HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981/03/12 - Agenda PacketJ.
Cl)
J.
VI
60 Mi n.
Min.
120 Min.
QTY of
I'LANNNING COMMISSION
AGENT
THURSDAY, MARCH 12, 1981
LION'S P= COiII$(riZii C NTEC
9161 BASE LINE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I. Pledge of Allegia: ice
II. Roll Call
Commissioner Dahl Commissioner Sceranka
Commissioner King Commissioner To'.stoy
Commissioner Rempel _
III. Announcements
IV. Discussion by Commission and Developer of Land
Use, Circulation, Parks 8 Open Space Continents
Raised
Break
V. Infrastructure /Design Criteria Report and Discussion
by Commission, Staff and Developer
VI. Adjournment
1 .I
,
w
E-
CITY OF RANCHO CCICA_NIONGA.
STAFF F.] ORT
DATE: March 12, 1981
TO: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
William Holley, Director of Community Services
SUBJECT:
M
ABSTRACT: As the Commission will recall, the Planning Commission meeting
of Thursday, February 26, 1981 was cancelled by request of the developer
in order to allow him additional time to prepare responses to the Commission's
concerns. We have attached the previous memorandum on land use, circulation,
parks and open space and the Staff Report on Infrastructure and Design Cri-
teria. Recommendations will be to resolve the issues of land use, circulation,
parks and open space and discuss infrastructure and design criteria.
DISCUSSION: The February 2, 1981 Staff Report beings up a number of items
under Parks and Open Space i.e., indicate the areas )f lake usage for boating,
fishing, etc.; concession stands around the lake; trails along Etiwanda Ave-
nue from the lake edge, where will they be; what are the advantages of having
the lake as active or passive park land; what credit should be given for the
lakes, for the trails or other open space usage; where should the additional
5 acres of park land go; and where will the developer obtain the water to fill
the lakes and to keep them at a reasonable level. The Director of Community
Services and the City Planner have met to discuss the issues relative to
parks and open space. The following resolutions have been reached:
- Fishing in the lake is acceptable and will cause no potential
problems for the City.
- The issue relative to concession stands should be studied to
determine its economic feasibility; an economic feasibility
study should be prepared by the Wm. Lyon Co. or their con-
sultants and submitted to the Department of Community Services
and Planning Division prior to any concession stands being
located on or about the lake edge.
- The issue of passive versus active open space was discussed
at length by the Planning Commission during the last meeting
on Parks and Open Space with no particular conclusion reached.
It is the concurrence of the City Planner and Director of Com-
munity Services that both passive and active recreation have
value and that value cannot necessarily be equated on a scale
of one to ten. It is a discretionary decision as to whether
of not passive open space or active open space has more re-
lative value. Therefore, we feel that to pursue discussion on
passive versus active open space is an exercise in futility.
t - Credit for open space provided was discussed. There are a
March 12, 1981
Victoria
Page Two
variety of open space areas in which credit is sought. Trail
credit is sought, Victoria Parkway credit Ss sought, Edison
and Flood Control credit is sought, lake edge and lake surface
credit is sought. It is the opinion of the City Planner and
Director of Community Services that 100% credit should be given
in all categories except for the Edison and Flood Control ease-
ments. The two questions which we had to ask ourselves in making
a recommendation were: Does the amenity provided give public
recreation opportunities? The answer to the question is yes.
Is it necessary for the Victoria Community Plan to have these
amenities to have the plan work well? In our opinion we believe
that it is necessary. The lakes provide a vital connection from
the commercial Bred W Lite reDlde/ltiai area aiw PrOVide f-
very good transition of an active commercial area to a more
quiet, less active, residential. area. The trails and Victoria
Parkway help to tie the entire planned community together as a
single entity.
The last issue that arose was the lake design and maintenance it-
self. We suggest that the lake design and maintenance be considered
as a separate topic after the planned community has been approved
by the Planning Commission and City Council. The approval that
would be given under the planned community review would be for
the concept of lakes to be approved but the precise design and
maintenance studies would come at a later date. We have an ex-
ample of a typical maintenance manual on another lake prepared
for the City in another community for your review at the Planning
office and it will be available at the March 12 meeting.
