIAL LOW—MEDIUM PARK I� ...................... .� - .� :•w ::::::: -$ :•::• — :. . . . . . . . . . . GENERAL "" " '• ' — — � � • • � � • w� :•: : : MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL • •" 5-14 DU/AC ....................... ::: _ •:: GENERAL INDUS. ::: ::. MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED • • "'� � 15-24 OU/AC L HEAVY go ::: _ ; — HIGH INDUSTRIAL .. — 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE -•;:;:• — = RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL .......... ;: � _ • • • • • e OPEN SPACE • • w • eess1�l :._ :: — :� ® ii o'a s s''affys� ' . � — • �•�i:i.•��5� COMMUNITY - - COMMERCIAL FLOOD CONTROL IMF%• • o" NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY CORR. --- •.::::::::::P•: _O ti . ._::•::::::: V __, . COMMERCIAL �- INTERIM PLAN DRAFT PLAN Inw Density Res Medium Density Res. (5-14 du/ac. ) 7 REQUEST: Commercial NALYSIS: Site is too large for commercial development and is not q. the best location to serve the surrounding area. The inclusion of commercial here would constitute a spot designation. 1t l' RECOMMENDA.""N: y' APPLICANT: Raveewan Kanokvechayant APzu 227-091-38 Iklo 13 ITEM N •1 i' 1 — c Jim- ?� 0 June 18, 1980 City of Rancho Cucamonga Post Office Box 793 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Assessor's Parcel No. 227-091-38 NE Corner of Rochester & Baseline TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I am the record owner of the referenced real property which is currently unimproved and designated as low density single family residential. It is my understanding that the City is presently in the process of developing a new master plan for the City. Further, it is my understanding that property owners may at this time request their property be considered for a different master plan designation that it has presently. Therefore, I formally request that my property be changed from its present designation to commercial. If you have any questions or require further information, please contact me. Raveewan Xanokvechayant q Wlesco Realty Services, Inc. 1152 N. Mountain Ave., Suite 104 Upland, CA 91786 (714/981 8956) Encl : Parcel Map 3�iTJ R p R a. •ta, •.ea. RS © raro.s.a a It 0 00' �7 8 R® a+s "Mirx 7At .l m...a.�a.u. nr er --- ----- -- It a . y � z w rJ OD a � F � R o ® c F � 4 � pi 84" S +� au► tv-t-pra wr.a _—_—___ S tia. W-x•ura ir it 0 k w ® tt a M4 a w N 41 La 0 g) �M?a.its' a:. . " .E ':. m mse myiw° ICE ( ,. • • m m • • t IO m m ••• m � mmgmmm m ° �,. •:. m�m�w mw�i mq%m°i � LOW °m e° OFF �...::::::::: �! 2-4 DU/AC ,•::::. . . - ® INDUSTRIA •::::•"::=:: LOW-MEDIUM PARK •:e•:'::::•::•:: - 5-8 DU/AC .. . . . . . . . . . . . 0,• • • • • • , • ' • • • "�.' GENERAL _ :: MEDIUM • • • • • " '= %� INDUSTRIAL •:.•:••:::• 5-14 DU/AC :::::.•.• m •. . . . . • • • e o GENERAL INDUS. :?: MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED 15-24 DU/AC HEAVY HIGH £NDUSTRIAL 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE 0 RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FLOOD CONTRCL COMMEROIAOD UTILITY CORR. INTERIM PLAN DRAFT PLAN Alternative Area Office REQUEST: High tensity Residential (7ii-If�ar) ANALYSTS: Either the current designation Dr the one proposed wouid be appropriate at the sight in question. Howe%er, the current office designation would be more compatible with the exi.;ting single family housing to the north. RECOMMENDATION: ,.; APPLICAFIT: Don VaVerka AP4 227• 152-1$,31 tM1 iTE144 NO. 14 f i. 4' AWL MUSIPOEERIIIIG SERVICE CORPORATION CONSULTANTS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING&LAID PLANNING January 15, 1981 CITY OF R."+PdC 1O CUCANiQKA ;> COMP+1UNITY DLVFI OPPAFNT DEPT. Mr. Tim Beedle, Sr. Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga pjp PtN P.O. Bo:. 807 Z�Si�►1�tiltL'fZ12�3i���'� Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Subject: General Plan Use Designation for NE Corner of Foothill Boulevard & Rochester Street Our W.O. 8683-4 Dear Mr. Beadle: Engineering Service Corporation is the civil engineer and land planner consul- tant for DLV Corporation who is purchasing the approximate 8 acre property, lo- cated on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Rochester Street and the flood control channel to the east of Rochester Street located in your City. A review of the proposed General Plan Amendment reveals this property Las been designated as 10office°. It is the intent of the developer to provide afforda- ble housing in the form of a condominium project. It is, therefore, respec- tively requested that the General Plan be enanged to allow for this property to be downgraded to high density residential ranging from 25 to 30 dwelling units per acre. Justification for this change is based on its close proximity to a proposed regional center Rt the Devore Freeway and Foothill Boulevard, and its proximity to the Foothill Boulevard Corridor which has like densities adjacent to it at Cleveland Avenue, Vineyard Avenue and Baker Avenue. This project will help meet the much needed lower cost housing which has a higher need than office space. It is the intent of the developer of this property to submit- the required zone change, tentative map and conditional use permit at the City's next possible filing perial. We would wish to meet with your staff to discuss our develop- ment objectives in order t- 'assure that