HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981/09/09 - Agenda Packetn. -. I i• I {I.
It �( <r t� ;v I 1 1 ° ✓�: I � III )� �l )1.1( 1 "�
1 % r
I r I
r.
1�
t r.
iI
i
h
1
c.
1 \.
1 I
a
CITY OF
RANCHO CTUCAMONGA ph T `7
AGE, NDA
NED14ESDAY SEPTEMBER 9, 1981 7;00 P.M.
LION'S PARK. COMMUNITY CENTER
A- C- T -I -O -N 9161 BASE LINE,.RANCHO CUCA14ONGA, CALIFORNIA
I. Pledge of Allegiance
II. Roll Call
Commissioner Dahl X
Commissioner King X
Commissioner Scerarka X
III. Approval of Minutes
Approved 3 -0 -0 -2 April 22, 1981
Approved 5 -0 -0 as amended May 27, 1981
Approved 5 -0 -0 June 10, 1981
IU. Announcements
V. Consent Calendar
Commissioner Rempel X
Commissioner Tolstoy. X
The following consent calendar itc."m are expected to be
routine and non - controversial. They will be acted upon
by the Commission at one time without discussion. If
anyone tas concern over any item, then it should be
removed for discussion.
V1. Public �:,arings
The following items are public hearings in which concerned
individuals may voice their opinion of the related project.
Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address
the Commission from the public microphone by giving your
name and address. All such opinions shall be limited to
5 minutes per individual for each project.
Approved 5 -0 -0 with amendment to A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO.
work out bui ding directory 80 -04 - DEVELOPMENT GROUP - A total planned develop-
between Design Review and ap- ment of 10.1 acres into 82 lots comprising 81 units
Plicant. if necessary. Planned arranged in duplexes, in the R -1 zone .generally
Development also approved. located on the west side of Ramona, at Monte Vista -
APN 202 - 181 -5, 6, and 16 (TT 11614)
a�
ar> .
Approved 5 -0 -0
Approved 5 -0 -0
Planning Commission Agenda -2- September 9, 1981
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 81 -03
DA ON CORPORATION - A proposed change of zone from M -2
General Manufacturing) to C -2 (General Business Com-
mercial) on 18 acres of land located on the northeast
corner of Arrow and Haven - APN 203 - 622 -01.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP NO. 7007 -
DAON C RP09ATION A division of 9.649 acres into 3
parcels within the 14-2 zone located on the southeast
corner of Haven Avenue and Civic Center Drive - APN
208 -35 -03 & 11
Approved 5 -0 -0 with condition D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP NO. 7061 -
that agreement between developer KACOR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - An industrial subdivision
and adjacent property owner be of 78 acres i� vi eTd into 45 lots (4 phases) in the
consumated within 90 days. M -2 zone located on the southeast corner of 6th St.
and Cleveland Avenue - APN 210 - 082 -02 through 9 & 10
Approved 5 -0 -0 E. ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP NO. 6976
CAPELLINO - An industrial subdivision of 49.93 acres
into 22 parcels in the M-2 zone located on the south
side of Arrow 'Route, east of Haven Avenue - AP14 209-
141-68
VII. Old Business
VIII. New Business
Approved 5 -0 -0 F.
01 -01 - Ktl)tK - Ine aeveiopment of 3 concrete tilt -
uo industrial buildings totaling 31,268 sq. ft. in
the Cucamonga Business Park on 2 acres of land in
the M-1 zone located on the west side of Archibald,
south of Arrow - APN 209 - 021 -37 and 38
IX. Ccuncil Referrals
X. Director Reports
XI. Public Comments
This is the time and place for the general public to
.address the Commission. Items to be discussed here
are those which do not already appear on this agenda.
ai
8:25 p.m
Planning Commission Agenda -3- September 9, 1981
Y.II. Upcoming Agenda
Y.III. Adjournment
The Planning Commission has adopted Administrate o
Regulations that set an IIr00 p.m. adjournment ..ime.
If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard
only with the consent of the Commission
L�
-.. -'4
,
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 9, 1981 7:00 P.M.
LION'S PARK COMMUNITY CENTER
9161 BASE LINE,.RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I. Pledge of Allegiance
II. Roll Call
Commissioner Dahl
Commissioner King
Commissioner Sceranka
III. Approval of Minutes
April 22, 1981
May 27, 1 981
June 10, 1981
IV. Announcements
V. Consent Calendar
v
Commissioner Rempel
Commissioner Tolstoy
The following consent calendar items are expected to be
routine and non- controversial.. They will be acted upon
by the Corwrdasion at one time without discussion. if
anyone has concern over any item, ther it should be
removed for discussion.
VI. Public Hearings
The following items are public hearings in which concerned
individuals may voice their opinion of the related project.
Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address
the Commission from the public microphone by giving your
name and address. All such opinions shall be limited to
5 minutes per individual for each project.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
AND
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO.
80 -04 - DEVELOPMENT GROUP -
A total planned develop -
ment of 10. 1 acres into 82 lots
comprising 81 units
arranged in duplexes, in
the
R -1 zone generally
located on the west side
of
Ramona, at Monte Vista -
'' '
S,Sr'
APN 202 - 181 -5, 6, and 16
(TT
11614)
ra
b
it
Planning Commission Agenda -2- September 9, 1981
2
UMUR UVrcruwiitun - A proposea cnange or zone trom M-z
General Manufacturing) to C -2 (General Business Com-
mercial) on 18 acres of land located on the northeast
corner of Arrow and Haven - APN 208 - 622 -01
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP NO. 7007 -
DAON CORPO TIO - A dN�isionof 9.6 9 a� cres into 3
parcels w thin, the M-2 zone located on the southeast
corner of Haven Avenue and Civic Center Drive - APN
208 -35 -03 & 11
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP NO. 7061 -
CICOR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - An industrial subdivision
of 78 acres divided into 4 5 lots (4 phases) in the
M -2 zone located on the southeast corner of 6th St.
and Cleveland Avenue - APN 210 - 082-02 through 9 & 10
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP NO. 6976 -
CAPELLINO - An industrial subdivision of 49.93 acres
I nto 2 parcels in the M-2 zone located on the south
sida of Arrow Route, east of Haven Avenue - APN 209-
141-68
VII. Old Business
VIII. New Business
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO.
81 -31 - REITER - The development of 3 concrete tilt
up industrial—buildings totaling 31,268 sq. ft. in
the Cucamonga Business Park on 2 acres of land in
the M -1 zone located on the west side of Archibald,
south of Arrow - APN 209 - 021 -37 and 38
IX. Council Referrals
X. Director Reports
X.. Public Comments
This is the time and place for the general public to
address the Commission. Items to be discussed here
are those which do not already appear or. this agenda.
1
X h
Planning Commission Agenda
\II. Upcoming Agenda
XIII. Adjournment
-3- September 9, 1981
The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative
Regulations that set an 11.00 p.m. adjournment time.
Xf items go beyond that time, they shall be heard
only with the consent of the Co=ission
EIEED
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION N.INUTES
Regular Meeting
April 22, 1961
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Dahl called the Regular Meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission held at the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line
Road, Rancho Cucamonga, to order at 7:05 p.m. He then led in the pledge
to the flag.
POLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jeffrey Ring, Herman Rempel, Jeff Sceranka *,
Richard Dahl
*Arrived at 7:45 p.m.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Peter Tolstoy
STAFF PRESENT: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner; Edward 11opson, Assistant
City Attorney; Joan Kruse, Administrative Secretary;
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development; Paul Rougeau,
Senior Civil Engineer
APPRGVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Moved by King, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to approve
the December 10, 1980 Planning Commission Minutes.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: KING, TtEMPEL, DAHL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: SCERANKA, TOLSTOY
ANNOUNCP.MENTS
Mr. Lam stated that the appeal to the Planning Commission decision flied
by the Coca -Cola Company had been heard by the City Council and referred
back to the Planning Commission for consideration of aesthetics, design
and landscaping. He indicated that staff has been working with Coca -Cola
and they will be coming in with a modified plan for review and design in
order for it to be brought back to the Planning Commission.
Mr. Lam announced that the long- awaited street naming ordinance will be
heard by the City Cauncil on May 6.
\.
Nr. Lam stated that another item has been added to this agenda under
Director Reports that. deals with a unique method of street signing proposed
by the Daon Corporation. He felt that it was important that the Planning
Commissicn make a determination. on this.
Chairman Dahl stated that Council member Pal.ombo has consented to be a
member of the Equestrian Advisory Committee and asked for concurrence of
the Planning Commission in this appointment.
The Commission concurred in this appointment and Commissioner Rempel asked
how many members make up this committee.
Chairman Dahl replied that there are presently four members.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Commissioner King asked that Item "A" be removed from the Consent Calendar
for discussion. He indicated that he has heard concerns expres.;ed
that the site is unsightly and felt that the Planning Commission should
do something about it before an extension is granted.
Mr. Lam stated that staff has been working w?th the Mobil Oil Corporation
and was told that they plan to rebuild the station. He indicated that
they want to cover all steps and that they need to have the landscaping
approved. He further stated that he expected that within 30 days they
will resolve the matter.
Commissioner King asked if Mr. Lam knew how much of the old station they
intended to salvage.
Mr. Hogan replied that it is their intention to build a new one.
Commissioner. King asked if there was anything the Commission could do to
raze the building.
Commissioner Rempel stated that from a practical viewpoint, razing would
be a very costly thing. Further, that there is a lot that must be dis-
connected and that the applicant is only talking about a 90 -day extension.
Mr. Lam stated that given the fact that the company has worked diligently
in completion of the requirements they have asked for the 90 -day extension.
If the work has not progressed satisfactorily at that time, the Commission
may look at the project again.
A. REQUEST FOR TIME EYTENSION ON DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -30 - MOBIL OIL
CORPORATION - Request for time extension for a previously approved
reconstruction of a service station located on the southeast corner
of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- April 22, 1981
B. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION ON SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 - HONE
& ASSOCIATES - A time extension request for the development of
the Chaffey Plaza Retail Center to be located un the southwest
corner of Lemon and Hagen Avenues.
Motion: Moved by ^.empel, seconded by King, carried unanimously, to
adopt the Consent Calendar.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, KING, DAHL
NOSS: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: C0I1IISSIONERS:
PUBLIC HEARINGS
SCF.RANKA, TOLSTOY. - carried-
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS14ENT AND CONDITIONAL IISE PERMIT NO. 81 -03 -
WATKINS The devc,lupmant of a commercial shopping center within
the C -2 zone on 4.83 acres located on the northeast corner of
Archibald Avenue and Foothill Boulevard - APN 1077- 641 -54 through
67.
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASF_SSMENT AND PARCEL MAP NO. 6726 - WATKINS - A
Subdivision of 5.09 acres into 8 parcels within the C -2 zone
located at the northwest corner of Archibald and Foothill -
APN 1077- 641 -54 through 67.
Mr. Lam indicated that this project is the first major one in the area
to be rebuilt and stated that Mr. Vairin would present the staff report.
Michael Vairin, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report and stated it
would require two actions, one for the parcel map, and the other for the
project. He further indicated that one written comment on this project
had been received and that the writer was in favor of the project. lie
stated that there was a correction that Mr. Rougeau would address relating
to a condition of approval on the parcel map.
Mr. Rougeau stated that standrrd condition No. L -2 is ambiguous and suggested
that it read that all proposed utilities shall be installed underground...
Mr. Hogan also recommended that condition No. 45 of the engineer's report
include reciprocal access for parking and maintenance.
Conmdssioner Rempel asked why there was a difference in the sizes of
the two properties, indicating that one is shown as 4.83 and the other
as 5.09.
Mr. Vairin explained that the parcel. map shows the gross acreage; however,
there is no difference between the two site plans.
Planning Commissien Minutes -3- April 22, 1981
Commissioner King asked relative to the sidcwalkF on Archibald what are
staff's comments on widening the sidewalks because of the anticipated
pedestrian traffic that would occur and especiGl.ly children using the
sidewalks.
Mr. Vairin replied that consideration has been given to increasing the
sidewalks from the usual 4 feet to 6 feet. He indicated that this would
be a good idea and that they could be changed to the increased size.:.-.
Chairman Dahl stated that under landscaping, item 3 had not been checked
for street trees.._::.`;='.'
Mr. Vairin indicated that this should Save been checked.
Chairman Dahl asked if someone had mentioned a buffering wall on the
north side of the school.
Mr. Vairin replied that a six-foot standard block wall is a requirement
there.
Commissioner. King asked relative to ingress and egress of delivery trucks,
would there be any problems with the way the site is designed.
Mr. Vairin replied that as far as the loading docks are concerned, the
design is sufficient for the size trucks they will. be utilizing. Further,
that a large "T" or "L" turnaround area would be provided.
Chairman Dahl. asked where the trash receptacles for the area are to be
found.
Mr. Vairin explained that staff will work with the applicant to be sure that
they will be located In appropriate and sufficient locations.
Commissioner King asked if there is enough room for truck trailers.
Mr. Vairin replied that this should probably be addressed to the applicant
because they have stated that the trucks they will use are not that large.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Mr. Barry Watkins, 1914 Orangewood, Suite 102, Orange, explained the
features of the plot plan and the "L" shaped design of the shopping
center. He indicated that all existing buildings will be demolished and
some of the tenants will be relocated withir the new center and a plan
has been worked out for some to stay while the rest of the center is
demolished. He further indicated that Miller's Outpost would be a major
tenant in this complex.
Mr. Watkins presented a group of slides to show the Planning Commission
a shopping center they were in the process of completing in the City of
Encinitas in San Diego County.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 22, 1981
Mr. Watkins asked that condition No. of the resolution under the
T•.ngineering Division be changed to allow recordation prior to building
occupancy rather than prior to issuance.of building permits.
Mr. Rougeau stated that this could be worked out.
Mr. Watkins then stated that in reply to Commissioner. King's concerns,
large trucks will not be making deliveries at this center.
Chairman Dahl asked how the shopping center u1.11 be phased.
Mr. Watkins explained that there would be some new shops built before
the other shops are demolished and indicated that the flower shop will
be one of the first phased. in.. He indicated that he would like to have
some of the shops operating before everything is demolished.
Chairman Dahl stated that it will only be a two -phaue operation. then.
Commissioner King asked what the distance is between the east side of
Millers and the wall.
Mr. Vairin replied that it is 36 -37 feet.
Commissioner King stated that his concern is the visibility of the center
to the homeowners to the east.
Mr. Vairin explained the wall and the plantings that would shield their
view.
7:45 p.m. Commissioner Sceranka arrived.
Mrs. Grace Brazel, 9734 Foothill, Rancho Cucamonga, owner of Cucamonga
Flower Shop, stated that she felt this shopping center would be a great
asset and that the applicant has worked well with her. He stated that
there is some negative thinking from some of the people who will be put
out of business but felt that this will be an improvement for the City.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner. Rempel stated that what the applicant is doing will tremendously
improve_ that intersection. He also commented on the work that staff and
Design Review have done and felt that this will be a really good looking
shopping center.
Commissioner King stated that perhaps nothing better could be done with
this site; however, he expressed concerns relative to the ingres.. and egress
of trucks at this development.
Commissioner Sceranka thanked the applicant for working with the Design
Review Committee.
Planning Commission Minutes -5- April 22, 1981
Chairman Dahl stated this was an excellent and attractive project. He
asked that the applicant work with the present tenants to ease them into
the new center and, while he did not like to see any businesses have to
relocate, he thanked the applican:t'for his work with the Desi('n Review
Committee and the City on this project.
Mr.. Vairin recommended that a condition be added requiring a :.ix -foot
block wall at the north end of this project.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by King, carried unanimous.y, to
adopt Re."luti.on No. 81 -39 approving file site plan with the aidition of
the block wall on the north end of the site, a six -foot si.dewilk along
Archibald, Item No. 6 of the Resolution, and giving the applicant permission
to work out the wording on the kiosk and the cbangc on page BIB. 5.
Motion: Moved by Retupel, seconded by King, carried unanimouhly, to
approve Resolution No. 81 -40 with amendments.
E. EWIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND P.D. NO. 80 -14 - (TR 117811 - THE
ROBERiS GROUP - A total. residential development of 76 crndominiums
on 6.4 acres in the proposed R -3 -PD zone, located on the west side
of Hermosa, about 330' north of 19th Street - APN 202- L7I -20 & 38.
Barry Hogan, City Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Dahl asked if, on the original project that had been approved,
there was some kind of sidewalk treatment on 39th Street-.
Mr. Hogan replied by asking if he meant a meandering sidewalk.
Chairman. Dahl replied affirmatively.
Mr. Hogan stated that this would not be able to be done on 19ti Street
because of the water situation. He indicated that the same ef`ect can
be gotten with mounding and recommended that this be carried oit.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Commissioner King asked the applicant what the setbacks are to the northern
property line.
Tony Quezada, representing the applicant, stated that they are a minimum
of 25 feet to the right -of. -way and 10 feet to tho property line.
Mr. Bill Pritchett asked how the freeway right -of -way was estab_.ished.
Mr. Rougeau replied that Caltrans has this information and was Responsible
for routing out the freeway right -of -way. He indicated that the line
that is there will provide for adequate freeway and should not have to
be made either narrower or wider.
Planning Commission Minutes -6- April 22, .'.981
Mr. Hogan stated that he knew there is concern but it is of no relevance
to this project.
There being no further comments the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner King stated that he is still opposed to the density in
this location but given the fact that the project is here, they have
done an excellent job.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -41 changing the zoning from R -1 -8500 to R- 3 /1.D.
and Resolution No. 81 -42, conditionally approving the Tentztive Tract
Map.
7:55 p.m. The Planning Commissior_ recessed.
8:10 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANT) TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11793 - MULLIN /BLISS -
A custom lot subdivision of 47 lots on 15.9 acres in the R -1 -10 &
R -1 -12 zones, located on the east side of Amethyst, between Highland
and Lemon - APN 1082 - 561 -04 and APN 1062 - 571 -04.
Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner King stated that relative to well sit-e No. 14 at 'Highland
and Amethyst, the condition recommending enclosure on the north and
east side would be appropriate if it were extended to the we-t and
south sides as well.
Mr. Vairin replied that inasmuch as there will be a gate on the west
side the east side would probably need fencing as well..
Chairman Dahl asked about the abandonment of this well site referred
to in the Initial Study.
Mr. Vairin replied that this was written by the applicant and not by
staff.
Mr. Hogan stated that if the well site is abandoned prior to the construction
of the tract, the condition will have been met. If it is not abandoned
prior to construction of the homes on that site it would then have to be
abandoned.
Chairman Dahl stated that he would be hard put to require a wall at this
well site if it is to be abandoned.
Mr. Lam stated that the wall will be one of the last things built.
Planning Commission Minutes -7- April 22, 1981
Y
Commissioner Sceranka stated that it is not the intent of the Water
District to abandon anything for 5 -10 years at the earliest. He asked
why standard condition No. 17 was checked.
Mr. Vai.rin. replied because the applicant will provide this in addition.
Commissioner Sceranka asked if this is a requirement of a custom lot
subdivision.
Commissioner Sceranka asked if they will be working with solar and other
facets of good planning.
Mr. Hogan stated that the Commission could require that all or some of
the homes to have solar but this was the Commission's perogative.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he wanted to see these pre - plumbed and
did not know if this was the right time to request that this be done.
Mr. Rogan replied that the Commission would have better control at this
time.
Mr. Larry Bliss, 7333 Hellman, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that he would have
no objections to pre - plumbing. He indicated that this would be a good
sales tool and would be no problem. Mr. Bliss stated that this is one
of the last lemon and grapefruit groves in the community which was handed
down from the Nolan family, who presently live elsewhere. Mr. Nolan
had a request that as many trees be saved as possible and if the Commission
was in agreement, they would try to lay out the tract to preserve as
many trees as they can. He indicated that they will provide more land
to the Cucamonga County Water District but not so much that it would be
a park. He indicated that a decorative block wall with trees and ground
cover would look nice and that they were pretty happy with what they have
come up with. He indicated that it would be the responsibility of the
Water District to come up with the wall and landscaping and their maintenance
aad felt that it was about time that the Water District started cleaning
up their act.
Mr. Hogan stated that the landscaping that Mr. Bliss was talking about
is the same as what he talked about and would consist of approximately
5 -10, 15- gallon trees, shrubs and groundcover.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner King stated that there would be a tendency to agree with
the applicant relative to the well on the south side of Highland relative
to the enclosure as it is not his property. However, this is an extremely
noisy well and for the sanity of the four homeowners to the south end
of the tract an attenuation wall would be proper. He felt that perhaps
the entire thing should be enclosed.
Planning Commission. Minutes -8- April 22, 1981
Commissioner Rempel stated that he dial not think the water company would
do this, although he felt that a noise attenuation wall is necessary. He
feather stated that he did not feel that it should be done on the south
side. He felt that the developer on the south side of this land should
do it.
Mr. Hogan stated. that to the south is the freeway right -of -way.
Commissioner Sceranka asked if the well would be able to be heard across
the street.
Mr. Kogan replied that it would without the fencing.
Commissioner Sceranka asked if the City could ask the water company to
put up the wall.
Mr. Iiogan replied that the City can ask. He stated that the primary
concern is whether it must go the entire distance to surround the well.
If there was concern for the northern area, the wall is definitely necessary
and some should also go around the south.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that this could be worked out with the
applicant.
Commissioner Rempel suggested that the wall not be extended that far
and that trees be planted around it between the well and the street.
Chairman Dal.l stated that the residents to thc, south are existing residents
who have lived there a long time. He further stated that he did not think
this developer should solve this problem for them. He indicated that the
north side should have a wall and landscaping and the rest is the responsi-
bility of the water company. He did not think that the west side needed
to be fenced in.
Motion: Moved by Rempel., seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution no. 81 -43, with the addition of pre - plumbing for solar
and a request that the Water District be asked to provide improvements
to this well site.
Commissioner Rempel asked that the water company work with the applicant
to offset some of the cost of the noise attenuation wall and improvements.
G. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81 -07 - A. H. REITER - A request for
establishment of an adult day health center for rehabilitation of
chronically disabled or elderly persona, within the M -1 zone and
to be located in the Cucamonga Business Park on the soutwest corner
of Archibald and Arrow - APN 209 - 021 -39.
Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, reviewed the staff report.
Planning Commission Minutes -9- April 22, 1981
J
Commissioner Sceranka asked how this project_ was advertised.
Mr. Vairin replied that notices were sent to property owners from the
boundary of the subject property:ro 300 feet of it.
Commissioner Sceranka asked if there were any tenants who have corresponded
to the City.
Mr. Vairin replied that he was not aware of any.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Henry Reiter, 2039 Vista, Newport Beach, explained the type of facility
that was proposed and what would be done to rehabilitate persons using,
this facility. He indicated that a service such as this is needed in
the West End.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by King, carried unanimously, to
issue a Conditional Use Permit and adopt Resolution No. 81 -44.
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 80 -34 - LESNY - A
total development of 117 dwelling units on 8.3 acres in the R -3
zone, located on the northwest corner of Lemon Avenue and Haven
Avenue - APN 201- 321 -14.
Barry Hogan, City Planner, reviewed the staff report stating that the
applicant has reduced the number of units in this project from 130 to
117 and redesigned the exterior of the dwelling units to be more compatible
with the existing residential units. Mr. Hogan stated that these units
will be financed by a California Financing agency and rents are expected
to be in the $600 per month range.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Mr. Alan Lowy, Senior Vice president of Lesny Development, 8200 Wilshire,
Beverly Hills, concurred with staff recommendations and stated that he
would answer any questions.
Mr. Tom Finnerin, in the audience, stated that this had been referred
to in the newspapers as low- income housing and yet has the price tag
of $600 a month rent.
Mr. Hogan replied stating that the California Financing Agency provides
the means to developers to assist them in putting in the project. He
stated that he did not know what the newspapers were referring to.
Planning Commission Minutes -10- April 22, 1981
Mr. Lam stated that there had been a number of calls from the community
and stated that this is not a HUD project. The developer, he said, is
involved in the program with the State of California and there will be
no subsidies to the rents at all. Iie indicated that this program is to
encourage rental housing construction and, as the Commission is aware,
there is not very much positive financing for rental construction in
California.
Mrs. Rosemary Correa, 10360 Banyan, owner of a Lesny home, expressed her
dissatisfaction with her init and cited problems she has had with her
roof. She stated her concerr was with the maintenance of this property
inasmuch as she felt they have not concerned themselves with the complaints
she had made to the Lesny Company.
Mr. Fred Wilding, 6223 Cortilla, Alta Loma, stated that he was not against
this development but wanted to know how it would affect the view going
east and south.
Mr. Vairin pointed out and Mr. Hogan stated that because of the 20 -foot
setbacks and the single -story units, the view would be obstructed somewhat
and that he may not be able to view San Gorgonio the way he has in the
past. He indicated that the developer had been requested to put in
single story units co they will not loom over the existing residences.
Mr. Wilding asked if there would be trees in this area.
Mr. Hogan replied that there will be landscaping.
Mr. Wilding asked if these rental units will be converted to condominiums.
Mr. Hogan replied that the developer can, in S years, convert these units;
however, under the City's ordinance there must be available apartment stock
in order to do this.
Chairman Dahl stated that this could have been a single family development
with two stories and things might have been worse. He felt that this
might be the best alternative and asked what the roofs are made of.
Mr. Hogan replied that the roofs are made of a fire retardant material.
Mr. Wilding asked if anyone in the apartment building would be able to
look into his yard.
Both Mr. Hogan and Chairman Dahl replied that they would not be able
to do so.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner King asked if there had been any change to the elevations
facing onto Haven since the Design Review meeting.
Mr.. llopan replied that there have been changes to reduce the vast expanse
of stucco with wood trim.
Planning Commission Minutes -11- April 22, 1981
a
Commissioner icing commented on the large amount of blacktop that would
be visible to motorists coming from the southeast and stated that a lot
of landscaping would be appropriate to block as much of the view of black-
top as possible.
Mr. Hogan explained that this was being considered and taken care of.
Mr. Lowy commented on the question of condominium conversion of these
units stating that because of the refinancing involved, it would be
highly unlikely that this would undergo conversion as it would be
mathematically impossible to accomplish this kind of objective.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that the project has changed since he last
saw it and expressed some concerns about the wall treatments and water
flow on Lemon.
Mr. Hogan stated that this must be worked out jointly by the northern
and southern property owners and felt confident that this problem would
be resolved when this happens.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 82 -45, with the changes requested by the Planning
Commission.
9:00 p.m. The Planning Commission Recessed.
9:15 p.m. The Planning Commission Reconvened.
I. ZONING ORDINANCE DETERMINATION NO. 81 -03 - SWATEZ - A request for
welding use in the M -R zone for industrial building located at 8800
Gnyx Avenue - APN 209 - 031 -59. '
Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he had no problem with this use and felt
it appropriate in this classification. He stated that the current users
are dumping oil on the parking lot and requested that if another auto
repair should go in at this location that the Planning Commission do
something about this problem.
Mr. Vairin stated that staff will try to do something about this right
now.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -46.
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
Planning Commission Minutes -12- April 22, 1981
STREET NAMING PROJECT
Mr. Lam, Director of Community Development, stated that the Daon Corporation
was proposing a different kind of street signing than what has been used
within the City. He indicated that Mr. Vairin would explain this.
Michael Vairin explained that there are four types of signs that the Daon
Corporation will use throughout their entire planned development, one
would be their main development sign which has three faces and would be
located at the corner of Haven and Arrow, Sequoia and Foothill, and
probably at two other locations. He indicated that the material will be
all alluvial rock face with recessed lettering.
Chairman Pahl asked if this would meet the present sign ordinance for
shopping center identification.
Mr. Vairin replied that this has nothing to do with the K —Mart shopping
center and that under the sign ordinance all signs submitted to the City
must be reviewed and approved. Mr. Vairin explained the other sign types
that would be used in this project and where they are proposed to be
located.
Chairman Dahl asked what the criteria is for industrial signs and whether
these signs, as proposed, would meet that criteria.
Mr. Hogan stated that all these signs will be on private property and
that the City will not be maintaining them as the owners of the park will.
Mr. Vairin stated that these signs will not be illuminated and the Engineering
Department has concerns that they must be reflective.
Mr. Lam stated that from the standpoint of identity for larger development,
the use of the alluvial rock would lend character.
Comm ±ssioner Rempel stated that if innovative --treet lights were used,
this might light the signs fairly well.
Mr. Hogan stated that this is not a standard for the industrial area but
that it can be used for this purpose effectively.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that this kind of signing should be encouraged
and supported. He indicated it would help the industrial area.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to
approve the signs proposed by the Daon Corporation for their industrial
Park.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adjourn.
Planning Commission Minutes —13—
April 22, 1981
Off
�•1
� �I 1'.
1
1,lti
1�
` �
� 1 �
�� 1
9:25
p.m. The
Planning
Commission
Adjourned.
Respectfully
submitted,
�.
JACK LAN,
Secretary
t
l�
Planning Commission
Minutes
—14—
April 22,
1981
y,
i1
a,
,lr
��
1,
I
f
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
May 27, 1981
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Richard Dahl called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission, meeting at the Lion's Pa•:k Community Center,
9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, to order at 7:15 p.m. He then
led in the pledge to the flag.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jeffrey King, Herman Rempel, Jeff Sceranka,
Peter Tolstoy, Richard Dahl
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
STAFF PRESENT: Shintu Bose, Associate Civil Engineer; Edward Hopson,
Assistant City Attorney; Barry K. Hogan, City Planner;
Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer; Joan Kruse, Administrative
Secretary; Jack Lam, Director of Community Development;
Michaei 4airin, Senior Planner
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mr. Lam announced that the City Council, at their last meeting, approved
the Victoria Planned Community and that it was now officially adopted.