We have also attached a report dated November 24, 1980, which discusses the
next two topics for review: Infrastructure and Design Criteria. As you will
will rec+ll, infrastructure talks about those public services that must be
provided such as sewers, water, natural gas, electricity, telephone, flood
contrcl and fire. Design Criteria encompasses the Victoria Parkway, landscape
standards, solar access, site planning standards, landscape grading standards
and road standards. As with previous reports on the Victoria Planned Com-
munity, the report of November 24, 1980 discusses the issues of infrastructure
and the issues of design criteria and lists suggested conditions for the Com-
mission to consider as possible conditions of approval for the planned community.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission:
1. Consider the comments and responses on land use, circulation, parks
and open space by the applicant and the staff and make the appro-
priate decision.
2. Consider and review infrastructure and design criteria and adopt
suggested conditions of approval to be brought back in a master
resolution of approval after the Victoria Planned Community has
O jcompleted its review.
BY.H: ik
\'J
11
CITY Or RAr UiO CUrAMONGA.
S-LAJT PL EPOPX
DATE: February 25, 1981 p
>I TO: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
SUBJECT:
ABSTRACT: As the Planning Commission will recall at the previous Victoria
Planned Community meeting we discussed the issues that had been raised un-
der land use, circulation,and parks and open space. The applicant was to
come back with answers to the 'issues raised at the last meeting. Staff
rprnmmpndat:innc will he made at the Planning commission meeting.
DISCUSSION: T.he applicant proposes to discuss five different topics under
land use, i.e., General Ilan densities, boundary changes, new population
distributions, regional - ^elated uses, and Base Line at Victoria Parkway
commercial center. Under circulation there are five areas which will be
discussed: regional perspective, Victoria circulation, circulation on
Etiwanda Avenue, circulation via Rochester Avenue and circulation via
Miller /Church Avenue. The applicant will make his views and reasons knawn
for each of the above - mentioned items. We would suggest that the Plannii:!1
Commission review and consider these items and act on them only if the
Commission feels that adequate information has been presented to satisfy
the concerns previously expressed.
At the last Planning Commission meeting, new boundaries for the Victoria
Planned Community were presented to the Planning Commission. Questions
were raised as to what the revised dwelling unit count is for Victoria
Planned Community. We have generated the new General Plan number for the
Victoria Planned Community revised. Allowable witi t e ictoria Plan-
ned Community as defined by the new boundaries under the General Plan
is 9,452 units. When the Victoria Planned Commu5�t1es oun ar s are
revised on the plan presented by the William Lyon Company, the new "op-
timum yield" that the Wm. Lyon Co. proposes is 9,040 dwelling units.
cc: Jack Lam
Gary Fryf, Wm. Lyon Co.
Don Tomkins, SWA Group
0
IlJ
0
ABSTRACT: As we all are aware, the Victoria Planv;ed Community text and
map has been with us for some time. Either under submittal or through an
informal review process within the Community. As a reminder, there have
been six meetings " Victoria. The dates are listed below:
9 -16 -80 -
Generz)l kickoff meeting - establishment of review process
9-29-80 -
M�1,
of
Land Use
CfTY OF RANCHO CUCAL�.JNGA
o c%`c"
of
Victoria and the Etiwanda Area
STA.]EF REPORT
Discussion
of
Circulation
11 -10 -80 -
Discussion
of
parks and open space
11 -24 -80 -
Discussion
of
review process and continuation of review
o -
1981.
'
F
DATE:
February
2, 1981
L077
TO:
Planning
Commission
FROM:
Barry K.
Hogan, City Planners&
SUBJECT:
VICTORIA
PLANNED COMMUNITY - P.D. 80 -01 - WILLIAM LYON
COMPANY
Review of Arodect to date
ABSTRACT: As we all are aware, the Victoria Planv;ed Community text and
map has been with us for some time. Either under submittal or through an
informal review process within the Community. As a reminder, there have
been six meetings " Victoria. The dates are listed below:
9 -16 -80 -
Generz)l kickoff meeting - establishment of review process
9-29-80 -
Discussion
of
Land Use
10 -11 -80 -
Discussion
of
Victoria and the Etiwanda Area
10-29 -80 -
Discussion
of
Circulation
11 -10 -80 -
Discussion
of
parks and open space
11 -24 -80 -
Discussion
of
review process and continuation of review
to January
1981.
This memo contains a listing of the items which has arisen at each of these
meetings on Victoria. Also please find attached, all of the reports that
have been prepared for the Victoria Planned Community. Recommendation will
be to review all of the items listed to verify that all of the issues have
been considered and to give guidance to the applicant as to the additional
information required. We have a';sc attached a proposed schedule to con-
sideration for approval of Victoria Planned Community.which the Commission
should indicate their desires for finalization.
