Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985/02/13 - Agenda Packet0701 -02 o 2 -13 -85 PC Agenda a 1.of F V1, r C��CAJq��� f �� ' CIT'x t?F 1977 WEJ7NESDAY February 13, 1985j' 7:00 p.m. T oirs PARS Comm fwr ,myy m$ 9161 BASE TUNE RANCHO CtICAMOROA, GAWORNIA L Fledge of Allegiance IL R 111 Call Commissioner Barker Commissioner Rempel Commissioner Chitiea—°- Commissioner Stout Commissioner MaNiel 1II. Announcements IV. Approval of Minutes December 12, 1984 January 23, 1985, V. Consent Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are' -- aect6d to be routine and non - controversial. They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without ftculsion, If anyone has concern over any #tams tit should be removed for discussion. A. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 10277 BARMAKIAN - A custom lot subdivision consisting Pf 30 lots on 24.36 acres of land loel ted on the north side r i Almond, east of Carnelian - APly 1061 - 171 -02. B. ENVIROW.'ENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ' DEVELOPMENT j REVIEW 85 -03 - BARTON The development of Phase Ii of the Barton Plaza consisting of an 80,000 square foot building on 23.22 acres of land in the Industrial Park category (Subarea 1) located at the southwest corner ot'.j Foothill Boulevard and Alder Avenue - APN 208 - 51 -19. TJ ff i�q�. Tice following :terns are ;'Jt iic hearings in which .concerned Individuals may yiQce,their Opinion of the related project. °lease wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address tize-iumrii$ssio y Ly stating Your, riami, and address. ,till such opinions limited to 5 rninufes per indiv.ldaal for each project C ENVIRONMYigTAL 'ASSFSSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1 12832 - LYON -The .'43velopment of 135 attached single Family LYON an 16A acres of land within the Victoria Planned Community (Law- Medium category, 4.8 dulae), .located on the north side of Vietcria Park i,��ne %1 the west side of Victoria. Windrows Loop - APN 227`,'371 -Y3, 14, 15. (Co ttindgd from January 23, 1885 meeting.) D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 19-993 -- LYON - The developrrcent Qf 127 attached `single family dwellings on ,X4.7 acres of land within the Victoria Planned Community )(Low - Medium category, 4-8 d"e), located' on the, -$oath side of Victoria Park Lane, on the west side of Victoria Windrows Loop - APH 227 - 371-14, 15 and 227 -391 16, fContinued from January, 23, 1985 meeting.) R. ENVIF,ONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12802,x- LEI9IS The development of 223 single family detached homes on V,,5 acres of lend within the Terra Vista r , PIanned Community,'14esignated Low- Medium and Medium, located on the south side of Mountain View Drive and the east { side; of Spruce Avenue „ APN 1077- 091 -D2, 03 and 1077 -421- y ;. 03, 04. F. ' ENVIRONMENTAL AS °ESSMEI6P ANE, , TENTATIVE TRACT 12822 - LAi3 BEbiTSE '- A one 1 m lot subdivision a�r,for -- Oondoii inium. purposes in conjunction with the development of 316 multi-family units on appro�dmately 18.18 net acres of land in the i—I Distriet (14 -24 dulae) located : north of Highland, south of Lemon, east of Haven - APN- 202 - 271 -55, 60. G;! ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELf3PMENT REVIMW 84 -22 - LAN BENTSEN The development of4%B mr 1ti- family units on 18.18 net aeres of land (phase orte of a 824 unit detyetopment on 58.3 total acres) in the MR District (14 -24, dulae), located north of Highland, .south of Leraon, east of Haven - APN. 202- 2.71 -58, 60. -i ti tS H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8891 GARASICH - A division of 1.224 acres of land into 2 parcels in the General' Industrial category (Subarea 13) located, on the east -side of Rochester Avenue, south of 7th Street APN 229- 283 -3. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -39 - GAR.ASCH -The , development of three r; buildings of approximately 4,000 square feet each for purposes of both industrial warehousing and administrative- and professional offices on approximately 1.25 acres of land located on the east side of Rochester ;Avenue, north of filth Street in the General In: istrial (Subarea: 13) categarry, of the Industrial Area Specific Ilan APN 29- 2$3 -iZ3. J. ENi - ONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL PAAP 8617 GARYN =:COMPANY A division o: 107.79 aerer into parcels, a p?rtion of a Master Planned Community [mown as Tract 12642, located between the extension of Banyan Avenue and highland Avenue on the north and ,truth, and between the extension of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on the east and west - APN 225 =( ': i I2, 13, 14, 1S, 16, 18, 22 and 26. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12895 - RJ.` VESTMENTS A total residential deVelopment of 99 townhomes 'nn 9.039.03 acres ox :land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac), located on the west side:. of Baker Avenue, south of Foothill B;)ulevard - APS 207 - 581`57; 58, 207- 571 -'79. L. ENVIR1?,NMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -02 An amendment to toe Riblic He tii - and Safety Element to provide zonsisteney with Mate law provisions of the Alquist- Priolo Act, as amended. VIL Public P;ornmea is 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. - VM. Adjournment The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Re gulc tic�trs that set an 12 p.na. adjournment time. If items go beyond that tune, they shall be heard only with the conseni: of the •Comrrrission. j CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA _ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting December 12, 1984 Chairman Dennis Stout called the regular meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7 :00 p.m. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center," 9161 Base tine Road, Rancho _Cucamonga, California. Chairman Stout then Ted in the pledge to the flag. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea,, Larry Mc4iel, Herman Hempel, Dennis Stout COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PPESENT: `rim Beedle, 5enic,i Planner; Linda Daniels, Associate Planner; Rick Gomez, City Planner; Barrye, Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Edward Hopson, Assistant City Attorney; Curt Johnston, Associate Planner; Otto Kroutil, 3i.ni6r Planner, Janice Reynolds, Secretary; Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer ANNOUNCEMENTS Rick Gomez, City Planner, announced that the December 26, 1984 Planning Commission meeting had been cancelled due to lack of Commission quorum. CONSENT CA6.ENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -45 HOFGAARDEN - The development of 'a 43,00 square foot industrial building on 2 acres of land - in the General Industrial /Rail Served District (Su4area 5) located at 9871 8th Street, east of Cottage Avenue - APN 209- 193 -011, 07 (portion). B. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12091 - SftVATI - A proposal to develo condominium units on 11.35 acres in the Medium -High (14 -24 du /acs Residential District located at the northeast corner. of 8th and Grove - APN 207 - 251 -02, 03, 13. C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12801 - DEER CREEK - The development of 97 single family detached dwelling units on 32.3 acres of-land in the Low Residential District (2 -4 du/ac) located at the southeast corner of Banyan Street `and 'Carnelian Street - APN 1062- 361 -01; 1062- 371 -01. Commissioner Barker requested that Item C be removed from the Consent Calendar. Motion: Moved by Rempei, seconded by Barker, unanimously Parried, to adopt the remaining items on the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Rempel commented that item 8, Salva?:i, was one of the nicest apartment designs to come before the Commission and hoped to see it built. C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12801 - DEER CREEK Commissioner Barker stated that when this tract was before the Commission for approval, there were a number of issues associated with the protect and concerns were expressed over the design of the east /west Street. At that meeting the Commission attempted to redesign the street without taking. a 'took at what the final design would look like. He further stated that in the future it might be best if redesigns are referred back to staff and the Design Review Committee for review. Since the developer hzd designed the street in compliance with the recommendations of the Commission at the meeting, Commissioner Barker made the motion to approve the design review for Tentative Tract 12801, Deer Creek. The motion was seconded by Commissioner McNiel and unanimously carried, PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Stout announced that the following items,, would be heard concurrently. D. AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PEp"Ar -143 OT - � %tHRISTESON - An amendment to the conceptual plan for t V Virginia arD Center, a business park consisting of office, con v_iOcialb restaurant and theater uses on 1j..1__ acres of land in the General Commercial District, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - -APN 1077 - 401 -01, 03. E. REVISIONS TO PARCEL MAP 8303 - CHRISTESON - A change from 15 parcels to 11 parcels A division of 13.1 acres in the General Commercial District (GC) located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue. APN 1077 - 401 -01, 03. Commissioner Rempel;,stepped down from the podium due to possible conflict,_F- interest. i Panning Commission Minutes -2 December 12, 1984 F Tim Beedle, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report pertaining to- the Conditional Use Permit and Barrye Hanson reviewed the report -on the Parcel Map. Commissioner Barker- referf•,d to the fast food use at the northeast corner and asked hcw access would be obtained from the property owner to the north. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, replied that this was a condition placed on the original parcel map and would assure that the fullest access is gained for the center as a Oole. Further, that access through the property to the north will be necessary for this project to have ieft turn access across the median on Haven Avenue. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Bill Heaton, representing the applicant, stated that the -site plan depicts the applicant's intent, but did not aelieve that immediate access out to Haven had been planned at this . stage. He further stated agreement with the Resolution and conditions of approval. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Barker stated concern with the location of the fast food restaurant. He stated that he was very proud of this project and it is• a very special one, but did not understand theilogic behind the fast food use at that particular l,cacior.. He stated that the location anti design of the fast food use creates traffic problems and cuts down on the open spac - %� Additionally, if that part were to be eliminated he would Stave no concerns. Commissioner McNiel stated that this issue was labored over during Design, Review and that the Committee recommended that the fast food use be designed with a theme consistent with the rest of the center and have sufficient landscaping and berming to almost congeal it. ' He stated that the applicant anticipated that most business will be generated from within the project and that the possibility of moving the fast food use to another location still exists. Commissioner Chitiea stated that placing : fast food restaurant at that location does seem to create access problems with the property to the north and should be further reviewed. Commissioner Stout stated that if the applicant needs a fast food use, he did not see the need for it to be a free-standing building. Further, that he would be more inclined towards approval if it were part of the main building. Mr. Heaton stated that the applicant shares the concern of the City that the entire development should blend in well. He advised that the applicant currently has a proposal for the fast food restaurant and that it will be before the various City committees and the Commission for review several times Planning Commission Minutes -3 December 12, 1984 before a specific design is developed, He further stated as the architecture and engineering has not been done on tha tipper right corner of_the project, he ' could not speak to that issue. jommissioner Barker expressed concern that approval of the revision now before the Commission would luck in the fast food use. Tim Beedle, Senior Planner, stated that the Commission could indicate that the- fast food portion of the conceptual master plan is conceptual only and does not waive the requirement that the fast food use would be a conditional use permit separate from this conditional use permit /master plan. Commissioner Barker asked if approval would not mean that a fast food use is acceptable at this location. Ted Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, advised that in approving the conceptual master plan the Commission does nothing but indicate that it is willing to accept a conditional use permit. application for a fast food restaurant. Commissioner Stout stated concern that approval of the conceptual master plan would be inuicating that the Commission is in favor of a fast food with drive through capabilities at that location. Mr. Hopson advised that approval would simply mean that the City is. willing to consider an application for that purpose. He stated that the developer is asking for a chance to disprove the Commission's reaction that he can't make traffic, general and aesthetic compatibility work with a fast food facility. Further, that since a fast food use would otherwise foe a permitted' use with a conditional use permit in-this zone, findiegs woui rave to be made as to why that determination is,being made. Chairman Stout asked if it is a permissab'le conditional use, did it mean that the City had to allow a freestanding building or could it be required to be a part of the larger building. Mr. Hopson advised that this would be ?,a condition of approval on the Conditional Use Permit. Chairman Stout asked the applicant if he would be wii,tna. to 'have the Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit and Parcel Map without the fast food use and return to the Commission an that issue at a later date to show that these concerns could be mitigated ;' Mr. Heaton stated that he Mould prefer that the Commission approve the plan to allow the applicant to come back for further review on the fast food use, thereby allowing the applicant to proceed with the theater negotiations. Commissioner Barker stated concern with the existence of parcel five on the parcel map if it is approved. Planning Commission Minutes -4 December 12, 1984 b Barrye Hanson,, Senior Civil Engineer, suggested that staff work on language_. would would combine the parcel with parcel four. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, carried, to adopt the Resolution approving an amendment to Conditional Use Permit 83 -07, with the removal of the building at the northeast corner of the site. AYES: COMMISSIONERS': DARKER, CHI -TIER, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL carried Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, carried, to adopt the Resolution approving an amendment to Parcel Map 8303, with the deletion of parcel number five: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES, COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: C0MISS10NERS: REMPEL - carried Commissioner Rempel returned to the podium. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR .DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -22 - BENTSEN - The development of a 924 unit apartment complex, to be built in 3 phases, on about 58.3 acres located on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven Avenue in the MH "Development District - APN 202- 271 -59, 60. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Rick Gomez, City Planner, gave an overview of toe Commission's past action regarding the project and advised that the item is before the Commission at this time for environmental review only. Don King, 9375 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the appl- ,cant, stated that the applicant had no problems with the mitigating measures outlined in the study and the staff report. An adjacent resident opposed the project and stated concern with traffic impacts on Lemon and 'Haven and additionally opposed the street widening of Lemon. Planning Commission Minutes -5- December 12, 1984 ,1 Jack Sylvester, Newport Beach, urgad 'approval of the project and stated need for apartments exists. He advised that when the City and its design review process finishes with the project,, 'will be one of which tip Citv:and its resi.d�-ats can be proud. Catherimi Porter, 10702 Finch, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the project due to tra( is concerns. Thl,re were -no- further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Chairman Stout stated th t when the project first came before the Corinission he had concerns with traffic and was surprised that the - traffic study indicated that the figures proposed by the applicant had actually been conservative. He further stated that based on proper engineering, mitigation of the concern would be pa ^sible and with that in mind, and not speaking on the merits of the project, -he environmental assessment seemed appropriate with the mitigation measures proposed. Motion: Moved fit+ Rempel, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to direct staff to prepar appropriate mitigation measures for inclusion into either the ultimate projr,., design or its conditions of approval, AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, BARKER, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried l 8:15 - Planning Commission Recessed 8:25 - Planning Commissioa Reconvened Chairman Stout announced that the following items would be heard concurrently. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8815 , A -M C014PARY - A division of acres of land into 2 parcels in t e M�lce ium (4 -8 ,",Wac) Development District, located on the west side of Beryl Street, south of 19th Street APN 202- 032 -30, 31. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12830 - A -M COMPANY - A proposed subdivision to create 103 residential lots )n 21.41 acres in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4 -8 du /ac) generally located on the west side of Beryl Avenue, north of Base Line Road - APN 202- 03240,a- -31. Linda Daniels, Associate Planner, reviawed the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -6- December 12, 1984 .:gin. I Chairman Stout - opened the pujlic hearing. Beb Bagby, 1111 S. Craemer, Brea, stated that the applicant had worked with staff on alternatives for pedestrian and emergency access. He stated that the alternative had been designed to complement the northerly tract. `iie additionally suggested that the 13 feet on Avalon left as a result of this alternative could be deeded hack to the Homeowners' Associaton of Tract 127 ?6._ Bill Blanchard, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the developer had been very cooperative in trying to meet the neighborhood's concerns. He advised that the intent of the emergency access was to allow access to the southwest corner of the tract and stated that it seemed to be an ideal solution. Regarding the vacation of the deadend on Avalon, Mrs. Blanchard stated that he would be interested in discussing the matter with'the developer. Michael Vairin, 6981 Opal, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that this project now is a good example of a .Low Medium project which meets the intent of the City's Development Code. -. He further stated that it was a satisfactory change of transition and supported the project. Bob Chelson, 9036 Lavine,.Rancho Cucamonga, stated concerns with the size of the home proposed on Lot 96, the elevated grading of the lots to the rear of his tract, and the loss of privacy. He suggested that the lots backing the existing homes be single story. He additionally stated concern with the placement of the proposed retaii,,Inn;.wall: Martin Balding,' 9016 Lavine, Rancho Cucamonga, stated concern with the obstruction of views to the north. Bob Linsey, 7145 Beryl, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the project was going_t3 enhance the area and supported the projert. - Alex Sanchez, 9046 Lavine, Rancho Cucamonga, expressed concern with the pace elevations and the retaining wall as proposed. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel stated that he understood the concerns expressed but that- - the developer is doing a lot for the residents -in his cooperation and that the project would be a good addition to the community. Commissioner Barker asked if the applicant would address the tissue of the retaining wall. Gary Mitchell, representing the applicant, replied that City staff has made it a condition of approval that the developer make every effort to work with the adjacent property owners on possible connection of th, retaining walls to existing walls. Planning Commission Minutes -7- December 12 `� "1984 I I k Commissioner Chitiea requested that language be added to condition number four_. to clarify that the cuff -de -sac facing Beryl would not be closed off completely. She advised that this was an issue discussed during Design Review. n Ms. Daniels advised the applicant indicated the opening on the project plans, but the 35 -foot opening could be added to the Resolution. S'he further stated. ,that if the Commission was inclined to approve the applicant's alternative desigri, that conditions one and two should be modified to accommodate the alternative. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 8815 and issuing a Negative Declaration. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 12830 with the amendments to include a requirement that the final -_sign and maintenance of the emergency and pedestrian access easement be subject to review and approval by the City Planner and comp`le+ted prior to map recordation; the requiremnt for a 35 -foot opening at the front of the cul -ae -sac facing Beryl and the equirement for a wat?,r easement to be provided at that location of the! ;26 - foot pedestrian and-emergency access easements. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMF,`MENT 84 -02 HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT - Planning Commission review of public comments and recommendations of the Interim Development Policies for Haven Avenue between 4th Street and Foothill. Boulevard. J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84 -04 -A - HAVEN RIENUE VERLAY DISTRICT - A Genera Plan Amendment from Office to Industrial Park for arproximately 40 _acres of land located on the went side of Haven Avenue, between ,'roothi :'B.poevard and Arrow Highway, in conjunction with the haven Avenue Ovc�'* ",District APH 208 = 331 -01, 12, 13, and 208- 341 -01. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 84 -04 - HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT, - A Development District Amendment from OP office Professional to ISP (Industrial Specific Plan) for approximately 40 acres of land located on the west side of Haven Avenue, in conjunction with the Haven. Avenue Overlay District - APH 208 - 331 -01, 12, 13, and 208 - 341 -01. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL .SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 84 -01 - HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY—DISTRICT - An amendment to the Industrial pecific ' Plan to expand the boundary of Subarea 7 (Industrial Park category) to include approximately 40 acres of land located on the west side of Haven Avenue, between Foothill Boulevard and Arrow Highway, in conjunction with Planning Commission Minutes -8- December 12, 1984' 1 A the Haven Avenue Overlay District - APN 208- 331 -01, 12, 13 and 208- 341 -01: -- Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea sL-md that kiosk. had been eliminated from the 1,esign elements listed under P6estrian Facilltles, F,3. and requested that they be included. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Lowell homes, 8772 ViVero, Rancho Cucamonga, requested that the Commission reconsider the removal of a north /south road between 'Haven and Utica from the Industrial Area Specific Plan. Bill Kirkland, West Coast Netting, opposed the extension of .:facia off Baker Avenue. Rick Gomez„ City Planner, advised that these issues deal more with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and not with the Haven Avenue Overlay District which is before the Commission it this time. He further advised that the Commission; might want to consider'!�aving, staff place this issue on a future agenda as an informational item for ds,,:ion and inclusion into revisions to the Industrial Speci.F t Plan. It was the consensus of the Commission ;that this issue be brought back to the Commission as an informational item at/,h future meeting. Robert Clark, Reiter Development, addressed the treatment of parcels directly adjacent to the railroad tracks and asked for the Commission's direction. Chairman Stout replied that this had been discussed several times and the general consensus of the Commission had been that there would be no special treatment given to parcels 6Yectl.y adjacent to the railroad tracks. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel addressed the parcel located .north of Arrow, wester of--- Haven, and stated that the development has to be special design to assure compatibility. Commissioner McNiel addressed the issue of the actual Overlay District and stated concurrence with the contents contained within the Overlay Guidelines and advised that if adjustments need to be made when a project is submitted they can be made at that time Commissioner Barker stated that when this issue had been discussed previously it was the concurrence that no special treatment should be given in the corridor in an automatic manner. Planning Commission Minutes -9- December 12, 1984 LL Commissioner Rempel agreed ;. that some special consideration should be given to final design of projects especially, since some pa:,cels ttithin the District—' will have restraints such as the fututre viaduct going urider Haven Avenue and the fact that the railroad w- M- -cause some problems. Commissioner Chitiea stated that it would be more appropriate to look at special circumstances individually when projects are submitted than to legin considering a whole new set of special rules and guidelines at This time. Chairman Stout stated that before a change is made to a basic general rule he would like to see a project submitted and would be open to reconsideration at that time. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 84 -02, Haven Avenue Overlay District. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 84 -04 -A, Haven Avenue Overlay District. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Development District Amendment 84 -04, Haven Avenue Overlay District. Notion Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, unanimously, carried, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 84 -01, Haven Avenue Overlay District. 9:55 Planning Commission Recessed 10:05 - Planning Commission Reconvened M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8486 - PLAZA DE 'LA MANCHA, LT[). District (Subarea 6) located on the southwest corner of arrow and Haven - APR 204 - 092 -04. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report. Chairman stout opened the public hearing. Dennis Hardgrave, representing the applicant, stated concurrence with the staff report and Resolution. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes -10- December 12, lik Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to issue a � -* Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution appit ing Parcel Map 8486. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER., REMPEL, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried NEW BUSINESS N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT kEVIEW 84 -51 - REITER - The development of four office buildings totaling 76,512 square feet on 5.68 acres of land ir, the Industrial Park (Subarea 6) and Haven Avenue Overlay Districts at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 7th Street - APN 209- 401 -13. Rick. Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout asked for pudic comment- Ken Lewis, representing the applicant, stated concurrence with the Resolution and Conditions of Approval. Chairman Stout stated that he was extremely proud of this project and tnat it was an excellent example of what the City would Tike to see on Haven Avenue. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by 6arker, unanimously carried„ to issue a Negative Declaration_ and adopt - the Resolution approving Development Review 84 -51. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, !TOUT, CHITIEA, MCNIZ :.,, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried 0. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT kEVIEW 84. -49 - GEIER& DYNAMICS - The development of a 580,000 square foot warehouselmaitufacturing •oui ing; two 3 -story office buildings totaling 166,600 square feet, and a field measurement area (2.6 acres on 75 acres of land in t`te General Industrial District (Subarea 11) and Industrial Park District (Subarea 12) located between 4th and 61c?h Streets, and between Utica and Cleveland - APN 210- - 081- OUS through 10. Curt Johnston, Associate Planner„ reviewed the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -11- December 12, 1984 - Chairman Stout invited public comment. _ Dick Haddinger, representing ;`he applicant, stated concurrence with the Resolution and Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Rempel stated that he was ppy to see General Dynamics cor:tinue its move into Rancho Cucamonga and that the project would enhance the area. Chairman Stout expressed appreciation for the cooperation of the applicant during Design Review. Motions Moved by Rempel, secopded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to issue a r Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Development Review 84 -49. j DI_RECTOR'S REPORTS P. DESIGN REVIEW FOR NTATIVE TRACTS 12238 AND 12530 Ci7ATION BUILDERS The development of B single family detached units on 8. (acres cf and In the Low Residential District (2 -4 dulac), located an the west side of Hellman Avenue, north *�f Church Street. j Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. j Chairman Stout invited public comment. Jerry Linton, representing`, Citation Builders, stated co-Acern with the composition of the proposed wain. .A-6 Linton displayed a slide presentation for the Commission which reflected the applicant's intent and expressed a desire to — gstruct the wall of siumpstone. as opposed stucco. He addition "..ly advised ti tucce requires more maintenance which may present prokleins later as Opposk :T1umpstona which is -a more durable product. Co mnissioner -el asked for clarification on the wall insets. Mr. Lintor, replied that the conditions of approval called for Eucalyptus treks to be planted 2C feet on center, therefore to break the monotony of the planting it would be preferrable to place the insets at the location where the lots step up. Commissioner Rempel stated that the smaller insets rather than 30 feet might be a lot to put up with on Base Line. He Oisagreed. and stated t-bat it would- look much nicer to vary the distznce in the recess. J j { Commissioner Chitiea stated preierence with the 011,1,cco and advised that it is attractive and appropriate in Rancho Cucamonga. 3h further indicated that it�. there does not seem to be a` problem with maintenance in other areas of the- City. -thd irman Stout stated agreement with the stucco with the rock insets. Commissioner Chitiaa asked if the developer would be agreeable to make the stucco match the existing slumpstone block `#all adjcaent to the sidewalk,on Hellman, hr. Anton replied that the developer would make every effort to match the existing wail.- Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Rte,. el, unanimov ly carri° ` ; to change ',he recommended condition of approval to. go reflect the priginal'UMiticns of a_)proval requiring rock veneer pilasters at the insets at IO feet insets, and tan stucca finish to match the existing slumpstone block adjacent to the sidewalk on Hellman, 1 Q. SIGN' AMORTIZATICN PROGRAM - HISTORICAL /,H4RDSHIP OETERNINATIONS _ Gary Richards, Code Enforcement Officer, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stott invited public, comment. Dave Kiedrowski stated agreement with staff's recomnendations. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution granting historical; significance to the Magic _Lamp, Sycamore Inn, 'Thomas Brother- Vineyard Winery and Opici Winery. Motiont Moved by Barker, seconded by McNial, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution granting hardship, status to- Sunrize Shappinq Center. PUBLIC COMMENTS Commissioner Rempel requested `drawings designating the locations of rights -of -way on foothill Boulevard from San Bernardino Rcsd to Grove. He stated that if people are parking cars within the right- of-way area along Foothill, something needs to be done about it. Planning Commission Minutes 13 December 12, 1984 m Chairman Stout stated that Foothill between Haven and the City Limits .should;, be looked at also. He additionally stated that the sign program!, is 'a keyk'-- element '40 cleaning up Foothell Boulevard and future projects should be looked at closely as they will set the theme'of that street and reflect what the City expects in the Tjtura as opposed what is there now. Rick Gomez, City Planner= advised that staff will begin ,working on the preparation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan after the first of the year, phich will address many of these issues. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 11:00 p.m. - Planning Commission, Ajtjournei! Respectfully submitted, f Rick Gomez, Deputy Serrztary 1 r f Planning Commission Minutes -14- December 12, 1984 J' 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting January 23, 1985 t r, Chairman Dennis Stout called the regular meeting of the" City ofk�Rancho Cucamonga. Planninm ^ommission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held at Lions Park Comm, ty Center, 9161. Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge to the flag. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea,- Larry McNiel, Herman Rempel, Dennis Stout- . COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT Barrye Hanson-Senior Civil Engineer; Nancy Fong, Assistant,,,,: ?Tanner; Rick Gomez, City Planner; Edward Hopson, Assistant City Attorney; Curt Johnston, Associate Planner; Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner; d Janice Reynolds, Secretary; L Lisa Wininger; Assistant Planner' ANNOUNCEMENTS• Rick Gomez, City Planner, advised that it was now time for rotation of Desije Review Cr=ittc;',members. Commissioner Rempel would be replacing.Commissioner McNiel on the Committee for one ,year, with Chairman Stout serving for another six months and Commissioner Chitiea serving as alternate. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded,;by McNiel, carried, to approve the minutes of the November '28, 1984 Plann.ing Commission meeting. Chairman Stout abstained from vote, as he was not in attendance at that meeting E ,r PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12832 LYON - The development of 135- attached single f .,,mily dwellings on 16.9: -acres of land within the Victoria Planned' Commn;il ty (Low - Medium category, 4 -8 du /ac), located on t,ie north side of 'Vic�oria Park Lane on the west -side of Victoria Wind -,nws Loop - APN X27- 371 -13, 14, 15: B. ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12833 - LYON The developr..ent o-f-=jtachef single family dwellings on 14.7 acres of land within the Victoria, "Planned Community (Low - Medium category, 4 -8 du /ac) located on the south side of Victoria Park Lane, on the west side of Victoria Windr,ws Loop APN 227- 371 -14, 15 and 227. 391 -16. Rick Gomez, City Planner, ,advised that the applicant for the above Tentative Tracts requested a two r%e,_'k continuance by the Planning Commissio:1 to allow time for preparation of `'evised plans. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, unanimously Carried, to continue Tentative Tracts 12832 and 12833, Lyon, to the Planning Commission meeting of Fehruary 13, 1985. frA• * *vk C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12835 - OVERSEAS REALTY NT RPRI - A total residential deveiopment of ,2 townhouses on 9.5 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du %ac) located east of Vineyard, g 600 feet north of Arrow Highway - APN 208- 251 -05. Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed: the staff report and presented a revised Resolution for the Commission's consideration Ms. Fong advised that the Resolution had been revised with direction by the City At;arney and contained a condition regarding condemnation proceedings. {hairman Stout opened the public hearing, dartan Minassian, representing the applicant, stated,concul.rence with the staff report and revised resolution. Chairman Stout expressed concern with approving the tract on the condition ;that easements are obtained from the school district:. If the easements cannot be 0tained, he stated that he was not comfortable with the City pursuing condemnation proceedings against another public entity He asked the applicant if it a continuance would be acceptable, thereby allowing the applicant time to Meet with the Central School District Board to reach a decision regarding the easements f Plann,,;,, `otmr►ission Minutes -2- January 23 1985 l f Mr. Minassian replied that the applicant would prefer a favorable decision at this time, however, would ;accept a, continuance. There were no further; comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Ted Hopson, Assitant City Attorney, advis�:d that this is not a unique condition and is one which is used in order not to stop development from occurring when the developer of on2 piece of ;property needs to get something across another piece of property.. He pointed out that this condition` requires the developer to pay all expenses incxrred by the City should condemnation proceedings be required. Commissioner Rempel stlated that there are situations in the City where this same type of condition was imposed, and if staff and the City Attorney, are comfortable with the condition as proposed, did not see the need for a continuance., It was the consensus of the remaining Commissioners' that decision on the project be continued until the _applicant �as'_an opportunity to discuss obtaining the osement with the Central School ;District Board. Motion; Moved by Stout, seconded by Chiti6a, carried, ,to continue .Tentative Tract 12835, Overseas Realty.Eaterprises, to the Planning Commission meeting of February 27, 1985. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITIEP,;_ riRitER, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL i ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried;. - Commissioner Rempei, voted no stating that he would be in favor of approval. I D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12319 - LEWIS -``The development of 274 single family attached units on 51 acres of land with'1fi the Terra Vista Planned Community (Medium Residential category, 4 -14 du /ac), located at the northwest corner-of Terra Vista Parkway and Spruce Avenue - APN 1077-091 -02, 06. ' Curt J1hnston, As'lociate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. - Gerry Bryan, representing Lewis Homes, stated concurrence with the resolution and conditions of approval. Planning Commission Minutes -3 January 23, 1985 E Chairman Stout, ed- concern wit, the pedestrian bridge and trail and that there would b, a large `expanse of open area with no treatment. He asked the - applicant his intent regarding the treatment of that area. John MelcherI representing Lewis Homes, stated that toe landscaping plans fo the bridge and trail had not been fina`10& at -_this point and�yiould be; dependent upon the Flood Control District's req�iiremerts Chairman Stout asked the applicant if they woAdl, b,e amenable to a condition- requiring the landscaping plans to be submitted for review and approval by til City Planner rlong with the final design details of the pedestrian bridge and,, trail. Mr. Melcher stated agreement. 7 Therewere - no,furthercomments, therefore the public hearing was closed .�� Motion: Moved by Chitiea,,seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to issue a'' Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 12319, Lewis, with an added_ condition that the landscaping plans be submitted for review and approval. by the City Planner prior9 issuance of building germttsr AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL,- BARKER, REM?EL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS,- NONE ` - carried Chairmr., Stout advised that the following items would be heard concurrently.' E. CERTIFICATION OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - TENTATIVE TRACT 12376 - F RECAST - Planning Cormttission review and certification of the Final EIR for a custom lot subdivision of 16 lots on 20.9 acres and a conceptual master plan for 94 acres of adjacent land in the Hillside Residential and Open Space Districts, located; north .e Almond Sic; eet, generally west of Sapphire Street - APN 200- 051 - 06,.07.' F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12376 - FORECAST A custom of subdivision of ots on 20.9 acras and,a conceptual master plan for 94 acres of adjacent land In the Hillside Residential and Open Space Districts, located north of Aimond Street generally west of Sapphire,. i Street - APN 200 - 051=06 & 07. Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. f . Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 23, 1985 y .. a A representative .of Kings Ranch, an adjacent property owner, asked if there would be .access provided to the 'easterly property. - Mr. Johnston replied that two points of access would be provided by this tract to the property to the east., Art Bridge, 8715 Banyan, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the project and urged denial of the tract. There were no further comments', therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel stated that he felt the`EIP adequately addressed the mitigation measures and didn't have a problem With it. He stated, however, that the tract has too many problems which have not been addressed and was in favor of denial. Chairman Stout stated ';;vat the Environmental Impact Report pointed out substantial problems and proposed mitigation measures which are comprehensive, therefore would consider it complete. He agreed with denial of the tract map and stated that the applicant apparently has problems which he feels can't be mitigated since an attempt has not been made on the applicant's part to match the submittal with the EIR. Aotion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to certify the Environmental Impact Report as complete for Tentative Tract 1 ?,376, Forecast. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITIEA BARKER, MCNIEL,`REMPEL i NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, unanimously °carried, to deny Tentative Tract 12376, Forecast. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL, PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -01 -N RICHARDS`- A request to ar:wnd the Land Use Map of the General Plan from Low Density Residential to Industrial Park for 1.2 acres of land located on the southeast corner of Main and Archibald - APN 209- 061 -01. Lisa Wininger, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff= report. Planning Commission Minutes -5 January 23, 1985 4 Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. _ Donald Harrison, 8889 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, owner of the property in question, urged the Commission's approval of this amendment. and stated that it would be a step forward in improving the area. John Owen, Rancho Cucamonga; stated that he would be purchasing the property to relocate his electrical business and ''indicated that he would be improving the interior as well as the exterior of the building.- - 1 Dan Richards, applicjat, stated that Low Density is not an appropriate land' use for this parcel.., 3iven its location adjacent to the railroad tracks and Industrial Specific Plan boundaries. Mr. Richards requested the Commission's approval of this amena�ent. There were no further co \men's, therefore the public hearing was closed. 1 Commissioner Chitiea st 1,A that__ttris pwrticular piece of property is not appropriate for either (osv -+ r med;at�., density housing. Ted Hopson, Assistant Attoeney,,s�advised that the question being posed to the Commission is whethel1 sir not th'y are comfortable with 1.2 acre Industrial Park or would the Comm '4';fon prefer that staff to go back and look at an Industrial Park designati4o .that covers Sante Fe property to the east and possibly property to the north. Commissioner Rempel stated that placing residential units on the Custom Alloys property would be out of the question, given the proximity of the 3anta Fe railroad tracks. He further stated that the alternative of estabishing Industrial Park on the property to the north is prematwe and suggested a General Plan Amendment be studied on the Custom Alloys site and Ithe Santa Fe (i property to the east. Chairman Stout asked staff ,;)proximately jhow much time would be needed'' to research the amendment. Otto Krou4ii, Senior Planner, replied that it would take approximately weeks and staff would estimate that the amendment would be ready for the Commission's consideration at their February 27th meeting., Commissioner McNiel agrezd with Co -A ssioner Rempel regarding the two properties adjacent to the railrow" '&ever, if it would take same amount of time do all of the areas in question, he would prefer to have the entire area studied, Mr. Kroutil asked if the Comanission would be interested in any annalysis of residential land uses south of Main Street. i �6- January 23, 1g8b Planning Commission. Minutes Y It was the consensus of the Commission that it would be inappropriate tg,_ designate parcels south of Main Street as Residential due to the size of the Parcels. Chairman Stout pointed out that the remaining parcels are too small to consolidate to get a good higher density project. Chairman Stout asked Mr. Richards if he would be agreeable to a four week continuance to allow stiff appropriate time to study the General Plan amendment. Mr. Richards replied that the applicant had enough time in escrow and would agree to the continuance. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carriLl to continue General Plan Amendment 85-011k' ' to the Planning Commission 1lmeeting of February 27, 1985. Staff was directed to research Industrial Park uses for the properties located on the eaat. side of Archibald, between Feron and 8th Street. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS H. ALTA LOMA CHRISTIAN CHURCH - A review of outstanding i,, ues regarding CUP 83-04, Alta Loma Christian Church, located on the west side of Sapohire, between 'Lemon and O-kange Streets. (Item continued from Planning Commission meeting of Ja, +uary (1, 1985.) Rick Gomez, City Planner., reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout invited public comment. Gene Surrell, representing the applicant, responded to concerns voiced at previous meetings. Mr. Surrell stated that the'graded area north of the project had been seeded with wildflower in September as required by the conditions of approval. He advised that most of the seed failed to germinate and that it ��ould be re- seeded with a drought resistant seed which should be well established by summer. He further stated that the irrigation system had not been installed, with the consent of the City. Regarding the wall design, __ Mr. Surrell stated that the applicant felt that the best treatment wou'd be to allow the redwood to weather naturally as opposed to staining the woad. In response to the lighting concerns, he stated that the current lighting meets City approval and any new lighting proposed for security measures would be submitted for approval by the City. He additionally stated that to the church's knowledge there had been no compliancs regarding the church's hours of operation, and would oppose any alteration of operating Tours. It was the consensus of the Commission that Alta Loma Christizn Church should reseed the graded areas with a drought- resistant wildf'"iwer, Without irrigation. The remaining issues of lighting, wall treatment, and hours of operation were determined to be in compliance with conditions of approval. Planning Commission Minutes -7- January 23, 1985 PUBLIC COMMENT Chairman Stout requested that a commendation resolution be prepared and presented to Tim Beedle at the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved b)� Barker, seconded by McNiel,,unanimously carried, to adjourn, 9:10 p.m.. - Planning Commission Adjourned Respectfully submitted, Rick Gomez Deputy Secretary 4 _1 i Planning Commission Minutes -B- January 23, 1985 n Li CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA c��o STAFF REPORT ,e s y tx. x r o� n tyrr DATE: February 13, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 10277 - BARMAKIAN custom lot subdivision consisting of 30-To-t-s--on-724.35 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District, located on the north side of' Almond Road, east of Carnelian Street - APN 1061- 171 -02. I. BACKGROUND: The v applicant is - requesting a six -month Time Extension for Tentative Tract 10277 7a�; described above. A final map was rerorded for the westerly eight lots. Therefore, the extension is required for the ,emaining 22 lots as shown on "Exh,.bit B The extension is necessary to ailow completion of a geological study required -for a portion of Phase II and III. Several lots are located'within',the Alquist- Priolo Special Study Zone for the Cucamonga fault. Ii. RECOMMENDATION: ­.Staff recommends that the Planning Commission grant a six month time extension for this project through adcption of the attached Resolution. Resyjectfully mitted, . -- Ick%Gomez ity Planner RG•DC:cv Attachments Exhibit "A" Location Map Exh'bit °B" Approved Tentative Tract :Map Time Extension Resolution of Approval ITEM A j }* u a -x -zo1 A KITH CITY OF NEVI= RAN ." TiII.E: PLANI`JM DINTOON EXHIBM SCALE ie � �PpKQU� Y' 5j•'- ICR,vsrniwsaa rr.sM b/.r G3. ✓R..M.A�. -�pI q./!i RI L4 1 CITY OF ITE1I: RANCHO CUCAMONGA TM.E: WrA � PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: — SCALE- ' tai J, u _ RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMQAGA PLANNING QMMISSION APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION FOR TE14TATIVE TRACT 102?7. HHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the above- des,.ribed project pursuant to Section 1.401.11.2, and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above described Tentative Tract. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: A. The previously approved Tentative Map is in substantial complitnco with the City's current General Platt, Spacifit, Plans, Ordinances, Plans,, Codes and P ilicies ; and, B. The extension of the Tentative. Map will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinances, Plans, Codes and Policies; and, C. The extension of the Tentative Map is hot likely to cause rablic health and safety problemsi and, D. The extension is within the time limits prescribed j by state law and local ordinance. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning 'Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Tract Applicant Erpiration 14277 Barmakian August 25, 1985 APPROVED tiND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO �GUCAMONGA j BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman .ATTEST:. Ruck Gomez, Deputy Secretary I. Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 *i City of Ranciio.Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of February, 1985, by the following vote- to-tvit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS:. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i I. a 7 CITY OF RANCHO CT7CAMONGA STAFF REPORT' � s n 0 0 1977 DATE: February 13, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Conolisior. FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner SUBJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -03 - BARTON - The development of Phase II of the Barton Plaza consisting of an 80,000 square foot office building on 13.22 acres of 'rand in the Industrial Park Gategdry, Sub- area 7, located at ti2e southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Alder Avenue - APN 208 - 351-19. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of 5ite`Plan, elei�ations and issuance of a Negative Decla4ation. B. Purpose: Construction nf a four - story, P0,060 square foot :office building. C. Location: Southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Alder Avenue (Exhibit "A"). D. Parcel Size: 13.22 acres E. Existing Zoning: Industrial Park (Subarea 7) F. Existing Land Use: Vacant G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant; Terra Vista Planned Community South Vacant; Industrial Park`jSubarea 7) East - Vacant; Industrial Park kSubarea 7) West - Office; Industrial Park jSubarea 7) H. General Plan Des4nations: Oroject Site Industrial Park North - Community Commercial South - Industrial Park East - industrial Park West Industrial Park ITEM B �A PLANNING COMMISSION'STAFF KFURT DR 85 -03 - BARTON - February 13; 1985 - J Page #2 r, I. Site Characteristics: This site has been previously ii graded as part of the overall development of the i( , Rancho Cucamonga Business Parka The site is vacant with no structures or,significant vegetation. ANALYSIS: l A. General: The proposed development is the second phase of the Barton Plaza Office Park Development which will ultimately consist of four buildings as previously approved by the Planning Commission, as illustrated on the attached "Exhibit V. The developer is i�_: uesting approval for the construction of_a proposed .80,000 square foot, 4- si'ory office building (Exhibit "B ") which. is identical to the recently completed building at the southeast corner of Haven and Foothill. B. Environmental Assessment: Part 'I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part Ii of the Environmental Checklist and found no significant impacts on the environment as a result of this project. 3ased upon site analysis and completion of the Initial Study, this project is consistent with the approved conceptual master site plan and will not cause significant adverse impacts on the environment. III. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised for environmental review in The Daily Report newspaper. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recomm(mds that the Planning Commission approve Development Review 85 -03 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Res ectfull ubmitted i ez i y Planner RG:DC:cy Attachments: Exhibit "A°' - Location Map Exhibit. "B" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Approved tonceptual Master Plan Exhibit 1 °D" - Elevations Exhibit "E" - Grading Plan Initial Study Part II Resolution of Approval �l ritt J f 'S r 4 t M tz T -i RA vt-%A 'F- �-- TTT Y r l R -3 ' R-3. �� YlKladl�di/Ee Tii+l�� �e11Pdr12'�" . C•Z r Y 1%ES+Cie44 MPMESC. TLAA /UA 1�.`ORTH CITY Q% 1TF.1'bI: RANCHO CLICATIVIONGA- TITLE: PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT= �-- SCALE - 6- 3 1 nL•rYw� . M'N..rta � �� �� - Qi —0o 4VAL Tg- A"ORT i CfY OF "O f ` R AiT ITFrli1 g`-03, Ol\ ?�,A TITLE= 61 7r-r 9:::). .A'&j PLANNING DIVISIOiN EXHIBIT•_-_ ___ SCALE: �` •1rr1��wM. �SY�rta� �N�h'�vy.. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE' AJIQ�� PLANNIN`'U DIVISION EXHI: IT, •, SCALE. ..rig +...�%� �rt.t «•? ,.r:.� .zt , N '�jt .j i ;. y�7 � - ;`;i YVf•i�. ! � > C .' .i.'nj�•n�++�� NF � Z * ti T S KTt. eh• l..y.iFJ r- • t•; �. Lt1.ilJ r..J [' � [3 +'i2 's•} v ! '•J'W . 3aCi•L c �y I \.L� -t'* •Z • .. � '. -- "�Y�.- .�A�-CkoL.. -. .. �a1�'a� 544j}b.,�i'••�.w..;. s. .. t ',L NORM CITY OF' RANCHO CIJTGkM PTO TITLE: �'LAMIN�G DIVISIQN MXHIBIT- SCALE - -- - _ - --`� -- CITY OF RANCHO CtJCA:10NGA - v -- PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: APPLI FILING DATE: (� `J LOG NUMBER. PZJDJECT: cc PROJECT LOCATION: I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - (Explanation of ail, "yes" and "maybe" answers are regal. ed on atta %hed sheets). YES myn I40 1. Soils and Ge01 e - Will the proposal have significant results i -: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions,, displacemcnc-s, compaction or burial of the soil. e. Change in topography or grautf surface contour intervals ?. d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any potential increase in wind or Grater erosion of soils, affecting either on or site conditons? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of Extraction and /or use of any mineral resource? ..._ 2. Hydr__ 0loEv. Will the proposal have significant results in: • Page 2 YES MAYBE NO a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction Of flooring streams, river or ephemeral stream channels? ,t b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, _ or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water? e. Discharge into surface waters, cr arw alteration of surface water qu&';ity? f. Alteration of roundwe 8 ter characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with - drawals, or through:`3nterference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction in the amcunt of water other- wise available for public water supplies? i I- Exj. -sure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding r I / or seiches? 3. Air Quality. Will the proposal h"e significant i results in: s. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sources? --• b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or Interference with the attainment of applicable­­ -sir quality standards? G. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? / 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results In: A. Change in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or number of;apy species of plants? o b Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare ` t..t endangered species of plants? / 9 c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural -sroduction? Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals iato an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? 5. 12kg tion. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, densit, diversity, or growth rate of the human popu;14:1on of an area? b, Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Socio- Ecnnomic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in local or regional socio- economic characteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? �.`. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A conflict with any designationa, objectives, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? c. An impact upon thl, "qulaity -or quantity of existing consumptive or non - consumptive recreational opportunities? Page 3 YES MAYBE NO ! Er re l Page 4 YES MAYBE NO 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results, in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. _.._ Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? C. Effects on existing parking f,,- ilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems?✓ e. Alterations'to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and /or goods? r f. Alterations so,or effects on present and Potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. �. Increases in traffir'e hazards, to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedest_`ians? f 4. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have ~ significant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and /or historical resources? 10. Health, safety and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? r b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? y_ C. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous �� -�✓ .- substances in the event of an accident? �✓ d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? e. increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous i noise leveis? .� S. The creation of objectionable odors? h. An increases in light or glare? ; Page 5 - YES ..,_,ty�ygg 110 11. Aesthetics, Will the proposal have significant �. results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive / site? ! c. A conflict with th• objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? i 12. Utilities and Public Services. Wil: the proposal have a significant need for news Pas, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? b. Natural or pr-kaged gas? -_ c. Communicat`- -�i systems? !� r d. Water supply? 1 � e. Wastewater facilities? f f. Flood control structures? C g. Solid waste facilities? __ h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? !� y. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities ? - 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental sery -4ces? 13. F--neTriy and Scarce Resources, Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing j sources of energy? C. An increase in the degand for development of new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non - renewable forms of energy., when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? J) =Sage 6 YES :idA1 F No e. Substantial deplet,!on of any',,7knrenewable or scarce natural resource? / 14, M =ndatory Findings of Signif3c�nce. r� a. Does tha project have the potential to degrade the 'quality oi4 the environment, substantially reduce the ha;itat of fish or' -wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to_ eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce`--- the number or restrct.the range of a rare or endangered plant or a..imal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or preh.story? b. Does the project Save the Potential to achieve sham- term, to r the di' ,dvantage of long - :term, environaental goals? {p short -terms impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into -the future) c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively Ask considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are consi erable when viewed la connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects), d. Does the project hav4 euvironmental`:.:Efects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? II. DISCUSSION OF ENVIR02L*SEEATAL EVALZ7ATIO14 (i..e. of affirms, ave the above , answers-..to -� -- questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). �Va Page 7 I1L DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: )dI find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant'effect on the environment, and a, NEGATIVE DECLARATION'wlai be prepared_ T find that although the proposed project could have a significant Li effect or the environment, there will not be a;significaut effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet hac,i been added to the project: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL RE PREPARED. I find the pro-po•eei project MAX have significant effe . on the i envirnment., aid an ENVIRONMENT T RT_ is r u ad; Date a ure Tit1P c� RESOLUTION NO. - ' A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVINu`OEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 85 -03 LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL AND ALDER IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (SUBAREA 7) DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 30th day of January, 1985, a complete application was filed by Barton Development Company for review of the above - described project; and 0 WHEREAS, on the 13th day of February, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above- described project, NOW, THEREFORE, the Ranck�Cucamonga Planning Commission reso`ived as follows: SECTION lc That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Industrial Specific Plan' and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Industrial Specific Plan; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the Public health, safety, or welfare,` or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on February 13, 1985. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 85 -03 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: - 1. The final plaza design, pedestrian amenities and landscaping treatment shall be commensurate with Barton Plaza I. Details shall be provided in the final landscape and irrigation plans. 2. The emergency fire lane shall be incorporated into the streetscape and plaza design with the use of special landscaping and design features such as i mounding, street furniture, and texturized r pavement. Final details shall be submitted -for review and approval by the Planning Division prior. to issuance of building permits. If a drive -thru window is desired, then revised drawings shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission. 3. The fire access lane shall be 12 feet 'in width, except at specific locations designated by the Fire District where 16 feet of pavement is necessary for parking`of an .aerial ladder truck. 4. The drive approaches on Foothill Boulevard and Havan Avenue shall be provided with texturized pavement. S. Future development of the remaining phases shall required reapplication for Development /Design Reiew for approval prior to construction. ENGINcERING DIVISION 6. The two -way drive approaches on Haven Avenue and Alder Avenue shall be designed in accordance i{ith City Standards at a width of 35 feet. On Footlill Boulevard the exit lane of the drive approach sh'ail be reduced to 15 feet in width. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1885. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 13th day of February, 1985, by the fallowing vote -to -wit, AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VUYYT CCO. V- ^J� a0 .0 Nb4. 4 V6 b U+t,+� Yu W OFO q6`l� N °..+- ,GLOA SOtpi oa Oyu Ly pw.b �n- .0 Vp Q'Y RV uRO Ly.. Q °.o �u °x Qqb ^y .�..PcL R aE� oW.y di Map Y¢.eoy °pot Y L u..- E Y" . 6�uoL y �`� CfJb6 �uyR . ^3_ .ATV y„�U VCT E`a vU i.,.�4 p. =N. V. `R~OOV t cV« CVK•�Ll .-.Lw af.- O° +•.WT ��OMEE � ~r�N W E u a-- a�--w N. �'1z6 =b u Ww LLM Sy L R�yV iLCN 7a � 7. C66 � °A4cp A�"y oc Y�qm =L °WLLaw1O a CVN bA0 dtµC� 9C� ^o _� CO1 °ViN�T C °O. °O C� »L � wEt 4tp qti .w�E 7 CLN rJ Ca=+NY WbO•�oW 9C ...0. A= 4.G��• L.dC' O .. ° 0• %t �E�at � T� bpw�a COQ dO,9.ES� C T� 4 •"^CE p. JgL.V Qpw .�NvLLt M W�u aRV.. CTCO Y� E�� p bQ ^i 40 d owl •*'pd�i . '. Yta�n W D mEg44..E y p�aEE+ �LObti.6 V V.G - pp MC UdYO LC Gq y. N.Qc dq OC QU Y.W VL V Q. E.st aTy EEWW Md V ba k- .per °LLti 4L ..^ CCV• H•" y O. Nd aQVV � N V VT yW 6."Y 6'Q2�nL4]CC FODON 4'Yw GN YM2 60Rem fi °d" �Mut Z E 0 V ¢ Q O Z N 4 0 i S L6 L Y. � MS L 1T x U {t hb p..p==Ytl zz Yy y O 6 WOE'. w ^EW ti d40 D L 4 p N.A p q O a C N. fxq p�.... yEaLEi q 4 t N C 1 4 . A iRU Y O H q R YV aS .-• 4Y.dp Yhd�W g4 .:a 6 6 �- J N i 3 + +u w w M M�CLC -oo 2yt`�y' 3 J G G ^~ 4 p ? Q QTY i N i M V d Z. 4J v Cf •O s_ Ll `' t•s �T C. V^ q: �C a b a V V L O.L��i r'Li.G gut C r uq U 81-0 Yqo. uo. rwo Gc.'"'bx Y1!sg: Lqa E a �G ra wb qa V5.- qam'- ° G wa aC..t E O gy'q.9 x O. 'O' phi 06 m Y O.Y pOC! y..p 9A U�'Y C 4"ra w 9dV� Oy Cb h W , .91 ^ Uwri^ `q� y OdA E G GEL�b O 9,rg, rE.... Gw UW Eym mil. `Y. w aL mrn 'y xm' Y u- Y oV msya o ua b.Y qbU r= p6 Cu, t�>Q Ni V Y yu Vo Q �T.Ygx l>,�!O�CY.N m^ Cq Y wN F w y�Y.a G LrY-n r �a.s it. Y O ;d AOx]tN QlY Ux. TLUC iv�G4 V= 9 Vi O xy V.� U YCO C O E L r Y.�xGN L q d C wb V OE • t o U pq _ qa -.yN c L x N �x °^ M A. CCVI NC mw ci- <O, Ley „scab �c� u Ob L OOY Y i byL 3 h Y �.. q CO OO A C r C SCdO ° w~� ...E > r.= cY ^^> V L'• L� arm fi O.qY ,O Tm xY.°.a ti13 V,�a.O aYOi Yni �d .cp °. 6NGVi oq r .:;roc c v EGNYS aGa... .°. v° m ,ite Y v yw UYq`L {�{��Lq �. .V J3.OY q Y Y 9 '. cHpG.Y OVapi•� CN t=z Q C.N c qG> ♦.�Ad EV Y _ tTE•� 3�1%i yt OUP G _r E gm�d�A ^` AnV.L E ia. O•. ° ns p. idq� y G O: uniO Y+ b pOp N NtrTti .cq N 2Sx VU nY G�3 .. 6 =C Er w .-_:. Y � 4�6ti 6wx0 4att.m pyymb V . t•s �T C. V^ q: �C a b a V V L O.L��i r'Li.G gut C • LN •' .O�Y� Lb E N txa 6N Y am..Ly O E -i �.p OdA wqt U' G GEL�b O 9,rg, rE.... Gw UW Eym mil. VOO YRL ra I^ y ^C r ^O.C� YCO Q94x ^ia °CYS MYN pi �� qbU r= p6 L. ^nM ..`.. NY �n dObY t�>Q Ni V Y yu Vo Q y0 c.E 7O �. pYx p.E-o O oo c mm'^ •d i �-En v =' mvt't YU LVE W Ga 00 M A. CCVI ca C.� �M In- V L O Ob L OOY Y i byL 3 h Y �.. � Y Y a0.2'OwgC r d V 9 .> L •� CO OO A C r C SCdO ° w~� ...E > r.= Y L '7 ^^> V L'• O\y L c in cb 9G ptC x0. S.c i i0 w b aL.. OOC ^gYnq --;:z Z7 Elk: 6c �00 �C i £ Y Ga. O n W O� VOYta V ♦ U OLL� q30 > ,.0 Nip G b O = db Y Ral-A c a cc u C Gap Vna �m C� Q!•. 60 =vNb G A x 6 .�qN H L >u'°un vuqu omamdt °°t pyymb Lc «a . ++o D• +•.• � xw.c a' 4cco4 as 6E+r ap. I N t W L a c U C O y U 9L. Y Ln o'rn sc o`l d.M tlJ Ua Oo Ao N a ° E a pN U GLy C.D 9 i.qa LaNN A cN R'. Lead. SCY..` a n V u N= is cda O F •� L c�Ac 4dy rn� �� Uay� .�u'r• C�. ...'i: �Vq q NaN S.LGp � o�^ d c.. t�bFa c • ��:'^c '° qq U�. - eS. tl U p a Q.E. o C-'a- a Qua rnuo +r u vh NS a d H r y Lam, u N L L a E E N Y p ° Ctl.� d. �L Y oCY C'.G L a o• ~�qoc E aq.atl Nd LU coi "'° N .s 'M is nqy�'° a .d.ac cFV a.z3c tl p - °•E'�° -d Nu mE. o °er i:N cocQ+b''r N � °o -47; .r,N va 4ui °a'u of r19 E o C� '4= au °S d. ao is °Nt iN d,as9 m r i6 ^Vy-W QOC yq�0 qd Cq• a+2� U E �L C�� qtl Y�cdq�. EQQ CCYO r-•QO Uutl �a O�'C.dC u ^O CIq. a Aa�p� p. ^.Y • o ac+uL p'•'C , it- 3 �W a H a q "' Y nu.. A 6Fn3NNdG qd a ^Od C 6u U Y.O Ca. N ,°tlC Cd ° 1- N.°O YN N a 3�� JLE� Ld. py t -nor -: i I. T u o n i p a Y q } c p Y c n NE R�L '-Gda w >. nr m u NL6C G oo y a a o ui °.Y 6M C� yUV =N. od. w^ m ov io Tpc 3p uwo p✓ L �, 9u ' Gam„ e tl�O a' i$ m ya u q aoo e v U a Lu d. a9 tl6 L ° '!t�6N4 6L. , QC dy L It _� 6Z L ato y�U C N Nd dy N A S >N ptl 7. d G 'C. O L °q 1.�4 da 'O Z?a SE L"+ di0 �. NN r o m p'L' tl ° ° c c o V_ t d p z.'�- Eau.V •.i y++tlt 6 ddU. tO.d NL�O O C w L+ 111�kt 2L 6 -9 :5 a p L ► a Y >y G O p d m ULq 2 a[ E {I Gd 6 t Lt V O rN TC a �N E 6 9 GAC P VO�C O�a'GiY +C VU L.Oe PT YPY ie tz l9 y b _.G ben V•w yy.0.� A 4N mL �� O. U.aA r. uaa F L 4 V G P N. ESE n ♦r '7 N N 9Y p m "' c. V Y p q4 Z- C� 0. LXdvT`. ^� Vr wy LO GNN � y �c A.G �' OYY I.. Pd 20 ' q� VCq. `C � • yOLeA ENti N L qL SO E -ryi Ygmy a p O Ev: EC d �b �y d6 wy NON O AY C P a» SuyOG cgG.uY Vb C =q Ew q f'LJGh D EYgy y' yp a D4 'rd � '� It O��•q yD' - 2 9 q A ..� L •.., t'O �. rEAY Ob Y• .O bYV.. uL��6 y r T•ay C�4 •L N R� VT a � �Y n =y '9N ` 3 �A. �L iP.=. A UL� qp =r ^_ C� 3d ^9 N L ey.. dT Y� P4 Yerv. x YC�d V a q d ^N VNV byL y0.0 N Gum L O C .O �eS�pp�6 N 1..••Tru GL. N A.p 0.0�Y rY9YC� FOWL �{0. Yt ii7 Aa'!iN L.•adq RawG Qu >v pCE %OpVO.. V9 b. Sr wai ne t0 YOq r pu: Yd V L ' �O c° N_N 4gti aqu 2 r C V •` Etc � TY Ai ti �.O ou Y .`t V e'.i •Na Y a � q o y ,fir y•.. d�G d 4 d ?� La v Y.. ' q� VCq. 9'' OY.� yOLeA ENti N L � T O •• � w`urW •- �.. ,...a v uau'- y„i 1p v c�9 •� n u c "yu'�u Acv LLL. p Y C L • T �+ CD d 'N Y � V e.�� • V , L ^_ Of^ g V ^N VNV byL y0.0 N Gum L O C .O �eS�pp�6 Oj N A.p 0.0�Y E Cu4 ,yp E r+p Ou o..O NDy:. �L Pb L t0 YOq r pu: Yd V L ' �O c° N_N 4gti aqu L4 L � " Gc'Y C V •` Etc � TY Ai ua aD• v v o L:i O iV NSO O 6d. U 7cy.Y _••Q C ptJ Wd O. yj_ P >� +70. �0.. ad de6r� O ✓ � y. 4 i+�iCmL 20q o'`. N vY ��� `� N.^ �� yN^ yoEEQ TcFO Ya „ ^_ G a E .qu-d Dusts � �aq Gt. uci aegno.,p N �O q�pp. LaF+ dCp '^CV 4� d'•” 43Y. Ciu 6a 0.q.Y O� � p Q LI O, AE Cy D`p 0.y7 O yC O _C U L= O W W L^Et Cy W E S 8-9 04 O E E 6 Y d 4YC EE 'Y4 TCO L ` O.L. MO YY YL y 1 j 9-/9 d .. ({���� �� j Kn c y Nay an d iv aM . g O.¢ b C F N O m S N p tot Z E 1.� ba dwA qX b. Cwµd Wy QJ Qs • O ^ O C V � �� O CwKL O ..iU t' AY ~'~ u,T Gw •':�. • y y � y w Cm � �L q d�iu.TL ✓,��0 tZbA Ad Nu Nd GP wq .-.O =L � np. p =L 6)) w b r Y U O Yu VL ^OPECE d. y b Vd N x £r ° E 4' u A O O CY L � ENT? 6t: �A � ^ V 4'b yw. Y � igwr ysO pu A d uo v�wi`E•,oTG �� N� Nle O� �}.,t 8^ C N N d..0 1 �� YI 7 C w. 6 OCJ C'00 6• Q M �Om N ..O..0 y� C. LG .N •. rno 48.t Ud b= Uy O. b^ I. �^ L•` 5 Y � u° aN d.�.� elm � .• a z.� �y .. gw , eGn 1 .N ci V4 cNO K. aLUG 4u. im ^tea 6 cvab °n einc E ti. m Ul i�w y .. yM AY E yYCM YCW OOU 01rOO y:'pRYA 'gap ggpC K Cb w0 a Lp�O y br�t�1 +0. G}C =V N O•Vm.6 d O M N �q :Aa tll'm S A Cam. 4 Ou CA L Vq� ONUC LP�gY 3Y- . I.. d d' AU JI vmi.UU9'C dY TyE nN I I Ut .P.y Ny F y OC Y.. UbEV� +- WE 1. I •� ^9 N gg G O M� V C c NLUM. C Oata� C'nOA 6 rb��A UO.O fL,� N�` cE Uft L6.A -q dNC C.a,Q aA �� LiN y v °� C •� j a �O. !}. '° OfN a1L dN u� N O•'=U� ^� N Vw rO O MEW LOdP dY Nb O�OU Ud2LiN A Y7Q OVLN QAwG M s.� P4+�E ^4 b O N V•� }. m ?Y 60tOJ Y00�w V } � O• V ...CC= F'� Q b d V O N_ G V_q 9 7 W v W 1 y roc a ie Y ° 't dam• ° °� O O 6II0 OL Y w w SAO u u N C N _ •• GyY tY� Y L ^yY t = N - pOPj � N -L W' N L _ •j y 9 ^ ° Z i U A d � L w N� � Y + C CN • w 0 N 'O NM ° cG E aE� ^ ~ • V a dy u p �P+°+ L1 u CV W4Y L L � • N GQO � yV u9dCY 2Z O 4,0 Y°.w '!'T LO dt L�. O•di Ad Y. G �� LyYq c c bp...0 ad •id OWN is Fy ds 9 =.G, tT ia. dV E4 G pV Bpi V 0.Ca1 LLL 'O.O 019` Huy O � .0 �uYiu P.26t°s.O C ." « 0.� U �+ AO W� Lf• GxG} 0... N W. �pG YY L' LN.Y. aLdi 0 � Mw Uv � Z•,n 9A `O.. L P L O•d0= 0 ' •L 6 01 _C.UG r d €n€ rM LW ^w OY UC 7L nd U E N9 • LN G N>. Fd'u M a.T SN�iUT O u N Tn_ V bu� O B. U .` E d �rY •-1 dil p.w •y N LfJ •-• SO w V� ��.O •W-• d h . 1-Vu <n z F t C u V L E c O z Yc Yv J' C E V.� P ° ' a Y ° 't dam• ° °� O O 6II0 OL Y w w SAO u u N C N Y L ^yY t tl 4i NL N W W rC« >LT W' N L _ •j y y = CY a A c S « U E E aE� ^ ^p ^y C1'• q q V q�y.p �d L1 u CV W4Y L L uT b b� 2 2Z O c. A Ad Y. G GY EY c c c bp...0 ad q n Zs P V Ell �N �. c u E °L. Lc+u` Hoi•ci A« c a N � ti. Uaad.. i.'. '. m q Y � ;W V � yu {] G A qL Or^ G Lq VJ Ord 6U YY - O � Nu I s 1 p 6�Ewu Y 0 6 o 2_ M � A YU► a�,., � p Z .°r- �� C 'a � � r« N� A �Y N p' ♦^-W s��W rq o u E � N r�i�... LrO N L d i O y L V` L > D m y j a Nava yA .o..W t' Y d q < ^ L d V N N4 c qq� Y m 9 N ♦ ^Y9 y L. +s Y x A u^ a •. ;y yN a� a.3 c ar't!" „r p, qC a 6EUn U� R LvAiC e;u �q s'ac qa q 9 d U' �~ V �^ T� SEA qT Y� rT Oy 40 � r •y •t l •,+ i L f S G d 1:� 4 ♦T• S� i�� 6w N 6 N .-•-Z _ Y C'•' �•3 i E .y� G C N ♦EY. > tl o .