He indicated that the City Council has also approved the Street Naming
Ordinance.
In other actions, Mr. Lam stated that the City Council has appointed them-
selves as the City's evaluating committee for the Redevelopment Agency
consultant. He indicated that the Council has requested that one member
of the Planning Commission be selected as a member of this committee. He
indicated that their first meeting would be on June 15, 1981. Mr. Lam.
stated that requests for proposal from the consultants are expected
by June 10, with interviews scheduled on June 15.
Commissioner Sceranka was selected by the Commission to be the representative
tc this City Council Committee.
Mr. Lam stated that under Director's Reports he would like to add a
Resolution concerning lot sizes and standards as Item "M" on this agenda.
Mr. Lam reminded the Commission that at their first meeting in Junc selection
of a new chairman should be made and asked the Commission for concurrence
in making their selection at that meeting.
Mr. Lam annoi_nco_d that the Annual Business Conference for San Bernardino
and Riverside Counties would be held on June 4 and asked any Commissioners
wishing to attend to make their reservations by May 28.
Mr. Lam stated that an invitation :lad been received from a development
company in Ve:Ltura in cooperation with the State of California to view
manufactured housing that would show the state-of--the-art. He indicated
that industry representatives and the news media will be in attendance.
The show would take place on June 9 and transportation for those interested
will be provided. Mr.. Lam stated that this could be important in light
of the implications of SB 1960.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION FOR SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -03 - BILL WYCKOFF -
The development of a pre - school to be located at 9212 Ease Line.
B. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP NO. 5525 - THE PLIES COMP
A subdivision of 38.6 acres into 4 parcels within the general
Industrial area located on the north side of Arrow, south of I -15.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by King, carried unanimously, to
adopt the Consent Calendar.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, KING, SCERANKA, TOLSTOY, DAHL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried-
PUBLIC HEARINGS
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-08
The development of a pre - school facility in an existing residers
on .70 acres of land in the R -1 zone, located at 9113 Foothill
Boulevard - APN 208 - 241 -09.
Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
The applicant was not present and Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the median island appears to have been
extended to save the trees and it appears that this would obstruct vision
because it goes out so far. He indicated that if this goes beyond the
property line it should be discouraged.
Planning Commission Mirutes -2- May 27, 1981
Commissioner Rempel did riot think the requirement for the wall capping
was good as it might detract from the stucco rather thon add to it.
Commissioner Tolstoy agreed with Commissioner Rempel about the tree
indicating that when you go from a private road to a public boulevard
you need to have adequate visibility. He also asked how much water is
anticipated to go through the break in the wall.
Mr. Sharma, the applicant, arrived and stated that he had nothing to
add.
Mr. Hogan replied to Commissioner Tolstoy's question stated that there
would be no problem in taking that water.
Commissioner Sceranka asked if the only change was the addition of another
tree.
Mr. Coleman stated that the tree that is propcsed to be saved is about
20 feet from the property line and would not obstruct the view.
The Planning Commission asked that this be. checked out for possible view
obstruction and if it is in the public right -of -way, felt it should be
removed.
The Planning Commission concurred that the condition for the masonry cap
should be removed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -58, with amendments as suggested by the Commission.
il. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 80 -03 (TT 11610) -
RLS ASSOCIATES - A planned residential development on 4.55 acres of
land, consisting of 28 dwelling units in the A -1 zone (P.D. proposed),
being divided by Tract No. 11610 into 28 condominium units (1 lot
located on the west side of Turner Avenue between Church Street and
Base Line - APN 208 - 061 -03.
Senior Planner, Michael Va.irin, reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that if the emergency access were turf block,
it would be of an obvious route. Otherwise, it may not be abla to be
use in an emergency.
Mr. Vairin explains t there will be a sigu clearly marking this as
an emergency access that this would be the only open area.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that this might be cluttered with picnic tables,
etc., by people living in the apartments.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- May 27, 1981
Commissioner King asked if it was proposed that the rocreati.on area come
back to the Design Review Committee.
Mr. Vairin replied that lie thought that the recommendation was that this
come back to either the Design Review Committee or the City Planner.
Commissioner King stated that this would be acceptable with the addition
of a tot lot which he felt should be included as necessary in all of these
types of projects.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he would like to see a childrens play
area in all large projects of this type.
Chairman Dahl asked if the Commission would like to have a Resolution drawn
to this effect.
The consensus of the Commission was that it is unnecessary.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Mr. Tom Harris, architect representing R.L.S. Associates, stated that
the project is of low density and the units vary from 1100 -1250 sq.
ft. He indicated that there would be a considerable amount of recreational
space and that a tot lot will be provided and have fencing around the pool.
He indicated that he would have no objection to a requirement for turf block.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would have no objections to the present
plan if the people in the homeowners association, through CCSR's, know
that the area discussed is an emergency route and must be kept open.
Mr. Harris indicted that there was one thing that lie had failed to
mention and showed the Commission a map that showed drainage to the
street through the slope to the south of the project.
Commissioner Sceranka thanked Mr. Harris, personally, for the cooperation
that he had giver. to this project.
Commissioner. Tolstoy stated that he really liked the parking treatment
in the cul -de -sac area as it was something new that lie had been hoping
they would get and further, that he hoped that this would be looked at by
other architects when designing projects.
There being no further comments, the public_ hearing was closed..
Commissioner Rempel stated that this is an attractive looking project
and agreed that through this type of development with a lot of open
area it would be a good addition to the City. He indicated further, that
he would rather see density go up and allow more open space around
housing units.
Motion: *roved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -59 recommending approval of P.D. 80 -03.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 27, 1981
Motion: Move? by Eempel, seconded by Toistoy, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -60 with the condition that an emergency area be
kept open and added to this development's CC&R's.
Commissioner Tolstoy commented that 'he hoped that on all north -south
>treets such as Turner that a flash wall concept will be used so that
water will not erode the streets.
x
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 80 -13 (TT i1797� -
INVESTMENTS - A total residential development comprised of 2z;O
condominium units on 11.5 acres in the R -3 zone located on the west
side of Archibald, north of Base Line Road - APN 202- 181 -21 (portion)
c Planner, Michael Vairin presented the staff report.
Commissioner King stated that in his report, Mr. Vairin spoke of emergency
or secondary access through the proposed office area. He asked where
it was locate:.
Mr. Vairin pointed this out to Commissioner King.
Commissioner King asked how this is intended to be treated initially.
Mr. Vairin stated it would be decomposed granite or an AC overlay.
Commissioner King stated that he understood that when these units were
completed that there would be a paved access out through the development.
Mr. Vairin explained this to Commissioner King.
Chairman Dahl stated that he die not see the recreational areas that will
be provided and did not observe any tot lots.
Mr. Vairin stated that this had been discussed with the developer and he
indicated that this would be no problem for him. lie indicated that this
is a different concept with a water element.'
Commissioner Tol.stoy stated that he would specifically want a
that is well fenced because of the water element.
Chairman Dahl asked what protection there would be for children living
in this project.
Mr. Vairin stated that the water would not be deeper than 18 inches and
that the developer would speak to this; however, because of the depth of
the water, fencing according to the building code would not be required
all around.
Planning Commission Minutes -5- May 27, 1981
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if Exhibit "D" had been redrawn after the
Design Review Committee looked at it. Further, if the mounding will be
such that parking will be obscured.
Mr. Vairin replied that this had been. redrawn to comply with staff's
suggeutions and that cars would be partially obscured.
Commissf,,ner Tolstoy stated that he wished to go on record in stating
that cars should be obscured somewhat so that it does not look like a
parking lot for a super market, or used car lot.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Mr. Jack Tarr, 270 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa, stated his concurrence
with staff's recommendations and made a point of clarification on the
Engineering input. He stated that the landscaping on the street side
is evo feet below grade in addition to the mounding in order to soften
the iupact of cars.
Chairman Dahl asked about the water way„ throughout this complex and
about the safety for children.
Mr. Tarr replied that the water would be. 18-inches or less and that
they have never had any problems on previous projects.
Chairman Dahl asked if they were anticipating building a tot lot or
children's play area.
Mr. Tarr replied that they had not envisioned a tot lot because their
marketing concept is 650 -750 square foot units and because of their
range, they would not be attractive to small families.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that even though they are marketing
smaller units, because of their price range they might be attractive
to small families because they would be able to afford them.
Mr. Tarr stated that- they would work with staff on this.
Commissioner King stated that a tot lot should definitely be a condition
of this project.
Mr. Tarr stated that another thir- Ha wished to address wa.s the requirement
for a drainage ditch on the north indicated that this was resolved
and that they would drain their own property instead of asking the
Southern Pacific Railroad for access.
Mr. Part Stryker, 1662 Irvine Boulevard, Tustin, a consulting civil
engineer, stated that when the parcel map was to be approved there was
a condition for a ditch along the Southern ?acific Rail.raod right -of -way
and was the same question that came up at the time of approval of the
Parcel map. He indicated that there had been a condition to concrete
Planning Commission Minutes -6- May 27, 1981
line this ditch and the Senior Engineer agreed that this should be left
in abeyance until final design. He indicated. that they had done a hydrology
study and-fcu -d that a lined ditch would not nerve a useful. purpose as
it might accellerate the water at that point.
Chairman Dahl asked if the drainage ditch uesign would cause problems
to the mobile homes.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would agree with them in an average
year because that drain Joes not carry that much capacity. It is only
put into service during wet years and he indicated that he wanted this
looked at very carefully.
Mr. Stryker asked that the language of the condition be changed to read
that the improvements will be required if necessary.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would agree to this.
Chairman Dahl asked if the Commission can lave acceptance of the condition
for the protection of the mobilehomes park.
Mr. Lam replied that he would prefer if the wording were left in such
a way so that if there is a problem it can be worked out with the Engineering
staff and that the language was purposely left strong.
There was discussion among the Commission that this condition would be
left to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department and that the
mobilehome park would be protected.
Commissioner Rempel recommended that the condition be changed to concrete,
gunnite or improved channel or that the channel will comply to the requirement
of the City Engineer or such other means as are appro-eed by the City
Engineer..
Mr. [Jayne Nelson, representing the Hoyt Lumber. Company, asked to see
the first plot plan and asked if this was on the east or west side.
The Commission stated that this was a typographical. error and that the
staff report should indicate that this is on the east not west side.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that this project offers lower cost home
ownership in the City and that density has to be increased to make this
possible. He indicated that there would have to be more of this in the
City, He stated that the trade -off 1.9 quality and with the water amenity,
this will be a nice place to be in the City. He indicated that the
Design Review Committee had done a good job on this.
Planning Commission Minutes -7- May 27, 1981
Motf.on: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
approve Resolution No. 81 -61 for this project as amended with the addition
of the tot lots and the requirement for a decision from the City Engineer
relative to the .channel. The Commission stated that this should be
brought back to the Design. 'Review Committee.
Motion- Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -62, approving the planned development.
F.
8:20 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed.
8:38 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened.
.;n amendment to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, amending
Chapter 17.04, Section 17.04.080, to eliminate the tri.- annual
review period and allow projects to be filed on an open basis.
Mr. Lam reviewed the ordinance asking that the Planning Commission
direct their attention to Item 5. He indicated that the only change
would be that applications would not be submitted three times a year and
that no other change would take place. lie also asked for a resolution
to be adopted recommending amendment. to City Council Resolution No. 79-
74 to conform to the General Plan definition of affordable housir;�.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if projects are hastily put together can they
be kicked back if this ordinance is changed because he would still want
to have the option and protection that the grc -.-th management ordinance
presently has in that regard. He indicated that he would like applications
to be completed when they are submitted.
Chairtnau Dahl opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to
adopt kesolution No. 81 -63 and also recommend adoption of this proposed
ordinance to the City Councii.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, that City Council Resolution
No. 79 -74 be amended to reflect the change in the definition of affordable
housing to conform to the Cenral Plan.
Commissioner King voted no because of his previously stated reasons.
Commissioner Tolstoy abstained because of his previously stated reasons.
Planning Commission Minutes -8- May 27, 1981
AYEF:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
SCERANKA, REMPEL, DAHL
KING
NONE
COMMISSIONERS: TOLST.OY
- carried-
G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSL•SSMENT AND PARCEL MAP NO. 6761 - CARN'ELIAN IN
A residential subdivision of 18.7 acres into two (2) parcels in
R -1 zone located on the southwest corner of Highland Avenue and
Carnelian Street - APN 201- 214 -05.
Shintu Bose, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Mr. Doug Gorgen, applicant, stated that he wanted to divide the property
that Caltrans wants from what he wishes to be developed.
Commissioner Sceranka asked where Mr. Gorgen stood in relation to the
Caltrans purchase of his property.
Mr. Gorgen explained that Caltrans is in the process of appraising the
property and he had met with the appraiser ,yesterday. He indicated that
they would be given a £our month postponement of the.EIR.
Commissioner Sceranka. asked if Caltrans has adequate funds to purchase
this property.
Mr. Gorgen stated that Caltrans has said that they have funds.
Commissioner King asked if in the absence of Caltrans purchasing this
property, did Mr. Gorgen think that this is a good parcel split.
Mr. Gorgen replied no but that he felt that if there is a snag with the
Caltrans acquisition, at least he could proceed with development of
this property.
Commissioner King asked for clarification or a reason for this parcel
split.
Mr. Gorgen explained that since the engineering on this piece is completed,
he wants the split for flexibility in financing and because Caltrans is
unable to move quickly.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if parcel one is a piece that Caltrans does
not want.
Planning Commission Minutes -9-
May 27, 1981
Mr. Corgen expla'ned the shape of the parcel and indicated that Caltrans
has s survey of this.
There being no.further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Tolstoy, carried, to adopt
Resolution No. 81 -64, approving the Envir.,mentai Assessment and Parcel
Map No. 6761.
Commissioner King voted no b .ausc he did not think this parcel split
will lend to the proper development of Parcel No. 1.
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL PiAP NO. 6863 - KOLL -LYON - A
subdivision of 71.9 acres into four (4) parcels for industrial use
In the M -1 zone located between 4th Street and 6th Street, west
side of Rochester Avenue - APN 229 - 261 -06, 24
Shinto Bose, Assistant Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report. He
asked that the following conditions be revised; Condition No. S, master
plan of streets revision required for Rochester and 6th Avenue, be added;
the requirement for sidewalk be deleted from Condition No. 7; and the
requirement for median island for Rochester Avenue be deleted from
Condition No. 8, as it is in error..
Mr. Bose stated that the applicant asked that the sidewalk requirement
and street trees be deferred until a later time, along with the driveway
approaches. Mr. Bose stated that these would be required at the time of
building permit Issuance.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the sidewalk requirement should not be
deleted totally because they may be required on one side with submittal
of the site plan.
Comnissioner Tolstoy agreed and stated that the purpose of the sidewalks
is to encourage public transportation.
Mr. Bose stated that these requirements could then be deferred until the
time of building permit issuance.
The consensus of the Commission is that these requirements be deferred until
the time of site plan submittal.
Commissioner King stated that it appeared that Parcel No. 1 has a 227 -foot
frontage on Fourth Street and asked if this meant that there will be a
side yard on Fourth Street.
Staff replied that this may not be so.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Planning, Commission Minutes -10- May 27, 1981
Mr. Robert Sundstrom, representing Koll -Lyon, stated that their request
that the sidewalk requirement on Condition No. 7 be deleted was because
they were unaware.of the sidewalk requirement on local streets and were
seeking consistency. On Condition No. 8, Mr. Sundstrom stated that they
were requesting that the street light energizing be tied in to the devel-
opment because they thought this would be the logical place.
Mr. Sundstrom asked for clarification of Item 5 and stated that it sight
be necessary to ask for a continuance.
Mr. Bose explained that the map does not follow the alignment of 6th
Street and they were conditioning the map so that there would be align-
ment of 6th. Street and Rochester.
Mr. Sundstrom stated that he understood that; however, in coming in with
a final map a few months from now, where would they put 6th Street. He
asked if it would be shown as it is now or would it show the 6th Street
alignment, vnd would he be able to record a map based on that change.
Mr. Lam explained that the City now knows where the alignment will be and
that Mr. Sundstrom can go ahead with the tentative map and fix this
on the parcel map.
Mr. Sundstrom asked about Condition No. 45 and further that improvements
be deferred as far as street lighting, landscaping, etc., until develop-
ment.
Mr.. Lam replied that if the Planning Commission approves this tract, any
requirement for sidewalks will be deferred until the time of construction.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Sceranka emphasized that at the time of site plan approval, the
Commission would look for the sidewalks and require them to be on one side.
Following brief discussion, Commissioner Sceranka stated that the requirement
for sidewalks would be left in Condition No. 7.
Mr. Hogan stated that the City could take bonding and at the time of
d:velopment, the sidewalks would be installed.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that they do not wish to delete sidewalks and
this should be a certain condition.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by King, carried unanimously, �o
adopt Resolution No. 81 -65 with the changes recommended by staff and
that the requirement for sidewalks on one side of the street remain.
Commissioner Rempel stated that all sidewalks, etc., would be deferred
until the time of construction.
Planning Commission Minutes -11- May 27, 1981
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR TRACT N0. 11369 - ALTA LOMA MEADOWS - The
Planning Commission shall be considering a recommendation for requir-
ing the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for
a residential project consisting of 60 single family lots within
the R-1 -8,500 zone generally located on the southeast corner of
Carnelian Street and Highland Avenue and within the proposed Foothill
Freeway corridor - APN 201- 221 -42.
Mr. Hogan reviewed the staff report and stated that there would b significant
impacts caused by this development and asked that an EIR be required. He
also staled that this is the staff recommendation in focusing on the
circulation aspects in building within the Foothill Freeway corridor.
Mr. Hogan indicated that the Commission had required that items 7 and 8
be included in the F.IR to be prepared by Mr. Gorgen and staff recommends
that all. of the items of discussion be included in the preparation of
this EIR_
Commissioner king asked if the Commission had requested Mr. Gorgen to
include transportation for the entire area rather than the City. He
indicated that in looking at the recommendation for No. 8 here, perhapr,
it should be focused only on the City in order for consistency.
Mr. Hogan stated that Caitrans has been contacted and what staff is doing
is moving the process forward learning from the Carnelian Investment
property and using the Planning Commission's decision arl a basis for
formulating any jubsequent requirements.
Mr. Bill Addington, and J. F. Davidson, representing the applicant who
l.i_ves in Colton, stated that if a report hac previously been prepared, there
should be sufficient information for this project as well.
Mr. Lam replied that althcugh an EIR for the corridor had been required,
it had not been prepared yet.
Mr. Addington stated that ii,,-e understood the Planning Commission's
of the EIR and focus on such itemq as circulation; however, on the subject
of hydrology, hoped that the City , ?ngineer would agree that it is a minor
and negative consideration because 'hev did not have any off -site drainage
and he t._._t that this could be deleted.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that tht only problem is that the freeway
corridor may present a • lrainage p•roblTm to the City and there must be
an alternate way to deal with drainage.
Mr. Addington stated that he thought the City Engineer would know whether
that should be required or not.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that was i7hy an EIR is needed.
Mr. Addington stated that he did not fee3 that items 5 and 6 should be
required either.
Planning Commission Minutes -12- May 27, 1981
Mr. Hogan asked that the Planning Commission be polled.
The Commission discussed which.- issues should be included in the EIR.
The public hearing was opened by Chairman Dahl.
Mr. Doug Gorgen spoke and stated that this Planning Commission, City
Council, or staff does not have a policy and while Caltrans does have
some money to purchase property, they do not have enough to purchase it
all.
Mr. Hopson recounting a discussion he had several months ago, stated the
City needs to have an EIR because the impacts must be determined. He
reiterated the points he had previously made regarding this requirement.
Chairman Dahl closed the public hearing.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
approve the recommendation for the EIR to include items 2, 7, and 8.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that regardless of what choices those people
make who own property in the Foothill corridor they will have a problem
in the use of that property because of the politi,:al decisions, and this
is not a game. He indicated that no Planning Commissioner takes this, or
the requirement for an EIR, lightly.
Commissioner Tolstoy agreed.
Chairman Dahl asked how many people in the audience were here because of
the Cable TV agenda item.
There was a show of hands indicating there were approximately 10 people
and Chairman Dahl stated there would be a ten minute break and they would
get back to this item.
9:45 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed.
10:00 p.m. The Planning Cummission reconvened.
L. CABLE TV REPORT
Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Dahl stated that possibly there should be a sixth option to recommend
the franchising of Cable TV companies.
Mr. Hogan stated that the Building Industry Association and Levis Homes
Company are opposed to subsidizing another industry. He indicated that
what they are saying is that the cable company install their cable when
the trenches are open and that it would therefore be available for
installation in homes.
Planning Commission Minutes -13- May 27, 1981
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that this made more sense to him than any
other solution with one more aspect. He indicated that when a homeowner
moves into a tract, through the franchise he may be able to pay monthly
to a cable company until his cost of installation is paid for. 'If it
cost $200, the first year or two he would help reimburse the cable company
for paying for the cable. He stated that he did not want to see a cable
company set the rate in such a way that the homeowner would be charged
for the cable over the next 100 years. He felt that a franchise is
needed but did not want to have an extra charge. Further, that the
installation cost could be prorated over a period of time.
Mr. Lam stated that at this level staff is asking how important it is
to have cable TV and how it is proposed that you get the cable to the
people.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the Commission must decide where the
fringe areas are and where there is no reception. He felt that the
Planning Commission ought to see that these areas should be isolated
and treated differently than those areas where they have reception.
Chairman Dahl stated that be disagreed with the BIA and that cable TV
is not a luxury and felt that cable should be requited in new homes.
Commissioner King questioned whether the Commission should go further
and have it throughout all parts of the community. It seemed to him that
pay TV and the rest is expanding and perhaps in the future, it will
be necessary in order to get into all the channels that are sprouting
up.
Mr. Lam stated that from a staff point of view they are looking at it
as an expanding communication system. Further, that their opinion would
be that the whole community would be well served through. a cable TV
requirement.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Mr. Ulla Bowers, 8367 Bella Vista, Ontario, stated that cable TV is not
a luxury. He further stated that it is being used more. and more for
such things as smoke detection, burglar alarms, medical services for
paramedics, telemetering for wells and other public uses. Mr. Bowers
stated that a study rhould be made to see the state -of- the -art and did
not think that cable TV companies would be reluctant to pay for the
drops.
Mr. Marvin Shaw, representing the BIA, showed a colored overlay from the
CATV magazine which stated that cable television companies would be
willing to bid for 'heir services in Rancho Cucamonga. He further stated
that unless all homeowners paid for the cost of installing cable, the
building industry would be subsidizing the cable TV industry.
Planning Commission Minutes -14- May 27, 1981
Mr. Greg Salvato of Lewis Homes, asked for consideration ir_ the cost of
installation to developers in that the initial cost to the homeowner
would actually not rover the cost.of instsllztion and hoped that at
some future point in time the cost could be recouped. He thought that
only those people who want installation should have it.
Mr. Gary Frye, representing the William Lyon Company, stated that some
builders like S & S have gone into the cable TV business. He wanted
the City to understand that large scale developers might look into this
on their own. He agreed with the BIA position and stated that some
comments made by Chairman Dahl were meaningful to him. He felt that
his company could work with the caLle companies but that they should pay
for the cable as it goes in.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried, that staff work
out a franchise ordinance that will be reviewed by the Planning Commission
and forwarded to the City Council with a recommendation that a condition
be, worked out with new development and the cable TV companies. Further,
that cable TV be made available in all newly developed areas.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if it would be appropriate to have the
ordinance come back to the Planning Commission or go on to the City
Council for action and to refer those parts that pertain to planning back
to the Commission.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, TOLSTOY, KING, DAHL
COMMISSIONERS: SCERANKA
COMMISSIONERS: NONE
- carried-
J. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -28 - VANIR
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - Proposed office complex located on the northwest
corner of 19th Street and Archibald Avenue.
Barry Hogan, City Planner, reviewed the staff report_.
Mr. Hopson stated that under the current development review process there
is no provision for extension beyond a one -year period.
Chairman Dahl asked if the applicant was present.
Mr. Ramon Polin, the applicant, requested that the Commission extend this
project because of current economic conditions and the plethora of available
office space within the city.
Planning Commission Minutes -15-
May 27, 1981
e
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the real issue is that Mr. Polin had
come back and asked for a second extension. He further stated that the
Commission must be mindful that when the County was approving things they
extended into infinity and the Commission stated that they would only
approve a project for one -year with a one -year extension. He indicated
that he did not wish to go back to County standards, and, if this came
to a vote, he would vote no.
Chairman Dahl stated that the Commission had been doing Mr. Polin a favor
in allowing this to come back previously. If this had not been the case,
the Commission might be looking at a_ little different project instead of
this one going on and on.
Mr. Polin stated that he did not want to come back to the Commission again.
Commissioner. Sceranka stated that Mr. Polin had come in previously and
indicated that there were problems with the offices and there is still
a problem.
Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to
deny this time extension.
M. RESOLUTION DEALING WITH LOT SIZES
Mr. Hogan stated that a resolution had been prepared relative to lot
sizes and private streets_ He then read provisions of the Resolution
into the record whicr, established net lct area and where such streets
would be allowed.
Commissioner King stated that he agreed with provision No. 1 of the
resolution and understands the reasoning behind No. 2 but was not sure
that it is appropriate to have a hard and fast rule on this.
Commissioner Rempel stated there is always room for variance and if this
resolution was not adopted, there would continually be problems.
Mr. Hogan explained what the procedure would be in order to get a variance
in conjunction with this.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that one danger is a junior planner coming
to the City and saying that this is a policy and that nothing can be done
about the problem. There are ways to get around this for special treatment.
Commissioner Rempel stated that then there is the exact opposite.
Commissioner King stated that he does not like it and thin there are
better ways to set this down and asked for more guidelines.
Planning Commission Minutes -16- May 27, 1981
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried, to adopt
Resolution No. 81 -66.
AYES: rOMMISSIONERS: SCERANKA, REMPEL, TOLS'TOY, DAHL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: KING
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried-
K. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET
Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
continue this to the June 10 meeting.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to
ad4ourn.
11:00 p.m. The Planning Commission adjov.rned.
Planning Commission Minutes -17- May 27, 1981
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PIJAXNINC COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
June 10, 1931
CALL TO ORDER
The Regular meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission,
held at the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Rd., Rancho
Cucamonga, was called to order at 7 p.m. by Chairman Richard Dahl, who
led in the plsdge to the flag.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jeff King, Herman Rempel, Jeff Sceranka,
Peter Tolstoy, Richard 1D�.:tl
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
STAFF PRESENT: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner; Edward Hopson, Assistant
City Attorney; Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer; Joan Kruse,
Administrative Secretary; Jack Lam, Director of Community
Development; Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer;
Michael Vairin, Senior Planner
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chairman Dahl requested that Item K. Selection of Chairman and Vice - Chairman
be handled right after the announcements.
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, stated that items C and F will
be continued to the June 24, 1981 Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Lam
indicated that relative to Item C, the Edison Company held a meeting
on .Tune 9 with interested homeowners and as a result have requested that
this agenda item be postponed. Mr. Lam stated that a problem bad been
indicated in the staff report for A & R Equipment-, and as a result, they
too, requested a. postponement until the next Planning Commission for
their agenda item.
Mr. Lam announced that Barry Hogan and Peter Tol.stoy will attend a
Planning Commissioners Conference pre - planning meeting in Oakland on
June li. He asked that the Commission communicate any items of interest
that they %ould wish addressed at the next conference to these individuals
for input at this meeting.
Chairman Dahl stated that the Commission will try something different
in its election procedures for new Commission Chairman for the upcoming
year and indicated that selection of the new Chairman would be done
through secret ballot. lie indicated that the Assistant City Attorney
would tally the vote. Chairman Dahl further stated that he would not
accept the Chair for another year and asked that the Commission make
its selection with this in mind.
Mr. Hubbs e-.cplained the problem with the catch basin and the way the
water drains at that corner. He further explainers that this would be
lilac the street signal situation where Ontario would not participate.
Mr. Hubos went on to explain some of the road needs and priorities, stating
that they are divided into four categories with a total projected cost
of approximately 7.5 million dollars. Ile indicated that there should be
a preventative maintenance program for the roads over a 20 -year period.
Further, that if the City had such a program, road maintenance would run
about 1.3 million dollars a year.
Mr_. Hubbs explained the gas tax funds and, using a chart, explained how
revenues are expanded. He indicated that SB 325 funds were running out
and that there is a proposal to increase the gas tax by two cents to stem
the tide of deteriorating roads by adding this to the road maintenance
fund. He concluded by stating that road maintenance is a serious problem
that must be addressed and that the public does not know how serious this
really is.
Motion: Moved by Rempel., seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -67, approving the 1981 -82 Capital Improvements
Program and finding consistency with the General Plan.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. uu -u-11 - SOt
CALIFORNIA EDI:SON COMPANY - The development of an electrical distri
substation on the northwest corner of Archibald and Wilson Avenues.
APN 1061 - 571 -04.
*lotion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
continue this item to the June 24, 1981 meeting.
D. ENV ?RONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11696 - VANGUARD
VENTURE - A custom lot subdivision of 2.0 acres of land into 6 single
family residential lots in the R -1 -0,500 zone, located west of
Sapphire Street at the western terminus of Garden Ct. - APN 201- 201 -33.
Barry Hogan, City Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner King asked what is occuring iz drainage on lots 1 -4.
Mr. Hogan replied that these lots will drain to the street and then out
to Sapphire.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if any thought was given in Design Review to
the parking situation on the cul -de -sac.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 10, 1981
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would not accept the position of
chairman, either.