we meet with the City requirements. We thank you for your consideration and look forward to your reply. Sincerely, ENGINEERING SERVICE CORPORATION R bert R. Suns;' P.E. Vice President RRS:hb cc: 7,,�o`nVaVerka DLV Corp. 73r" 2� k. 4678 ADMIRALTY WAY, SUITE 933 • MARINA DEL REY. CALIFORNIA 90291 • TELEPHONE 213/822-4040 1 MAPPLICANT John D. Lusk and Son _ AP # 210-062-2,13,26,32,33 LOCA'iION MAP • • • • � •may a e 4 e • • • o • r i°e •:N••••e•* • m • • t °oi• se°®s��• • • p°°°p 0 i i N a o INTERIM PLAN DRAF I_AN Low ^es. and Service Comm. Medium Res. (5-14 du/ac) REQUEST: Medium High (15-24 du/ac) and Commercial ANALYSIS: Portions of the site were shown as Service Commercial on the Interim General Plan. These were changed due to the subsequent development of a Neighbor- hood Commercial Center at 4th and Vineyard which could serve the site. Tourist commercial uses are also allowed east of the site in the Industrial area on the north side of 4th down to Devore Freeway. It was felt that the Medium Density provided the reasonable integration of industrial and residential . A higher den- sity as requested would not be compatible due to the fact that these higher den- sities should be located on major intersections. Consensus of Planning Commission opinion on 1/12/81 , was to strip commercial 300' deep along 4th Street. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is necessary that the Planning Commission retain the Sedway/Cooke designation of medium density res dential for the reasons stated above and in addition, there may not be enough of a base to support service commercial or restaurant at this time or in the near future. ,I,. • ■ • •� •¢ a •�:••f. ..�j.-. � !'� - L.. . •Rr-'. ............ C" e . _ ': — irr-:'•v.; ,=ru•wiL�wy;�.ai�- •v_c2s-n4:rr-_. � __ G :T G p ourse w Te` : 1..•: :• •KLP:Y: :•�.•: .LT. ..... - - ;Y. .: • LT;:-.A-•.�'wg•- • i i 1•• : wa...i/.rtw. M Nw rrt!•cw•.M1^�-�.ir' •..Y;.�-..w'v2 i�.��... y�� -): w,T3'w�iCw. — w-Y Y • • 1: — �---------r--• / �' '� .:' ': i is � �. . ••Y..r..r.-:: — ` :":�':: J..!�='. �_` Golf ours v0yl�ra 1Im���•o gat ........r • • • • , JIr .1 ..Y Y R t • • •:::� _ I� . . _ r .. •:::.: ............. : :z•; i . f '.l •F 'HIV ♦y�M �..-. •..• Oe �l/' •ice �� M S.:.V..:` ::a.• �' : � lilt _ :: 21 sr �.B° , :='—S •r.nit_ •_.i _ .r_ '�: `3. t �._:. a _ t ,f 1 . i t' -----r----- �\ 0. • � i s No N � s+N S aei•�. ^ , /-1M175 W V - 1 N �' • R •� r en�o Y `u I � oun .W t C.A. .ro aw rrt it 1 •. -N O- a NU .<I'i A � m •V O ' '� � �_ : 4 L !r -...62CHIVl.D ..t "` -,t. :AvFJaUE•-=- � r-- i 1'. Fd;' 00 • • • . . . i• • • o • • o • e • • • • w • e i • M e • • • • • f • e • • ' a of • 6 r tl i 0 e • o • r • • • m e • • • c • 0 p • • e • o • • e e e o 0 0 • * s o • • • • • • • • • e • p • p • o • o e • • • • • o • • e• I PEN , e e • • • • e w w o • s • • • • • • m e o • • • • • e • i ,' � 4P 00e0000AA00.000U� ' '. t e00e•.eee0ie 00M�0t eui 00000,0000e00*0009� 0000e100000000?0e01, e000 ele 0eeeeY e'00e� 0000000e00e000'ee0fl 0e00ee0000r1 00000 Dee eefo000®000t ec r00000e�0Yet eee0ei00e00e0•00et •000000000. 00et eeosse a'ee000000 Hoe Z es&Aeee•eso,eeee .tT t 000e0ee00e0e0ee fr� ae ® a ®n ® BA ® M l MM sb� 3WEN �s e i I fB1U CITY OFF;,,171,a.; r.uCrrir?QiiC,A COTAMII.NiTY [TVP f)?P+1FNT pFPT. L' AM PPA JC)HN D. LUSK & SON '718191101111V11j213i4 516 A MEMhAR OF THE LUSK FAMILY OF COMPANIES A: 1755D GIIIeHe Are., mine InderFriel Complee • P.O. Bm 417560, Frrine, CeIIF. 92712 17141 S574227 • 12131 72648e1 �•` December 22, 1980 City of Rancho Cucamonga P. 0_ Box 807 ` Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: .4r. Jack Lamb Director of Planning Re; Lusk Property - Norchwest Corner of Archibald a r Fourth Avenue/Tax Parcels No. 210-062-02 , 13 , 26 , 32 and 33 - 54 .8 Gross Acres Gentlemen: It is our understanding that the City of Rancho Cucamonga is currently considering revisions to the land use element of the General Plan_ It is our further understanding that the current suggPGted land use for -the subject property would be for residential use in the medium category; 5 to 14 units per acre. The property presently carries a land use designation of service �► con'narcial •_n the poition of property fronting on Fourth Avenue between Archibald and Cucamonga Creek with residenti .l designation on the balance. Based upon our review of the subject property and its proximity to both the Cucamonga industrial area and the Ontario International Airport, we would respectfully request your favorable consideration of the following land uses (see attached map) : 1. On Parcels 2, 13 and 25 which comprise approximately 30 .54 gross acres and which have froi.tage on both Archibald Avenue and Fourth Avenue, we woulti request a continued commercial designation_. It is our understanding that the service commercial designation has been -hanged to reflect straight commercial ; however, our marketing indicates the potential 11, , 1 r r• Mr. Jack Lamb Page 2 December 22, 1950 use of this property would be for uses formerly considered as service comme: -ial. 2. For Parcels 32 and 33 , we would request a designation for residential medium high density allowing 15 to 24 dwelling units per acre. This designation has been requested on the basis of our understanding that the City is interested in having more modestly I.riced housing available for employees in the adjacent industrial