DISCUSSION: To date, tie have reviewed land use, circulation, parks and
open space and have presented reports on infrastructure and design criteria.
At each of the meetings on land use, circulation, parks and open space,
there were suggested conditions included. The Commission, after reviewing
each of the topics, then discussed each of the conditions suggested. In
some cases, the conditions were modified and ir. others, conditions were
added. In each of the meetings on the topics there were additional issues
raised that were not answered by the text covered by conditions suggested
or answered by the map. We have complied for the Commission's information
and use, those issues that have been raised that have not yet been answered.
rt„
�n
fiS+
Victoria Planned Corf.. .lity -2-
February 2, 1981
LAND USE
- Commercial usage along Etiwanda Avenue (already addressed by the Sedway/
Cooke General Plan)
- More detailed and regional related uses i.e. types
- Victoria Street not to connect to Etiwanda Avenue
- Regional related uses to Etiwanda Avenue (some examples should be shown
relative to site plans;
- Buffering along Base Line noad, i.e. residential uses and commercial uses
- Landscape buffer at the Temple (mention was made when land adjacent to the
Temple was thought to be within the planned community that there should be
landscape buffering from any new use to the Temple. Now the Temple land
is only contiguous to the planned community boundaries on the western
property line}
- Phasing of regional related uses from Foothill Boulevard north to Base
Line Road
- Treatment of Highland Avenue relative to architectural character and land-
scape character to simulate the "rural atmosphere"
- Precise planned community boundaries showing all property that is owned
by William Lyon Company within the planned community and any other property
that is consented to be a co- applici.nt
- Adjustment of densities and land use patterns within the planned communities
relative to General Plan changes
- Density bonuses and affordable housing percentages
CIRCULATION
- Treatment of the emergency lane of traffic for Victoria parkway
- Indication of what streets would be used for regional shopping center access
- Efforts should be made to minimize traffic through the Etiwanda Community
- Indicate a loop street plus or minus 1,000 feet from Etiwanda Avenue in
order to take traffic off of Etiwanda Avenue
Victoria Planned Coy'. .city -2- 1. February 2, 1981
AML
PARKo AND OPEN SPACE
- Indicate areas of lake usage for boating, fishing, etc. What about "con-
cession stands" around the lake, How will these be handled?
- Will there be any trails to Etiwanda Avenue and from Etiwanda community
to the lake edge? Where will they be? Show examples.
- How much land is contained within the lake edge and the lake itself.
What about the issue of radiation from the power lines (this should be
discussed in the draft environmental report).
- What about the activp narkland versus passive parkland? Advantages, dis-
advantages of each.
- What credit should be given for the lakes, for the trails, for any other
open space usage.
- Where should the additional five acres of park land go to, if still
necessary after adjustments in the General Plan densities?
- Where will the developer obtain the water to fill the lakes and to keep
them at a reasonable level?
AUh
qF We hope that we have gathered together all of the items which were discussed at
the various meetings on Victoria Planned Community. The Commission should
review each of the items listed above in the three categories, to determine if
they are accurately revresented and if all of the issues raised by tit-! Commission
are contained within the list. Our anticipation would be that at the 'February
26, 1981 meeting the applicant would have answerad most.., if not ail of the
issues contained within this report and Staff would have the opportunity to
make recommendations on the applicant's proposals.
We still have Infrastructure and Design, and Implementation and DER to review.
It would be one suggestion that the Planning Commission reserve March 12, March
26, and April 9 to complete the Planning Commission reivew of the Victoria
Planned Community. These meetings would be on Thrusday night beginning at 7 :OC
p.m.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission reivew the
list contained within this report. Add or subtract to those lists as may be
necessary, and clarify the items they wish to have brought back to them in
the way of answers or solutions for the February 26 special meeting. Also, it
is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt March 12. March 26, and April
9 as review dates for the completion of the review of Victoria Planned Community.
BKH:cd
Attachments
Is
l��
� u
11
LJ
CITY OF RANUiO CUCAfVIO.NGA o�`cnrwc,�
STAFF, RE POPX S� f "�
7 r
L•
DATE: November 24, 1980
F
i�
TO: Members of the Planning Commission I917
FROM: Barry V... Hogan, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
ABSTRACT: This report covers the topics of Infrastructure and Design Cri-
teria. Infrastructure refers to the public services that must be provided
to the project such as sewers, water, natural gas, electricity, telephone,
flood control and fire. Design Criteria encompasses Victoria Parkway, land-
scape standards, solar access, site planning standards, landscape grading
standards, and road standards. As with previous reports, after the dis-
cussio.n of each topic, there are suggested conditions for the Commission.