Mr. Hopson, after tallying the votes, Indicated that the new chairman
will he Jeff King, with Herman Rempel elected vice - chairman. The newly
elected chairman will be seated at the July 8 meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIE14 NO 81 -20 - GENER
TELEPHONE COMPANY (GTE) - The proposed 3,440 sq. ft. addition to
the existing telephone equipment building in the R -1 zone located
at 6322 East Avenur - APN 225- 181 -25.
Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt the Consent Calendar.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, REMPEL, KING, SCERANKA, DAHL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried -
B. CAPITAL IMPROVIMENTS PROGRAM 1981 -82
Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer, reviewed the staff report, explaining the
funds that are available to support the Capital Improvements Program as
well as an expenditure summary for the projects scheduled.
I
ommissioner Tolstoy asked about the Deer Creek bridges and what is
proposed to be done, as well as the City's responsibility.
Mr. Hubbs replied that most of these bridges are funded through the
Department of Water Resources and they would replace these to the original
width. He indicated that the City would have to add to the bridges to
bring them up from substandard and it would be optional for the City to
add sidewalks.
Mr. Hubbs then explained the Storm Drain Fund.
Commissioner Rempel asked if the City of Ontario would work with this
Citv on the storm drain at Fourth and Archibald.
Mr. Hubbs replied that the problem is that it is on the north side.
Commnissioner Rempel stated that he knew this, but that we would be
draining Ontario's water, also.
Planning Connuission Minutes -2- June 10, 1981
Mr. Hogan. replied that a great deal of thought- was given and that there
was more than one revision to the plans. He explained how the Fire
Department objected to some of the plans because of the turning radius.
Commissioner. Tolstoy asked if there was any way to get more space for
a center island.
Mr. Hogan replied that there was some difficulty in the width, depth and
angle for the cul-de-sac.
Chairman Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Coleen Dyke, project manager. for Vanguard Builders, the applicant, stated
that she found the conditions acrPprahle.
There being no further conments, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he had a problem with the project and
stated further that this was extremely poor planning. He indicated that
lie could not imagine a project like this without having some more parking.
Mr. Hogan explained the restrictions due to some existing streets and
that nothing would help the design of this project very much.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he felt there are too many lots and as
a result, there is poor planning.
Mr. Rougeau explained that because of the configuration of this piece of
land, this is a better than normal case as a regular cul -de -sac has 4
lots and this has only 3.
Commissioner King stated that he agreed with Commissioner Tolstoy, not
so much from the parking standpoint, but because there may be too many
lots. He felt that t%is should go back f_r a better configuration.
Mr. Hogan stated that this did not go to Design Review because it is a
custom lot situation. He asked if the Commission could give the applicant
some guidance.
Commissioner Sceranka recommended that this go back to Design Review.
Commissioner Rempel stated that one problem is not seeing this as a standard
cul -de -sac. Further, if you look at this configuration compared to that
of a regular cul -de -sac, there is actually more parking space. He felt
that there are a lot more areas in the City that have less parking than
this.
Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Sceranka, to se-id this back to
Design Review and that this be placed on the next available Planning Commission
agenda following Design Review.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- June 10, 1981
Mr. Hogan asked a legal question regarding the environmental asse sment
and the time limitations.
City Attorney Hopson replied that if action is not taken on this :tem
tonight, the time clock on the environmental assessment would nog begin.
Commissioner Sceranka stated if this goes back to Design Review 7 e would
like to poll the Commission for their concerns.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the Commission should look at exl ibit A
to see what is being talked about as far as the area of land inv lved.
Chairman Dahl stated that he noted that the one on the upper lef : has
5 units going around the cul -de -sac.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he. was not inclined to use tha designs
of previous cul-de-sacs and he felt that the Design Review Comm: 'tee
should look at this for the first time.
Mr. Lain stated that if there is a question of the ability to paik on
this cul -de -sac and this exceeds the standard, the question to l-)ok at
is do you have a standard for lot width around th,� bulb. If it :s found
in review that it does not meet the Commission's viewpoint, it w »ld
need to be amended and it will raise a policy question for all cil -de -sacs
in the City.
Commissioner Rempel asked if this would be a redesign after some .king
had been submitted and the Commission can change this ipso facto and have
this go under new standards.
Mr. Hopson replied that the Commission can find that there a_e environmental
concerns which would justify reexamination of policy and it could be done
this way. If there is a circulation problem they would be able to change
their mind if a compelling situation exists.
Coleen Dyke stated that this is a 8000 square foot subdivision ani the
smallest lot is 3800 square feet and the iargest is 16,000 square feet.
Further, that this is a standard cul -de -sac.
Chairman Dahl stated that he could not see the developer go back, especially
when they have exceeded their standards.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that be would reconsider his motion If the
sec .)nd is withdrawn.
Commissioner Sceranka stated he would withdraw his second.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that tie appreciated what Commmissioner. Rempel
dial and that it is not the pc.icy of this Commission to do this to the
developer. He indicated that he has a problem with all the cul-de-sacs
in the City and wanted to express his concern and ask that design i.riteria
be looked at.
Planning Commission Minutes -5- June 10, 1981
Mr. Hogan asked if that is relative to additional parking.
Commissioner. Tolstoy replied that is what he had in mind.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -68 and the environmental assessment on this project.
M • a: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, that
the Planning Commission review the current standards for cul -de -sacs
within the City.
Commissioner King stated that earlier he said he wanted a study done
on parking and would like aesthetics of cul -de -sacs examined also, especially
off of strc ^ts like Sapphire.
* * * * *
8:00 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed.
8:15 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened.
* * * * *
E. ENVIRONMEN°AL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11663 - (P.D_ 80 -12) -
MARLBOROUGH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A total development of 413
townhouses on 40 acres in the R -2 zone, lozated on the east side
of rrchibald, on the south side of Church, west site of Ramona -
APN 1077- 341 -01, 1077 - 133 -08, and 1077- 631 -03.
Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, reviewed the staff report. He 'recommended
a change to Condition No. 1 on page 2 of the Resolution relative to
landscaping because he felt that this could be worked out with the
developer.
Commissioner Sceranka a.sked what the General Plan designation for this
area is.
Mr. Vairin replied that it is me-ilum- density with 4 -14 dwellin units per
acre and the proposed project is proposed to be 10.8 dwelling units per
acre.
Commissioner Sceranka asked. what the density is to the east of this project.
Mr. Vairin replied that they are between 3.25 and 4 dwelling units per
acre.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he would like to see more consistency
where there are multiple family units and that there should be no more
than a cne -story units next to sine'_e family homes. He indicated that
he would like to see a policy where the Commission does not encourage
more than one -story units bordering single family homes and stated that
this is a privacy and security issue.
Planning Commission Minutes -6- June 10, 1981
Chairman Dahl. stated that this type of precedent was set with the project
at Hellman and Foothill. He then asked if a condition had been included
for a chil.drea's play area in the project,
Mr. Vairin replied that they will be required to show this in the final
landscape plans.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the roof tile was traditional or flat.
Mr. Vairin stated that he would let the architect. reply.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked what the standards are for sound proofing in
a project such as this.
Mr. Vairin replied tSat they would have to meet the Building Code requirement
and chat lie was unable to provide that information.
Mr. Lam stated that the Uniform Building Code requirements would have to
be net at the time of plan check.
Coimnissiocer King asked If the developer intends to have totally along
the perimeter �f the project an interconnecting or interlocking pedestrian
path„ and especially around Ramona.
Mr. Vairin replied that this is a cv:.cition.
Mr. Paul Byrnes, representing Marlborcugh Homes, stated that they did
not specifically address tot lot areas because they felt there were an
adequate number of places within the complex to place tot lots -- they
anticipated having to put in 6 and the 3 requested by staff are well
under what they thoug'.it they would have to put in.
Commissioner Sceranka asked what Mr. Byrnes' definition of tot lot is.
Mr. Byrnes replied that it is a grass -lined area without a lot of play
equipment that may be fenced far security. He indicated that if the
rot lot was along a major street, it would be fenced; if it were along
the green belt, it would not be.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that one of the trade -offs of higher density
adjacent to single family is the provision of parks that the single family
units may utilize and it is a fact that tot lots are necessary. Further,
that they should be positive and keep children from the street as much
as possible.
Mr. Byrnes stated that he was not sure that this is an issue because it
is > marketing concern and he had not had any input that tot lots are
desired. He indicated that he did not have a problem in accepting this
condition and having swi.ngsets. Further, that they are planning on 6
tot lots. Mr. Byrnes stated that a perimeter wall was not considered
but w:.s not sure at this time if it would be more desirable to put the
perimeter wall in front of or behind the walkway because of the heavy
landscaping,that will be put in. He indicated that there would be no
problem with t is condition.
Planning Commission. Minutes -7- June 10, 1981
Mr. Byrnes stated that the roof tile is the traditional "S" type. He
indicated that they want a quality project and have wanted it from day
one and that this will not be an inferior project. Mr. Byrnes provided
the price ranges of .these units for the commission and the audience.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked that since Commissioner Sceranka brought up
one -story frontscape and since he was not on the Design Review Committee,
he would like clarification.
Commissioner Sceranka stated tha': or, the south perimeter of the property
there would be a problem with these units.
Chairman. Dahl asked Mr. Byrnes if he would have a problem with malting
t'iese units one - story.
Mr. Byrnes replied that he did not know and could not say.
Mrs. Elaine Parnham, 8003 London, was opposed to tl-'.s project because of
the increased densities. Further, that she did not want a two -story
building next to tier home so that people could look into her back yard.
Mrs. Gay Lesch, 9913 Norwich, was opposed to this project because of
being told that single family homes would be built at the time that she
purchased her home, also being told that there would be a park and she did
not want two -story units looking into her property. She indicated it
was her feeling that property values would deteriorate.
Mr. Bill. Butek, Perlite, asked what would he done to handle increased
traffic because it is difficult on Ramona now.
Mrs. Alvarado, who lives just across from this development on Ramona, was
opposed to the entire project and especially the two -story units.
Mrs. Mary Brite, 8021 Melvin, was opposed because of increased school
impacts and higher densities. She felt that traffic would be increased
and asked when the zone changed on this property.
Mr. Vairin replied that this zone was created prior to the City's incorporation.
Mr. Max Agate, 9911 Striford, stated that when he purchased his property
he had been told that there would be a park area and single family homes.
He indicated a concern of increased traffic. He asked why he had not been
notified by letter of thin hearing.
Commissioner S%eranku asked that staff advise the audience of the notification
procedure.
A residr -o- of 8C16 Dasero, stated than he did not want two -story units
looking into his 'bad; yard and was to.:ai'_y against this project. lie
inr'�catecl that th(- Marlborough Development Cimpari told lies to the
eroperty owners relative to their plans for this protect.
Planning Commission Minutes -8- June 10, 1981
Mr. Oscar Jones, 7752 Ramona, was opposed to this project because of
the reasons stated by the other residents.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Byrnes stated that this property was always zoned R -2 and was that
way before the t•roperty owners purchased their homes. He indicated
that while he did not doubt that they might have been told that there
would be single family homes developed on this land, the statement that
it would be single family homes, was not authorized. Mr. Byrnes explained
that they would have to procure school letters before development can
commence. He indicated that this project will be completed in six
phases approximately 6 months apart.
Chairman Dahl stated that it was his understanding that the developer
is putting in a park site.
Mr. Byrnes replied that they are as part of this and another project
site near Turner and Church and that it would be approximately 7 acres
in size. Ile stated that this park will also serve existing residents of
the area.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the idea of the park probably came from
the Blayney Plan. As far as the rest, Design Review has done a good
job in reviewing the plan overall. He further stated that people are
saying that they don't want this density but that more efficient land
uses must be made. Mr. Rempel stated that i.i this were a single - family
development there would be nothing to prevent the homes from being two -
story and that the applicant has stated that he would have single- family
along the south perimeter. Commissioner Rempel stated that there will
be no units built until there is a school letter and as far as property
values are concerned, a good condominium that is well maintained could
be like the units that are in Red Hill and he was in favor of this
project.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would like to be stronger than Commissioner
Rempel and would like to emphasize the condition of having one - story units
along the existing houses. He indicated that this will help their concern
and felt that this project would boost property values.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked Paul Rougeau to give some information on
traffic on Ramona Avenue.
Mr. Rougeau replied that he did not have any numbers available. He indicated
that this is a collector street and of adequate size to handle traffic.
There was discussion of the traffic and water drainage_
Commissioner King stated that he agreed with the consensus on single. -story
along the southern perimeter of the project and was concerned that there
i& enough room to really add any children's play areas. He indicated
that he also wanted an access trail.
Planning Commission Minutes -9- June 10, 1981
There was discussion of tot lots between the developer and the Commission.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that at some point in time the Commission
needs to define what a tot lot is and what they should contain.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he. would like to make a recommendation
as part of the condition of approval that this be a minimum of at least
three active lots and at least three others.
Cheirman Dahl stated that he believed that the phasing and traffic was
well covered. He further stated that he did not feel that density of
10.8 was very much different than 7200 square foot lot sizes where you
are looking at 4 -5 dwelling units per acre. He felt that the growth
management plan goes a long way in easing the impaction on schools and
added that the developer will be puttiag in a fully developed park ai
Church and Turner. He stated that it is a good idea for prospective
buyers to check the zoning on surrounding property before they purchase
and thought that it should be a policy of the Planning Commission that
whenever a townhouse development abuts a single family tract, it should
be mitigated by single -story bt.ildings.
Commissioner Rempel thought that even if it was necessary to eliminate
one or two units, there should be provisions not only for tot lots but
for areas for adults to enjoy as well.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that one reason there seems to be a traffic
problem is because the streets are not at full width. He indicated that
when they are fully developed, they will help the traffic. problem. Rc
indicated that the project would not be approved if the street would not
be improved. He did not feel that this project- would depreciate property
values.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would like to see the CC &R's state
where the fire lanes are and that they cannot be encroached upon. He
indicated that he would be in favor of a homeowner association and also
a badminton court. He indicated that he would rather see a turf block
situation in this project because when there is open space you are always
afraid that the fire lanes will be blockc?.
Motion: Kuved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -69 to change the zone from R -2 to P.D.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution. No. 81 -70, approving Tentative Tract No. 11663 with an
amendment to remove the 10 -foot landscaping and that a minimum of 6 play
areas be contained within the project,, 3 active with play yard equi-ment
Planning Commission Minutes -10- June 10, 1981
in the north, west and east areas. Further, that there be only single -
story units on the south side of the project abutting single family
residences and that fire access not he encroached upon. The project
should also contain a directory boaW to be located at the clubhouse.
9:30 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed.
9:40 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened.
G. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81 -10 - VICTOR D. EASON - Inter_im use of
the business office located at 9513 Business Center Drive, Suite J,
for the Foursquare Gospel Church in Rancho Curam -nga,
City Planner, Barry Hogan, reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner King asked relative to Conditions Section 2, No. 2, was it
fair to restrict the times that they can do business and felt that this
could be amended.
Mr. Hopson replied that the condition is somewhat ambiguous and does not
mean what it implies.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the first part of the sentence could
be striken.
Commissioner King replied that this would be .acceptable.
Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing.
Mr. Victor Eason, 6635 Masada, the applicant, stated that this is a
subsidiary of the Four Square Church and that they would hope to locate
within the Etiwanda area in two years.
There being no further comments, the public bearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded
adopt Resolution No. 81 -71 with the
Resolution.
H.
AND
by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to
change to Item 2 in Section 2 of the
�nae�anoe
The development of a 17,860 square foot professional office complex
and a 4050 square foot restaurant building on 1.84 acres of land
in the A -P zone located n the west side of Archibald Avenue approximately
150 feet south of Devon Street - APN 208- 801 -39 & 40.
Michael 'fairi.n, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Planning Commission Minutes -11- June 10, 1981
Mr. Tom Harris, 130 E. 9th Street, Upland, representing the applicant,
indicated that they would crane back with a revised south elevation.
Commissioner Rempel iel:, that the Design Review Committee had don'! a good
job.
Chairman Dahl stated that this is a good project and complimented staff
and the applicant for it.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he would like to thank the applicant
for the cooperation they have shown. He felt that this was a good project
as well.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Hempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 81 -72.
* * * f x
I. ENVIRON14ENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 81 -07 - PRAVER -
The development of a retail garden center on 1.9 acres of land in the
C -2 zone to be located 100 feet east of Helms on the south side of
Foothill - APN 208 -261 -043 & 044.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that his family owns property in this area
and he does not wish to vote on this matter.
Michael Vairin, Senior Planner., reviewed the staff report, recommending
adoption of the Resoluti ,)n of Denial.
Commissioner King stated that as a member of the Design Review Committee, he
wished to provide background on this item. He stated that they bad some
concern about what that property could be used for and how it could be
integrated into a nursery and shopping center as a whole. He did not
think that the architectural design proposed was up to the standards
required in terms of and what the Commission would like Foothill Boulevard
to be.
Mr. Stan Praver of Encinitas, California, the applicant, reviewed for
the Commission the various meetings he had attended on this and the
changes that were made to the application. He indicated that all of
the Committee was not present at any one time and they are trying to
keep out a good project. He indicated that these actions are ruining
his budget. He indicated further that this will be a F.W. Woolworth
Garden Center with 6000 square feet on a piece of land that is approximately
85,0000 square feet.
Mr. Praver stated that they are proposing 2 small buildings with a large
parking lot. He explained the processing procedures that had taken place
and that they have spent a lot of time. He did not feel it fair that each
time he brings up the plan it is rejected.
Planning Commission Minutes -12- June 10, 1981
Chairman Dahl stated that it was his understanding that several designs
had been submitted to the Design Review Committee and that when they
found one that was acceptable, Mr. Praver stated that he could not build
it.
Mr. Praver responded that he did not recall that.
Mr. Vairin explained the building designs that were submitted and the
comments made by Mr. Praver relative to the designs.
Commissioner King stated that his recollection was that the first design
submitted was wholly inadequate in terms of elevations and how it fit in
with the rest of the parcel and was given back. When it returned samples
were shown and there were still problems with the buildings. He indicated
that the nursery area would not fit in with the rest of the complex. He
stated that at no point in time did they lead the applicant on.
Mr. Praver asked if there were still problems.
Con..nissi.oner King replied that he still has problems with the way that
piece of property is designed and fits in with the rest of the complex.
Mr. Praver felt that they have gone overboard on everything that they were
supposed to do. lie thought that the site plan was good and said that
they have done all they can with it.
Chairman Dahl asked what happened with Design Review.
Commissioner King replied that it was not acceptable at Design Review.
Mr. Praver asked staff if they could provide him with a design that will
be acceptable.
Mr. Hopson asked Mr. Praver to address his questic-t to the Planning
Commission.
Chairman Dahl asked if there was any design that the Commission would
like to see incorporated.
Commissioner King replied that in his opinion there were none.
Commissioner Itempel asked if this piece of property is one piece or a
separate piece of land.
Mr. Hogan replied that right now it is one piece with the Tentative Parcel
Map on file.
Mr. Vairin pointed out the parcel on the map and provided an explanation of
it to the Commission.
Commissioner Rempel again asked if this is a deeded and separate piece of
property.
Planning Commission Minutes -13- June 10, 1981
Mr. Hogan stated that it was not a separate piece of property for the
Woolworth project.
Mr. Lam stated that the question is does the City have control over the
parceli.zation of land and the answer is that the City does have that
control. He further stated that if the Planning Commission finds that
the shape of the parcel that is requested for parcelization inhibits some
better site plan in the future for this property, the Planning Commission
does have the option of not approving the parcel map.
Commissioner. Rempel felt that this should be worked out so that it is on
the site plan.
Mr. Hogan explained the site plan and what was physically located on it.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he had a problem with parcel one as
proposed. lie did not see how it can be integrated into this configuration.
Chairman Dahl stated that the Commission will be getting into spot zoning.
He cited the Foothill Bank at Vineyard and the requirements for a conceptual
plan.
Mr.. Hogan stated that if this were a temporary project the Commission
would have less. problems with it. He further stated that it seemed that
the Planning Commission is uncomfortable with the site plan or the project
configuration as proposed, and if that was the case, the project should
be denied.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that Foothill Boulevard is something that
should be upgraded and this is a key piece of property along Foothill
Boulevard. In approving, this, he said, the Commission would be perpetu-
ating a bad situation.
Mr. Praver stated that they must have reciprocal agreement from the property
owner. He indicated that this was the configuration approved by Hughes
and they have no way of knowing what will be developed in 1980 or 1990.
Chairman Dahl stated that the Commission has two choices: if there is
no solution, to deny the project. The other direction is recommended, with
the applicant's permission, that this be reviewed by Design Review to see
what can be worked out. Or else, he stated, it can be approved.
Commissioner VAng stated that he did not think that the matter can be
approved and it was moved by King„ seconded by Tolstoy, carried, to
deny the project.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that it would be appropriate to add that if
this project comes back, the entire site development be done as a whole
and not a series of parts.
Planning Commission Minutes -14- June 10, 1981
;',;
J. ESTABLISH HELRING SCHEDULE FOR INDUSTRIAL PLAN
Mr. Tim Beedle, Senior.Planner, reviewed the staff report stating that
the Industrial specific Plan will come out in about a week and asked that
the Commission set the hearing schedule as proposed.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt the hearing schedule.
Commissioner King stated that he realized that Commissioners Rempel and
Tolstoy would be gone for the next few meetings so he wished to commend
Chairman Dahl for the fine job he had done as Chairman with the General
Plan and Victoria Plan. He then presented a plaque on behalf of the
Planning Commission to Chairman Dahl to commemorate his term as Chairman.
Chairman Dahl, in accepting the presentation, stated that the Commission
had gone through a lot over the past year with Both the Victoria Planned
Community and the General Plan. He indicated that without the rest of
the Commission this could not have been accomplished. He stated that
during the General Plan hearings he complimented the citizens for coining
out and making their thoughts known. Further, that the day the Commission
begins not listening to the cou unity, that is the day they should leave.
He indicated that he hoped that he could support the new chairman and
vice - chairman the way that he had been supported and thanked staff for
their aid as well.
L. ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN
Mr. Otto Kroutil, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report, explaining
that the Etiwanda Specific Plan Committee would probably meet on a once -
a -month basis with additional meetings scheduled as required. He explained
that the program is divided into three phases and that by the end of phase
one they would have a full blown progress report to the Planning Commission.
Up until that time, he stated, that the Planning Commission and City Council
would be advised an a monthly basis of update.
Mr. Kroutil stated that it was felt this is a realistic time frame and
that the EIR will take approximately 9-4/2 months to complete with 2 -4
months in public hearing.
Mr. Kroutil asked for comments of the contents of the plan and what should
be considered before it gets too far into the process.
Chairman Dahl comer nded Mr. Kroutil for the thought that went into the
schedule.
Planning Commission Minutes -15-
June 10, 1981
Commissioner Sceranka asked when the public would get into the plan and
when a Citizens Advisory Committee would be chosen.
Mr. Lam replied that the City Council would either select a Committee at
the next meeting or the meeting following that. lie stated that right
now the Council's time is being taken up in trying to wrap up the budget
for the fiscal year and that this is a new project for the new fiscal
year.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he knew that but that there will be
a lot of people saying that it should not take this long and he wanted to
say this publica'ly.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he had seen this before tonight and he
had one problem with the EIR review. He indicated that this is far more
realistic than any other work plan that the Commission has ever had and
that other work plans have never worked. He said tie had the feeling that
the 45 -day EIR was too long but that this is realistic and with a project
manager to keep this on track, and the Planning Commission doing its part
along with the CAC and staff, this will work.
Commissioner Rempel stated that when you start to have meetings more than
once a month, you don't get people coming, out. He felt that this is
mere realistic.
Mr. Lam stated that what staff has been instructed to do is look more
realistically at this. The more you are involved In public hearings the
more time it takes.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that the n :juc problem they had with he
Sedway /Cooke plan was not getting feedback to those people on the committee
by the previous meeting.
Mr. Hogan stated that the CAC process through the General Plan had
taught some lessons. lie indicated that you have to give something to
the Committee to get their teeth into. Ile indicated that the progress
reports would be valuable in providing feedback and the time schedule
would determine when the process begins.
The consensus of the Commission was tLnt they approve the Etlwanda Specific
Plan time schedule.
NEW BUSINESS
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he is getting tired of having complaints
each meeting, that he felt could be resolved by the City Council adopting
an ordinance requiring that each new home buyer be shown the General Plan
and zoning map before purchasing his home. In this way, there would be
assurance :nat the prospectivehome owner knows what the zoning of the
surrounding area will be.
Planning Commission Minutes -16- June 10, 1981
Commissioner. Tolstoy stated that he would add that each real estate office
in the community have a map on display in their sales office_ of the General
Plan and zoning map.
Commissioner Sceranla stated that everyone who buys in this City should
:.now what they are getting into and that this should not be for only
new home buyers but everyone.
Mr. Hogan stated that new homes could be covered by a condition of approval
requiring a sign off sheet. He indicated that for the older homes that
would be much more of a problem because there are over 17,000 residences
in the City and he did not know what percentage is for sale at one time
or another.
The Commission felt that each real estate office Jr. the City should have
a map on the wall.
Mr. Hogan stated that staff would prepare an ordinance.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded 'by Tolstoy, carried unanimcisly, to
adjourn.
10:55 p.m. The Planning Commission adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK LAM, Secretary
Plarning Commission Minutes -17- June 10, 1981
I
L 11
7; :.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 9, 1981
TO: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director
BY: Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner
1977
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 80 -04 (TT 116
DEVELOPMENT GROUP - A total planned development of 80 Single
Fame — ly attached units on 10.1 acres of land in the R -1 and
R -1 -5 acre zones generally located on the Nest side of Ramona,
at Monte Vista Avenue - APN 202 - 181 -5, 6, & 16.
ABSTRACT: The applicant is requesting approval of a planned development and
associated Tentative Tract Map, (Exhibit "D "). The project will consist of
80 Single Family attached units on 82 lots to be located on the west side of
Ramona Avenue, south of Victoria Avenue. The proposed project meets the
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance requirements, and has passed the City's
Growth Management and Design Review process. Therefore, the planned develop-
ment, tentative tract map, and issuance of a Negative Declaration may be
considered for approval by the Planning Commission.
BACKGROUND: The applicant has requested review and approval of an 80 unit
project to be located on 10.1 acres of land located on the west side of
Ramona Avenue, south of Victoria Avenue (Exhibit "A "). The project site
consists of an existing orange grove, two single family residences, and a
mini- ranch. Mature Eucalyptus trees run along the south tract boundary,
through the middle of the project site, and also along Ramona Avenue. The
site is currently zoned R -1 and R -1 -5 acres (Single Family Residential), and
is designated for Medium Density Residential (4 -14 dwelling units per acre)
on the City's General Plan. The proposed project density is approximately
8 dwelling units per acre and is therefore consistent with the General Plan.
The project site is bounded on the north by a citrus grove that has been
approved for a single family subdivision, on the south by a single family
home on approximately 5 acres of land, to the east by single family residences,
and on the west by vacant land and an approved condominium protect, as in-
dicated on the Site Utilization Map (Exhibit "B "). The surrounding zoning
is shown on Exhibit "C ".
The project has been reviewed and rated by the Design Review and Growth
Management Review Committees in accordance with the Growth Management
Ordinance. The project received a point rating in excess of time required
threshold and is therefore eligible for Planning Commission Review. In
addition, the Conceptual Grading Plan has been reviewed by the Grading
Conmittee and has - received approval in concept only.
STAFF REPORT
September 9, 1981
Page 2
ANALYSIS: As noted above, the project will consist of 80 Single Family
attached units (Exhibit "E "). Each dwelling will have an attached garage
and a private enclosed back yard. Dwelling unit types include one and two
story units, as shown on the attached Elevations, (Exhibit "G 1 -4 "), with
one, two, and three bedroom floor plans ranging from 989 square feet to
1,537 square feet (Exhibits "H 1 -4 "). The typical unit entry and planting
concept shown on Exhibit "K" indicates that each unit will have a 6 -foot
stucco wall at property line, or wood fence alternate, to enclose the rear
yard. In addition to private yards, a common recreation center, green belts
and active play area have been provided. Facilities include a swimming
pool, recreation building, spa, open play area and a tot lot (Exhibit "E ").
The main vehicular access point, Street "F" is located on Ramona Avenue
directly opposite Monte Vista Street. Street "F" has been designed with
36' of paving plus a 5' heavily landscaped center median. A private drive
system provides access to all dwelling units within the project. A fire
access point is provided at the north tract boundary and will consist of
a crash gate between the project site and future London Street cul -de -sac.
All dwelling units, with the exception of floor plan 1, have been provided
with two -car garages. An additional 41 guests parking spaces are being
provided throughout the project, therefore, the total amount of parking
provided exceeds City standards. Some units have 20' long garage aprons
to accommodate overflow parking. The pedestrian circulation system within
the project is comprised of a series of private sidewalks and walkways
located throughout the project. Texturized pedestrian walkways have been
incorporated into the project design at appropriate locations. A condition
has been provided that would require additional pedestrian crosswalks across
circulation aisles.
Based upon the Grading Committee's recommendation, all lots have been graded
to drain to private streets, and eventually drain to the southeast corner
of the property site into a 10' drainage easement out onto Ramona Avenue.
The attached'conditions of approval require the developer to provide certain
improvements in Ramona Avenue to accommodate such runoff. In addition, flood
protection devices will be required along the north boundary line unless the
approved project to the north develops first. Also, a storm drain connection
will be required to extend from London Avenue on the north through the
project to the existing outlet structure on Ramona Avenue at the southeast
corner of the project site.
E
E
P 1, `.
STAFF REPORT
September 9, 1981
Page 3
According to the Conceptual Lanascape Plan, (. E)hibit "I "), the applicant will
be providing a substantial amount of landscaping similar to a Special
Boulevard treatment such as raised contour berniny, specimen size trees
and shrubbery, to soften the visual impact of he proposed project from
Ramona Avenue.