and commercial areas. Our experience would indicate that densities of 15 to 20 units par acre will be necessary in order to provide housing in price ranges to meet the income ranges for the employees for these 3i :as. Your favorable consideration of the foregoing will be ap, reciated. Should you have any questions with regard to our request, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, JOHN D. LUSK & SON 4' Donald D. Ste£fensen $, Senior Vice President r`, L DDS:ks i' A L,. ��t t �i J� 1rXfk'PON MAP � y�"""� VERY LOW HE610NAL DU/AC COMMERCIAL o : •. :: . LOW14 ;■o OFFICE .. • • • ,',2c[+a ■ 2-4 DU/AC ® INDUSTRIAL • - LOW-MEDIUM PARK • ° • 5-8 DU/AC GENERAL • • MEDIUM C////il INDUSTRIAL • • 5-14 DU/AC ,�y �•; � :: =.; {/,g �7/ GENERAL INDUS. - �• � MED. HIGH 7�rr�n RAIL SERVED 15-24 DU/AC ` • HEAVY •:.-.•: —_ __ - HIGH INDUSTRIAL. •:.-.•: 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL �•• _ • + COMMERCIAL • :::: OPEN SPACE Y COMMUNITY K COMMERCIAL - _— FLI,JD CONTROL • • - • • " ' " •:� a NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY CORR. ___: •::o •.�.� ::: :' S COMMERCIAL INTERIM •PLAN DRAFT PLAN Low Residerrial Low Residential (2-4 dulac) REQUEST: Low Medium Residential (5-8 du/ac) ANALYSIS: The site c',:,,prises 20 + acres and is therefore vt,"ge enough to accommodate appropriately planned low-medium density d welop.:�nts. The first developer in the area, Tract 11610, should be required to plan out the circulation of the entire area to provide a system compatible with the existing surrounding residential subdivisions. RECOMMENDtT:;,,l: APPLICANT: Staff Initiated AP= 1077-J31-1 ,2,3,4 ITEM NO. I' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1. co��rraus� 1 . I I 1 _ I 1 i r ,l .' . • . ...• '�: .. ja ,4a : ',r1 • �Q\� ♦t4.r, a� r. 1 r� -i l• xr 1 • ..•� w'.-. .. ,-.., '/y'3. c^..'t,..•'.:.%•�,1 'a ..i«..P-• '-.�'� rf::':'.1'• 1 i+' L « YS �.�� L'-..r� -.nur�._-f�]f''w a�"� ..� r.-_w'.o"___ Y_ ____J� "•.ut Y r••� t IF P 6 A r7 aC "t'la�: y z�.r. s a.'` al c l •. ... •�4 Wl.._ . �... 2 %� {rr.:a .� ?` �r- '__I;.. ©;. '4• y'4 S ..net L ' �`� ! .la�^.•J�.G>4..aM.C-i 1.I.Fa.• aA SL'z"i r2. a? a1) C`•e;t;a } c` .eY.i19 a:D .y-, ¢?:I F• aer a:i s II e 1'J •V3 3`` 'I''�'-"3�p_u' '_"{C'. `"��`'� `N ` Y �� i -,k_ 41 i. �.J �' .'.- � -/ J4��1 a I 1 w .�[N.•wrL�r•.�I,.,.I - r y; 1 I ems- - = .^4�r,./- ' ..5�� i C(j i'7 :.wi Lu:�iml•... � " ' .0 f; I! ,_ ✓4 alp 1 s a��S I: I mart Zi 1 t aa.� 1 I ..i i ~•=l' _ =e� }.a,2°12 L Q'tppa rf -g. I .w • 1, 1 i IS �. -L� J ••s 1. i•3.1edr ^ lal.la4 ?r � y ._I a •+� u �h � e ' •ta 3'*.I_:^. �a r.�.:'�: I I SrA -LYl `�x>.%'��!• ' a :..a� , • —.TT- ••• � . _ 1 ` -c� al•e -c�a: _t c9 I. tz ; -F 1. • - a. t=•a. a la tm��x .- � . t ''• Y m � .rn•a.•.r •wwr ii.• ' -r I r s •9 '• r '::I 3 �.3• ,,. I ,� .. i �I-may�m�lug°S ' Wrr,Y wrx:' 'M••aN 1s ta��.[ �'„"^�. 1 i:, �. 1 t '• t s' • •,,a� I r'I TF- OMAS D. HARRIS, A. I.A. A R C I-I I T E C T January 20, 1981 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department Attn: Mr . Berry Hogan Subject: 78 Unit Planned Residential Development - Turner Avenue Between Baseline and Church for RLS Associates , Inc . , Los Gatos , CA Gentlemen : The Sanchez family, represented by Mr. Roland Sanchez , requests a hearing before the Planning Commission at the next scheduled meeting for the purpose of discussing the density of their proposed project as it relates to the proposed general plan. Please contact this office regarding the granting of this request. Thank you . �. Very truly yo s , 0 S D . HARRIS , AIA Architect. TDH:dj 130 EAST 9TF1 ST., JPLAND, CA. 91786, 714/981-3632 CI;Y OF RANCHO CUC.rANi INCA G�oc�ACAmr,) i. STAFF SPORT LZ January 26, 1981 z TO: Members of the Planning Commission 1977 FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: STAFF ANALYSIS OF THE ETIWANDA PLANNING AREA For planning purposes, a planning boundary was selected to differen- tiate Lh- Etiwanda planning area from the Planned Community planning` r_djt area. While this line runs north/south approximately 1500 feet-2014 of Etiwanda '.venue and separates the two planning areas, (the extent of Eucalyptus w'ndrows) there is considerable interest and concern about land uses that might occur between the planning areas. There- fore, this staff report will not only address itself to the area that is deemed the Etiwanda planning area but also the eastern edge of the Planned Communities planning area. Upon review of the input the City has received from the Etiwanda area, at public meetings and during informal disucssions with small groups and individuals, staff suggests the following z:,alysis and modifications to the Sedway/Cooke plan to assure planning relationships that meet the needs of the Etiwanda ® community. The design concept of the Etiwand" planning area is the retention of low intensity uses to maintain as much as possible, a rural cha- racter which is reflectc-.0 by opennesss, small scale, and an image of a more rural lifestyle. In examining the planning area, one can readily note that the greatest area of potential impact upon such a concept is the area north of the Etiwanda core, more precisely that area which is in the City's Sphere of Influence but still under the control of the County. Furthermore, access to any developme there would more than likely have an effect upon any north/south roadways. Especially if the only neit:hborhood services such as grocery stores, etc. , are located south of Hio*iland. As for these services, there is a need to further study the future need for and location of such facilities within the Etiwanda community since the locatior of such facilities will influence traffic patterns. A more precise study of both the Foothills area and the Greater Etiwanda area is necessary to better define the physical relationships of land uses and ser- vices and to gain further insight into specific needs of the Etiwanda community which can better be accomplished through direct input from its residents. The County, at the present time, is contemplating the concept of a Foothill Specific Plan which the -taff feels would contribute to better planning for the northern sphere area. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission and the City Council urge the County to move forward on such a specific plan an urge close coope- ration with the City. Further, staff recommends the development of .! a specific plan for the Etiwanda area. This would address not only the issues of service, precise street ciruculation, and land use distribution, but would allow greater control over development and Vi• � Staff Analysis of the Etiwanda Planning Area January 26, 1981 Page Two result n greater assurances that development patterns would occur as Planned. Further, such a plan must incorporate a process that would include direct input from Etiwanda residents. Etiwanda residents also have expressed the desire to see a Smoother transition between the eastern boundaries of the Planned Communities area and the Etiwanda planning area. The SEdway/Cooke Plan, while relating land uses to the regional activity node and transportation corridors, does not go far enough to provide a Smoother transition between such land uses. Furthermore, should Victoria be continuous between Milliken and I-15, there is a possibility of traffic infusion into the heart of Etiwanda. Both these issues can be addressed by mak- ing Victoria discontinuous to through traffic west of Etiwanda Avenue and shifting some densities closer toward the regional activity node and reducing densities in a step-wise fashion to provide a more fa- vorable transition between the two planning areas. These suggestions and the retention of low density uses in the heart of Etiwanda and 1e1w intensity uses along Etiwanda Avenue would preserve the rural lifestyle and character of Etiwanda. Traffic is diverted so that the collector streets would, in the heart of Etiwanda, serve only 'local traffic and all high intensity uses would be more closely fo- cused upon the transportation corridor of the regional activity node. Please find attached a brief summary of suggested staff changes for the Planning Commission consideration. Please note that the net effect of the shifting and reduction of densities would be to reduce the net holding capacity by an additional 1200+ dwelling units. Res ectf 1 submitted, SLAM, Director o Community Development JL:jk Attachment r i SUMMARY OF STAFF INITIATED GENERAL PLAN MODIFICATIONS A. Modify Victoria St. from Day Creek Blvd. to Etiwanda Avenue so that it does not continue east of Etiwanda Avenue but instead in- tersects southerly with Base Line Road. b. Modify that medium density area between Gay Creek Blvd. and Etiwanda Avenue south of Highland Avenue and west of the Railway from medium density (5-14 du/ac) to low.-medium density (5-8 du/ac). C. Mnriif:; that high density area north of Base Line between D;�;r creek Blvd. , and Etiwanda Avenue so that the western portion is reduced from high density (25-30 du/ac) to medium-high (15-24 du/ac) and the eastern portion from high density to medium density (5-14 du/ac) . D. Modify that high density area south of Base Line Avenue between Day Creek Blvd, and Etiwanda Avenue so that the eastern half of that high density area is reduced from high density (25-30 du/ac) to medium density (5-14 d:i/ac). E. Modify that medium density area south of Base Line , north of Church and between the Edison easements from medium density (5-14 du/ac) to high density (25-30 du/ac). F. Modify the easterly one-half of that medium density area west of the Rochester tract and south of Church Street from medium density (5-14 du/ac) to low medium (5-8 du/ac) except for that portion fronting Foothill Blvd. G. Move the park designation west of the Rochester tract from Church Street to Rochester. H. Urge the County to move forward on the Foothills Specific Plan in order to properly plan the area north of Etiwanda. Urge close cooperation with the City. I. Encourage a specific plan be done after the adoption of the General Plan for Etiwanda area east of the Victoria Planned Community to the northerly and easterly city limits down to Foothill Boulevard. This specific plan to have direct interface with the Foothill 's Spe- cific Plan and participation by the Etiwanda community. Plan to `den- tify appropriate locations of additional street, traffic diversion from northern sphere, design elements, service requirements, environ- mental constraints, and more specific land use assignments. J. Modify that medium density between Rochester Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard, on the west and east, and Victoria Avenue and Base Line Avenue an the north and south to Low Medium adjacent to Rochester and Medium High adjacent to Day Creek. A .,�rrwrrr :. l'1'1 1 1 Il I�I 1 f � I'I'I11'I'1'1 11111111111 I'! II11.1111 IIII I1111'I'I'111'1'I I'II. � 111111 ' Il I'I IIII11111111 ' Illllllllll II,I IIIIIIIII . I IIIII11111 I•I • IIIIIII •.....: ::. :: 1 ••I I.1 I 'I I,I I I1111 I I 1 .' �_ �� '1'I II I'111' '1' I I I'I I I I •:'. •�:::: LI L: ' 1 I '' I'1 �.