DISCUSSION - INFRASTRUCTURE
Much of the discussion of infrastructure topics are listed in the Draft
Environmental Impact Report on pages 104 -115. The Draft Environmental Im-
pact Report discusses water supply, sewage disposal, telephone service,
electrical service, gas service. Of particular concern in the past has
been the adequacy of sewer supply. The.Draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) discusses several alternative plans for waste treatment and disposal.
The Day Creek flood control channel traverses through the project north to
south. Currently, this channel is unimprov9d and no plans exist for im-
provement in the near fixture. Pages 47 -51 or the DEIR, discusses the hy-
drology and flood control for the Victoria area. The DEIR discusses the
alternatives for accepting or diverting upstreem flows, the alternatives
for providing protection from a major levee outbreak during a major storm
occurrence, alternative approaches for site drainage systems, and alter-
native methods of funding flood control and drainage. The hydrology and
flood control issues discussed within the DEIR, indicate that there is a
major concern with the flood control of the Day Creek channel.
Prior to the submittal of the Victoria Plan, the City contracted with
L. 0. King to prepare a study of the Day Creek channel from its source in
the foothills down its course into Riverside County. Any solution of the
drainage problem of Day Creek must be done on a regional -wide basis in-
cluding the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the City of Ontario, the Counties
of San Bernardino and Riverside, and any developers which may contribute
to the flow through the development of their property. Limited development
can occur with-r; the drainage area of Day Creek, but there must be appro-
priate improvements to the Day Creek channel at the time of those develop-
ments. Currently no solution has been selected as yet; however, the City
Engineer is confident that a solution will be reached that is acceptable
to all parties involved. The City Engineer will be available to comment
on the i1ooJ control issue at the Monday night meeting.
November 24, 1980
Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Two
The final topic under infrastructure is fire protection. Although fire
protection is more of a community facility, its discussion fits best under
infrastructure with the topics selected for review with Victoria. Fire -
station No. 3 is iocated on Base Line Avenue east of Rochester Avenue in
a temporary station or County -owned property leased by the Foothill Fire
Protection District. The DEIR oa page 79 indicates, under impact summary.
that new fire facilities will be planned and located based upon adopted
plans for Victoria and adjacent properties. Fire protection will be a
major concern in this development due to the recent financial situation
which the Foothill Fire Protectiuri District finds itself in. Special
consideration and care should be given to the provision of adequate fire
services for this development and existing development in the vicinity.
SUGGESTED CONDITIONS
1. The developer shall participate through financial contributions
and /or construction of storm drain facilities within the Day
Creek and that drainage area in accordance with a to be adopted
master pian for Day Creek. Development will be allowed to take
place within the drainage area so long as flood protection is
provided by the developer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
and /or the San Bernardino Flood Control District.
2. Prior to any substantial development in any of the four villages,
an alternative for sewage treatment shall be selected by the City
and the Cucamonga County Water District.
3. Adequate fire protection through either expansion, of Fire Station
No. 3 or the addition of another fire station or the relocation
of the existing fire station shall be provided by the Foothill
Fire District with the expe.nsion, addition or relocation costs
paid for by the developer.
DESIGN CRITERIA
Under the discussion of Design '.,riteria, there are six categories: Victoria
Parkway, landscape standards, solar access standards, site planning standards,
landscape grading standards, and road standards.
VICTORIA PARKWAY
Page 127 of the Victoria Community Plan text describes fully the basic design
concept for Victoria Parkway. Victoria Parkway is the key element for the
overall plan for the planned community. It is provided as a continuous open
space element that ties together the fragmented parcels of land that currently
exist within the planring area. The parkway is a linear park that is proposed
to have a two-.lane road within it. The right -of -way of the parkway varies in
accordance with the adjacent land uses. Pages 128 -129 of the text give the
basic desiqn concepts for the parkway. Where the parkway passes adjacent to
open sapces, the right -of -way will narrow. Where the parkway passes adjacent
to residential areas, the parkway right -of -way will widen. The minimum width
of right -of -way is 120 feet with the maximum width of right -of -way, 180 feet.
i
November 24, 1980
Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Three
The parkway includes a bike trail, hiking trail and equestrian trail.