As indicated on the attached Ramona streetscap± drawings, (Exhibit "J "), the
proposed backyard fences for lots 26 -37 have b ?en designed with a variety
of heights and setbacks. Doming the Design Review stages, the applicant
was requested by the Committee to modify the d =sign of the fencing alonq
Ramona Avenue to a maximum height of 3 to 4 fe ?t of masonry block with
wrought iron on top, to which the applicant cciserted. As shown or the
Conceptual Landscape Plan, (Exhibit "I "), the ieveloper intends to provide
substantial landscaping throughout the project site along greenbelts,
private drives, unit entry, turf blocked visitir parking spaces, and one
AdElL tree per rear yard. In accordance with City tree preservation policies,
a detailed tree plan will be required as a conc.ition �)f approval with the
intent to preserve as many of the healthy Euca' -yptus trees as possible.
Tire Design Review Committee also reviewed the tuilding elevations and
arci,itectural design of the project and has rec:)mnended approval of the
project. The Committee recommended that final :olors and roof material
samples be orovided to the City Planner for app -oval prior to issuance
of Building Permits. Colored renderings and elevations of tnesq buildings
will be available for review and comment a;; the Planning Comr.oission
meeting.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Attached is Part I (f the Initial Study as
competed by the applicant. Staff has complete( Part II of the Initial
Study, and found no significant adverse impacts on the environment as
a result of this project. Staff recommznds :;seance of a Negative
Declaration.
CORRESPONDENCE: A notice of public hearing was placed in the Daily Report
newspaper. In addition, approximately 36 public hearing notices were
mailed to surrounding property owners. To date, Staff has received
no public input regarding this project.
n
STAFF REPORT
September 9, 1981
Pag_ 4
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review
fhe proposed Planned Development and Tentative Map and conduct a public
hearing to consider all public comments. If, after such review, the
Lommissicn corr_urs with the attached °findings and proposed conditions
of approval, a motion to adopt the attached Resolution of Approval with
Condition:i would be appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK Li!ii, AICP
Director of Community Development
JL:DC:kp
ht' achments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" Site Utiiization Map
Exhibit "C" - Zoning rap
Exhibit "D" - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit "E" - Site Plan
Exhibit "F" - Grading & Prainage Plan
Exhibit "G 1 -4" - Elevations
Exhibit "H 1 -4" - Floor P1anF
Exhibit "I" - Conceptual Landscape Plan
Exhibit "J" - Ramona Street -.cape
Exhibit "K" - :miry Landscaping
Exhibit "L" - Landscape Details
Initial Sutdy Part I
Resolution of ".pproval
Conditions of Approval
Taaclf 1I (,a8
Tract Io.+9I
F
1
G
W+ NAP B72 -36 -IC
l
V V
NORTH
CITY OF ITBI: FR bo -0+
RANCHO CUCAIVIONGA TITLE S1T� (TIILIZ�4 -1iCN MAP
MANNING DIVISION E;Iif(3II- _1°LSGII.E___�_T•'�
ILI
\ t:
�I
1�
I
♦
r•• f
1
�
I
I�
Il'
t'
_I
i;
r 1,1
ary Or
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING DIVISION
r�
+w Cdr
NX)RTH
TITLE = T AiTAT) Pe ► T �
EXHINT= P SCALE: __
0
CITY OF
RAINCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING DIVISION
ITEM:
TITLE:
GrYHIP.IT.- _ /,_(L_ SCALE- ""-'
NORTH
7Y/° /Cn`.= .SECT /oN,s
J_
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMO\YGA
PLANKNI G DIVLSIOiIN
.i.., • �•/P M•�IIVIINY
I FORTH
ITEM: PD cap - 64
TITLE - j��fj r� t E2R�
EXHIBIT-_ SCALE.
E-171
11
1 1 � ;. � r.. 1 ,;1� I I; .,. •fi .� uf.
r 1 lil •,1' ',� 1 l-
'
{ 1 t 1 I 1• / 1
l �
1I .1'. 1 � 1.t1'• I I � 1 I .
V III ' V' ( • ' {i „ ,1 � 1. 1 ( 1• I ' I
l 1 1I
'• 1�r
li
i;
GOO lJY. t D�
I'��� M,� 1� '4 �_.� � L�.r ...� IWrliisi 4;• Ii' '.ffll�..
mou r I
r
fa M
to) LIN
.1.
NORTH
CITY Or, ITEM:
�.
RANCHO O ,.
ijr.
js
71 1
1 ~ 1 1
I � I:
�1
ITLE: Vft`j"I
OP��S
iF I1fiIT -�-�_ SCALE-
"-'
I
.yy
�1
ITLE: Vft`j"I
OP��S
iF I1fiIT -�-�_ SCALE-
"-'
is Ir
X11..
1
t
L� •J "f °rY I D�
1
pp
r.a lllf 1!� 5jr Y lil.
r •11. .� . � •�IWih .�
__
'; ��i . iL161 �• ,r ' ��� iii i
r'•"°�"ill�i ,. ,!hr4ly i v � IV I • N 1 • 1' ,
Ll
•''', � �rJ�!I—'9 q %ern. .r.. ./, " ^' � rv.r /Ii '
�C III s...- � �• �Ir, 1,
h x'11', II nn
•
s, r
4F',
♦ \
� 1�
� 111{] 1
I
`..
� �
L
I, '.
I ( 1
i
�
I: �
111•
,r �'� - ��1 �r• II 1. ,fin II I,iC
li
1.
1
.r
.1.� � sll' •,
1�1
1
��r■YI■�1� ,I i -
I
,NN,yy��LL I
m K
LTA; r�� ■sr■urrut�, - ■r■
y
I
I
r
Al
�r
1
I
li
1.
r �
i
y
;
y
bilk
if
,r
h
l '
T o i V 070 O.O p o O y
• ' �� 1A;aP \ oI��Y ■�Iwl� 9E� _.OApp r I ,.
1 �� q °0 +?jj1 103' I�1 �`�d= I(O♦�p0��7
.�, � O
, o a "�' O,MIlV4'O �e71►pt eor, ...� � � _ �O,
'°Q, na1Sw1 wG: uR,eF .�3i 61ne
1 a ail YISW�� �•d� cG vwr6'1+
\ i', �„�' i%a' lV7 �GiO `tfil�l r'1' :r4,i ■ vxi�j��PI
mc ll
j 1. r loi4�iit���to'rejl,14�`I"► �_!Z'd °qie °'O� I
t, ,. �,`aa uo pt[7 4�y�' 00,'4.OQ.�(��nlrbdddQO�r_..1A01 Ed I.+
0' b� c_,6i�K:.T+ sw T'iwl,A�n� +osww vJ0 � 1' /•
Ms., ofv °GDo1 oa 6.1 tT( t[t 8.
.+• O �,, +� eyes - ♦.1� -_ro a1J ,
Ipto,• p+a o .° °�66AOoyotlafd Ci
0 Am
.'•_ ..�- w..,r r -•.arm � � � r. .
rr
O
,
1
,
0
11
L- vM4ill' � i .
��1w1�1 IIr n I'� roe
=� I I � ara
1
p �. .i .�pfbppVjY$/
��' 1 � MNIeI:RALA'A?f'r✓
�� �1/ , •IfbbfO� fb���
t _...t r .- r.+1r./trff -d.Y Ja:�rtiVtlb!SIFAJH/1f6
..aAC�I/Ais
Twm-& . Mu
de.MPIA"WAtOW
��
P t F IC I 1 MIIFPF
C V
NORTH
CITY or, ITEM: FD so- 01-
RANCHO CUCAiVIONCA TITLE: JEW= MDSCAPIM 6
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT = I'S SCALE
•
Y
..t�iriN4NN3fl'. Tr
�?W..�
L- vM4ill' � i .
��1w1�1 IIr n I'� roe
=� I I � ara
1
p �. .i .�pfbppVjY$/
��' 1 � MNIeI:RALA'A?f'r✓
�� �1/ , •IfbbfO� fb���
t _...t r .- r.+1r./trff -d.Y Ja:�rtiVtlb!SIFAJH/1f6
..aAC�I/Ais
Twm-& . Mu
de.MPIA"WAtOW
��
P t F IC I 1 MIIFPF
C V
NORTH
CITY or, ITEM: FD so- 01-
RANCHO CUCAiVIONCA TITLE: JEW= MDSCAPIM 6
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT = I'S SCALE
l
11
n
Is`M`l�i�Pyi"/1 AA
O-Le LL L om- V `J
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCATMON'GA
'LANNING DIWSIGN
ITEEZ 1: c+
TITLE- .CTI asj S
EXHIBIT: SCALE-
CV
NORTH
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
INITIAL STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SKEET - To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Fee: S70.00
For all projects requiring environmental review, this
form must be completed and submitted to the Development
Review Committee through the department where the
project application is made. Upon receipt of.tllis
application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare
Part II cf the Initial Study. The Development Review
Committee will meet and take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of
three determinations: 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a *negative Declaration will be
filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or
3) An additional information report should be supplied
by he applicant giving further information concerning
the proposed project.
PROJECT TITLE: Countryside Villas
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: The Development Group
4aan fYl..... r..c ,._ "I
LAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED
CONCERNING TIi_IS PROJECT: Thomas L. Utman
LDCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDIZE:SS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.)
202- 181 -16 7070 Ramona Ave.. Ranchs Cucamonga
X07- 181 -05 -
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STA'L'E AND
FEDERAL, AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCII PERMITS:
No other permits required
1-1
. � r
El
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 84 attached Homes -
E two story residences; all with private yards,
Duplex - Single
development (PUD) - Drivate streets - Dool - green belts - each o
will own its land in fee.
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 10.1 acres
Residences will range from 989 sq. t.; 1180 sq. .; 134U sq. .;
1537 sq. ft.
DESCRIBE THE ENVTRONMEPTPAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE
INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES),
ANII -MLS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCEI•IIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY .
EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS)
Topography is a slight southerly slope of approximately 3% -old ornage
nrnvp will be removed in addition to 1 row of eucalintus trees. The
Surrounding properties are as i'ollows: westerly - vacant with a
-Christmas Tree Farm - Northerly - is vacant but planned for single famil
hnmpc - _Easterl_y •• a single family tract approximately 3 years o -
Southerly - is _a single family home on approximately 5 acres of vacant
land. —
The or sent use for the __property is a mini ranch with horses, a barn
parcel which is included into the proposed development has a single
family home of approximately 1500 sq.ft. an a yina orange grove.
Is the project, part of a largor project, one of a series
of cumulative actions, which. although individually small,
may as a whole have significant environmental impact?
— Not a part of any other development.
�- rL
i;
r�
w7LI' 7L, 22- P]10111-CT:
YES NO
X 1. Create a substantial change in ground
contours?
-- X 2. Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vibration?
X _ 3. Create a substantial change in demand for
municipal services (police, fire, water.,
sewage, etc.).
X _ 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or
general plan designations?
x 5: Remove any existing trees? How many?
Dying orange grove 1100 trees, 18 eucalyptus 1;rees
X b. Create the need for use or disposal of
Potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, flammables or explosives?
Explanation of any yEs answers above: 3. Additional municipal
services such as fire, _water sewage and schools will be nee a eca.
of private streets and landscaping the c7ty wi not ave o main ain
street improvements an Ian scape impro�emen s. wi a math
by and association with %Cat's. 4. As per Berry Hogan - tty to
ch,Inge zoninv to medium density 5 Eucalyptus trees an orange grove.
IMEOR•tANT: If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next page.
CERTIFICnT10N: I U. ',-�by certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and belief. I further understand that
additional, information may be required to be subm'tted
before an adequate evaulation can lie made by ti
Uetirlo�,inenc
Review Committee.
Date $ $ d
Signature
Title
Y 3
c ��
qP
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
The follotiring information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the
school district to accommodate the proposed residential development.
Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.-' ThP Development Group Tract 71614
Specific Location of Project: Portion of Lbt 9 and a portion of Lot 10 Block 8
Cucamonga Homestead Association Lands
Ranch Cucamonga San Bernardino; California
PHASE I P74ASE 2 PHASE 3 PI7ASE 4 TOTAL
1. Number of single
family units:
2. Number of multiple
family units: 42 42
Date proposed to 5/81 10/81
begin ccn,'-truction:
4.
Earliest
date of
occupancy:
11/81
4/82
Model 4
and r of
Tentative
5.
Bedrooms
Price Ranae
Plan 1
1 Bedroom
$79,000
$85,000
-
Plan 2
2 Bedroom
85,000
92,000
Plan 3
2 Bedroom
92,000
99,000
Plan 4
3 Bedroom
99,000
'107,000
a
ps..-
x -- 4
�
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11614.
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11614, hereinafter "Map"
submitted by Development Group, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing
the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of
San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential subdivision
of 10.1 acres of land located on the west side of Ramona Avenue at
Monte Vista Street into 82 lots, regularly came before the Planning
Commission for public hearing and action on September 9, 1981; and
WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map
subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning
Divisions - eports; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commmission has read and considered the
Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other
evidence presented at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings
in regard to Tentative Tract No. 11614 and the Map thereof:
(a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable
interim and proposed general and specific plans;
(b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is
consistent with all applicable interim and proposed
general and specific plans;
(c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed;.
(d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to
humans and wildlife or their habitat;
(e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public
health problems;
(f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with
any easement acquired by the public at large, now of
record, for access through or use of the property within
the proposed subdivision.
11
Resolution No.
Page 2
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment and a Negative Declaration is 6ssued.
SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 11614, a copy of which is
attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following
conditions and the attached Standard Conditions:
PLANNING DIVISION
1. All units with a garage apron less than 20 feet long
shall be provided with automatic garage door openers.
2. Fencing at the rear of lots 26 -37, which back up to
Ramona Avenue, shall consist of masonry block at a
maximum height of 3 to 4 feet with wrought iron on top.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
3. The required eesement per City's standard for the
proposed stormdrain shall be dedicated to the City.
4. The construction of the proposed stormdrain shall be
coordinated with that of the tracts 10491 and 11.608
and that portion of the stormdrain from Victoria Avenue
to Ramona Avenue shall be comple'ed prior to issuance
of occupancy permit for this project.
5. The full width of the existing P.C.C. pavement on Ramona
Avenue shall be removed and replaced with asphalt
concrete pavement.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1981.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
of rey King, hairman
ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commissi�on -
I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the Ci.ty 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 2nd day of September, 1981 by the following vote
to -wit:
L
p
'1
yFy
LL
J i
W
r
0 0
•- O
s
25 e
V fL
LL p
U <,
6
i N
9-
i]
Y!I
'J
N
p
W
d
C
« q
N
`
`
�
L
yq N
uLVL
V
VV
UDC
P�uoy
O
.
V
L
r
:J V
vrl3 Oq
•n
\ • `q
�
T.V
d O
�.
UYn
d
t•
V'
L U.
q
t N
L
t.
L
u
4 7
V
9 u U L
L
C. a
p
_
. �j
� V�
u
g U� �
V
s
o
-
.-
n q
i C V i
:. 9 o nC'•
6
L
w�
G
N
..
d
i••
W
�
y
�u
wM
S^iuc
p
r-
ILLi c•
V
✓
V q p
y
� V V i
..
•^
l' L
•r � inl �
U N
u
lNJ
L V
^
w
A
n
- O
L V L
L
O� C V
V C�
y
V
O V ACV
11 V .- •-
1'
i �
q o
... r
r
to
"' °
:1
i — =• i.
. °
a, °
v . V. ° °
c i
u
� w_
Iro
c q
w
p
•ti u
,r
•n
u
P c P
N y
uV
�J
�
bNC�R
N
ILL VY
y
9V
OCIJUKC
Yu
^S:
b L
.Oi
OY•V
i
N
w
V M
:• O
•.•
C^ d V
p C
u
7 N •L^1.^
v
lJ
if L
W t L •�
'_ : T
g Y.
Q O
F
u
ti J
•
�
- V
LI \.
T V
U
V N
CUM
r 4 u U
V
J� Y
L Y•
4.
•.
C Y
i
�
1.1
b
ICI./
N O
a
` u'
�f
l
>
j
c
L u N� 4
n (J
l 7 r .L u
.p.•
\�
'•
if,
.°..L.
m
.: c
r
c o
i.
r
> �
v
.'°• L:
�c �
^
a� .,� a a
«>
No i i'! L
'6 ^
L
L' •^
C Y
C L.
(q 1.
N Y
9 O�
q
•i
V L
N u' L (;� O L'
9
y
l`
y� d u
s LL
V
L
S
V_U c
d q
.G
Vr
9NyG
V�
aViV j V n+
i
uLV
Lr• V
L fn
d^
N
N ~
m
L P A
(
G`
Ci N
V •^
V ��
I C Y
Ip
N r
�
6cq
r•
C
1k
��
GC
iu
V•O�tl �
NV
.wL.0
•n
w
[p:O
• -•O'^O V��
tI
d
...
�
M�
'C^ iva•
�« G u C
c n 9 c J
C YU.
ILU y •.
� �
W
[:� N�
A� V >• N V
„' •A
N
v>
'O�
'.F
4
� •.L
[
� S: P
It
�
u
L• ll p
64
��
v�4C.J. iL pi
N ^�
\.
R Y
d w
L
pY
��
N
V
� C
LugiY
N
d
4 ICp
•� •Vn
9...
d G
V
v
? .+ O w
••.
A C V
u
V 1'
V !]
V V d l 4 >•
.1: P N
v()
V
�V
�
O
T. un
V i
VL n L�
T O
�
V q ..V-
l• -9• -u
V 'o
ni N l
N •r- •Tip
LV•
fi
.W. V .� O L
C
C
L V
r
r
L 4
an d
� V
.w. [� f
T o w t
C 4
Ito,
•^ Q w r
L
C; C
� W w
I?
pp Q• N
L� q
l
•q-. L
«
` `
Y V
V n
V
J,
V
V. f. U L
U•r
y ll `
.. - y N
nO
aLr
N
�. u
G 4
41u•-
;
LL v� N • •• }
u�
q
•� qM
P
C
V
N T
.� 9
Ite
•^
y V •n y
W C
L u
L
q •. �. V
vi N
i y
: u
n
N Y « V
••V. n
X
.0 V
N 4
4 q
V• C
V. Q vpi
yb� iJ
W Y L
V
4
m V V
+• p1
V
C
Y f- j
1�.�
u�! N% L
1- pl
N k �
•W V�
W
L l V 4; q
> K O
4
•I
w
I7
.pi•
NI
CJI
T
NI
\O
NI
V�
`
J�`��
I I
`%Nw�
/]t. \�1
��J
``�OQhy
1
1
1
1�
•/y��1�•
Ir
pVN��
..
rp 11/�•1�
�
r u
J
N
V
W
O Y-
k 4
L LL
V
L
C u
•y
�y-
i_
O
V
•I Ll Y
V
9=
69�
�
Ltl
TL
p�
� J V
4
T .- O
•WJU
+• C
i
G
O
LL
�
R
r
p •n
G+ Ct
N
q
�•
W
y
— V
vY
V n 1
q
N C C u
d N U
y L
N n
q q
a j' P
�
PgVp
u
VL
CL �C
W
q�LL
p�!•
•
w
Ng
un
I
r
LJ
tq
>N[1
�O
S
o}9
kL
.n C�
ytlO
��
O.L UL•
T
NO
nrN
L O N
p
i P
u E.2
C•L
6
N
pC VU.
V�
O u9
N�.�
C7•n
ry
9 V.
•Nib
L^
L -.
m tl
.-
y
C
C
O} •^V
>N
IO I. dJ
•Ni• L CJ
'O
^
O
J
c.y
CO 6V
VN
qa uL
VLp
N
'
�N
�:
u
C+
YC
NC �q
NN
pYIN LO
� =•V
NcY
\rV
9L •
p
V^
R•
)'u
Y q �^
V
•^
O
25
V i
V OL
.«.• u0 N
q
r
•N
///���
v
u~ 6
yV
O..- O L
y
S:..C.
V y
O
1_ P L
Y
u M
N
Y
y
j
C
y
u L
�`
ON
•^
'V`
11N
^�•L
`C
O
•V-.
yVq,
W
uv
V q
P
p
N Y
q
N \•.
d ^• G 6
r
C:5 IW
J
•n
V u c
q:
q
y
O O
�
� L
fJ C N
Tf rr
y
A7
..^ n.L
�Ny
V
WILLneV
7}•
u
^\.
A
1•"
O
Ali
^«
9
LL
^ LL
C.V
AV
•yTI, •^ v,.
w
•�i
'E'C
^ >>.
EQ
N
C
DM
P
�•
�
f9
q
C
O
u• u
Lp
N •WJLL
•-
. � V
� \
✓ :'
H
ti9y
J
4N
e r �
L
`
N T u
L C pai
L'
4•^N
•p U
N
n
u
J
1R
A N V d L
LL A
n
` Y a Y.. Y
(p.�
V 9 •-
U
iJ�
d
nM•.0
R` . 4
C
q 0
O
W
iE
d V
A V N N= T
L=
P 1.
Ui
l
uLi q
Y
V
V C
u
` y
NV
?
qLN
u
G qA
Q
O
ty.•
\/L\
N
F•
V•^
6 ^ten
fj «O9
G
L>
V�LL 1'V
uA
ILIN
pVy
W
W`'
L
���/ \
q
L•
a
L u.
°c
YuA
•`
� A
AIL
per`
� �`M
Psi
uy�
I
4
^.^
�u NPR
N
p
w'LO od
N
Av«
n;u •�
�9
�
w L� L
4y
9 A C m f •..
Y u
L fJ y
(q1 N
C c°
• CC vi
T
al
.N•1 n
_
9`
{{
1•�L
ppp l u
LAN
q �^
p N
Vu•q
f •• O q
�NW�
L
LPq
�u
YO9 `IVy
y
•LI•ViI
ldN
r L
.J
N�
•kr•L
�• � L
\
__V(1VII1
�••
Vq�
=
O Nr
0. 4MU
1-¢
HiN Q4
Y. •^N
fYYY
1^•Or
•S Vp
60
NLY•
KM
LV.JL
•
^fa'
C1
N y
R
N 1D
IV
^I
wS����
I
I I
I
I
V
C J
6p U
N
�(JO(Jj },
1
1
S
rf
M •CJI OL _ N A •y y L A p y O L= I q
_u �.ta � ✓p y N b n �_i iu � •°., �.y iNlT a.n
p •`.I � c [.'m rJ y .p. °I :. c „ n' c i c o v o. L :� W .• «i %= 4 v
V 4 C U N L' Y'} N ... •Ji• 1 b 11 � y C N l« , u C� .� l ... l
e V A V - r. l� '� W A u � u q ... � �. t✓ Gi �. LLO V�
L 'Y G V L G LL ••• � Y 4. V � �• „VJ y 7 L W 2 1�� � L V 0
n 0• N 9 G� 4 L T N /'. l ,JI, ° OI n W h V A C u O C R (J L W L' ...
- L C J V� V' L O n O'C .n+ u � O •W rn� V✓ A .. 4 l' ✓ Nf d« q
I vi « N9 ✓ C NN WY.I l L V WV 1^Ll W L .� ReI �M1��O
' V 1 n u i •V n � V L ^ 4 9 W n •u -u m
1'•.]> � '�VV r9.� 4N CL ` n OV t° Vi JW ^ "apPr 6N
L L O q J q ✓ m N ^ V n lT L JL' V A U, u V Y �t w W d.. V � q u
ti Q Ir n t" tV w 1 � 6• N w N _ _ u V M V G V a9 ` N "J L' L n'
✓LC N qL� bCy V,V uy �} f{ cC• �LL yr � { pN .V �y{. ,n
f' .`• n « _ L v o YLp_ 'c tW. �� e. •uu m R � is d o e .Wn i � Y � �' �
�V� O ?V� V W c� u- •^ H L P� L V N L N4 I4 •y V DVL r t' ON
C« V
- �, V ^ 4[�' C: .O � ¢ 1 4• U i� q L Y_ M L' q V V W O
O` 4
L F _ V �,•
_ - w `J y "' w N r-^ [n o n. N ni c 1c o p " «'•4- }i ° � �«, `,GCiI m �' ]N. v n
C N LI {. C N 1' n P ✓J n � � L � A ) 'L i1 ..- � ?I V O• W .I � V 'n r N •e U •.• '_, .: . O •'� .
v N � .� n N Y _- •'• p �✓ �> q V✓ L C f L' L N ✓ L � O= L N
L [L y y � LL[ '^ W L..-I T• U V � u �.^
40 }V Y-(•q NV [LLILrV 2.V�NV4
cN
- fq
'L L
... L W N J n V P ]`•� V C W
V `.L V[T d 4Y O V . 1 ..L -uu Nd uC NV9
O ^" N J•• W L L L L W O= .d, Y V Y_ VOi 0.� p •_ C�� L 11 �
J C 1 O L 4 r N N .Lt/_ V .n .n [y un • Z
A-n UC C <1N N.-NL r L N� O, °yN[[..L•u Nf OLa n
T d L +« T y •J q L' W C O N 4: � Y O O V a W V V C Y O
N urn 6.L « Y E N � O• • _ O i c V [�
A V •n A✓ r • ,r C C L V q N A N 6
c 6, �` 4n r V W d C} O 4 W O �C S V. g V V L 1 N lU ✓
V VO y Nb '9t/ t/4 ."�(JN I�L a«p �L y O. l�'G <J4�10.�[�. �u•u „L
L 4 V N �' Vj .l- 4 .-. r• nq. .n ; Q. V A v � �. u�, n
� qua O V uV VNV [[N Cf R9 qR 'p nNn1 VV q GOV,Nn•V ^ „yJ >\V� Cp0.
V• WN 4 W V, Ld i� 0.NNt'WN r yp n•y d„ 4pI `yM Nr
C V V V^ VTr w V, LJ N.�VI � i' L L N V y Y V nl {PJ O ): tL 4« y P N
N L C P a V V' •Lpn v y W ,r q 6. « O P, Vr W O i r^ N C f; •O « >• L N N 4✓ V F
uo aN..e �.�
W U -) n Y_ VL: LuNN n, P =•n Y. WN L Y9 OW C l J
Womc �iJ
P J• ( p C (! p'n N 9 +« V `o'l.n O a V N
r C r n ' C L] C 4 ••V. ^ C t• C L L n O L .� •n L Y V
.n
u
cc c N i .''.. L N.L..L N ✓� )p, d i v «e� Wu L>r
•] v .L. «L' °°, .r'J� aoq,a pv Nim` iJC ,�i aL •W -ENO °c [Li >.o✓ dui aul
l G � c� •°c ni L ` "']- N -?� �c ,.v eoAWa �Y aNN nif
q [T N _. V q N u V p. W n , W V C N C • N ii « Y C Y- P P p V ,V•, n V q <J
U ^ ^ q u L � 4 € � ^ N N L O O N O ti ..C. ^ •! W L
aL J nl ul Y� Tu NVVY�a TOgly N; .•C.= WO'�•«>nMC C119 AV
- >v' w •_ N •Y_✓ L +:N�^ Pm L Nc, •6[' n....v q.n mac•.. '^L.W. u
x
� N V T L N N L V. O L� y n> .fir •� b O W N M n✓ O N W O i_+
[a N�
�'� L V O W
WY I[],Cp. OdT..p• L r•M N .^VNq .V e? CL
L_ _ [y[y ^ L < J � IL •+ ,Li, C 4 W LL n-pl V y 61 L N C C ,Ni..^
V_ gym•. Li, 6 6 NM l�pdN yNN S,CWL WOO. k•.'l.LV Nund Vd N•-.G N;� `C4 p�
I' ,Ln N« •n (L > - T N N u N 01 C N- y � ... A N fy W J O rC -w, N V q ..V...
' ^ q O' W JJ y 6 N N V •V '•- 'V O V co, /�... L C T P W 3 C- C G N- N
I N V _ VN ... ttu VVi� NN tW. V 6 (S ✓ON T�Qi gIYV .<.. -Pv, f[Ly�AN �V
q V V y � - .� N F L q> 6 L C C[ N N✓ V yny1� C C, A u N (J YI V N ` N N= a Nry A M •J P O VpI - .0
'1 VS N > u W Ny1� �C IV WTTL]un- r ^N p >� yV` Cyy JN `CCL+ .NU �N
r i T N V L C c C L M L L N W x N O L p 4 yW L 0. W' � V Y 7 ,.°• q }. A ,G" T
t� , ✓ O, < 6 'J o U p✓ N n- N u L •� u° W N V g N C Y 4 �, � N •A V C m ,L, C C � i ..-.
��' w N •W. - p� N r. L uv - W r [ry n a n .L.. vL° v' a: v
L -4
• K � o l.. 6 �rJ LL- s YV- $.,G..- V >� k r. O L l 0 r• L W L n•
YI' O 4 4 W N U tT V✓ I O Vy, M� q - L C lJ - �4 ry N N
p NNV � P .lO .[.PnN L.-Cla 6Y Op Y. •rG.
✓ •.. 4 W y Lr ✓ � rN.r u C C
p
L, ✓a 4 CN L, LAN.•.
c to « L V Y
Y � X
. .r. Gr � ^ ''J i, ~� 4 ✓ L .. U Y � � ��; P V v u r a; c v Or r J w .� V � C
Y
X:; F I •� C ur ,. Y N V v. L L} u V - H Cj' 4 N
W
-
1 Or W L N V li u T q V .J L P n 'w •. r `r .� V/ +� n
V N F.:2
L•. n�L
V V •�L - F v OA� ..° -�Y. ur ^��u C�-ry � N L Nv
^ � u •. - C L m r r b ¢.�1
4l 11uJ -VJ NWC r^LV :
[Y L;q rrY ��uu N u V LJ
yLw'rn �1v'r `4. V4 -rat LNp unuYq
C N L Y wr u y 0 ✓ q ✓ 4 N V � N 4 W N f ✓ A N 1.� � V Y_ IJ L ^ r� N 4 Y V
urP 2` Vr.r w Yd C9L i mL.. -L _ W Y nl
n q^ Y LL •.- Ur Lw C r rn x • n.