•1II'I I II II II II111111111 •••_•. ••---- I'I I t ''I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I. •�� -- I I I I I I I I I I I I,1,1 I I I I I I III I I LI 11 1 I . i��� I1111111 : III III I t 11111111111 ,IIIIII 1 I1111111111 I1111 ': II IIIIIIIIII I III1111111 I'I IIIII I IIIIIIIIII IIIIII 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I 111 I I I y ]� �� •. III IIIIIII 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I �':-•-:::::: EEEEEE 11III111II III II IIIIIIIII IIII II IIIIIII .T: :..:.. ...... :•:•:• •:•: I IIII111111111111 �� TT I,11111111111 II,IIII i �I�IIIII I,I 1,I,I I 1 I 1 IIIII ' :{ eo r•��r . as� rr . ....... ..... Fj LU . ................ . ................ ... .............. .................. ei a .•.71 �I I' I 'I I 11. . 1 !�; • • • e . ,I IT 11,I'I'I'I'11'I,1 111. I'I'I'I 1 111'II'I`I'I �••�••••�• :: • ::-•- _ _. : IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ••••1111111111111111IIII11 ' III1111111 IIIIIII111 I111 11'I ••••___ 1 IIIII I I I I I III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I'I I I IIIIII I _ �1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I II I'1 1 I I I I �I�I�I�II ®1�1�1�1� 1 , '.I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIItIIII111IItIlll,11 ®u IIItIIIt11I' IIt,IIIIII111Illllllllll11111 IIIII111111 -, •III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIII ( IIIIIIIIII _ ' . - •' ' I I'I l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I l I I I 1 1 1 I t III I I I I I IIII I �b�h,e�,y}1amI. •' • IIIIIIIII'III'I'I II�I I111'1'I'I II'I1111'II I'III'I -:•7!�::: "' __ _ + .i\\\.I I : 1 1 I I I . . . IIII I I I I I I I I ���.®� ••• '•w-) YL1111Y. 11 'poll ll . tlllllllllll 111 oItl ' IIII III11 � 1 I • :,IIII II I l III I V 1'1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I ! 1 ICI IIIIIIIIIIIII III � : II ;^,I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 11 I� IIIIIIII1111111 I II II II : II II I IIII I W I +•I I 11 II 1 II I I I I I . 1 I III I 1 1 II I III I I I :•LLB_I I i II I I f I I I I I I I II I ,: 1�I I'I'I III II III IIIII IIIIII 11, - 4 � , //yy�• I II IIII II . I IIT"II IIIIIII IIII . IIIIIIIIIIII 11 IIIIIIIIII � : 1 11 IIII 1 1 I I I 1 1 11 ' 111 I I 1 11 III IIII III 1 IIIIIII I illl I I I I 1 I I \II' II III I I I 1 \ I IIIIIII I I IIII I I I II III III III : 1 11 I 1 III I II I 1 8Ys . E I' 1 1 1 Y! 1J� Illk�MrllrYMi111{la'rrrr .•.•.•� •. . �PC In I,IIII :ill '�I l l�l,ll I I'1'I'.' eY.- �(� 't) ���.�•�. ����� ♦ \ III I 1 I' 'M t' .',,�• I I11 . I I I IIIII I ..Gt;r -:ii ........... ............. ....... ......... . ..... . l ". �' I• y.J. Lsa morrow rn 1 t 0 1 1 • r ai 1i1 I • i+ I'1�I1 I •. �I II IIIII I, I ' ' IQ ill lll'1111 I1111 , Ii•I , 11111 I I I I III, I I I I I I �� : I 1111 1111 I • III } Illllll • ♦ aaCppp I I'I I': I 1 'I'll II1'i`I'1`I`IIIIII ' �i ,,I: III ' I li', I I I IIII I1111 I . - ' Illllll IIII Iil ' ' 'IIIII IIII III III IL,�,1 ''I,I,IIl �..��.---_ A l'It�I IIIII I lA,I Ill, IIII IIII IIII UB I • , 111'I ll'I'I'II III :y\ I I �f I III 1 II II II I'I,'R. Ill ll ll 111 'T�G I I I,, I I '. 'I ,I• I I • I I I I I K'1L c y .; tu Y Y • .c p. a Y • 1 Y Y • —17 \•y Y r c `ii _ Y • Y • DIY a Y Y y rY Y Y r • 11 Y 1 r Y u 1 .. 4r oY . •'YI'I'I'1'I'I�Y1 �1�'I�I I'll I 1 r:�l�r �l �•1 I I -•- � •••• •• L'w. -- t IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIilllll 1111 � .I I1111 ,111 { Illllll ® pp �'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . IIIII 1,1 , I,I 1,1.I,1 - .tl lfll ll IIII tl Illllll 6 \�\\'. r I I I I l LI I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I,I I I I I,I I I I I I I „7y�� . III { 111 I t l • rY �®i\\��.� FC ,I I I I 11,1 I I I,I I I I I I LI I I I I I I I I I I'I I,I, I I I I I I 11 I I I •• it �'..`.l �;11111.f llll�lllli•�Illlllll�l III�1,fll ll IIII IIII I,III,I II r . I I I I . IIII .,I I I I I I I I,I I I �-.. ••• •-•- IIIli1l'lIIII�I ;ca'IfIII'�'�'l'Ill'I11l�l1; 1�1 '1:�:11• 7ti�� UA I Illllll ! IIIIII IIII � . [ I'1 I I I �W - 1' IIIIII 1 1 I11,11•�I;Ill,.l _.;� • �,,� ..II II I'.':'1111d '�11 III'1ll IIII I I'LI I, eifiiYaitt � : 1 IIIIILIII IILI , •: I II I t IIII Ill I I `[ 1.[tlii�t 1 1 I 1 1 I,.�.M ;'�'I lIl I11'II IIIIIIIII 1'I I': I •: -:�/�-� [[ ■'^;�[�: ...F� , I I I I I y.�l� I 11 1 I I : � I 1 '•'~ [a � :•:.•';:.:: ,. � I IIIIIII . 