Relative to the planting concept, the plan proposes three basic trees: pines,
which will be located on the high ground, sycamores, as a transition tree,
and alders on the low ground. Of the three trees proposed, the pines are
the only evergreen. The use of the alders on the low ground will be remi-
niscent of a riparian area as would be the sycamores.
Victoria Parkway is not proposed to be a flat roadway but will be a split
level road with one direction lower than the other ,direction, thus providing
added interest and taking up grade at the same time. Pages 130 -131 of the
text indicate in detail the planting concept and the grading concept. For
a more precise indication of right -of -way width, please refer to pages 134 -135
of the text.
It should be noted that the median island in Victoria Parkway contains an
equestrian trail. The text does not indicate that the equestrian trail will
begin at Deer Creek, but we believe that it is the developers intent, thus,
providing a connection to the regional trail system. The equestrian trail
at each intersection transitions to the street corner for crossing within the
crosswalks to be provided at the signalized intersections. Where there are
no signalized intersections, the equestrian trail will cross mid - street.
Tile trail in the median will continue on Victoria Parkway to two outlets.
One will be Victoria Street outletting to Etiwanda Avenue and the other will
is be the Pacific Electric right -of -way, a proposed master planned trail. The
text only indicates the outlet onto Victoria Street, but in conversations
with the developer, he indicates there is no problem in extending the trail
to the Pacific Electric right -of -way.
Pages 144 -149 illustrate the typical edge conditions and cross sections for
Victoria Parkway.
SUGGESTED CONDITIONS
1. The equestrian trail contained within Victoria Parkway s':all begin
at Deer Creek and terminate at the Pacific Electric. right -of -way.
Specific desion of the trail shall be subject to City review.
Equestrian fences, Grading, soil samples, may be reouired.
LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
Tne applicant proposes to use drought- resistant plan material where possible.
Windrow style planting to accentuate the traditional windrow character of
Etiwanda and to provide protection from wind and an Entry Hierarchy Plan
in order to provide a sense of place, and of transition from one land use
to another. The Entry Hierarchy Plan is contained on pages 156 -157 of the text.
Typical edge conditions are depicted on pages 160 -167. Particular concern
® is with the Milliken- Highland -Base Line - Foothill sections and r•<:s�dential
® land uses. There is an indication of a median within the street; however,
no indication of any trees within that median. Both the section and the
planned view lack trees within the median. We would suggest that either
November 24, 1980
"dictoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Four
accent trees be added within the median or street trees at appropriate
spacing.
The section of land uses indicates an 8 f ^ot minimum foot minimum for peri-
meter landscape treatment in parking areas. We suggest that 10 feet is a
more appropriate stanrard. additionally, the second graphic on pale 160
on the bottom right -hand corner needs to have an indication of where the
property line is.
On page 161, on the northern section. of Day C:eck Blvd., the street median
should depict trees. On the south sectiui-., the .dndscaped area from the
parking lot to the property line should be 10 fees not the 8 feet shown.
On page 162 the same comment en the Miller- Victoria loop for the median and
the parking lot. On page 163, the section depicted indicates that there
will be a natural equestrian trail in the median from Victoria Groves Park
to Victoria Street. It should indicate from Deer Creek through Victoria
Groves Pa;-k to Victoria Street and to tf.e Pacific Electric right -of -way.
SOLAR ACCESS STANDARDS - SITE PLANNING STANDAr1S
The solar accESS standards illustrate the desirable site plan relationships
in providing pessive solar access to residential dewllings within the Vic-
toria Planned ivmr"nity.
RESIDENTIAL SITE PLANNING STANDARDS
Pages 180 -196 depict the various types of A, B, C, D, E, and F, Residential
Land Uses. Each are typical examples and do not necessarily represent the
precise development for any particular area but a concept. Page 184, B land
use, minimal lots 7200 square feet, indicates a 4 -foot walk on one side only
within that land use. Throughout the B land uses there is listed a 4 -foot
walk on one side only. The Commission may wish to consider this issue to
determine whether or not sidewalks should be on both sides or only on one
side of the street. Additionally, you may want to make your decision in
accordance with the minimum square footages proposed. Throughout pages
184 -196, we have suggested additions a•d changes to add consistency in each
of the typical concepts rather than list these twice for the Planning Com-
mission, we will list them in the suggested conditions.
Some additional items w;A ch the Comnission may wish to consider are the re-
location of these varitcular graphic concepts to the Part III Regulations
and Standards section. The reason for this suggestion is that many of the
explanations detailed on each of the pages contained within the residential
site planning standi,r•ds are repeated in Part III of the text.