°' v. �� V V u u u r L ^ b ♦`
^ I: I'� C C U �lr G✓ N L_ N N O W d
C N J ✓ G q G W L N r- ` V°- N O rCU. p N Y G �" E S. rY l T n V p N L L ✓>- y
y .:J M^ Lu « NVM Y (Ypu 144 NnNU« N N� «Gr l.n nq� L W
w u. N iu ^. ✓ b uq n a u, rn.n c .°. v N w °Y• N \- rn y L
n .�Jrc r!r _q nM\ �� oL Nv =L'r >u YL � W u• - «
<L �� NL �'. uN c:: n. « _ ,o« i. i v ✓A v:n° uw rnu cLL` � N .-c ... � o °._
u M L n V u • rU q .� � iN r^
JuV CP �^ ^Y a'�rC 1� r�irVrAir LAN yJJC�L P4M 60r.��r \1N w- rir^ rFV: L 4 ALN
p.� n Or IlV G ��2 ` b .^L^ ✓� �Lyi�.L a- � = N 4 U Ny
Cv -d ^-° ^-r V NOU Q'VL V✓LM4 LLgv q1M 04 N<U V A}r u 6 P p
N ^mV Nu WV try A J C �k VV V L 4t;,
Vtn�t°r RVr 4p F -V'i�n K q 11 V V N v.. N VO GJ uir 6°. to IL Ou
rN C
M
u W VrL q V
nJ � T
u l,T �^ 6 V AV NrVr [Ir TJ upu u L t V
?`V�V �L� w LN •�uL- V -_ X2.0 �uLl' N�c C w� q .� b
u
`v iu'c �G^ A -N ."� orv'• .wig WTUN w.�J O. v NLO N w'� L,u
� ✓' qd�f 04C ul: quVWN ^ 'J N TV VY qP
L- =�1r'G ao�so Irc_N ir� t� our _ ° «.cn�W °. r{°/ +�yu L n° ✓ ^'„^
'y ✓Nd.� ^ C NVI.N 4'�VU W ��« uuS r +Caro L4C^ u CN L-^ i^- Vr
yLrgl.d✓.�.+ O « u .`-. EWa CGV Vr•+.° L A .q VV YL mwLV V^
6 L V. .. N N > EC C ij q u 4� M CL �q) `f� q d v L V L J ✓
V ✓= V W V r u V O 4 N � S V- V u d d A N� L: 4 N q °- + u 4� fn C Y_ .7
O uq .ruxiL u nrC ULgq �+A NWn LW�LVI V«{<� ~ T C n` Lm W
(, - 5 it�NW 1 N 4 yU'G O✓ir UV b�
p VLV Yu OLJ p nr nVLL L u V..•- V•- u`
quFN��C ✓VLL rNLC dO aW SJ F, 1'd u �.W-W CrwV -� C u TrU 6'd r
^LC uL �qN du vVN� ^ p.V.. NL� gNLW� g1�fn V L rV.� VV �s
glNb ^4u pL^ Yry'gd ✓ +m7 r rOVVVV kq ^V Vu:I AfN 604 �m ^ a VV VU IJ 49
CW �uCd V. VC LWC Lr-VIL \ -^Y.q Y rr� •G ��
wJ L G 4✓ rdn q �L A'V %' .r -r C 4. a � l X PN Tu
V•W YLL L' a � � pWW � <J �4t _ _ pk'
> „ u i N V [:J P n✓ N L. N P a L .r- u o �- P u U Cl w r« -V V tV-� 4 L
c� �Aa °� ✓� °il, a. Lu° ¢ N '� °
c� N v� o No ov -. G Y—owL- Y Arn c L« «S
E'M r:.r r..� tY vu •
ZL tl '
V C V V N C L- V N L L: ✓ V q GL Cr O 6 V r w• -.- °r N Or C L C ru/r V u Y V i q v N T
°NC7; ✓ ✓.� a :.'
✓�YUr ^ur=n pL u COL - -O. �CV4r } «OV t`� vrCjl✓gq �N�Q .•V- J iu ~ r r�u ��
VG •a- 'N +�Vm ✓O Cp•' -Cr L•p�N� O Y'^N CO•n ? Lr6 -CN l N qV JL Lv
Gc N•[ ^u �N V. A ✓u�v 4a s O. C v. V0.
V (J C V O^ q wJ Fq` r.rlJ q V ±'r yr
' W C � \. tr y U O u L N O� J a- L .•- tr ° Y- Al q � u V r� L
� L =V VM <, C�u W Nq [:`V J GVV Lu ✓ { °�C°]i OCUr N` Nq yN L.,✓ N4
V�• r�� ..� .�_ LPL uyY ^ VV OWN Nru N�uM � ..J� Ob Id w•-V. N�
q u N y J— u W V h ^ V i N T Y fi 6l •� V O✓ L N CON +r N C ru- LV'r ^q P^ M L N° O
•' W Z V WrY A N n. AuO X 4nr N
>E A V^ 'n V •."r MV- I f'. N f. C 2
L Vim..
qW LlIG GV C O^ {• r°C «W° NON N N W p
G aL -5
°o o•� Nu tiE..• - �Su v cL m�r.0 yq "�u✓ N °r` «w -y vim p
VrAq VV ^ «-'•O Y kW TM 4 gVgN N V � u yuu W 1v. CN (!r U1 �'x
q.•C- FNCL °+N -CNC Cu.q p L^ n .Vn4LY ✓NU� 4VryC /rU 1C�4 p UQ Lk`
Y�du ju N W 4 r✓Vi.� N AV Ll NJn V n1"y� A usl L M ^�. li. wry, 4•.. C y C M t /.. N lI E L O1^�
L A, V
Ll•�... {lica y/ cNC^r- cWCL i !' ^L. Lc N4 Lean Lq� [>idi ✓ q& .� -li,% � �o 'no �$
60A }'p«u L11V4 H•n..0 IGLU✓ Fy 41 r�q0 IyN 6UV4V dOVYV N �J tiVV N 6V W.V
r'• /�R�I�]y Or 6 =` O /��'� {y /N�fL �Xij�L .�`�(I {' �- N nl
4 V.•
Y
d
6
V
O
4
c
w
M
r
1,
`u
c
l
V
L
w
c
C O_.
T W
O +
4 V
�a
a
A t
b �
C
rn
R C
O W
L u
c u
ac
uViY
N W
i✓
Nn
n
N
L. U
r�
G ~
C U
p W
✓o
l V
kW u
L
w .
p r
!�N L
J
L
(r L:
N O
lV
C
✓ y
N ^V
Rey ° c
1 L
J..W
v o
qF «
� L
W [( N
« � L
W e o
a
u M � l
� n c
N L
J i y
•• C u
•- W .. J
_ ^c
L �
Ou ^ r
1
b
u
n
C
O
�a
„ �
W
r
d P
rC
W
«r
b V
'p d
O��
L9
uc
N
C
„O.
yNb
at
d J
u p'
+ L
� r
V
4
C
d
0
V
L
d
M
V
a
4 L
D R
L A
L N
4+
r r
W ^
Pi
+ ti
L
b Y
yu
N q
W
o a\
c
o n
. G
A U
^ C
S O
W
c 'tl
✓ L
W w
D
L
Vc a
4u
J
yL N
L
m W
WL O
V- O
^ V
W A
u �
P N
c •°•
mot° ryN O b C D
� N ✓ w
° ` .°. yL_ t• _2'� °, aN. -- N� •off
NhN � NC � til ✓ IOC -'•a y'R 4u -J -I1L ^ N CUNV
T r W N N V
Off'
CWV LW `LL UN f.1LW V4 ••• -O ^L WWi:A _WN °4 Y NL ^CUi.
i� 4 O W 2 w: L i V u '° t a[ ♦; � D O u J V "� J P� °' M W P N J V C
✓ � i L c °' V �N Y^ W N X ulLr:T v R O° a db� W u> y u: O
L u 4 d T N U r'O � W i al -.•. L V V _ N L u W
V�4 'n° C•. !�.� w.Lt f` L 1 _ •'nG0 uD °'w! COl` LV "J
1y: V ..V• L u � b '- 6 C N -.C- % 0 [ � u ' C� V� O'er h � �l u !yN' � V � ” b V d
OlryAp a°rC ANN 4i�j WC^ �` Q 0u ll L °1 \J OLC'rtV '°T`F VV �O ? ✓bP
^y ` ✓G T� Lr G L G �"' N ' ° LUA C JLM qV
u L ^ n •yG V WpW
YY �V Yf' U V C � NCB ^P N N[4' V C!J •iJPWV
✓ r N ^ L W U T F V -^ J! Z ✓ �' w V u«
'L a' rV N !i U.
�A- N^ •i.0 �� L6•- 4V°-^ .°. F •` 1]NL 'l ^ ✓"'« ✓u P nIL LW L DNU
>O° N,b A •.� u'L V NN ` V_t X ^. YVO CV �wC r� (.'Ll0 �- � yy ^O
Lo
SAO y r.A ✓V VffN �� �' NW P NpC [1`M6N 'A ^4 N u0 i1 ✓VV
JJ6 .en v.^ rC 'n ✓I `N Ll0 W V].� �' «uP .�'�'Ubr LyJ° dr Nb V•�pN�4
WV 1 }'L ✓ N C✓ �✓ VO ` q YIA✓ u.0 ua Wrn ✓a P� O�N
���. vV ^� y, � CDIW L N.� V•V V L^L' J2 + ui:i` .•W !'^ y44
Qi V Y O. A •C O' W f L V� u K L, O� � V .°.� � � L 'O C• N V L '. 'r uJi N� W v " ai•' C A N
b n ap P ^ c N
♦ I I VI ^� N rn W V a0 P
C I
a
A L
•'
�
H
C
d
V
y
J
C^
-
o•
C
i i
O
L
.Or �
J
V u
r
V
N�
N
o �
i
✓ c
i
v W L
F L
u `.
v
J
y
y °'
V
u
V-
A l
✓
.•.
N
N J .T.
w'
i
.-.
v c
oNY r<
N[.
—„r•
D
°'v
�
=W ti
nn:
v
(N.
N!
p
u L
` 4
•-
'�.� V'
Oa
.-. �'
O i
LOT
6
N
p C� R
4
u •'-_ L
C N
u: W
N
lU.- N
[: C
u U
N
^�
u
V
N
w
LI
U N
N
O U
!1 i
u v
p
x
�
i
t ✓°
^✓
C
O W
V
N vV.
U
L
`
C�
R<
C O .a
NN
G
°L
V
V
�
W?°
Vyti
O'er
9•ai-.
UL
J9O
hN
•U
WC
NL ✓N
N
J
a4
,�
L
SUT
� :o
� Yo
db
00
2
LMA
nN
✓a
_
•WVr
N
^b
ti w_
K4N
HT
O
-N-•.
W
NI
OI
al
bl
•�
I
U
�
�I
xl
Y
V
O
4
c
w
M
r
1,
`u
c
l
V
L
w
c
C O_.
T W
O +
4 V
�a
a
A t
b �
C
rn
R C
O W
L u
c u
ac
uViY
N W
i✓
Nn
n
N
L. U
r�
G ~
C U
p W
✓o
l V
kW u
L
w .
p r
!�N L
J
L
(r L:
N O
lV
C
✓ y
N ^V
Rey ° c
1 L
J..W
v o
qF «
� L
W [( N
« � L
W e o
a
u M � l
� n c
N L
J i y
•• C u
•- W .. J
_ ^c
L �
Ou ^ r
1
b
u
n
C
O
�a
„ �
W
r
d P
rC
W
«r
b V
'p d
O��
L9
uc
N
C
„O.
yNb
at
d J
u p'
+ L
� r
V
4
C
d
0
V
L
d
M
V
a
4 L
D R
L A
L N
4+
r r
W ^
Pi
+ ti
L
b Y
yu
N q
W
o a\
c
o n
. G
A U
^ C
S O
W
c 'tl
✓ L
W w
D
L
Vc a
4u
J
yL N
L
m W
WL O
V- O
^ V
W A
u �
P N
c •°•
mot° ryN O b C D
� N ✓ w
° ` .°. yL_ t• _2'� °, aN. -- N� •off
NhN � NC � til ✓ IOC -'•a y'R 4u -J -I1L ^ N CUNV
T r W N N V
Off'
CWV LW `LL UN f.1LW V4 ••• -O ^L WWi:A _WN °4 Y NL ^CUi.
i� 4 O W 2 w: L i V u '° t a[ ♦; � D O u J V "� J P� °' M W P N J V C
✓ � i L c °' V �N Y^ W N X ulLr:T v R O° a db� W u> y u: O
L u 4 d T N U r'O � W i al -.•. L V V _ N L u W
V�4 'n° C•. !�.� w.Lt f` L 1 _ •'nG0 uD °'w! COl` LV "J
1y: V ..V• L u � b '- 6 C N -.C- % 0 [ � u ' C� V� O'er h � �l u !yN' � V � ” b V d
OlryAp a°rC ANN 4i�j WC^ �` Q 0u ll L °1 \J OLC'rtV '°T`F VV �O ? ✓bP
^y ` ✓G T� Lr G L G �"' N ' ° LUA C JLM qV
u L ^ n •yG V WpW
YY �V Yf' U V C � NCB ^P N N[4' V C!J •iJPWV
✓ r N ^ L W U T F V -^ J! Z ✓ �' w V u«
'L a' rV N !i U.
�A- N^ •i.0 �� L6•- 4V°-^ .°. F •` 1]NL 'l ^ ✓"'« ✓u P nIL LW L DNU
>O° N,b A •.� u'L V NN ` V_t X ^. YVO CV �wC r� (.'Ll0 �- � yy ^O
Lo
SAO y r.A ✓V VffN �� �' NW P NpC [1`M6N 'A ^4 N u0 i1 ✓VV
JJ6 .en v.^ rC 'n ✓I `N Ll0 W V].� �' «uP .�'�'Ubr LyJ° dr Nb V•�pN�4
WV 1 }'L ✓ N C✓ �✓ VO ` q YIA✓ u.0 ua Wrn ✓a P� O�N
���. vV ^� y, � CDIW L N.� V•V V L^L' J2 + ui:i` .•W !'^ y44
Qi V Y O. A •C O' W f L V� u K L, O� � V .°.� � � L 'O C• N V L '. 'r uJi N� W v " ai•' C A N
b n ap P ^ c N
♦ I I VI ^� N rn W V a0 P
C I
R
13
LO
v
O
V
Y
¢
T
��-
M�y�a+
10
G
V
Y
`\'Y
VpO�
� O
'
L WLl
ydLO
b
V Y U
W
._
�
C Y`
�• O.
0.N
OY Y
T
�
VV i'O
VOA
.�
u �
ti °uu
A
°Cd
POt
r
oc
y. j
Oi V
_��
L°n
yTi�Jr
„d CU
N'OW
y
'.'
Vur pi
¢
4'O
4Vy`
CN.`uc
^U
t°iV
W
C1Y
V—
�r0u
L
m
a=
d
mug
mLY =
L
`..iv
CVUO
c.0
V V
C
b n
b
L Y
4
N N V g V
N
q
�j
�
N 0.
6
V C �
a•
m
m O i�
y n
^
y
L
T i c
V
C
O•
b
� C Y
i��
I��✓
yam`
C m tJ O
i n°
T•C�m
6 .LJ
u
O� P V
` q
6 V c V
y .1 dVAjY
°C7
L
_
^b
UW
LuVi W1V".
LLN
Nu !nu
yyQ Y
C 6 V
`
I
I
I I
O
A U
q
O O M
C
V t C O
yC
V
S
LO
RESOLUTION NO.
11
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT NO. 80 -04 REQUESTING A CHANGE IN
THE ZONING FROM R -I. AND R -1 -5 ACRE TO R- 1!P.D.
FOR 10.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
RAMONA AT MONTE V?STA. APN 202 - 181 -5, 6, AND
16.
?WHEREAS, on the 28th day of August, 1980, an aiaplication was
filed and accepted on the above- described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 9th day of September, 1981, the "tanning
Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section
65854 of the California Government Code.
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made
the following findings:
1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted
in the proposed zone in terms of access, size; and compatibility
with existing land use in the surrounding area;
2. The proposed zone change would not have significant
impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties;
and
3. That the proposed zone change is in conformance with the
General Plan.
SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found
that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the
environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on
September 9, 1981.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California
Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the
9th day of September, 1981, Planned Development No. 80 -04.
2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City
Council approve and adopt Planned Development No. 80 -04.
3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related
material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall
be forwarded to the City Council.
4. All conditions of approval applicable to Tentative Tract
No. 11614 shall apply to this Planned Development.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1981.
Resolution No.
Page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Jeffrey King, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Ranci:o
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly anO
regularly introduced, pasc�,d, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 9th day of September, 1981 by the following vote
to -wit:
AYES:
NOES
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
El
I':1
E
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REFORT
September 9, 1981
Members of the Planning Commission
Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
Michael Vairin, Senior Planner
CORPORATION - A proposed change OT zone Trom m -z
General Manufacturing) to C -2 (General Business /Commercial)
on 18 acres of land located on the northeast corner of
Arrow and Haven - APN 208- 622 -01.
ABSTRACT: As a condition of approval for the development of the K -Mart
Department Store, the applicants are requesting a change of zone to a
commercial designation for compliance with the adopted City General Plan.
Staff has reviewed the request and has processed the change of zone in
accordance with all legal requirements and is now presenting this request
to the Planning Commission with a recommendation of approval to the City
Council.
BACKGROUND: The applicants, Daon Corporation, are requesting approval for
a change of zone from General Manufacturing to General Business /Commercial
on 18 acres of land located on the northeast corner of Arrow and Haven Ave-
nues (Exhibit "A "). This request is in response to the Conditions of Appro-
val regarding the development of the K -Mart Department Store. At the time
K -Mart was presented to the Planning Commission, the Commission had re-
quested that a change in zone to commercial be accomplished prior to final
occupancy of the structure in order that the site would be in strict com-
pliance with the General Plan. The site is partially under construction
based upon the approval of the r. Mart Department Store application and
many of the off -site improvements such as the cabs and gutters have
already been installed. The remaining portions of the site are presently
vacant and are planned for commercial uses in accordance with the adopted
Master Plan of Development for this area. The General Plan designates
this site as commercial uses.
ANALYSIS: The Planning Division has conducted
to the request in comparison to the adopted City
Master Plan of Development for the Daon project.
subject property is suitable for the types anti
an analysis in regards
General Plan and the
It was found that the
uses permitted in the
ITEM B
Environmental Assessment /Zone Change 81 -03
September 9, 1981
Page 2
proposed zone it terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing
and planned lard uses in the surrounding area. Additionally, the pro-
posed zone change would not have a significant impact upon the environ-
ment and is in conformance with the City's General Plan.
The applicant has completed Part I of the Environmental Assessment and
Staff has completed a field investigation and Part II of the Environ-
mental Assessment. As a result of the completion of the InitiAl Study,
Staff has found no significant adverse impacts on the environment as a
result o� this project and recommends the issuance of a Negative Declara-
tion.
CORRESPONDE14CE: A notice of public hearing was placed in The Dail Report
newspaper on August 28, 1981, advertising this item as a public hearing.
In addition, approximately 7 public hearing notices were mailed to property
owners within 300 feet of the subject property. To date, we have received
no correspondence either for or against this project.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission conduct
the required public hearing to receive all public input. If, after com-
pletion of the public hearing, the Commission can make the necessary
findings required by law, then it is recommended that the attached Reso-
lution b • adopted which recommends approval of the Zone Change to the
City Council.
Respectfully submitted,
JAC AAM. J! 14
I
Director of Community Development
JL:MV:jr
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Part I Initial Study
Resolution of Approval
L
0
I�Nlj m
vesL:;µi.
s.rq,.
CITY OF
RAINCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING DIVISION
3
\
\� .W. wwi n.0
j
�1
5
f
ri
� —
i.,,
Lt,
vesL:;µi.
s.rq,.
CITY OF
RAINCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING DIVISION
3
\
\� .W. wwi n.0
�1
\
f
ri
� —
i.,,
NDRTH
TITLE: i.00A7101 AM-?
EXHIBIT: _, SCALE: -
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Aft
INITIAL STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $80.00
For all projects requiring environmental review, tbLis
form must be completed and submitted to the Development
Review Committee through the department where the
project application is made. Upon receipt of this
application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare
Part II of the initial Study. The Development. Revlew
Committee will meet and take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard,. The Committee will make one of
three determinations: 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be
filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or
3) An additional information report should be supplied
by the applicant giving further information concerning
the proposed project.
PROJECT TITLE: K Mar; Retail Shopping Center
RANCHO CUCAMONGA BUSINESS
APPLICANT °S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE:
Daon Corporation, 4041 MacArthur Boulevard, Newport eac E,
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BF.CONTACTED
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Jack H. Corrigan, Genet
Manaaer. Commercial /Industrial 714/752 -7855
LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.)
NW corner Arrow and Haven, Rancho Cucamonga _
Assessors Parcel $ 208 - 622 -01
LIST OTHER PER!42TS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:
MI /a
- 1 -1
E
LA
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
C th ad-iacent narking lot and
landscaping
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY:
approx. 18 acres
DESCRIBE THE ENVIRODT- IENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE
INCLUDING I1WORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) ,
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY
EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS):
negative declaration
Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series -
o£ cumulative actions, which although individually small,
may as a whole have significant environmental impact?
The nroiect is a part of a larger project consisting of
approximately 240 acres.
a -2
WILL THIS PROJECT:
YES NO
X 1. Create a substantial charge in ground
contours?
X 2. Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vibration?
3. Create a substantial change in demand for
municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc.)'.
X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or
general plan designations?
Ll
X 5: Remove any existing trees: now many?
X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, flammables or explosives?
Explanation of any YXS answers above:
IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next page.
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the date and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and belief. I further understand that
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaulation can be made by the .Development
Review Committee.
Date August 10, 1981
Signa26eJneral%w,'tager t2c ,.a.�-
ack Cor an
Title,
Commerci al /Industrial
i3
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE
NO. 81 -03 REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE ZONING FROM
M -2 TO C -2 FOR 18 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF HAVEN AND ARROW AVENUES - APN 208- 622 -01.
WHEREAS, on the 17th day of August, 1981, an application was
filed and accepted on the above - described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 9th day of September, 1981, the Planning
Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section
65854 of the California Guvernment Code.
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made
the following fin ings:
1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted
in the proposed zone in terms of access, size, and compatibility
with existing land use in the surrounding area;
2. The proposed zone change would not have significant
impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties;
and
40 3. That the proposed zone change is 'in conformance with the
General Plan.
SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found
that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the
environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on September
9, 1981-
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
i. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California
Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the
9th day of September, 1981, Zone Change No. 81 -03.
2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City
Council approve and adopt Zone Change No. 81 -03.
3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related
material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall
be forwarded to the City Council.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1981.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
11
Resolution No.
Page 2
BY
effrey King, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
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 r the Planning
Commission held on the 9th day of September, 19b! by following vote
to-wit-
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
`:i
L]
0
11
E
W
Clrf OF RA WHO CUCAWIONGA
STAF F REPORT
DATE: September 9, 1981
TO: Planning Cormission
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician
SUB.;ECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 140. 7007 - DAON
CORPORATION - A division of 9.649 acres into 4 parcels
within the I1 -2 zone located on the southeast corner of
Haven Avenue and Civic Center Drive - APN 208 -35 -03 & 11
INTRODUCTION: Daon Corporation has submitted this parcel map to divide
parcel .. of Parcel Map 6617 into a, parcels for commercial development,
Off -site is-provements are now under construction. A conceptual site plan
showing planned locations of buildings is attached for your information,
but no development is being presented for approval at this time. Surround-
ing property is industrial /commercial with K -Mart being constructed to the
south and the proposed civic center directly 'to the north, across the street.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: An Environmental Impact: Report has been certified
y the Planning Commission on April 23, 1980 for the entire Daon Corporation
proj ect (Parcel Map 6206).
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the teaitative map be approved, subject
to t e ,ty ngineer's Report, and that a Negative Declaration be issued. A
resolution is attached to provide for approval should the Commission concur.
Respectfully su mitted,
v �
PBK-.jaa
Attachments
ITEM C
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
PARCEL MAP NUMBER 7007 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.
7007) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HAVEN
AVENUE AND CIVIC CENTER DRIVE.
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 7007, submitted by Daon
Corporation and consisting of 4 parcels, located on the southeast corner
of Haven Avenue and Civic Center Drive, being a division of Parcel 3
of Parcel Map 6617 as recorded in Book 65, Pages 61 -62 was approved
by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and,
WHEREAS, on July 10, 1981, a formal application was submitted
requesting review of the above - described tentative map; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 1.981, the Planning Commission held a
duly advertised public hearing for the above - described map.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the map is consistent with the proposed
General Plan.
2. That the improvement of the proposed
subdivision, is consistent with the proposed
General Plan.
3. That the site is physically suitable for
the proposed development.
4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements
will not cause substantial environmental
damage, public health problems or have
adverse affects on abutting property.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant
adverse environmental impacts and Negative Declaration is issued on
September 9, 1981.
SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 7007 is approved
subject to the conditions of the City Engineer's Report pertaining
thereto.
APPROVED
AND
ADOPTED THIS
9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1981.
PLANNI MISSION
OF
THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Resolution No.
Page 2
BY
Jeffrey Y.ing, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
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 9th day of September, 1981, by the following
vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
E
Ell
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT
FILED BY: Daon Corporation TENTATIVI: MAP N0. 700:
LOCATION: Scutheast corner of Haven and Civic LATE FILED:
Center Drive
NUMBER 09 LOTS: 3
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Par•CLI 3 of Parcel Map 6617 RECEIPT HUMBER:
as recorded in Book 65 Pages 61 -62 FEE:
ZONE: M•• 2
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * is * * * * * * * * * * * * r * t * * * * * * * * * *
TENTATIVE MAP PREPARED BY: L. D. King GROSS ACIEAGE:
ADDRESS: 517 N. Euclid Avenue
Ontario, CA 91762
I•IiNIMUM _OT AREA:
MINIM':M .OT FRONTAGE:
RECORD OWNER(S) ADDRESS PHONE
Daon Corporation 4041 MacArthur Blvd. 714/752 -7855
Newport Beach, CA 9c660
REPORT OF THE CITY ENGINEER
Dedications
1. Dedication by final map of all interior street :rights-)f-way and all necessary
easements as shown on the tentative map
2. Dedication by final map of the following missing right. -of -way on the following
streets:
x 3.
4.
5.
6
RCE 20
additional feet on
additional feet on
additional feet on
_ Corner P/L radius required on
Other —'
Zights of vehicular access shall be limited as foliows: non- vehicular
n H n with r, tin f one shared drive aoa r ach_with property to the
Street vacation required or: south
(•taster Plan of Streets revision rec, i; -ed for:
The following perimeter intersections require realignment as follows:
TENTATIVE MAP NO. 7007
Page 2
Improvements (Bonding is required prior to ❑ Recording for )
E1 Building permit for )
7. Construct full street improvements (including curb and gutter, A.C. pavement,
sidewalk, one drive approach per lot, parkway trees and street lights) on all
interior streets.
R. Construct the following missing improvements on the following streets:
*inrluriinn land -ranina and irrigaticr on meter
STREET NAME
CURB &
GUTTER
A.C.
PVMT.
'SIDE--1
WALK
DRIVE
APPR.
I STREET
TREES
STREET
LIGHTS
I MEDIAN
ISLAND* OTHER
9. Construct all storm drain and drainage structures as shown or Lire tentative
map, or as required by the City Engineer.
X 10. Provide all utility services to each lot including sanitary sewers, water,
electric power, gas, telephone and cable television.conduit. All utilities
are to be underground.
X 11. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of
any power poles or other existing public utilities ds necessary.
X 12. install appropriate street name signs and traffic control signs with loca-
tions and types approved by the City Engineer.
X 13. Developer is to provide all construction plans for drainage and street im-
provements. Such plans shall meet approval of the City Engineer.
X 14. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Vater
District standards. A letter of acceptance is required.
X 15. Street light locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern
California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall be decorative
poles with underqround service.
16. The following existing streets being torn up by new services will require an
A.C. overlay:
17. The following specs .c dimensions, i.e., cul-de-sac radius, street section
widths) are not approved:
_ 18. The o owing existing streets are su standard:
They will require:
Approvals and Fees
l9. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval rrom CALTRANS/
San Bernardino County Flood Control District.
X 20. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agen-
cies involved. Approval of the final map will Le subject to any requirements
that may be received from them.
RCE 20
TENTATIVE MAP N0. 7007 Page 3
X 21. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
_ A. Caltrans, for: _
B. City:
9— C. County Dust Abatement District:
D. D.I.S. Trenching Permit if any trenches are over 5 deep:
T— E. Cucamonga County Water District: water and sewer
F. Other:
Map Control
22. If only a portion of this ttap is recorded, adjustments shall be made to pro-
- vide for two -way traffic and parking on all affected streets.
_ 23. The following lots appear to be substandard in either frontage, depth or area
and should be corrected on the final map:
_ 24. All corner lots shall have a corner radius at the right -cf -way ine awn accord-
ance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga standards.