1 I --; I I n t� ,I�:�ct � I II __ 111 I :III n I I I I I I I'1 I I I 1 .rl I •e ■ l I 11 1 I I II 1 9 a 00 0 ,'ICI 11 rl I I I I � �YYY�•��YY a/FYI�YY�•��.er ' ���•- \ \\ ' I 1 �' I 1 I"'I 1 ) ♦ j Y w •�,y•" ,. j�jjj . . . CITY OF i A NCI-O CUCA MONGA a�c�'CA kl() SEAff1 REPORT j r' r O O Z DATE: January 26, 1981 F- _ U > 1977 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner BY: Tim J. Beedle, Senior Planner SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN CONSIDERATIONS FOR ETIWANDA PLANNING AREA ABSTRACT: The SedwaylCooke Plan provides for continued rural life style in the Etiwanda area, including very low density and low density residential. , equestrian trail system, preservation of Eu alyptus windrows, protection of Etiwanda Avenue character, and the development of a detailed specific plan for the Etiwanda planning area. This memorandum more specifically describes how the General Plan deals with the Etiwanda planning area. DISCUSSION: For the purvu:>e �' discussion on the General Plan, artifical boundaries of the Etiwanda area ha:-_ baen assumed. Specific objectives and policy recommendations for Etiwanda planning area, as with other areas of the City, are contained throughout the General Plan text. Attached to this report is a summary of the area characteristics and the General Plan ob- jectives for the Etiwanda planning area. A detailed presentation and slide show of the overall objectives and characteristics for the planning area will be presented to the Planning commission on January 26, 1981 . The Etiwanda planning area is predominantly vacant land dominated by Eucalyptus windrows as a major landscape feature. There are some Victorian style and orchard homes in the older residential areas. Extensive use of the alluvial rock for curbing is prevailent in the Etiwanda planning area. Many of the older streets in the planning area are lined with mature trees and the use of rock has been extensive relative to curbing and other features. Very little change is proposed from the Interim General Plan to the Sed...-y 'Cooke General Plan. A significant area of addition from the Interim GAnerai Plan to the Sedway/ Co ke General Plan is in the area of specific planning. It is suggested that the Et'wanda planning area be defined as a -pecific Plan Area of the General Plan. The Specific Plan would deal with the more special concerns of the Etiwanda planning area that are not detailed at the General Plan level . It can establish more definitive design standards, identify particular land use areas, ti .e. commercial shopping centers), provide for the cevelopment of precise plans for public streets, recreational features, and adjust land use patterns. As the Commission will recall , a resolution of policy was adopted identifying a portion of the City that should be devoted to eques Irian/rural use which included sensitivity i:, design for equestrian uses and provisions for master planned trails and local feeuer trails. Although this policy has not been included in the original draft of the Sedway/Cooke General Plen, it will Etiwanda planned area -2- January 26, 1981 i be incorporated into the final text and does affect the Etiwanda planning area. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the Genera Plan objectives for the Etiwanda planning area and provide Staff direction on any changes desired. Redpectfully .' bmitted, SRRY///�C'. H GA / J�yi ty1ipl anner SKH:jk:cd Attachments : Planning Area Map Summary of Etiwanda Characteristics and General Plan Objectives Equestrian Area Map Resolution on Equestrian Policy 1J. , SUMMARY OF ETIWANDA AREA CHARACTERISTICS it G, - Predominantly vacant a - Dominant landscape feature is Eucalyptus windrows - Victorian syt'.e homes in older residentia: areas - Mature trees line streets - Use of rock face on houses and curbs r - Flood control lands to the north SUMMARY OF GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES FOR ETIWANDA PLANNING AREA Develop Specific Plan for areas which: - Establishes Design Standards - Identifies Community Center - Develops precise Street Plan - Develops precise Parhs Plan - Established location of commercial uses - Adjusts land use pattern L •nd use is predominantly low density and very low density residential . Preservation of existing character of Etiwanda Avenue. �. Preservation of rural character through maintenance of windrows and possible selective replacement. is Special Boulevard status of Etiwanda Avenue, East Avenue, Church Street, Victoria Street, and Rochester Avenue. Protection against fire hazards. Develop a plan for local and regional equestrian trail system. "Study Area" has been replaced with very low residential density required to master plan. y, Foothill area to be planned under a .ioint .ity/County plan. ti NNW .gm re 4111 . fii WIN. rh,IM mm;.&'�P-4." ON RO" r 711.1� ME g R,M�MOM. ii f.0 MXX g n. .pa'm�� Mow hat-III Jolla :tz�z EQUESTRIAN/RURAL AREA DESIGNATION a-"=, WITHIN CIT%e' WITHIN SPHERE OF INFLUENCE RESOLUTION NO. 80-82 A RESOLUTION OF fHE PLANNING COMMISSION ESTABLISHING STANDARDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF TRAILS IN THE EQUESTRIAN/P.URAL AREA. 1 WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Planning Commission to implement Resolution 80-74; and, WHEREAS, it is necessary to provide standards for the development and maintenance of trails; and, NOW THEREFfP.E BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY ESTABLISH TRAIL DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE STANDARDS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Side-to-side slopes on trails shall be less than 2%. 2. Master planned equestrian trails shall be a minimum of 20-feet wide. 3. Local feeder trails shall be a minimum of 15-feet wide. 4. Master Planned trails shall be delineated through the use of the extruded concrete .equestrian fence, painted white, similar to those used at the Fox Hollow development project on Amethyst in Alta Loma. 5. Delineation of local feeder trails, i .e. , along the rear of lots or the side of lots shall be designated on both sides of the trail by a standard commercial 4-foot high split rail fence. 