SUGGESTED CONDITIONS
1. Page 184, add the word minimum in the setbacks paragraph under
"garage ".
2. Page 185, the paragraph setbacks under side yard, add the words
"each side ". The new phrase would read "side yard: 5 -foot minimum
each side."
[J
i
November 24, 1980
Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Five
3. Page 18[, directly under the graphic, the words variable height
fence by developer on Victoria Parkway property Tine should indicate
that fence height shall not exceed 5 feet from the highest finished
grade-
4. Under setbacks garage, add the words "requires garage door openers"
after 5 -8 feet and add the word "minimum" after 18 feet.
5. Under side yard indicate 5 -foot for each side yard.rather than
10 feet between buildings.
6. On page 187 indicate in paratheses under the graphic after the
phrase developer to provide fencing on corner lots and adjacent
to community trail system "(see page 189) ".
7. Under setbacks, garage, add the words "requires garage door openers"
after 5 to 8 feet. Also indicate what width sidewalks and location
of said sidewalks.
8. Page 188, indication of minimum parking requirements may require
a change in the Rancho Cucamonga Parking Ordinance. Should the
ordinance not change, the indication of minimum parking standard
should be amended to be consistent with current code requirements.
Also there is no indication of the kinds of sidewalks or location
of sidewalks.
9. Page 188 under setbacks garage, add "requires garage door openers"
after 5 to 8 feet.
10. Page 189, the second note from the top of the page add the words
"5 -foot maximum" so the phrase will read, 5 -foot maximum back yard
Fence adjacent to trail by developer.
11. Page 189, the second note from the top of the page add the words
5 -foot maximum" so the phrase will read, 5 -foot maximum back yard
fence adjacent to trail by developer.
12. Page 190 under garage setback, add "requires garage door openers"
after 5 to 8 feet and add the words "or sidewalk" after, curb so
the phrase will read garage setback: 5 to 8 feet (requires garage
door openers) from back of curb or sidewalk. The indication under
garage setback of the parking requirement is in excess o` what
current code requirements are and should indicate code requirements.
13. Page 193 under the graphic indicates minimum of one covered parking
space per dwelling, additional spaces 3s specified in Part III.
This requirement is different from the existing parking code and
should be consistent.
Ask 14. Under the graphic there is an indication where sound attenuation
walls are required they may not be needed to be continuous but may
work satisfactorily when broken or staggered. The words "however,
in P11 cases these must be consistent with the adopted Noise Or-
dinance" should be added.
C.
November 24, 1980
Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Six
15. Page 196 under the first graphic. the words "automatic garage
'door openers required" should be added after 5 to 8 feat.
LA14DSCAPE GRADING STANDARDS
The applicant proposes contour grading and grading of open space to create
views and take up grade. All of the graphics illustrated on pages 202 -206
are of excellent depiction of the kinds of grading standards that are pro-
mulgated by the Grading Committee and the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga.
ROAD STANDARDS
On pages 212 -215 the applicant proposes road standards I -or Victoria Planned
Community. Except for Victoria Parkway, the road standards for Victoria
should be consistent with the road standards for other areas within Rancho
Cucamonga. The City Engineer will present at the Monday night meeting, the
proposed standards for reads within Rancho Cucamonga.
SUGGESTED CONDITION:
All road standards shall conform to those of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
except for Victoria ?arkway.
CONCLUSION
As a reminder to the Planning Commission, the suggested conditions contained
within this report are not refined to the point where they can be specifically
applied to Victoria Planned Conmiunity. They are to be used as a guide for
staff in preparing final conditions for consideration by the Planning Com-
mission when the review process culminates. In order for staff to have ade-
quate direction to proceed on to the next categories and to prepare final
conditions for consideration, we would recommend, if the Commission concurs
with the suggested conditions, that they be adopted to provide for staff's
preparation of final conditions for consideration. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Res}fect fu 1,Ty ,546mi tted,
ARR
Ci ✓Plan
BKH: jk
n
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
ADDRESS CITY ITEM
' 333 �
�, a.
° 1�. 14 Z
I
Planning Commission
Meeting of
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSI011 SIGN -UP
:HEET
Please print your name,
address, city, and indicate
the item that
you wish to speak on.
Thank you.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
ADDRESS CITY ITEM
' 333 �
�, a.
° 1�. 14 Z
I