25. A Parcel Map shall be recorded prior to the first phase subdivision to prevent
the creation of an unrecognized parcel located
26. The boundary of the Tentative Map needs cl- arification as follows:
27. The border shall be shown to centerline of existinc - . -.,:;_ er streets, or
title explanation required.
qP
Parcel Map Waiver
28. Information submitted at the time of application is / is not suffic4ent
to support the issuance of a waiver of Parcel Map Certificate, according to
requirements of the State Map Act and local ordinances.
Flood Control (Bonding is required prior to ❑ Recording for
U Building permit fo— rPar— c�cT?��
X 29. Proposed subdivision falls within those areas indicated as subject to flood-
- ing under the National Flood Insurance Program. This subdivision will be
subject to the provisions of that program and Ordinance No. 24. Zone A -0
_ 30. A drainage channel and /or flood protection wall along the entire north
oerty line may be required to divert sheet runoff to streets.
Such flow may be required to go under sidewalks through culverts.
_
31. If water surface is above top of curb, 30" walls shall be required at the
back of the sidewalk at all downstream curb returns.
32. Culverts required to be constructed across streets at following locations:_
33. Bruad scale hydrologic studies will a require to assess impact of increased
runoff.
X 34. Applicable portions of the conditions for Parcel Map 6206 and 6617 shall also
apply to this project.
RCE 20
TENTATIVE MAP NO. 7007
Page 4
4iscellaneous
X 35. Dust abatement will be made a condition of issuance of the grading permit for
this project.
X 36. Noise impact on this project will be mitigated in accordance with the Planning
Division report on subject property.
37. 'his property is not within the present City Boundary and will require
annexation.
38. All information required to be shown on the tentative map is not shown as re-
quired:_
X 39. Proper grading and erosion control, including the preventation of s enta -'
tion or damage to offsite property shall be provided for as required.
40. A preliminary soils report will not be required for this site for.the follow-
- ing reasons: A copy of the soils report furnished to t',e Building Division
prior to grading will be furnished to the Engineering Division.
X 41. The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that
sewer treatment capacity will be available at the time building permits are
requested. When building permits are requested, the Cucamonga County Water
District will be asked to certify the availability of capacity. Permits will
not be issued unless said certification is received in writing.
X 42. The City Engineer shall make the determination, in accordance with Section
66436(C)(1) of the Subdivision Map Act, that division and development o:. the
property will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise
of any public entity or public utility right -of -way or easement and the signa-
ture of any such public entity or public utility may be omitted from the final
map unless the City is notified in writing of any objection to said determina-
tion within the specified time limits of said Section.
X 43. At the time of Final Map submittal, the following shall be submitted: Traverse
calculations (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference and/
or showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks referenced.
44. Development shall be limited to one drive approach per street. Multiple lots
fronting on a single street shall use common drive approaches at lot lines.
X 45. Reciprocal access easement ensuring access to all parcels over private roads,
drives or parking areas, and blanket drainge easements across all parcels shall
be recorded concurrent with the recordation of the parcel map.
X 46. Waterline easementsto the Cuc,-onga County Water District shall be delineated
on map.
X 47. Easement for sidewalk to be delineated on map.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
LLOYD B. HUBBS
CITY ENGINEER
i
E
al
1 I
•
1� 1
01
I ...ANC ✓Sr: 1
�(, rA[4rYT I
f.'1
//gyp TENTATIVE MEET IOFI
PARCEL MAP ICI®. 0 007
IN THE CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONSA
BEING A SUTIDIVISION OF MRCEL S OF PARCEL UIP MQMI7 AS PER YAP RECORDED
IN RDOK GS.Dr FRRCCL YAM. PAGES 61-92. IN THE OFAICE OFFAE RECORDER OF TIRE
COUNTY OF SAN NERNARDIND.STATE OF CALIFORNUL
AUGUST.% L.D.KINO.ING .IOMIR.FEENSTNA R.O1041170
ff11A[n
11) b•n (st10 L.111
PMM. 4 VIILi
iuruluv
Y orcl � suoinwl t
w11Y1✓IYw nw.
I.•rl 1..1.. a IlliO
>w)sr•nns
' Lw•N. 4SI f
LYMLPCIA(
- OINOU: TNIq(
i a••Y
/
-
IY
,t D
1.
PARCEL Aa.O
/
r// Porcel / 1
1 --
I
LANG ✓se:
COMMCNC/AL
S.�I \ WIn [.l�n <�w1I WM DIl \.I<t i. [M/ INI: 0•]111
��A•. <II 11)4 ]. 1MIY: 1�[ '
)IfIMI).tNl a ]lTl IN�1wnN M 'NI \1ww YC ]nrvY
Gn . Swlti. 4t1Iww1. fw (rwj IYY LMt IrtKr. t1 I
IM Lnl \Mn ]In1l A• 41VN0* A nM ..Y..ww 0 {wf,
ti•wl. 4 M.A a1 .1.0. � S.Y. {wN. wF
ilywlYM\ kn. L6 . www IIn.
1r.IW o.l..ly1
t.lnw�•f�r.l M1ll�.w1 <ww. I [Nn11nn. 1ME.pYI•
AI.. - ta1A•iY (1111w116wY1 f`1Yn
IMI LrN M•wf
4•Irin. 4 11111
I r
rY•r
1
Y•
11' r
ra7r /I3
,
f.'1
//gyp TENTATIVE MEET IOFI
PARCEL MAP ICI®. 0 007
IN THE CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONSA
BEING A SUTIDIVISION OF MRCEL S OF PARCEL UIP MQMI7 AS PER YAP RECORDED
IN RDOK GS.Dr FRRCCL YAM. PAGES 61-92. IN THE OFAICE OFFAE RECORDER OF TIRE
COUNTY OF SAN NERNARDIND.STATE OF CALIFORNUL
AUGUST.% L.D.KINO.ING .IOMIR.FEENSTNA R.O1041170
ff11A[n
11) b•n (st10 L.111
PMM. 4 VIILi
iuruluv
Y orcl � suoinwl t
w11Y1✓IYw nw.
I.•rl 1..1.. a IlliO
>w)sr•nns
' Lw•N. 4SI f
LYMLPCIA(
- OINOU: TNIq(
i a••Y
/
-
IY
,t D
1.
PARCEL Aa.O
/
r// Porcel / 1
1 --
I
LANG ✓se:
COMMCNC/AL
S.�I \ WIn [.l�n <�w1I WM DIl \.I<t i. [M/ INI: 0•]111
��A•. <II 11)4 ]. 1MIY: 1�[ '
)IfIMI).tNl a ]lTl IN�1wnN M 'NI \1ww YC ]nrvY
Gn . Swlti. 4t1Iww1. fw (rwj IYY LMt IrtKr. t1 I
IM Lnl \Mn ]In1l A• 41VN0* A nM ..Y..ww 0 {wf,
ti•wl. 4 M.A a1 .1.0. � S.Y. {wN. wF
ilywlYM\ kn. L6 . www IIn.
1r.IW o.l..ly1
t.lnw�•f�r.l M1ll�.w1 <ww. I [Nn11nn. 1ME.pYI•
AI.. - ta1A•iY (1111w116wY1 f`1Yn
IMI LrN M•wf
4•Irin. 4 11111
I r
rY•r
11' r
ra7r /I3
II
J �
1'
f P
Porer/ 33
1 t �
�
1
`i P
P'ucr /3!
1 --
I
LANG ✓se:
COMMCNC/AL
S.�I \ WIn [.l�n <�w1I WM DIl \.I<t i. [M/ INI: 0•]111
��A•. <II 11)4 ]. 1MIY: 1�[ '
)IfIMI).tNl a ]lTl IN�1wnN M 'NI \1ww YC ]nrvY
Gn . Swlti. 4t1Iww1. fw (rwj IYY LMt IrtKr. t1 I
IM Lnl \Mn ]In1l A• 41VN0* A nM ..Y..ww 0 {wf,
ti•wl. 4 M.A a1 .1.0. � S.Y. {wN. wF
ilywlYM\ kn. L6 . www IIn.
1r.IW o.l..ly1
t.lnw�•f�r.l M1ll�.w1 <ww. I [Nn11nn. 1ME.pYI•
AI.. - ta1A•iY (1111w116wY1 f`1Yn
IMI LrN M•wf
4•Irin. 4 11111
I r
rY•r
11' r
ra7r /I3
II
J �
1'
f P
Porer/ 33
1 t �
�
1
`i P
P'ucr /3!
Jill � V
r ..
C /Portrr
27
c
SCOIO: 1'Y /00•
Pare/ 2 1
b
_ ZCNLO : M •z
LA +O usc:
/NO✓6 T/F..TL
'; p•y:
1
rte. is
cm
ul
�'' -4
I r
rY•r
11' r
ra7r /I3
II
J �
1'
f P
Porer/ 33
1 t �
�
1
`i P
P'ucr /3!
C /Portrr
27
c
SCOIO: 1'Y /00•
Pare/ 2 1
b
_ ZCNLO : M •z
LA +O usc:
/NO✓6 T/F..TL
'; p•y:
1
rte. is
cm
ul
�'' -4
❑I
0
W
IY
J
WI
6
S
U.
71�
SIT
--- A
I T LL
}� p
1
m
IT
G-
1
U
atnoa , MOH-HV
r
s
�
,i,4Wttyyyiy�l:4.
gpp1.1W$pNpNpf��7iilNppf�I
Y
(a v�igp8bb0
moo
�
��
m,yr.m
SanioiNAm�p�'
R
g�
VI
Y�
I T LL
}� p
1
m
IT
G-
1
U
atnoa , MOH-HV
�.1
a.
r
s
�
r- --�
- - -4
A,
K �
�
�.1
a.
K �
�
VI
Y�
�.1
a.
11
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 9, 1981
60: Planning Commission
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: EN'JIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL FIAP NO. 7061 -
KA OR DEVELOPMENT C MPAV - An industrial sub ivision
of 78 acres divided into 45 lots (4 phases) in the
M -•2 zone located on the southeast corner of 6th Street
and Cleveland Avenue - APN 210 - 082 -2 through 9, and 10
INTRODUCTION: The applicant is requesting a division of 78 acres in 45 lots
in four phases. Off -site improvements and an approved conceptual grading
plan shall be required prior to recordation of the map for Phases 1, 2 and 3.
Phase 4 off -site improvements shall be required at time of further subdivi-
sion or building permit issuance.
The subdivision is in accordance with the Industrial Specific Plan land use
and circulation. Each lot will be subject to further review before develop-
ment but all public improvements necessary for orderly development will be
requirements of the parcel map.
Recording ofthemap will be contingent upon approval of a conceptual grading
plan for the entire site.
A conceptual site plan showing possible development of the lots is attached
for your review.
All surrounding property is within the 14 -2 zone and is vacant at this time,
approved Parcel Map 6085 (Kull- Lyon), lies to the east.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: Also attached for your review and cons ^deration is
Part 1 of e Initial Study as completed by the applicant. Staff has completed
Part- II of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist, and has conducted a
field investigation. Upon completion and review of the Initial Study and field
investigation, Staff found no significant adverse impacts en the environment
as a result of the proposed subdivision.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the tentative map be approved, subject:
to the City Engineer's Report, and that a Negative Declaration be issued. A
resolution is attached to provide for approval should the Commission concur.
Respectfully subigitted,
Attachments
ITEM 0
RESOLUTIUA NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
PARCEL MAP NUMBER 7061 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.
7061) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 6TH
STREET AND CLEVELAND AVENUE.
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 7061, submitted by Kar_or
Development Company and consisting of 45 parcels, located at the south-
east corner of 6th Street and Cleveland Avenue, being a division of Lot
17, 18, 23 and north 1/2 of Lots 24 and 26 as recorded Map Book 4, page
9, San Bernardino County was approved by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and,
WHEREAS, on July 16, 1981, a formal application was submitted
requesting review of the above - described tentative map; and
!WHEREAS, on September 9, 1981, the Planning Commission held a
duly advertised public hearing for the above - described map.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the map is consistent with the proposed
General Plan.
2. That the improvement of the proposed
subdivision is consistent with the proposed
General Plan.
3. That the site is physically suitable for
the proposed development.
4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements
will not cause substantial environmental
damage, public health problems or have
adverse affects on abutting property.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant
adverse enviro —r nmental impacts and Negative Declaration is issued on
September 9, 1981.
SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 7061 is approved
subject to the conditions of the City Engineer's Report pertaining
thereto.
APPROVED
AND
ADOPTED
THIS
9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1981.
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF
THE CITY
OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Resolution No.
Page 2
admL
6Y:
Jeffrey Y.ing, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the P anning Commission
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 hL •1 on the 9th day of September, 1981, by the following
vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
E
6
CITY
OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
CITY
ENGINEER'S
REPORT
FILED BY: k. C. Land Co. TENTATIVE MAP NO. PM 7061
LOCATION:_ South side of 6th Street between Cleveland DATE FILED: 7/16/81
and Milliken NUMBER OF LOTS: 45
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:Lots 17, 18, 23 and ..N 1/2 of RECEIPT NUMBER: 12155
Lots 24 & 26 as recorded MBA Page 9 FEE:_ $250.00
ZONE: M -2
TENTATIVE MAP PREPARED BY: Derbish & Guerra GROSS ACREAGE: 78
ADDRESS: 124 East "F" Street. Suite 12 MINIMUM LOT AREA:
Ontario, CA 91764 MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE:
* * * * * * * * * * * * x * * * x * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * x * * * * * * * * * * *
RECORD OWNER(S)
ADDRESS
R. C. Land 380 W. Foothill, Suite C
Rialto, CA 92376
REPORT OF THE CITY ENGINEER
Dedications
PHONE # 40
X 1. Dedication by final map of all interior street rights -of -way and all necessary
x_ 2.
X 3.
4
X 5
6
RCE 20
easements as shown on the tentative map.
Dedication by final map of the following missing
streets:
14 additional feet on Cleveland Avenue
30 additional feet on 6th Street
additional feet on .
_ Corner P/L radius require on
Other
Rights of vehicular- access shall be dedicated aio
th St. _xcept two 35' openings centered on prQRgr
Street vacation required for:
Master Plan of Streets revision required for:
The following perimeter intersections require rea
rights -of -way on the following
gnment as follows:
r
' S. idt i sf ac-
n
TENTATIVE MAP N0. 7061
Page 2
Improvements (Bonding is required prior toXN Recording forphases 1,2, & 3 )
U Building permit for p ase 4 )
X 7. Construct full street improvements (including curb and gutter, A.C. pavement,
sidewalk, one drive approach per lot, parkway trees and street lights) on all
interior streets. (sidewalk on one side in separate easement)
X E. Construct the following missing improvements on the following streets:
*includinq landsca in and irrigation on meter
STREET NAME
CURB &
GUTTER
A.C.
PVMT.
SIDE-
WALK
DRIVE
APPR_
STREET
TREES
STREET
LIGHTS
MEDIAN
ISLAND*
OTHER
6th St.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cleveland
X
X
X
X
X
X
Milliken
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X 9. Construct all storm drain and drainage structures as shown on the tentative
map, or as required by the City Engineer.
X 10. Provide all utility services to each lot including sanitary sewers, water,
electric power, gas, telephone and cable television.conduit. All utilities
are to be underground.
X _ 11. Developer shall coordin,;te, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of
any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary.
X 12. Install approp.-iate street name signs and traffic control signs with loca-
tions and types approved by the City Engineer.
X 13. Developer is to provide all construction plans for drainage and street im-
provements. Such plans shall meet approval of the City Engineer.
X 14. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga Coanty.Wa.ter
District standards. A letter of acceptance is required.
X 15. Street light locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern
California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall be decorative
poles with underqround service.
16. The following existing streets being torn up by new services will require an
A.C. overlay:
17. The b lowing specific dimensions, i.e., cul-de-sac radius, street section
-- widths) are not approved:
_ 18. The following existing streets are substandard:
They will require:
Approvals and Fees
_ 19. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of
San Bernardino County Flood Control District.
X _ 20. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities
ties involved. Approval of the final map will be
that may be received from them.
RCE 20
approval from CALTRANS/
and other interested agen-
subject to any requirements
TENTATIVE MAP NO. 7061 Page 3
X 21. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
_ A. Caltrans, for:
B. City: _
)F_ C. County Dust Abatement District:
D. D.I.S. Trenching Permit if any trenches are over 5 deep:_
X E. Cucamonga County Water District: sewer and water
F. Other:
Map Control
y_ 22. if only a portion of this Map is recorded, adjustments shall be made to pro-
vide for two -way traffic and parking on all affected streets.
_ 23. The following lots appear to be substandard in either frontage, depth or area
and should be corrected on the final map:
X 24. All corner lots shall have a corner radius at the right -of -way line in accord-
ance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga standards.
_ 25. A Parcel Map shall b^ recorded prior to the first phase subdivision to prevent
th creation of an unrecognized parcel iocattu
_ 26. The boundary of the Tentative Map needs clarification as fo s:—
27. The border shall be shown to centerline of existing perimeter streets, or
title explanation required.
Parcel Map Waiver
_ 28. Information submitted at the time of application is / is not sufficient
to support the issuance of a waiver of Parcel Map Certificate, according to
requirements of the State Map Act and local ordinances.
Flood Control (Bonding is required prior to D Recording for )
0 Building permit for )
X 29. Proposed subdivision falls within those areas indicated as subject to flood-
ing under the National Flood Insurance Program. This subdivision will be
subject to the provisions of that program and Ordinance No. 24.
_ 30. A drainage channel and /or flood protection wall along the entire north pro-
perty line may be required to divert sheet runoff to streets.
Such flow may be required to go under sideyialks through culverts.
_ 31. If water surface is above top of curb, 30" walls shall be required at the
back of the sidewalk at all downstream curb returns.
_ 32. Culverts required to be constructed across streets at following locations:
_ 33. Bread scale hydrologic studies 1rrr a required to assess impact ot increased
runoff.
X 34. Installation cf a portion of the Master Planned Storm Drain No. 7E may be
required at the discretion of the City Engineer. The extent of the improve-
ment shall be as determined by the City Engineer and to be coordinated with
Assessment District 79 -1 project.
RCE 20
TENTATIVE MAP NO. 7061
Miscellaneous
Page 4
X 35. Dust abatement will be made a condition of issuance of the grading permit for
this project.
X 36. Noise impact on this project will be mitigated in accordance with the Plannir.,
Division report on subject property.
_ 37. This property is not within the present City Boundary and will require
annexation.
_ 33. All information required to be shown on the tentative map is not shown as re-
quired:
X 39.
Proper grading and erosion control, including the preventation of sedimenta -"
tion or damage to offsite property shall be provided for as required.
40.
A preliminary soils report will not be required for this site for the follow -
ing reasons: A copy of the soils report furnished to the Building Division
prior to grading will be furnished to the Engineering Division.
X 41.
The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that
sewer treatment capacity will be available at the time building permits are
requested. When builiing permits are requested, the Cucamonga County Water
District will be asked to c °rtify the availability of capacity. Permits will
not be issued unless raid certification is received in writing.
X 42.
The City Engineer shall m»kF the determination, in accordance with Section
66435(C)(1) of the Subdivision Map Act, that division and development of the
property will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise
of any public entity or public utility right -of -way or easement and the signa-
ture of any such public entity or public utility may be omitted from the final
map unless the City is notified in writing of any objection to said determina-
tion within the specified time limits of said Section.
X 43.
At the time of Final Map submittal, the following shall be submitted: Traverse
calculations (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference and/
or showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks referenced.
X 44.
Development shall be limited to one drive approach per street. Multiple lots
fronting on a single street shall use common drive approaches at lot lines.
X 45.
Conceptual grading plan shall be approved by the Building Official prior to
recordation of Parcel Map.
KI
RCE 20
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
LLOYD B. NUBBS
CITY ENGINEER.
By:
,
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
INITIAL STUDY
PART I — PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET — To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $80.00
For all projects requiring environmental review, this
form must be completed and submitted to the Development
Review Committee through the department where the
project application is made. Upon receipt of this
application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare
Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review
Committee will meet and take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Coimnittee will make one of
three determinations: 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be
filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or
3) An additional information report should be supplied
by the applicant giving further information concerning
the proposed project.
PROJECT TITLE: Twca. NAB -loco B
APPLIC:ANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE:
KaCcr Development Co.
P.U. Box 55 Temecula, California 9239U (714) 676 -5641
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPIONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Ignacio Gomez c/o KaCor Development Co.
P.O. Box 755 Temecula, California 92390 (714) 676 -5641
LOCPTION OF PROJECT (STRELT�R'UESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.)
South side of 6th St. between Otfi $t. and Milliken Ave.
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:
�.J
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Proposed 78 Acre Industrial Project
Phase I — 12.5 Acre
Phase 11 — JZ.6 Acre
Phase III — 4.2 Acre
Phase IV — 28.7 Acre
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 78 Acres Groxx
No Proposed Buildings
DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE
INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PIANTS (TREES),
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCE ?:IC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERV IES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY
EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS):
Existing Project site is grape Vineyards
•'Topography falls at 2 f to the sour
No existing structures on site. —
Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series -
of cumulative actions, which although individually small,
may as a whole have significant environmental impact?
No
1- 1
WILL THIS PROJECT:
YES M 0
X 1. Create a substantial chan,e in ground
contours?
Y 2. Create a substantial chan.•e in existing
noise or vibration?
r _x 3. Create a substantial chan.je in demand for
municipal services (polica, fire, water,
sewage, etc.)°
X 4. Create changes in the eri >ting zoning or
general plan designation.,,
X_ 5: Remove any existing tree:!? How many?
X 6. Create the need for use r.r disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, fla=ia:"es or explosives?
Explanation of any YES answers above: _
Is
IMP.IRTANT: if the project involves the cDnstruction of
residential units, complete t.ie form on the
next. page.
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
information required for this initial evaluation ts the
best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are+ true and correct_ to the best of
my knowledge and belief. I further understand that
additional information may be required to !�e submitted
before an adequate evauuation can be made by the .Development
Review iiCommittee. /�
Date_ i!►��git Signature ACJ
Title 'L6= %" ; �u iti t A� =sue•
.a%PC _ Cue, 100am
I3
RESIDENTIAL COD'"STMICTION
Alb
The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cvcamonga
Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the
school district to accommodate the proposed residential development.
Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.:
Specific Location of Project:
PHASE I PRASE 2
1. Number of single
family units:
2. Na=er of multiple
family units:
Dale proposed to
begin. construction:
4. Earliest 'late of
occupancy-
Model
and = of Tentative
5. Bedrooms Price Rance
-r— 4
PHASE 3
PIU -.SE 4
TOTAL
1
71,
CD
U
ANi
.r
(�'y� � ��G ..`.1� 1 .�� _ -•ten --
4 /
\ � /•� � I I-j 2
so
Vol 6
at• G1 i 1!: 7 3 del i \ ''— • w4
21 Cp
S
�jl �✓ � .v�.m wn
N
M
N
�� 1:J�VL-"I.AtaJp AVfNJX
COD
0 CD
6 � J
� � I •p ' II m
srnEE>r-
s
{
11 i�;is6° 1
:Mfg
� r
..,., ,
rni
r-r-
r. Z _ `A _. .. �� M6IIJKEN AVENUE
J
btu �Q
i
Ell
KI
.. ,.�. � - � - � � L �� .L. �
11
E,
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DPTE: September 9, 1981
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Lloyd 8. Hubbs, City Engineer
BY: Barbara Krail, Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP NO. 6976 -
CAPELLINO - n industrial subidivision of 49.93 acres
into 22 parcels in the 14-2 zone located on the south
side of Arrow Route, east of Haven Avenue - APN 209-
141-68
INTRODUCTION: This subdivision consists of 49.93 acres being divided into
M-To-t-s-fo—rfuture industrial use. All lots are two acres or larger and
are in conformance with the Industrial Specific Plan.
The site is currently vacant. The property to the west is developed as in-
dustrial, to the south is partially developed as industrial, to the noN:h
is the Dann /Barton project being constructed at this time and to the eas:
is a. railroad spur line and vacant property.
Attached for your review is a conceptual site plan showing typical building
lay -outs, parking areas and on -site circulation.
Being located in the special drainage impact area, the project is required to
construct a drainage retention facility to minimize impact of flooding.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: Also attached for your review and consideration is
Party the i m t a rstudy as completed by the applicant. Staff has completed
Part II of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist, and has conducted a
field investigation. Upon completion and review of the Initial Study and field
investigation, Staff found no significant adverse impacts on the environment
as a result of the proposed subdivisicn.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the tentative tuap be approved, subject
tote City ngineer's Report, and that a Negative Declaration be issued. A
resolution is attached to provide for approval should the Commission concur.
Respectfully submitted,
LBti:
Attachments
ITEM E
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING f _..'.,:4S5!GN 'F THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
PARCEL MAP NUMBER 6976 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.
6976) LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF ARROW ROUTE,
EAST OF HAVEN AVENUE.
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 6976, submitted by Richard
J. Capellino and consisting of 22 parcels, located on the south side of
Arrow Route, east of Haven Avenue, being a division of the south 1/2 of
section 12, T. 1 S., R. 7 W., San Bernardino Meridian was approved by
the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and,
WHEREAS, on July 2, 1981, a formal application was submitted
requesting review of the above- described tentative map; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 1981, the Planning Commission held a
duly advertised public hearing for the above - described map.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the map is consistent with the proposed
General Plan.
2. That the improvement of the proposed
subdivision is consistent with the proposed
General Plan.
3. That the site is physically suitable for
the proposed development.
4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements
will not cause substantial environmental
damage, public health problems or have
adverse affects on abutting property.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant
adverse environmental impacts and Negative Declaration is issued on
September 9, 1981.
SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 6976 is approved
subject to the conditions of the City Engineer's Report pertaining
thereto.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1981.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Resolution No,.
Page 2
BY.
Jeffrey King, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
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 9th day of September, 1981, by the following
vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
LJ
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT
FILED BY: Richard Capellino TENTATIVE MAP NO. PM 6976
LOCATION: South side of Arrow Route, east of Haven DATE FILED: 7/2/81
Avenue NUMBER OF LOTS:
LEGAL DESCP.IPTION:subdivision of the south 1/2 of RECEIPT NU14BER:
section 12, TiS, R7W. San Bernardino Meridian FEE: $250.00
ZONE: M -2
22
11958
TENTATIVE MAP PREPARED BY: George MimMack GROSS ACREAGE: 49.93
ADDRESS: 214 S. Euclid Ave. MINIMUM LOT AREA:_
Ontario, CA 91761 MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RECORD OWNER(S)
ADDRESS
PHONE 0
Richard J. Capellino 1860 Del Amo Blvd. 213/320 -1234
Torrance, CA 90501
REPORT OF THE CITY ENGINEER
Dedications
X 1. Dedication by final map of all interior street rights -of -way and all necessary
easements as shown on the tentative map.
2. Dedication by final map of the following missing rights -of -way on the following
streets:
_ additional feet on
additional feet on
additional feet on
Corner P/L radius required on
Other
X 3. Rights of vehicular access shall be a icaLed along a 'lots contiguous to Arrow 6*
Rte except two 35 openings centered on the property lines between lots , &
4. Street vacation required for:
5. Master Plan of Streets revision required or:
6. The following perimeter intersections require realignment as folloras:
*and shall be delineated on the map.
RCE 20
TENTATIVE MAP N0. 53a
Page 2
Improvements (Bonding is required prior to It Recording for all parcels
0 Building permit for )
x 7. Construct full street improvements (including curb and gutter, N.C. pavement,
sidewalk, one drive approach per lot, parkway trees and street lights) on all
interior streets.(Sidewaik shall be on one side of the interior streets within
8. Construct the following missing improvements on the following streets: separate
anti irrinatinn nn meter easement)
STREET NAME
CURB &
GUTTER
A.C.
PVMT.
SIDE-
WALK
DRI'E
APPR.
STREET
TREES
STREET
LIGHTS
MEDIAN
ISLAND* OTHER
* Lien Agreement
X 9. Construct all storm drain and drainage structures as shown on the tentative
map, or as required by the City Engineer.
_y,_ 10. Provide all utility services to each lot including sanitary sewers, water,
electric power, gas, telephone and cr.hle television.conduit. All utilities
are to be underground.
X_ 11. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of
any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary.
X 12. Install appropriate street name signs and traffic control signs with loca-
tions and types approved by the City Engineer.
_g_ 13. Developer is to provide all construction plans for drainage and street im-
provements. Such plans shall meet approval of the City Engineer.
14. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water
District standards. A letter of acceptance is required.
_ g i5. Street light iocatic-ns, as required, are to he approved by the Southern
California Edisrn Company and the City of Rancho Cucar. -)nga shall be decorative
poles with underground service.
15. The following existing streets being torn up by new services will require an
A.C. overlay:
X_ 17. e following ssped is dimensions, 'i.e., cul-de-sac radius, street section
widths) are not approved: pavement width for all interior streets shall be 44
f_ w'd9.W thin 54 feet rightQf -wav
_ 18. The following existing streets are su stan ar
They will require:
Approvals and Fees
19. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval from CALTRANS/
San Bernardino County Flood Control District.
X '.0. Approvals have not. been secured from all utilities and other interested agen-
cies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any requirements
that may be received from them.
RCE 20
TENTATIVE MAP N0. 6976 Page 3
x 21. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
_ A. t;altrans, for:
B. City:
C' County Dust —Abatement District:
D. U.I.S. Trenching Permit if any trenches are over 5' deep:_
X _ E. Cucamonga County Water District:
F. Other:
Map Control
_ 22. If only a portion of this Map is recorded, adjustments shall be made to pro
vide for two -way traffic and parking on all affected streets.
_ 23. The following lots appear to be substandard in either frontage, depth or area
and should be corrected on the final map:
_ X 24_ All corner lots shall have a corner radius at the right -of -way in in accord-
ance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga standards.