6. Trails shall be maintained by a maintenance district. 7. All trails soils shall be sterilized to prevent and control weeds. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS LOTH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1980. PLANNING CCOOMMISSION OF 1HE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: r— ichard ahi , IVhairman ATTEST: Secretary of t e lanning Commission r�; Resolution No. R80( 0 Page 2 I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby, certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the loth day of December, 1980 by the following vote to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Rempel , Sceranka, King, Tolstoy, Dahl NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None CITY OF RANCI-10 CUCAMONGA GLICA MEMORANDUM <z� t `gin 01 0 Z U y 1977 DATE: January 26, 1981 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner BY: Tim J. Beedle, Senior Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT ENERGY CONSERVATION ELEMENT The Planning Commission considered the Draft Energy Conservation Element at Their meeting of January 22, 1981. From their comments, Staff will be preparing revisions to the Draft Energy Conservation Element. Due to the late nature of the review, copies of the revisions will be handed out to the Planning Commission at the meeting of January 26, 1981. Should the Commission wish to continue review of this item to allow them more opportunity to review the recommended changes, it is suggested that this item be deferred to the meting of January 28, 1981 . RECOMMENDATION: Defer consideration of Draft Energy Conservation Element, with revisions, until the next regular Planning Commission meting of January 28, 1981. Respectfully submitted, / {1RRYI'C. HOGAN ity fanner ".::TJB:jr -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �VCA.y° F Z U q 1577 DATE: January 26, 1981 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner BY: Tim J. Beedle, Senior Planner SUBJECT: REVISIONS TO DRAFT COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT The Planning Commission considered the Draft Community Design Element at their meeting of January 22, 1981 . Based on this discussion, Staff is preparing revisions to the Community Design Element to be brought back -to the Planning Commission during their meeting of January 26, 1981 . However, due to the late nature of this review, it is recom- mended that the Planning Commission consider postponing discussion o-P the Draft Community Design Element and revisions until the next Plan- Ping Commission meeting of January 28, 1981 . RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue the consideration of the Draft Comnunity Design Element and revisions to their meeting of 2anuary 28, 1981 . Res ectful y submitted, RR Y K. OGAN ( \` ¢ity canner` BKH:TJB:jr Cr1TY�OAffik p�F,�R�AI�\K7yHO C'L)CAA40NCA �pG ACAM�tic J L] Lt�' REPORT VRTqP i 7' w n O O F C� � U Zj 1977 DATE: January 26, 1981 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner BY: Tim J. Beedle, Senior Planner SUBJECT: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ON THE GENERAL PLAN ABSTRACT: The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Draft Se way Cooke General Plan is complete for Planning Commission discussion and public input. Planning Commission should review, discuss, ..nd pro- vide guidance to the Staff on the Environmental Impact Report. It is anticipated that additional review will be scheduled at future public hearings. DISCUSSION: The Draft EIR has been prepared in compliance with require- ments of California Environmental Air Quality Act and State EIR Guidelines, Section 15147. This permits analysis of the Draft EIR to correspond to the "degree of specificity" envolved in the project. The analysis within the Draft EIR is a review of the secondary effects which are expected to follow with the development of the City as conceived in the Draft General Plan. Also, the Draft E?R identifies potential problem areas which would need further environmental studies prior to development approval . In this way, the Draft Environmental Document serves as a future guide to the City for determining specific environmental studies. The Con nission will be asked to review this environmental document during the up coming meetings on the General Plan. It is anticipated that, once the Commission has completed their review of the General Plan, they will also have completed the review of the Draft Environmental Document. The recommendations on the Environmental Document will be forwarded to City Council . The Council , prior to approval of the General Plan, must cer- tify that the Environmental Document is complete. Planning Comnissiou Ask January 26, 1981 MP Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission begin considering the Draft Environmental Impact Report and continue this review during the remaining scheduled meetings on the General Plan. Respectfully su mitted, rf B�RRY ,K. HOGAN 7ty Iflanner BKH:TJB:jr Attachment: Environmental Impact Report Summary Matrix r is 1r; , y N C W O L N ya � V O A L W y41 O O: N i •O � O LL u • A O J y� ' L O y EOE O 9 N ` O � •r y. r� rtl q �dJ Y C aVJI N�yy VJ U a N Y O Q V O L> \. 