25. A Parcel Map shall be recorded prior to the first phase subdivision to prevent
the creation of an unrecognized parcel located _
_g_ 26. The boundary of the Tentative Map needs c ar:fication as follows: fee owned
roperty by A T E F Railway at easterly boundary O.R. 542/243) shall be*
_ 27_ The border shall be shown to centerline of existing perimeter :streets, or
title explanation required.
*excluded from map.
Parcel Map Waiver
28. Information submitted at the time of application is ; is no' sufficient
to support the issuance of a waiver of Parcel Map Certificate, according to
reouirements of the State Map Act and local ordinances.
Flood Control (Bonding is required prior to 13 Recording for
O Building permit for
X 29. Proposed subdivision falls within those areas indicated as subject tc flood-
- ing under the National Flood Insurance Program. This subdivision wiil be
subject to the provisions of that program and Ordinance No. 24. Zone A -0
30. A drainage channel and /or flood protection wall along the entire north pro-
! perty line may be required to divert sheet runoff to streets.
Such flow may be required to go under sidewalks through culverts.
_ 31. If water surface is above top of curb, 30" walls shall be required at the
back of the sidewalk ac all downstream curb returns.
32. Culverts required to be constructed across streets at following locations:_
9 33. Broad scale hydrologic studies irr ll be—required to assess impact of rncrea ed
runoff.
X 34. A drainage retention basin per City standard shall be constructed at the down-
stream end of the project to retain increase in runoff due to ultimate develop -
ment, prior to recardation of the map. The basin shall remain in place until
such time as the master planned storm drain is built in this area.
RCE 20
TENTATIVE MAP 140. 6976 Page 4
Miscellaneous
Y, 35. Dust abatement will be made a condition of issuance of the grading permit for
this project.
X 36. Noise impact on this project will be mitigated in accordance with the Planning
Division report on subject property.
37. This property is not within the present City Boundary and will require
-- annexation.
38. All informatior required to be shown on the tentative map is not shown as re-
quired:
Y, 39. Proper grading and erasion coorirol, including the prewentation of sedimenta-
tion or damage to offsite property shall be provided for as required.
40. A preliminary soils report will not be required for this site for the follow -
ing reasons: A copy of the soils report furnished to the Building Division
prior to grading will be furnished to the Engineering Division.
X 41. The filing of the tentative map or approval of saute does not guarantee that
sewer treatment capacity will be available at the time building permits are
requested. When building permits are requested, the Cucamonga County Water
District will be asked to certify the availability of capacity. Permits will
not be issued unless said certification is received in writing.
Y. 42. The City Engineer shall make the determination, in accordance with Section
66436(C)(1) of the Subdivision Map Act, that division and development of the
property will not unreasonably interfere with tna free and complete exercise
of any public entity or public utility right -of -way or easement and the signa-
ture of any such public entity or public utility may be omitted from the final
map unless the City is notified in writing of any objection to said determina-
tion within the specified time limits of said Section.
X 43. At the time of Final Map submittal, the following shall be submitted: Traverse
calculations (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference and/
or showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks referenced.
44. Development shall be limited to erne drive approach per street. Multiple lots
fronting on a single street shall use common drive ap[ roaches at lot lines.
X 45. Reciprocal access and parking easements ensuring access to parcels 1 to 3 and 4
to 7 inclusive over private roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided and
the easements shall be noticed on the map.
X 46. A blanket drainage easement for cross lot drainage shall be provided and delineated
on the map.
X 47. Grading plans for individual parcels shall be submitted for approval prior to
construction on each lot.
X 48. Appropriate drainage easements along the southerly boundary of parcel man are
to be recorded as part of parcel map to the satisfaction of the Building and
Safety Division.
RCE 20
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
LLOYD B. HUBBS
CITY ENGINEER
By:
CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT
FOR PARCEL MAP NO. 6976
continued.....
l
X 49. On -site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering or protecting divided
properties,are to be installed prior to issuance of building permits for
construction upon any parcel that may be subject to or contributes to, drainage
flows entering, leaving or within a parcel, relative to which a building permit
is requested.
X-50. Grading plan shall be submitted to Chino Basin Municipal Water District for
review prior to any grading work within their easement on the east side of the
project.
11
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA14ONGA
INITIAL. STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SFEET - To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.0')
For all projects requiring environmental review, this
form must be completed and submitted to the Development
Review Committee through t1le department where the
project application is made. Upon receipt of this
application, the Environmental Analysis stzff will prepare
Part II of the Initial Study. The Developm(.nt Review
Committee will meet and take action no latitr than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at whia:h time th(:
project is to be heard. The Cc:-nittee wilt. make one of
three determinations: 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be
filed, 2) The project will have an dnvironr.ental impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared. or
3) An additional information report should be supplied
by the applicant giving further information concerning
the proposed project.
PROJECT TITLE: Tentative Pa I MaR No 6976
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: QrQ•. 77- Aj— Mari,
Consulting Civil Engineer. 214 South Fucli Fay n la' C,ntar9o.
California. 91761 _
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE COVTACTED
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Same
i
LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.)
11100 Arrcw Route _
Assessors Parcel No. 209- 1'1-68
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REG:'ONAL, STATE AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THF AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:
None
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This project consists of a three
phase, 24 lot industrial subdivision located on the south s'_ie of
Arrow Route approximately 4,000 feet east of Haven Avenue in the
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AD.D SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: NQUO
ogol
���1- {•�',r?s� oa i- xt��TVv1CI Y::t1�D1cJC7S•
DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONKENTAL SETTING OF TH" PROJECT SITE
INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES),
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY
EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS):
T- existing 'site is level. in the east -west direction with a gentle
__ percent slope to the south. Vincent Avenue dead ends into the
'subdivision at the southwest corner of the site. There is a railroad
spur track along the easterly boundary. There is native ground cover -
with non - maintained vineyar&5. There is a 6" diameter Pine tree and
several o" diameter Eucalyptus trees that were plated us part of the
landscaping for the existing development adjacent to the west property
line. There was no noticeable animal population on the site beyond
naturally occuring animals. There are no cultural, historical or scenic
aspr.cts to this 9�,Y�,'. T ' site is nrrctjtj,g vaennt- T-P prnpprty to
the west is developed as industrial. The property to the south is
partially developed as indus+ •ial but a majority of the land is vacant.
Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series
of cumulative actions, which although individually small,
may as a whole have significant enviro,unental impact?
This tract consists of three phases of approximately 17 acres each
and will nest be part of a larger project.
LJ
I- 2
I
_ C
WILL THIS PROJECT:
YES NO
_ x 1. Create a substantial change in ground
contours?
_ x 2. Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vibration?
_ x 3. Create a substantial change it demand for
municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc.)'.
X_ 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or
general plan designations?
x 5- Remove any existing trees? How many?
-V_ 5. Create the reed for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, f'.!ammables or explosives?
Eyplanation of any YES answers above:
IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next. page.
CEZeiFICATiON: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to tha best of
my knowledge and belief. I further understand that
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaulation can be made by the development
Review Cc - nmittee.
Date May 29, 1981 Signature�5
Title %u'► c'/i
Z - -�
Mot PF
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
{
The following information should be I.rovided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Plann".ng Division in order to aid in aZsessing the ability of the
school district to accommodate the proposed residential development.
Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.:
Specific Location of Project:
PHASE I PRASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL
i 1. Number of single
family units: _
12. Number of multiple
family units:
3. Date proposed to
begin c-onstruction:
l;
`4. Earliest date of
ii
occupancy:
Model $
and r of Tentative
rS. Bedrooms Price Ranae
E
tJ
11
TY OF RANCHO CUCAMOP.'�i
ENGINEERING DIVISION
VICINITY MAP
title;
PARCEL MAP
NJ. 6996
N Page
S2ET /
TENTATIVE
PARCEL.. MAP NO. 6976
IN THE MYa-RAT:CHOCL AARONo^LN JULY. lost
"I'M A SUBDIVISION OF 7NE 9dRN 92 OT 6LC)IDN r47DWNS/lpl 501111:
R WGE 7 WM. SAN BERNARDINO BASE LW ACMD/ .ACLOROMIG TO
OFFICIAL OOVMWW.NT SURVEY. APMGVED Of THE SURVEYOR GEN(JU1L
GATED d1A•Y 9.WW
ENG44EER (7aNFRS OF RE[MaD ! ?RUT /E! LST!N9
L!LAIL`CNN /MM.C( IO GKL[AM7 /NY>n6Kl!%AY'/ lLY/RI['.0 / /ICMt,[�rpyf✓
(pvLK N.�GV/L leKN/L['A L(O /NHOfW /ILL/➢Y/I yt/PM /-�Y/4br11>irvC'.3
( /I.10 [eY[ /O < ✓L.M/[ y/ 3l nVPfAHL [/M.14/NC/%C'YYL'fA11fllrlb PyrNr[L (n / /LpTNY p'N/
d✓IMOGYVR:K. ✓Y O1Xd /(1�'>Y[/IJ Lt/ /. LIJM,[l.[Z /LM IIwJ PL�/! f(Y
[)/11 YYL•6IIp IGIL /pA✓Y t•O!W )[!eA iG✓!N[ 1LtL/NhY [O
zcw)NO /1N /N
P Q C41 /FO ✓/1>.1 V /X L
✓lI P
!r/�r /n6�•LrLIi1}LO,XO LCWL: n.( SIY dN/1N[M✓G1L. GLf /11
A'ICgL KIG
.SUafYhY•fIM17 +LI+ >/•'V: n! wN Lgwrn+w [XLl•O,MrL91M11
r
"
Ol ?N'LY�I>Y.
I1L//E9✓-W // lY ti
elLfr.'/sm
8AC„ 1 7 /.wr.( ow Qa prLwollmnrrr
+$...t� ..S
z J �" i� Iy Phl �9Pi�AhOfi S°!� ji n : q vs "` as 35 IS
ARROW a'n'.e'w — — ROUTE �roreFr _J
-_1 TTBD 1F83 N. --7wep.
LWi 1 - - - -_ —_
W
.. .y 1 rK rd rc ! � I rd I r.1c
_ ne•
1
i
1 1
V V �C^I ilmRmTGY /N
y
. II LmruYla.v I r[r�
�2 IyI
) 1 a 96 >p 13 re .14 13 Z n 13 f2
W 1�1 �h SI i
n9
r!'MV3dlf[1'X� -•� QiNYY>rfa'
LKbMYO /."K
3fAYR �
k\
:J, W
L?ATMj �L>!1'NIN y
LY91� Y
IL
Qlw6b• .. G�� .✓N:W!("[' __� -_. __..._ __ /ITS _' __
°✓/
PORTION SECTION J? 1
_ -- ¢i. c SDISS SfATE7MNf y' I s/�lF�(
•4TNy)Lpvyga nr,: a.:[✓wt mgr ^YC'1 LN✓sY..l }'
�— O'QIr(lYII m /�QV N'�.('dri10YM!1(.Vq>
L•v1L LLX /lA5 CiYPwGu i
L'P✓.IX�' M1I.dAppMA��[I((r�W(N
e %MC LYYl+r/e%MIhY�
PgOPOSED LAND uSAGEq k'
Jig nYPf[S!Rln(nWGV/}� /LW}7aYN'
M1M /MLro/MY [LW/eQMIOtAVO LFL
vlclnlm 1�pP
11
HE'M,YO /t[w'LIM �
� r
rT[ww.3rleRCRJ —
17 %
yy
18 1
19 2
20
'r(J'nnv.rrsvu
PORTION SECTION J? 1
_ -- ¢i. c SDISS SfATE7MNf y' I s/�lF�(
•4TNy)Lpvyga nr,: a.:[✓wt mgr ^YC'1 LN✓sY..l }'
�— O'QIr(lYII m /�QV N'�.('dri10YM!1(.Vq>
L•v1L LLX /lA5 CiYPwGu i
L'P✓.IX�' M1I.dAppMA��[I((r�W(N
e %MC LYYl+r/e%MIhY�
PgOPOSED LAND uSAGEq k'
Jig nYPf[S!Rln(nWGV/}� /LW}7aYN'
M1M /MLro/MY [LW/eQMIOtAVO LFL
vlclnlm 1�pP
11
vlclnlm 1�pP
11
0
TENTATIVE
i8----,RCEL MAP NO.
P
6976
76
IN THE CI (Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BEING A SvWMSIGII OP THE SOU7N V2 OE T.ECYgN M TO" =01 "rm-
RANGE7 NtiS7 SAIV BERNARDIND R'lSE fJV NERVIAN. ACCORDING TO
OFFICIAL ODVERNMENT SLOWLY- APPROVED BY THE SURVEYOR GENERAL.
DATED JUYBB.IN5.
aulc: r•,ro
uw+.,uv�?7x�eir.'
72 rd Y.�K' m K
e•Ic
i 411
if
0 22
RIC.
5
� I
TYPrw� - JECT/ON
.178 N
v. -CENT pollC
4M, ff-L� q'pL7E
b
-- - - - -ll-
— • - - - -•—
- - - -- i
�N/N afroACL
i
P
per[ ,7
7
ZW
Duyr
d /GV'
tli AO•
i
slrorr� -osocL
N IW .CLwC
Y
72 rd Y.�K' m K
e•Ic
i 411
if
0 22
RIC.
5
� I
TYPrw� - JECT/ON
.178 N
v. -CENT pollC
M. .r
3.Lnou
r.
o
O
rI. el
nit ZZ
fla
p:.
21
7 In
a
E
Ell
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 9, 1981
T0: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
gY: Arlene J. Troup, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 81 -31 -
R I - The development of !, :ee concrete tilt-up n us ria
building totaling 31,268 square feet in the Cucamonga Busi-
ness Park on 2 acres of land in the M -1 zone located on the
west side of Archibald Avenue south of Arrow Route -
APN 209 - 201 -37 & 38.
ABSTRACT: The applicant is requesting review and approval for the
development of three industrial/office/warehouse buildings to be lo-
cated on the west side of Archibald Avenue. The development wbuld con-
stitute an additional phase of an already existing industria'1 park,
Cucamonga Business Park. The project has been reviewed by the Design
and Development Review Committees and has undergone appropriate revi-
sions per their comments. Staff has reviewed the project and has recom-
mended conditions of approval for your consideration.
BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing the construction of three sand -
b asted cones•- -•e slab tilt -up buildings totaling 31,268 square feet for
the use OT industrial, office, and warehousing operations on two acres
of land. The project sit( is located at the southwest corner of Archibald
Avenue and Business Center Drive just south of Arrow Route (Exhibit- "A "),
and is presently vacant. The project is bounded on the west by a portion
of the Cucamonga Business Park, on the south by Inspiron (an industrial
site), on the east by Archibald Avenue, and on the north ky vacant land
that is designated for industrial park development. The axisting grade
slopes gently from the north to the south approximately 1% to 2% as in-
dicated on the Conceptual Gracing Plan. The property is presently lo-
cated in Subarea 3 of the Industrial Specific Plan. This particular
site is designated for Industrial Park development. The balance of
this subarea is designated for General Industrial uses.
ITEM F
Environmental Assessment /Development Review 81 -31
September 9, 1981
Page 2
E
ANALYSIS_ The site development plan (Exhibit "A ") has been developed in
accordance with the Zoning Ordinance and Indust.•ial Specific Plan standards
and requirements. The parking stalls along Business Center Drive are to be
screened from view with a dense landscaping hedge. The design of this parking
area is in keeping with those of the already existing sites in the park.
Archibald Avenue is designated as a Special Boulevard in the General Plan,
and the applicant has proposed to landscape it accord -ngly. Access to the
site is being provided in four locations. There are three driveways located
off of Business Center Drive, one of which is shared access. There is also
a drive located off of Archibald near the southern property line. Full
street improvements will be required for the future landscape median on
Archibald Avenue. Building elevations, as shown on the colored rendering,
indicate the use of natural colored sandblasted concrete similar to the
buildings already in a ~istence in the park. Colored elevations and ren-
ucr•ings will be available at the Planning Coim„ission meeting. The Design
and Development Review Committees have reviewed the project and recommend
approval of the design and the site plan.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review and
consider the various aspects of this project. If the Commission concurs
with the findings and analysis of the Staff, then the appropriate Resolution
is attached for your consideration along with the appropriate Conditions cf
Approval.
Respectfully submitted,
1
ANJ, AICp
Director of . •mmunity Development
JL:AJT:jr
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Flan
Part I Initial Study
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
u 1.
0 .Us I. N E d d C C N T [ N_ 0 R / Y 9
rb
b
no
im-l-mll .WT
v'
h
4 b
• •e
4r
CITY OF
RANCHO CUC ANNIO \TOA►.
PLANNING DIVISION
Ti
z
1�y —
Y
V
11
�i
o,
� o
z,
V�
G7
..•.1.1•r.m
V V
NORTH
ITEM: hireclvr Re.otew Wc.61_.3{
TITLE: R e$er - --" --.,� a- I lk
E,XI IIBIT: �� SCALE: 'aa
�t-edua�
LI
�n4
p i 4:R C E L
5
ePA
F C'E .L
du.a wtlw• urru wn
��.
M.4e1 • J•...
MMTY ``• • .Y.fNI� •e..w
y.rN ee1.LU• ♦.i. n.. r�O...
F....ww....f/• e.w w. •ew..
•, er.la nq\ U. /!I •.Ne.PM
.�ief�..'�•uu..iFO..i.aY..i �. \1�..•.e
/•... I..P'C•WCYI ♦)O4.wMK
I I.10. M0Y•n MP w+LOt.Lww• YO•.O
Ow..W.
E.YI .RY.VM.V.IMTY01•MO•Ma Ee'YYMi. •
.N..Y.1•�.•Y..w...•w.4.'..OM
4w•R. —. �J�V Pte. ^.•P.�v.Y�.
.w.�ORWtvy wYi n.lN n.. \uqR y
V' � �Y. Ow. ri W Y.KNy� Y.Y.
�IMV W.. /IiY.O.I ... w. Pa/�(�.•
P'IO I..•.Y
CITY OF
RANCHO CUC ANNIO \TOA►.
PLANNING DIVISION
Ti
z
1�y —
Y
V
11
�i
o,
� o
z,
V�
G7
..•.1.1•r.m
V V
NORTH
ITEM: hireclvr Re.otew Wc.61_.3{
TITLE: R e$er - --" --.,� a- I lk
E,XI IIBIT: �� SCALE: 'aa
�t-edua�
LI
CITY OF RANCHO CU :;&40NGA
INITIAL STUDY to
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $80.00
For all projects requiring environmental review, this,
form must be completed and submitted to the Development
Review Committee through the department where the
project application is made. Upon receipt of this
application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare
Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review
Committee will meet and take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of
three determinations: 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a Negative Dec? --ration will be
riled, 2) The project will have an environmental impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or
3) An additional information report should be supplied
by the applicant giving further information concerning
the proposed project. ,
PROJECT TITLE: C,,.:741 f �� (� �' 6- _
APPLICAN'T'S 217AME. ADDRESS, TELEPHONE:
RAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF P P.SON TO BT. CONTACTFP
CONCERNING TnIS PROJECT: ,Q- - /Z ".1 '+6
IACATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASCESSOR PA_'= NO.)
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUIFG SUCH PERMITS:
- $ -I
E
C
PROJECT_ DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION LP PROJECT:
_ a
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SOWME FOOTAGE OF PAISMING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: � ,4 e--,
f/�gGJ 1�
DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONALNTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE
INCLUDING INFOIu ATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLAINTS (TREES) ,
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY
EXTSTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS):
Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series-
of cumulative actions, which although individually small,
may as a whole h.ve significant environmental. impact?
I -2
e.
1 f"
WILL THIS PP.OJECT: `
YES NO
±� 1. Create a substantial change in ground
contours?
2. Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vibration?
3.. Create a substantial change in demand for
municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc.)?
x4. Create changes in the existing zoning or
general Flan designations?
S: Remove any existing trees? How many?
_ X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
tonic substances, flammables or explosives?
Explanation of any YES answers above:
IMPORTAN^: If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the corm on the
next page.
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished,
above ai.d in the attached exhibits pro se.it the data and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and belief. I further understand that
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evallation can be made by ttye') Development
Review Committee. L
Date 2 5
Signature,,-
-
Z �
Title
SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse
impacts on the env•Fronment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on
September 9, 1981.
SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 81 -31 is approved
subject to the attached standard conditions.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9li! DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1981.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
effrey Y.ing, Chairnrin
ATTEST:
Secretary of the P anning Comoission
RESOLUTION N0.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RAI4CHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 81 -31
LOCATED IN THE CUCAMONGA BUSINESS PARK ON THE
WEST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE, SOUTH OF ARROW
ROUTE IN THE M -1 ZONE.
WHEREAS, on the 5th day of August, 1981, a complete application
was filed
by A. H. Reiter for review of the above - described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 9th day of September, 1981, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning
Commission held a meeting to consider the above- described
project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
resolved
as follows:
SECTION I: That the following findings can be met:
1. That the proposed use is in a,:cord with the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zone in
which the use is proposed; and,
2. That the proposed use, together witti :v.a conditions
applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to
properties or improvements in the vicinity; and,
3. That the proposed use is in comrliance with each of the
applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance; and
4. That the proposed project is consistent with the General
Plan and the Industrial Specific Plan.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse
impacts on the env•Fronment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on
September 9, 1981.
SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 81 -31 is approved
subject to the attached standard conditions.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9li! DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1981.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
effrey Y.ing, Chairnrin
ATTEST:
Secretary of the P anning Comoission
Resolution No.
Page 2
I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Ranchii
Cucamonga, do hereby certify `lat tse foregoing Resolution was d�tjly and
regularly introduced, passed, and aiopted by the Planning Commission o.'
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
,,ommission held on the 9th day of September, 1981 by the following vot(+
to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
]
\• b
b w
w
N +
+
V
V C N
N P
P^ u T
T
UO y
y^ f
f•�q
�'� N
N N
N q
q C
C .
.� 4
4 «
« fi b q n
n L
L N V N G q
q q
q b
b T O
O •n N N C
C
• a
aJ .
.'.° V
V u
a y
y .
.°.�iJ r N
°^ v
v c
cp .
.`. awn n
u a
nG�iw
C '
u q
O•✓ a
W` w
w✓ +
+ w
L L
w q
q L
L C
✓ u
q F
F. d
d L N
N O O
a •.. f
u L
4 d
d l
lT � V n
✓i -
.-. •
° d
p V (..UI O u
u�
L u ✓
-_ o^ .
LLq n
•�^_'..•. °
d q moo`, c
° F
4, •
•A N
V^ Y
Yp UN.Oi Y
Y L
nT4 y
N N
N V
V q
L; L r
r L
L 6 q
.• V
V V 2 C � f
f= P
w �
�^° v
v q
q rncw � N
q� L
.iOC _ {
{ c
Y w
�✓ u
u° �
✓ �
N n
=m i "
" v
v°i o
oir.w °
°� .
a. ✓
�: �
�• Y w. N
u c N ._ n G
G
V
LL c
n' a
N ✓
✓ u
V i
i L
c q 0
0 a,
L
N� y
� u
u. �
4 4 °
N T
✓ _
_ � N
b A
N
_ aJ b
b n q
q t
y ✓
w L
L: N C �
� 4
T r i
i V
q C �' b
•O ✓ C
C
=.i.ov c
c °
° ?
T.N+� a
a o
o
✓` N
$ �
� d
d N
NNiI+ v w
w✓.. =
?..' T
•" n
p Y
Y _
OO •
•- ••l "LV L
L u
uu i
ir'i:: •
cU ^
^
^ p L
nw p
_ n
n f? O
Y� L
uT u
•nw0 c
L O O
O LL J
J ^
^ N
y }
y y C
C Y
•° b
b � J
J w a 4
4._ a
Y
•_
a'• v
N Y
L acute'
'•' +
M ^
^ F
F. W L w -r• N
N V w
w W N nl'O G
G J
+ M
JI F•
r•O °
°1U O
O� q
q V
V+ b
bnt LL W
W b
bL�l°i OI •-. L
L
`
VuC J 4
4
—c n
no N
Nc q
qn '
^NiL q
q' °
°i�kOO.c r
`w Z
ZL.b V
ozyc°— q
qc
�-
VN L
L r
' ^
V'Y ^ L
q.V L
ro
Y
Yi:° o
N.M �
N� d
d'P N
N+ V
r-' J
Jt V
L g
gFCC q
L L
Ll V
V ✓1.�'y N
tGC M
b J
�L O
O� V
V>i u
uC f
Nu i
iu �
�9••_ +v V
V u
u u
uL� C
.� V� v �
M
j� V
V b
Yi +
+ .
N C
._ P
P y •� p _ O
q V
'n .
._ Y
Y• p ^
.� .
�J O
W C
V C C
C� L
L G
�Ou L
gi p •/. V
WI
V> D
Du M
ML R
� �
�1� �
+ >
l q
q+ .
.Li�� �
L••O.CL UC ^
n•� 6
m w
R� �
T 9
� +
wu N
N4pV l
LL °
°. qn 1
?V� V
-gyp J✓
^^ t
t
6n C
WG V
V C
Cu Ud O
W �
�Jy +
pip F.1 ?
VV9}�LL Y. 6
6 PN u
u
O p
p C
aJ q n
nI q '
' V s
O W C
n
U V
V r
ri O
Op d
C � p •_ u a
`q N
s V
C G °
._ p n
dL G
G,C q
q +6d V
Via`/ `
NuN O
`C
v C' L
L V p
p N l
l �
� i
2 +
+ N
O r
r
`mu .
°' $
$ .
=� b
i u 2
iJ • -b n'oJ N
NW `
.•un o
N y w ✓` O
v °in `
._p _
_. °
._ v
v`i \°..vc =
b•J y
yw L L L N
`«` .
`
V� N
Nf_ 6
6q
No C
N 6
6°Vi W
W �LZ fi Y
Yi4 q
N y
F-°. N
NSu �
�r` _
L
w 4
_4 YO ✓N w
40 L
LL
0
N
✓
C N V •
•-- N M
M L p
p �
� C
` ✓
U• L
LV O
O U C YN- L
L .
._ y _ y
y w u
F •
LG F
u •
v. Y N 4
4 F
•� O •
•� C L
C O
O •Or• N +- _
q
jG p
p v
Fn' C
_O N
N w
w q
Or• Nr W
W C
CL, O q
q P
PV L
LO b
b w
w
O. V
Vy N
N . A
A N Y
Y A
AL C
CW Tn C
C .
LL O
�..C. ^
N q
q N
nAro i
.s
p 6
6 ^ •`°{✓' n
ilz
m•- .
a. y
W ^
^• L T u
u ^`� {
o�w �
Nd
= W
WL i
.L. a
V L
yq W
rte{.° +
{Equ (
� N
p ✓
_b V
ru r
+�I! n
nD f
('� o
b -
O V
O
-rvt
W p
p'^ O
VTJ d
dL O
O • Y^ N
NW••- g
gLIN +
+u V
VN p1.O
,Vf u
CO ^ w
w q
qb m
m +
T. y
y✓ u
u✓ T
T =
n ,
uV C
� V
O f
•n C
+p T
=C
� Y
Y O
V L
L v E
E N O
C p C
C r• `
` V p
p� L N J
J.�
W J
J �
O C
C wG- �
w
+ w
ZN A
H m
m V
V - T
T1 j N
Nu V
Vy0 Z
Ou FNILmS M
M N
Nu
O �
rj G
Gt°i W
WO! uL O
A_.0 �
�UtJ F
Frp. O
'J O
� `
` r
OT W
WuC �• b
by .
.•. ^
OO ^
qV
.HOC ^
^L L
Lq� Z
p!y �
2u d
^L y
yO }]LM u
u q
Utr O N
N q
q ^
^ q q
q> ^
^L >
ZZ \
�J 2
d y
y ^ •C q
q
TO
•` O
O p
p b
b r„ [
[1 .
.-- N LL } T ^
^ N
N i C
C .
..J q V O V p
p
LL O •
O r
rJ •
•� w
O S O
� N
w q N V
V a r
rLp L N L L Y
Y T L
L r.-.•- l
lY w
w u ••y -
- u
F �
N �
� C
C u
uu ups >
>N v
v�0.� rL y
yL 6
4 N
L`y_ CVq u
upC.
F F
N ✓
✓ r
f"
LON
4 �
�T q
qV>i y
iq O
di (\ P
'� �
�a
..1 p
p W
W•.- N
yC °
V A
OL N
NrVi.O r
rr ✓w- ^
^+• d
P +C•rw '
N _
.
N O q
q L N N M
L= ^
y U
_> .
V d
y N
LLL� ,
M P
^ P o
y L
L u ✓° ^
O- N
N p
d 1
rl y
1by L
M L p L
L V U
U✓ 4
> N N >
> V ^
^ y
^ O
l)b.l
y L W W q
6� 6
6 2
N q
- ^V N
q O °
°I ^ L- L L
L y
LL✓ q
2 O O F A
A N
q N .•• q
o c. v
v `
y L
q
i5
2m N
N^ m ^ \° w
w .° W
W u✓ w d
d N
N o
` u° �_ W
E y N
N o
Q( W
W u
u «
a
aN C qc.. >
>u F
FW.au °
oq v .
.°.cq n
n.. n
nLL •
..cu
a. >
«
>.•• � W o o
oe w
pmn L
LaN '
'O .'-'. u
.'O N
N L
Lo-q
nde i
i a
a OT
N
Q
v
a
6
V
O 4
N V °
twL
c N
q o i
N
c n ¢
V_
z
V C •�
Y,r N a
4�T n
d G W
ry A l
L 6 W
v a
O V q OlY
C 4 �✓
C � O
NLn Id
v
ms Sc
f W
1.
V � a I.• d
ti
1 N 6 w
/I
V
Y
V
Y]
0
a
t
n
A
S
k
F
L
rt
L o
C V•
F.�
� F
l u
d C
a^,v
cO
V
q V
b A
4 +
c
b �
C u
q V
m �
L N
ti V
if
o +
L
> V
O
%L v
a «c
�qg
✓ r9
N q yO
N V L
V +
U 1�
C 4 +
mew
L N V
hS� w
W O Y.
1
W
N
S
a
a
V
r
OI
L
a
°
C
a 4
L O
O VL
W i
O O
Ny
V J
d _ N
n
V
J �L
O N
Nd
N ° A
rn n: w
c �
n m u
V N
N .y
> w `
c b
V N
u+u✓
G C L
F .1
q
G
1 C
'Z 10; P
V U C
w q
fit+4 u.
O
q V
L W u
V O u
L V
L u ✓ N
W N C
V
✓ T
C q..C.
+N ✓o
r` =3
a c q o
u Y V
Qa�A
M IN 9
�r uL,O
PI
a
L
A
9 N
o
V o
C
uT
G
VF ^
D =
N °
a.�
ao
^ a
N C
n
QN
na
C u
Y y
` O
YL
6
n C
q °
a �
6
4 O
O 01
A
^ C
6
.q• V
C 6G
qM
C
✓ 11
V
Vo LG.
L1 Y•d0 d
r• V O
_N ^ «Nw•O u
N¢�
L N C V n O N° •w•
NVV H6
its
°
l Nq C
Q qyO v,0
^ b + L N
= Nmc,�piT mot
6TL` -Ea
a
N^ •c4 a✓ c n% u
o m °.m.. Sia -o ✓d
C 6 V 1 L g N P C N L
its
L L d Y L p C O
W✓ O d `J q q L
cmmvq LiO�;
^p A W
VL' �� d A u V L� ✓ ^LT O
J ✓ 6v 1N. q G V,
m = C N
TTY. =J„ Vqj
a✓
c c TAN ✓q°'
y O N
✓✓ N4L
N L O N
W a Y TV u O N g V N
N1 .�
1
L T
P
WAS 7 .-rV C E T ..C.
qo
•� c 201 L^
N O T O L G G� u N f+ O t
Y
,J711
u V u V b V C C Y O
p. L ✓ a N A V 6 u
^ N Y •°C V C L^ u^ O •'j u�
a° q
Win-
IS
CCtt . E,
4N
a •y OL
O� ^ Lv F3p�TLNN G
Gu
L� T O,O CLU N,r+
y
VC 9 W� 4r O:4 U C
Z .0 yu �Ni
°Oa n.✓ VO.°.
L Q 91 ° N V G E ¢' O q W V L •�
PG N OOL +.CSI{, u G
L _ c✓ u q� . a A o s
,•'O V d ^ LI ^ C
N N,av v °�oa q4 JL• LG4Y°
OVM L LC.JNL'LN µy°
NLNU�if 2 vv
y OL C•�
Q NO, QO 6 P¢,�n .L•,k +OD 4LOlG•
a
L
11C
C 6
V
+ o
u y
O,✓
i
r
v
r
l 1
R
Q�
O.0
6 A
A O
C y
q
� A
N C
P L
C W
n^
NG
T
C O
^ a
O M
TD
u O
i
b N
r
m�
E
L. u
rn
L
^
C
N
J N
VN
'••
y d
q
u L
Y+
l
L
u
AWN.-
C
CV A
V C
O
c O
`
Cc
19 V
'^
.V J
N
No
✓
LL
N
M
2
V
C
`
n
10; V
vY �
L +,
o
o
}t-
4
aY
,N
oo
v
I°
ter.
•�
G
72
✓.n �m
L]
.o,."
to
gVLu
nF.G.`.L)c .,,o
'
L
�O,M
VL
°
AN
�
y
L
a
O
w
lTP
G
~ N
r
OOdgV 4V�l
u L
L V_
L
✓ p
N
O
N
y
u
d W u A
VLO
n -p
Cq
v
u
9
���
Tr
y.°.r
¢Oi Nu�C7
_La
w]
u
L d
C^
L
^^.r^
vL,i
iu
a
1'+v
Y -�
✓4w
✓<,9
N
Jp
n +r Hoar
q�
I
W
n
N
6
4
P
LN
U O
q^
L N
A L
` 9
4°. °
L VJi
` L
N
y
n^ N
L
d •n
� q
° ��
>,
L✓
W
✓,
C L u C •�
(:
V
,Li,
N
A
g
✓
�_q
I
�y�
4•�u
uu
�:
mL
�L
V
N
ONV. ✓.Ji�EN
�
CMG
A
Ob
~
°
✓
A
x
.__N
^ ✓�
✓yL^CL••Cu
mC L
l
Vdi
(�
2.2- q
n • Nu
�O
J
VNO
`�
✓L
._
^°
N
pVv
vLJ
p O�
6
•r
° JgJUO
VFC
~
AR
IGOFVCrG
qL'�
O'N
qL
OJ
L
A
,L L'N
+Sp
4� N
b
9 d
y
O C ••
pL �
� L
d^
�J
2
.^
° C b
W N 6
u
y
•'�
V C A✓ O N
AFN
GCC
Wt0
.dG�
`
L�•
_
`•
`
d
Y
_
L{66L
�
C
8
^+
JJ
T
Y n
M
w_¢
O N
can
N
q )• N L n+
L f.
�� •�
C N✓
P'�
9 2
OI
C
�
C
Y•
m .�
C {' A
C^
Z
N
A N
p
N
O
d •� N
C^
`O
6'
LC L
1_
�L'C
L u V
u
O1 ^l�N ^✓),O
All
eL6,rV
F
)Nw
11q
VI
4i
q�'v ,r��V96
cNy
vf1'n
nn
q
�.
!i•r
c +v
bw✓
Vu.,C_
✓f,
Uw.o �'
I
+ d
wp�
+•T
A
OMC
YNG
CCCq
mV
✓Pr O`CN
d•N
W
N :�
�_ O
^✓
f
V O
A N
,•, O J W T
G
N
C 'V'C <I ON
�
u
J
+
Vu
V4�
L
N
4
T
•�O
uy t 4'
F L
LLNC
a
L LV
J 4
b✓ 3
�L ✓d
(J : ^4 R > O
4 O
L
H
A
U
W
W
N
S
a
a
V
r
OI
L
a
°
C
a 4
L O
O VL
W i
O O
Ny
V J
d _ N
n
V
J �L
O N
Nd
N ° A
rn n: w
c �
n m u
V N
N .y
> w `
c b
V N
u+u✓
G C L
F .1
q
G
1 C
'Z 10; P
V U C
w q
fit+4 u.
O
q V
L W u
V O u
L V
L u ✓ N
W N C
V
✓ T
C q..C.
+N ✓o
r` =3
a c q o
u Y V
Qa�A
M IN 9
�r uL,O
PI
a
L
A
9 N
o
V o
C
uT
G
VF ^
D =
N °
a.�
ao
^ a
N C
n
QN
na
C u
Y y
` O
YL
6
n C
q °
a �
6
4 O
O 01
A
^ C
6
.q• V
C 6G
qM
C
✓ 11
V
Vo LG.
L1 Y•d0 d
r• V O
_N ^ «Nw•O u
N¢�
L N C V n O N° •w•
NVV H6
its
°
l Nq C
Q qyO v,0
^ b + L N
= Nmc,�piT mot
6TL` -Ea
a
N^ •c4 a✓ c n% u
o m °.m.. Sia -o ✓d
C 6 V 1 L g N P C N L
its
L L d Y L p C O
W✓ O d `J q q L
cmmvq LiO�;
^p A W
VL' �� d A u V L� ✓ ^LT O
J ✓ 6v 1N. q G V,
m = C N
TTY. =J„ Vqj
a✓
c c TAN ✓q°'
y O N
✓✓ N4L
N L O N
W a Y TV u O N g V N
N1 .�
1
L T
P
WAS 7 .-rV C E T ..C.
qo
•� c 201 L^
N O T O L G G� u N f+ O t
Y
,J711
u V u V b V C C Y O
p. L ✓ a N A V 6 u
^ N Y •°C V C L^ u^ O •'j u�
a° q
Win-
IS
CCtt . E,
4N
a •y OL
O� ^ Lv F3p�TLNN G
Gu
L� T O,O CLU N,r+
y
VC 9 W� 4r O:4 U C
Z .0 yu �Ni
°Oa n.✓ VO.°.
L Q 91 ° N V G E ¢' O q W V L •�
PG N OOL +.CSI{, u G
L _ c✓ u q� . a A o s
,•'O V d ^ LI ^ C
N N,av v °�oa q4 JL• LG4Y°
OVM L LC.JNL'LN µy°
NLNU�if 2 vv
y OL C•�
Q NO, QO 6 P¢,�n .L•,k +OD 4LOlG•
a
L
11C
C 6
V
+ o
u y
O,✓
i
r
v
r
l 1
R
Q�
O.0
6 A
A O
C y
q
� A
N C
P L
C W
n^
NG
T
C O
^ a
O M
TD
u O
i
b N
r
m�
E
L. u
d
W d
P
C N
1�-9 N
2ryVY
C_V
^ti
•iC
Y
W
u
1 n,
-1 L
C
T O
- V�
V
_ c
M� W
cp u
c ✓� tir q
j
y A
r u
V� P^
N q O
V N�
U
g V
J
✓
�
^ n'Q
V p. \T
J
L
L C N
✓ r
G
L O
0 •� u
d
w
O
u d L
•
S .a rr
V
6 J A j
u._
t V
�
tT
�
V Y
i
O
i Y P
N .�
N T l
O-1
N
Y.
..- 4
W
I
._
y
•UJ C
a"
� O
O O
u^
J L
F
y
�.• = ' V
N C y'r
^ m V •
C
N >•
C
PO
J
L N V p
L
9
�
t L U
O'^ ^
_
UW
�
9A
V
H
,•�4L'
L
L G j L rn_
�\
N •11.1
d�
•rr °
n._..
u
rL.
O
NLVO.
^` C
V
d
L
q
.L.f
1T V+
q
W< q =r
_«
�
O
j
C rn C w V Or
l` L
i d
q O t
N n V • L
Rj
N N d
G W
L
C w G
V9O
q ^
am°
1� �
L u q
9 w T
N
q
C'
N .� 1ti .•.
aJ
L V
u
NNj
q
n L a (i
N.
N
GT09(_-
�C
ud
4
O
V
v
dug
- UTd
`WP
��4'L+
ANA
`
N921
qV
04��
N LWq
Ct
u� LLN
1_rN
NC
L
d
d
Jq q
r
yW
11
qOa
�
����
zv 'vi eo
°m o•
x ` Nc
•�
v °Dorn
ariW
`W•_ o
[`
°
-
w
a `N }
^ NL
NW�
.0.. N••-
.ac
gnu
N�Gc:•^
�u
a1
LL'�^
rr IOU
�n
ai0
VT'
Nrp
O
it �n tryN `[l
vii
NSW
NSf.
JCA
Lllw
1riu Vm
Nu
VW
A
u
a_
V
_
O
LNV
n
10 lN� mE
LO
q�L
GNU
��1 GVL
dN
N ^qN ^O
Y-4
Y'
^
.�
N
Ui
aPw `.4 AO
•��W
G 9rdi�
_lyN
O•V
LLl
tN
aN
cG
VOU
.' Sl
VVr
Vr V�V
j1
r-1u
nt1
N �C
C •n
nW LUi
auc�
Nn1
v9.N.�
+�
�OU
u.�r
.-•N
rc°.rn
G
Nc�
_
giWN
u.
_,6,
« rti
va°.v
.PC
�b
w .. °L
w
u
av
c
u
r
wV•q i
C>p
vOU
u
-..L. u
my�0y
u �r^ir�
yuq
G
O
u
l rn d n q
~ L
T
T
4N `•
N U w
r W V
- z; M L
h
�
V
V9q uV
rnOL
13 Zr-L�
mil)`
wN.rO -L^
PV
OLq 6LU
Y V
O..
W2•
Uu
r-V'�
WNU
VOd
V
NOL(i ^G
i '^
Cq
C
L
/dj
O
N N
90
^N
ON
^\/ i
V'O�� NO OE
^P�
V JY-O
Ou
6Vd
c[ L
cL IM`
n
vqF-
�:�rnw NL
V }
n
V
Oa+L
LL
<100A b
NT
�
L
La
O[O V Q V1 •2 q
\-. L] u�
Q 9
A
V
O
W
N
p
Cj
U
N G
O
N
Q q
� O u
•I
Nf
QI
6 V
C]
j
ry
S
M
W
w
q
•J
cL W
rr
9y
c�
r
c
O
�h
AC
q
a`yrp
aY
•
Nrla L L
N
E
NY-O
-o
W N
VN
GnV
q
„
[l -1
in
c
to . .N
L�
J ^C
O
� -
•a VU L'j
O•U4a
L•
^nGL
V�
V
V
L
4 r
�
�
?
•J L N> O ; C=
L O
4 d
•4- N
C
• m 0
q !J T
N J=J n
N O
U
l U
r _ y r
•� L O
y L N
�C
V
L V O
T O W
V Lur N
O
N
rn
C N
L V O O
'^ L
°
d
g W N
y
Cr
of "• LE
tJCnO
�V LL
JO
- -t yj
«,�;`
V•�GA 1_..Y`
L•••rn J 0.0'r•
j N
C._ u•
VC
w. Or u
\L
U•r-
�••O
v.
'-'^ G
(p ^«
CUl11LL
V
LV wgL5tVY~
dYr FN
VYrgY
H
LT WC
Ny0
Cr�rL --pr
O��
V
q
V�f
V�
UM V^
a L 4 A 1: •� q i
1r. ['
OVOO
C O
O � V
p V Y
N g T G�
� q h0.
V
E
N pV
U
r .•.
LUL=ucVMG+Y
1V�i•_
jq
V.Cu ^
c
Li
nc
CCiP Vu
LC
Oct +wY du
«ur(y
mp^
6
s
�Yq
^Yrc.
;VV
b ilp
a. dr
wV.
q
v
c
LN
•E
a.d.YN�O
�^ L
w�a9
W
Wqa
CV dOO
LY WLL
01
«G
L. a•
VrV- p`
6 -C.
NGq
> q.�
Y
a.`�
uri /P
•Y-w9
LL.W
u
^CJ
.+ L N
W_ V_
O N
•1C
n
'. L C
q N G tr •
q W
q
9
L
=i
bW
�y �C
jNV
urr Ya
.L
N V••O•V 69^
G L
l
•-�q}
q
yJ
O.W
{A�LL9
b C
OY >YW
1L
OO J,^
�_
q
r-• 9 0 L1 (L� N q
Y. Y' d
q 9
-!fj'
V
... V I L W
Y- ^ V I
f
Or w
T y
L
> ^J
^ a r
LL
u
V
V C O
M a O
r_
.L
L
N
^O y
d n V N P[L P
hV.^L C
rn
nC(fr
d
L
[�.
N T N
WrL-W
l..a
OL•
. rn
LMW
1
�C
C
�d
Ly ON
O
N MA
C
V
Y. M d
L
9y•
E nr
u
y
pp
yC�uWr vO JLJZ
O>9`Ipa
rn
NC LU
OO
NAG
T&
_
pOJ
Y
V d 9
O' J Li u
N Y pr
J L
A
V p q
aV L1diV
N 0�
nC
A
j
.9 `
q
(J^
N
O7 MV
u
LJLV
Wq4^
U�
L
r
C %W OLV
LNdC
V
✓
1j
LV ' F.
O Nq
C'�90CVGVV�V
NArq�
L
�4V
C ^N
^• 1
C
W 41 �aqL
p
ii
`EN l
7d V rW_
Zia, L arV
P
+•C_ V_
�`V
�
^
Ny�N.Ua•
4w•a
`
WY
2V ._ \.
LWNG
O
I
ZEN
P\OL+
A�aq•Y9
Aq.q.•Yy
OOLWiNLny ^u
H�G•_
4
C
V4
�V�I�
^l
C
�JN
rV-NV
NCWJN
Nu dLJ
d
Vrr-
^i
dC�l��O�•�A9
LL
d`N�
«NV
C`OYUr
O
Ld,o
JYU
OuWNV_
OLd
A
d�
^
M
^O
VUdr��O Onu
9 Y` ••' •_ .• •••
V
O V V
A V P
Y y
l
^
A L
C
«q
{•�
L q
W
C S NNO.V
r� Y-
A d
s
N _
_
]
V V W
M. -O-�u
Y' .^
W w
u
^
v
ou
q
N
q «O•
«n r,.sv[i nEJ
=9c °.y
qj ^i�B
°°
_.•qY
b9 oN
c'v n:E
.a«
N
=
c1Mq
j�
r` „n��
_._N..
\r NrL
gE9AV
LgCN
L60rN
Z
rL VF/a
wj tll auTl
„L Vn
7ggN
L'`
wirL
VV
C•C 9�
l� O L 09
N9'_ L
�
1�
NL. L
L V C
N Nr N
N u
N W
N
d
N O
^ Fy
L
C O
p L
L4W N1a 1«ir rJ¢cq
a{i aW.
N
Y�ci1a4
i
q U
CL1]
Aw•a/
Vy1Wi
w1.G+
q gNg09rr._u�9
>l.jd
YyZ
w[y
W /J
L L
•�•
�JVq
G
._ rte jw_
^ j g G L O n q q C
\. n
p u LL
L~
:�
'
N `O a,
L C V C
C C 91r
9
L b
J ^•
L j
1'' P
O
,
J rn
AM
�9 ryd „uN V•�-
E dy.uq C q
agtlq
a W
3IV S^
Nd 2J a
O
V
Yy pC LN
Yw40
A l
�UNd�1
ii.~(�.
��i.JC
N
P�
d
Eb
Nt
L
yC
T
_
V
V ^EU
yY•W1Jrn
OOE••'
u
aC•
d
OA.I'
V d
09
=` Y f
P
0A` ^A SOS +�YO
N� rn
N�V�
J
C NOON
L^•.h --n
J
V
u
rf
a d w N
O d W_
a d •�' ^`
n G L
y V W^ d
{ w d^ V
V
^ !J
N
N M YO
LV[r +- L�d>.Uw
D.Oq j�M LAVA
tNLL
1 -•.•^J
{yV�
N
Nye
LjgO
Im
aNNY-
LCNNI
Lw9AV
rn N
^nC
�
�O
5
�
6J9AO
n9
N
Gb
SJO
6V
WN WY
a O
Y
i
O
d
O
4
u b W d OI V T
� b
a ✓ q ti r o
N L y r V_ � SW'. ✓
S W N 2 Y iI
N d V q O V J
V �
dL L p rby NL
L L.r A
L ^ 4✓ W A V{
✓
Y 6 b 4
9a c aum ✓o° ?.
49 �
>00 T WL NY ...yi NN I2
H a f a{:I qF111 N
W ..>.
V.'
1Y H 0 O. L/ N , /AuIY1
K
O
-o
o� V
W ^ J
r
J
V O
¢ u
4
CJ _J
✓� 2
.T
V �-
•6
bW
K_ r
Ul
W '
� a
N
W
V O O C u G r
Wuq•� uw O i C
npl w � c c L
1 ✓bo
saE wo K g' .
PO 61 }..� d «✓ ✓ N 6ri V41
L P C.� T.r L \: V O✓
r^ � L ✓ P ✓ P L L O V
nNT u`ic TL� b ✓« oN�`.
wYq L V✓ VLV w N^ `.l V
!�
t52 ✓ L` i 'p V V O L V
ZE
✓ b✓ Y w .L,r V T V - W C � V L C
.-
V ✓ rvY' � r X laJ G 4. 0 VyV u V P
C ��V Y Nl L O Nun . ^4 � ✓ I. ITV NW
O LA'Y A.Lr ,�irN✓ L �✓ r'� ✓C P9 i�`T
'�' OIL N W q L ' N J •._- L y W
✓ W'Y MLV b ly4 �� �O' W VGM
Ir ✓ r o N p cV. ° C N •l O- t
C V O n
nY 4a -e N ^ «no �� N d✓ LN
6 rLW V4� WOr ✓W CIN Y"1 .�
tYLT NW [N[^ uV VqN
C 1� f1 A V L N + q V
6 V d+
p IYOy' _•]ylQj) Ip m' P
�J
J
b
V ]�
✓, V y
y I
I V O
O 7
7 �
� N C W V
V C
C V
V `
`
ur N
N .
.. W
W W
r .� �
� N
N ^
^ ✓
✓
N q
N L
O L
W r
•^ l
l V
V N
L I
I = V
V � O
` V V
O .
.� 4 L
L 9
9 W
O �
� N
q N
N T
V n
W O
T
C '
� A
'� V
V N
T rn N
N� V
V�✓ N
A $
_ P
P T
O �
A N N y
y W
W .^ `
` u L
LL N L
N _
$r T
T i
i .
.F C
C W
W •^
�J �
✓ nj. V
V'.. N
N O
O,y O
O �
qrrC �
.r O
�V !
!nV q
qV ✓
� .
.LiV
N C
O• N
y• �
� O
i L
L J' U u A
A ^
^ W ^
^ C
C N V
V r
rf '
q
C V
W V
V y
y✓ ✓
✓` ^
9� V Y
Y y V
m �
�� T
T <l N b u
u T
TV O
O, u
u n W
W O
O
V l
^ 9
•VnC ^
^L' A
V m
u d
•VL V
l �
�•� L
LL •
AA T
Tu N
N Od u
di «
« •
V N
NV
W N
u^ ... O
i O u
u V
V LG n
n L L
L q
✓
a T
Wv n
V u
O« i
4« Y
Y L
q c
« Y
YI V
N J
N rn ✓
n•-
T �
� W V
.. y
y N
N 4
L( O
, V
V ✓
✓ y
yr N
W N
N Y
Y W
OL �
✓C
CON U
UJ 1
1r0 u
uN (
(J O�y V
V '
'aY A
AL y
yl V
VtJ ✓
q C
y u
W L
u V
V V
F, L
L W
V^ N
N L Y
Y V i
i •^ r
d M
M v
v O
O V
V
VN
C Y
Y O
V F
�' .
.�vr �
�-V i
iJ✓ V
Vu n
r d
N 1
.o.� n
„.L �
nV V
LL 1
^ 4 4
U �
J' C
CJ d
d q O
1.` V^ L
L W �
� ^
4 O
O U
� L
L u N
yG L V r
r '
't -
- V W
W P G
G• J
�.
C CI
L q
q N L
L r. O G
W L Z
Z .
✓ c
c y N
N y r
r`r N
O• q L
v 4
4 v
w. .
M O ^
^� �
N "'
an c
cy o
o =.o+oY .
." .
." 4
4`✓ "
"'u N
Nc d
d`J 4
cu N
NL a
N N
au I
Iw'•o
p, V
✓ C
C..r p
p 1
✓ a
1�j
.� W o
o a V
V ✓
F .�. L
L i
i✓ O c
c O .
..0. ar ✓
✓ !] C
C':L u w
w m �
�� ✓
a'y ✓
✓� N
N y L
L 7 y
y
'� N
N .
1. q
N C
L n ✓
Z ... 4
4 y
N b
b .� w
w N N
C N
V C
C W
W O
v1 >
> C V
V" 1
q l N
C L
✓ .'.J Z
y ^
^ L 1
1.
N V
O V
V v
-i '
nC W
L
N V
OTi rNn LrLgi -
'O �
�V �
� [
[.C> w
w~'l-A. n
WO p
L >C
�" ✓
✓ N
V y
O' u
C V
O L M
A n
N d .
. P V
V 7 I
I N L
L `
ZI'N N
NC ✓
yr N C
Ct O
u. 1
1 C
V b
.Wi W O
M L A
n« y
y W N
`)
✓ ^d L
LL N
V n
nV6 N
N�C p
pU W
Wd y
yrVN O
Y b
b. u
u+l «
«P (
(l...W. L
i4 V
VV 4
4u4-� n
n 1
1-b �
� I
JZ '
�✓ P
G••� U
Uq
IL -.�.0 2
2nN �
�r,Or J
'NM Y� I
IL..Y I
I LN �
PY ✓
✓V G
J
49 �
>00 T WL NY ...yi NN I2
H a f a{:I qF111 N
W ..>.
V.'
1Y H 0 O. L/ N , /AuIY1
K
O
-o
o� V
W ^ J
r
J
V O
¢ u
4
CJ _J
✓� 2
.T
V �-
•6
bW
K_ r
Ul
W '
� a
N
W
V O O C u G r
Wuq•� uw O i C
npl w � c c L
1 ✓bo
saE wo K g' .
PO 61 }..� d «✓ ✓ N 6ri V41
L P C.� T.r L \: V O✓
r^ � L ✓ P ✓ P L L O V
nNT u`ic TL� b ✓« oN�`.
wYq L V✓ VLV w N^ `.l V
!�
t52 ✓ L` i 'p V V O L V
ZE
✓ b✓ Y w .L,r V T V - W C � V L C
.-
V ✓ rvY' � r X laJ G 4. 0 VyV u V P
C ��V Y Nl L O Nun . ^4 � ✓ I. ITV NW
O LA'Y A.Lr ,�irN✓ L �✓ r'� ✓C P9 i�`T
'�' OIL N W q L ' N J •._- L y W
✓ W'Y MLV b ly4 �� �O' W VGM
Ir ✓ r o N p cV. ° C N •l O- t
C V O n
nY 4a -e N ^ «no �� N d✓ LN
6 rLW V4� WOr ✓W CIN Y"1 .�
tYLT NW [N[^ uV VqN
C 1� f1 A V L N + q V
6 V d+
p IYOy' _•]ylQj) Ip m' P
�J
J
K
O
-o
o� V
W ^ J
r
J
V O
¢ u
4
CJ _J
✓� 2
.T
V �-
•6
bW
K_ r
Ul
W '
� a
N
W
V O O C u G r
Wuq•� uw O i C
npl w � c c L
1 ✓bo
saE wo K g' .
PO 61 }..� d «✓ ✓ N 6ri V41
L P C.� T.r L \: V O✓
r^ � L ✓ P ✓ P L L O V
nNT u`ic TL� b ✓« oN�`.
wYq L V✓ VLV w N^ `.l V
!�
t52 ✓ L` i 'p V V O L V
ZE
✓ b✓ Y w .L,r V T V - W C � V L C
.-
V ✓ rvY' � r X laJ G 4. 0 VyV u V P
C ��V Y Nl L O Nun . ^4 � ✓ I. ITV NW
O LA'Y A.Lr ,�irN✓ L �✓ r'� ✓C P9 i�`T
'�' OIL N W q L ' N J •._- L y W
✓ W'Y MLV b ly4 �� �O' W VGM
Ir ✓ r o N p cV. ° C N •l O- t
C V O n
nY 4a -e N ^ «no �� N d✓ LN
6 rLW V4� WOr ✓W CIN Y"1 .�
tYLT NW [N[^ uV VqN
C 1� f1 A V L N + q V
6 V d+
p IYOy' _•]ylQj) Ip m' P
�J
J
W
V O O C u G r
Wuq•� uw O i C
npl w � c c L
1 ✓bo
saE wo K g' .
PO 61 }..� d «✓ ✓ N 6ri V41
L P C.� T.r L \: V O✓
r^ � L ✓ P ✓ P L L O V
nNT u`ic TL� b ✓« oN�`.
wYq L V✓ VLV w N^ `.l V
!�
t52 ✓ L` i 'p V V O L V
ZE
✓ b✓ Y w .L,r V T V - W C � V L C
.-
V ✓ rvY' � r X laJ G 4. 0 VyV u V P
C ��V Y Nl L O Nun . ^4 � ✓ I. ITV NW
O LA'Y A.Lr ,�irN✓ L �✓ r'� ✓C P9 i�`T
'�' OIL N W q L ' N J •._- L y W
✓ W'Y MLV b ly4 �� �O' W VGM
Ir ✓ r o N p cV. ° C N •l O- t
C V O n
nY 4a -e N ^ «no �� N d✓ LN
6 rLW V4� WOr ✓W CIN Y"1 .�
tYLT NW [N[^ uV VqN
C 1� f1 A V L N + q V
6 V d+
p IYOy' _•]ylQj) Ip m' P
�J
J
�J
J
i
F
1
`�
n
0
d
bU O•'
°
9L
7Y d1
cN •L�n
•i
c
�
e ✓ c
d
b
+]
y O•.
9
J
L V �
•� .-• I'.
O V ar
O
Vpi Y
vUp
w
V
YF�d
��y
Y
CV LKC
/y]4 qT
ON
o «va✓
ov✓
-
LY_
yq
•^LV
V
„yy NU
••� N
N
O V ... V L•
N V
u
G
y, �Vlp
Ur
�av
J
pvpa •.-
,
L406
�'INL
� w �
[J
✓
LL
�
72
c
�
e ✓ c
d
b
+]
y O•.
9
J
L V �
O
Vpi Y
vUp
w
V
��y
Y
p
O Y
Ei�U
yq
•^LV
V
G
.J
� w �
[J
✓
��
�
72
N
CC n
L
7 V 4✓
C�
L
Y^
W^ V
G
L L
Y
L w
Y
W O
N L W
q
y q
�bLY
V L
e
L
T
�
fu
O✓
�'
W
VV�
V
q
uOM✓
V
Vp
Y•N
d
T�YA
4uib
T
n
V L
L
u4A
V
p«
uyi
l y
d
C
O�4V
✓ TV`
CL'
..L�Vi L[�
AC
O
l��tY••
>
q
Ly
JUq.
�r
OCUN
O.b
V V ONO
d1..6
�
�'�
dN yy
uO
N!n of
e'
[•unu
m4
Lycra
iiy
e2s._
4!O VO
Gryq
. d
Y
L y WL4'.
4M
y
qL
JJ'n
4.-•
JL�•