9•O O N O N C V � ii��C O X y A C j. \a qqJJ T" VNi J Z 6 J V V d O W JV• C C J Y- J Wrr aL. VI coo N O•r •^R G A� q,CVy N � NaCa11 w= CU C9d K. dO\ MOy 7� •Y \n 6 Y y A C Y y_ C+� O F r 3'C` T V aJ .1.• P — r V•r y W W G LLLLL w � vl C r d g A Py .r•N 01 C J O d A • rM^ OI N A n C N EygN O' CIA NdN W�•rA S OOy LNyyU AA LTJyOV1 C Y- > L ti• L_ JJ C U V Y1 Cyr d p1 i r } N O O p>p C N L oll a- A L 01 N O�_rC V- �L LU T T Nqq VOO PCy Gq V p V L VI q N,• V 1_ L+ r L O•T C O Tr y C A V d N� y�� L. P T QI C(•J E d L L@ J Y L�J L•r L C C d W A i N 9 L N'p O••� O } A U y Cj,N qr C9y•'• LOOV C yN0 OWC CJVI V O.N A L A po p 1. C r 'p•w` A O V O L Q1 L 9 Nqq L y L� 6r U•O 61 'O L Y- C � L L V W y O V V O C p d E O �•L C y p y y C-O O W A M C �V1 C.� aLJ V G. L A C d W d q 61� O1 IU )C d N�-`••• X A V O d O V J d d wy L O1rr N •r• LY p1C•r^ V �... } A U Y r C L i r L U� N y V f}A 2 V^C q L py Lt N•� W U } L•� W W r (;J Wtr i� N L•q• Nary JOM WCLZ Up,ALU ddA U >CN•^ CY 2�Y• 2 OV YC V W N AA 6N •dNp OL yU pd NAr O•r•r LVA ; > (`} Ql d q N 0 W W N r C1 = Ldp aJ•rLV 6�-l-JgLA yYrA NLLGU VIJ�. A V1WrU r C V I O d d CACgy AV N •t _UW WOC WL.O•rVq _ A�• V C O.A U L N C C V O y- 6 A O\r' > S A L W N C N V Y O L T O W V W Y y T T F V U C w y O a d L C 4 bo a1 J q M^ V O' O O }.•r y Y AJ V j W •r• O V1 U O U W N W V cc F: W 01 W L:JC � Axy O� rW O OV CL C6•rW U•r Wu OCEET O•V O OAr N LWQ NL � wc N.0 'V 6L d -•- A W UU: LV- L J VJ y'C W C WyY� d O'E•XY1 Q>-Od y CY C CrdTA Cy JN� NCNTJ WVWWA YVI ATJ WEOod NL CL WNCuOVI A A O Lt W L A C A F L f= L C J= C t L r aJ d Z L L O L T\' L d•�V t•^ J r Jp• O-O M �J O LL y 0. 1- � U q H g y M 6 C] L tJ O r U 6 N d 1- N ]t 0 F^= C A V E Y U� O1N AL U L L •N A y \ C N � � C p U U y V- A p\•w- d y A V- N 7•d C N L V L yW TOIW NC•r N. L+ AVC AC•r G Ay S W C W W •Vp L'�� r � \O C v O.•O �O Cp y N p O V^ A Q� U� L Y- O r .J Jn p L Y r• VIr V1 A L 01Y A W W E'O y C N� C V W aJ V 01 O w N L U L N C C p U r N N pOp C L WWY VL wL\W \wA- TLOA = Eu LN ET O s y y L q r O E A y L t 01 O C VA rA6 EhT V N.� AC = O y54p•` ^ �V wm Y pLC O V^9 a WOV.OW 'U WCy C = u y L Nr r 6 W A d y W NyaJ O =p K u O \O L V L V•r A Cy �f V 2 Vry N W z o i 0 W r w O A O U y y t c On L L E -rC•V- L W C '•J O•� C1. L•r L W 9 G W y �'O L q W V Q L d L Y 01y Y fz 9 V• N N �J f] L W A E N ry•L1 W yQ 3 N U•r L A N L LL U L qTv O qTqW r O r V ma X A A V y O 9 q O T >•r F A W E LV A yyppL O•r Ow 0 O W o`rA^ Sla4-•O Vr C+ q A y dyJ= O aJmwL upCpC..Oy u > CJC m.a ovu OICW 2V yuy psJn p V W b J^•••C^ O N o n L7 a} N 1•A 0.• a>y1 iJ- w i s a>1 6 C u'•L o O t 0 > N N N W W � F W Tr � yr ` �{ � L qd•r V L I � $• $ c u �I �II r l F u a N P L •- L J N V W W V VI 1"1 C QI d N w W d d O A W O CILI ^ r N a V V yp>1 L _ N q N V C O A A It C L d OI OW WOC dLY NUJ 7� a N Vr`IV L 1 yr N6 M WO•r ah•^C' q� pNW1 W� In N•rw CON u J CO >JLI WC- AC 'L_' NWPOONaY a •.- gGVNa as c� C�L T1V V C W N (A}g µ, � Oqa NLO I Ly .C � CN'O LV qL� M W CNV FLaF YapC�rN Vl a9P dy rY:tl V V L w d O aU rAc• 4J NINn rVrVOU a q O+ qi 4 L u y PITO � > WCr -- 9JC.YyCyL>-11t•ZNO�l YNL- ♦YYUq•.1!V�a COWC•9.ONa-.YCO�.11O1�]9qNC NLCAOO I•NLpLr1 yW.�YTN IC=NF NON LJJ. W1•LV- L Ic, VVaNL•WFGP.L-vVWNNL-rM>O>, vrro LVa YU.NNaIJ N r.WQ: OiqU Y~NC,GANO r'Q'O NNVS'.dLp^ •cO•r O.V V ^ J JJLo VWL V^Wc....-VJ-JOdfj•' 6NEd.LC N✓ad. Wda .'N. Cg} PTy'L6}C.VOC� NPI V V Y > LaOwOO Nw -YCYd O ONOww IL c O V— O Y W q ✓ c rnZn w aa Ca IP N acW Lw [Jj. c� Io•rro � N _ ygLPP ulc4 wccuiy� • � �..� W YaNC rYN Lp �G 9{ V� Ww CCLg1UW OL�•W- WC IOL �J V•r rN �"IOY'O P.NII N AG4Ya d+• Nd M N pp11 6 4411 rI�p FN Q O•.- C U•r dN VV^ CI VOC VL4 w UGL LE •^t �� VwaC O yw2�«O Iq CU Wr9r OL QLCI 'L]w.0. OAS NdV•r wyc W (>�YFO rUq AA aJ WOL ~j wcMwN NL .� iY � NtYO qq�N OWON NN,NCO��J• wICNVO-. d .T• LLNl~•LA W rN y N l dN d }E V�-+=y D MN^ In'- ONIn .OW%1LC 'Cp 4NObOyY G, i CC �rro 1grSAdQNgC NPO q .1cwu0 "COP, 41 q L O C rIl O O•r• 6 C G V y O q JJ O G C NICJ OV-O GC N M� OV N N^ q � PV Y4� N•r :J•r C >f+.F1' NL LO ti 0.1�-'M.0 >f0 8 CO. NN V V �r 0.O.Q c W O.Sd "' Q L••C• C C' UM. N F. N V C OJ Z' C N TI •Q•rC'•.0 Icl q .?•]t 41"V A a•'�• W d M 11 O•. •L V O N M• V O N N u �0 O N .LJ U N N w N GS•.O• T _✓ L. �{1 W y N 6 U d 9 N V W O W C 1 N 0•r C r C M U a d q 6}�L 9 a1~ p C L L] w W p1 = N C.JJ O CF••r g N U L A L•.••+• O L W L C w a q•� C L N L L X q O N W 1: L 6 O a t 0 0 >L Y - 'Pe . C V- w w C ) V 1� 0.(1 U L N ♦-JJ C JJ O 9 Q J I W JJ q F V d.�'C.G 2 V d N Z r F M 9�,1- N .O ti g O V V•, L a 4' c L CL.19�I a O L y A Y P .JNO u ca+ O . (� .Vc L L wi> � W .�-' L c 1� Oac N S N•., Ip C_Y W a1 4.Y W C I1 q G Y r S NQl {J w q •.� J N N 4W! C N Om O W 9 A 1U1 >lJ.s L w C L O tir p> C aJ C W L N •C >fr q �' O WJN 4: YYpO L y � NN Yr OrVW wN LV Vi dC ct C N ...4 q0 ••V q •IJ N Y4. L L rY C } N� _ Na Nr _W ^ wLV w WV41 q �� C NIL{I I, w+r P N •^ V (b q yNy L ��'TT I i T V q N a r 30 C OpE O N B V C LLLLLLLW > r0�9 L�ryI L6N � +11G VI�1V U L�q• NCyCS dC wN roU 1 q UP•r� NwyU Y �eI m^1 ¢w Ul TON OI pC� C g Y V N Y Y A L , rr- > rA A WC, r Inc ^� L I N 3 vl q Q3� y N r g S L yl qw N Fa N I L C I f I•.aa•'• U q LO CN+ fwaC $LC�^ c6; E OLA C�1L C6 Cr yECyE V-f�^ Ct�VpOM j?L (�CpJ, Lq 441V �.Q �� N ISLE06L ~+CLNr _ W NV OVN OIN pC� O CIn > C1r� OT Oa papl1e n ry�1y w 4dU11.4L1 }�Y y> L 4>1 d Y pO� ti+1 pY1r AIR } L ry> L 4}I R d N d pN N Q Wa N O U C� n I ,1••• ~�•.N� N q O � � r "' V OL 01 VT O I' W U r O.r q N L C 6 Y p o L C C U N J[ L O L W W O p Y Z