[ o. 3 S W4Y — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAB+ E REPORT DATE: February 13, 1985 TO• Members of the Planning Com- mission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Curt Johnstrin, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12832 LYON I. The development of 35 attached single family dwellings 1 an 16,9 acres of land within the Victoria Planned Community (Low - Medium category, 4 -8 du /ac), located on the north side of Victoria Park Lane aryl west side of Victoria Windrows Loop - APN 227- 371-13, 14,;X16, r ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENT'AVE TRACT 1:833 - LYON - The development of attached single family dwellings on 14.7 acres of land within the Victoria Planned Community (Low - Medium category, 4 -8 du /ac), located on the south,_ side of Victoria Park Lane, and west side of VicttkJa_Windrows Loopy APN 227 - 371 -14, 15 and 227 -391- 16, PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. A-ctinn Requested: Approval of 2 tentative tract maps, unit designs, and issuance of Negative Declarations. B. Purpose: Construction of 252 single family attached units. C Location: North and south sides of Victoria Park Lane,'--­- west of Victoria Windrows Loop. D. Parcel Size: 31.6 Jj E. Densit : 8.0 du /ac overall for both tracts I F. Existing Zonin • Victoria Planned Community, Low /Medium designation 4 -8 du /ac). G. Exisi.no Land Use: Vacant Land, A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoninn• North Single Family Homes, Low /Medium District - '75:130 square foot lots (The Gardens) ,, ITEMS C & Q �. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 1283, and 12833 Lyon February 13, 1985 Page #2 S t II. k i -, k4 ou h - Single Family Homes, Lcw /Medium District - 3000 square foot lots (The Tark) East- - Single Family Homes, Lbw /Medium District 5000 square foot lots (Th( Country) West Vacant, utility corridor I. Serrounding Land Use and ?oni Project Site - Low- Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac)' North Lcw- Medium ResiJentia, (4 -e du /ac) South - Low- Medium Residential (4 -3 du /ac) East - Low- Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) West - Low-Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) J. General Plar: Oesionations: Prcaect 'ite - Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 dujac) No>;:h - Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) South Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) East Low- Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) West Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 du!ac) K. Site Characteristics: The site slopes gently to.the south at approximately 2 -3 No significant vegetation exists. ANl}L1SIS: A. ^eneral: This project reprp5ents a new product type for Victoria and is an alternativ- .o the center plot single fzmily units on 3,000 square foot lots, ('t he Park "). The project consists Of two, and your -plea units. Each unit is on a separate lot with 4, p,.-'bvate° rear yard. 'rypical lot sizer------ are approximately 4,000 square feet. With development, of the project,"' %ioria Park Lane will be extended nearly 700 feet. The product was developed in response to design concerns •regarding monotonous ,treetscapes created by long rows of garage doors, continuous driveways, and little variation of building fora. This project addresses the design concerns with alternating front and side entry garage_, conbined driveways, considerable variation or building setbacks, and split level architecture tJiet provides significant relief to roof forms and buildl)ig mass. i l Ell PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 12832 and 12833 Lyon February 13 1985 Page #3 ddbka B, besn Review Committee: The,, N.sign Review Committee s review focused on the design: treatment of Victoria Park Lane. The major concerns dealt with location of the equestrian trail,-wall designs along the ,park .lane, and orientation a units. In ;irldition, the Committee required upgraded roof materials of ail " units, and installation of master planned pedestrian trails along the north and 'south project boundaries. Also discussed W1 7e requirements for R.V. parking and timing of a -Victcria L ak> s plan, In response to the Committee's concern, the ?;?alicartt, • provided considerable detailing of alternatives for ^the: des?gn of the mark lane as discussed` ;in the trails section of this report, Othar changes included revision of street pattern, provisions for trails _along the north and south boundaries of the project, and,,addition of mesanary wails (vs. fencing) adjacant to Victoria Park.i.ane. In addition, the appl? cant has begun discussions with Staff and a private consultant regarding a "Lakes Plan" and is,working' on a commercial R.V. parking faailityr withinr the planned coaminity,: u {th these revisions and the Conditions of Approval as listed on the Resolution, the Uasign' Review Committee recommends approjal. sfr Technical Rev -:ew Committee The Technical Review Committee reviewed the project and require, a number of technical revisions to the street alignmei. and mailing 'setbacks. T090-her, the revised plans and rec6mmended Conditions of APProval bring the project into compliance with -" ,a Victoria,. 1a"munity Fiat,; and applicable City Standards an,: Ordinance_. C. Trails: The Trails Committee reviewed t-5ails along Victoria Park Lana as requested by the Planning Commission. Alternatives were presented by the applicant for an equestrian trail in the center of the park lane median or along the north side of the park line. The committee-; determined that locating ;a trail on the north side of the pa7,K lane is ,nicest appr4riate. Details of the pj--estri'an trail are- indicated on the attached exhibits.: The trail will be t�,ntinued to the east t7ong the frontage of the school and park siteJor consisten.y. The existing trail in the median would hE, removed: PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF 't.EP0RT Tentative Tract 12532 and 12833 Lyon February 13, 1985 Page f.4 D. ti;,vir•onmental Assessment: Part I of the additional study has beer` completed by the applicant. Staff has cymplete..d the environmental`?checklist and has fJund no signi €icant or adverse environmental impacts as' a result of this project. If tue Commission concurs ►lith this finding, issuance of a Negative Declaration would h =a appropriate. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The project is adequate in size and shape to accommodate th3 proposed number of lots' within the subdivision, The proposed subdivision, detailed site plan and architectural elevations, in conjunction with the Cort'litions of Approval are consistent with the Victoria Pldnned'Comm-nity and - General Plan. The :project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant adverse environmental impacts. IV. COnRESPC:aDENt�Er: phis item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Dail Resort newspaper. Notir:es were dent to all property o7'wners within 300 Meet of the' subject site. In addition, public'. hearing notices were posted on the property. To date, no correspondence has been recived for or against this project. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is race.manded ' the Planning Commission conduct public hearing and consider �c input and elements in tl *,is project. If after 'such ; nation, the Commission roncurs with the Facts for Findin ..nd Conditions of Approval, the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, RixGomez City Plar aer RG:CJ:cv Attachm::nts: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map E,;hibit °B" - Tentative Traci Map Ex5ib"rt "C" - Conceptual Gradinq!Plan Exhibit. "Dte Detailed Site Plat Flhibit "E-' - Conceptual Landscape Flan . it "F" Victoria Park Lane Details Floor Flans - Building Elevations tdy Part II -eso, 5 of Approval with Conditions ,; wzarE TM IZJ4G- lunMWYQEss14i elsta — wztxm ro...�..+o.......•.w Tk 12045•1 233 TWCOwnrr!ea tLVr rw TOFORAatp R000('ONiad. CWRNEI o. 1 _ PURRE DEVElOPSIdi �rr•X`wX[• _ �, ! � •PrROPp58p ECWq, • ��� �.. • t � / 1'a � •w.cROwsuacw UM Ve �G p!� .ti..r...� v •� rpm' � `'� � �� .QC r.p r �. � •� �. � � TR t: W4 1 r - s1f �' iIE GNgER3 PHitSE i tro attl 50U�1R6Ni PF RI , 1� ', fJ( ,mt,934TW-P. 1t150m) SOI]i11ER11 :.ALFpNit EOr3Gli EA4ELFNi' NURTH CITY Oil I 'LTG;. 0 JCAMONTGA TITLE=: "_�C PLANNING DI'VE101 LXIIIIiIT��r_ C.1LE '"'`°° �f TENTA-TIVE TRACTS NO. 12832 & 12633 IN THI% CITY W RANCHO CUCAMONGA its tmLMEs ewa�aww 3 < < 7 I r✓. , � n w w � J rt. � , Vic' w. • t bnnL wwwa �' y'T t -� rjf� nasrano +a w _'• ' (4 waa xw�n t� `L PL lite.3"°" s .,,�., s •w r tri ,� I s s rY T .. \ �— n }� � 1 tV-4 0� TYP�CAI SECi.�N3 I'•1 -� w • ++ r w s r f• \ w n "vt 'CHE7ARFL F0.i: �. • - t_ �:t�_�•�; - '✓i/i�7LL1A111 LYON�J, .....� ..ww •Y09 d�•�l4 ata - ' cvm4naaR6Gk4C� � /� NORTH CITY OF ITIa�+f= i3 1 RANCHO CLJCAMOj'\TGA TI'CL,E PUNNING DIVLSI€ N EXHIf3t _. i CITY OF ITEM:' JTII t'Z% - I LI RANCHO CU✓AT OINGA T i LE � �O' . .ADI%S--_ PLANNING DIVISIC3N EXHIl3ir.. SCALE. '- Gd -Al: TYPICAL STREET SCENE GIN 0 iz s wa o CITY1(�� �/�)�i — YY..CAL PLAT PLAN CI .R. O NnJSc RANCHO CU rIvIC3i\T ` : 'nTLi; � PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. `i_ SC 1LE ''�° a 4AUSTNATME LANOSUPE PLOT PLAN T!lE:YEAOOAS.777. ORiL WinummS �� PPgCAP tAiiAYAPiy cal.AIA - ^'^ 'THE WkLIAH LYON COLIPAPT' YENTAS 1I "ACT NO -2421 Ai s» CACAaies+. CANtbreiu' i • lgol ll RANCHO CU VIa�TC� TrrtE= PLANNING DTV&QN EXMBIT= St'AL8 • � n� 1.ECENO + ar■rrT �. 1. �© r —r ..—�.. Y w•.�••• fH'E'w1&iLY tYZ1N. COMPANY `ENTi TI „E TPACT NO. 17532. i��� ����� �_ �•,.�L,» .;F A >neA. Oaeamong P�. CtNtarnl� j CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TI'T'LE PLANNINU DIVISIOiN EXHIBIT- SCALE- C-10 �, rr .1-4 rho EVA W CQNCEPTUAI LANDSCAPE PLAN ' IlTNEawtAP MEAOOYfS.:1 VICTORIA tl WS W"".. Cstame TNE Wit 11RY LYON CONPRNT TEN -.tTtYE T »iCT NO. 12031L t.mlwPl�GNttltaq: ...... C7 ,TY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONGA TrrLE: c-aicerr. �', ►�.. ►�i� _ PLANNING DIVISION E.-�1-iIBiT = 5Cft%D�.� t, '. �a l�rr EVA W CQNCEPTUAI LANDSCAPE PLAN ' IlTNEawtAP MEAOOYfS.:1 VICTORIA tl WS W"".. Cstame TNE Wit 11RY LYON CONPRNT TEN -.tTtYE T »iCT NO. 12031L t.mlwPl�GNttltaq: ...... C7 ,TY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONGA TrrLE: c-aicerr. �', ►�.. ►�i� _ PLANNING DIVISION E.-�1-iIBiT = 5Cft%D�.� t, '. SECTION cc SECTION 00 _SECTION EE. .. SECTt�NS " niiuta n. THE MEADOWS at VICTORIA WINDROWS 'o'•"'^"� lancho Cucamonga, California rarratto rotr THE WILLIAM. LYON COMPANY TENTATIVE TRACT NO 12832 $ 12803 ~� M Rancho Cucamonga, California • • C„.., .•..... C.N•...• tCJti, ^ tt1" Ottttt•f•i... CITY' 0- F ITEM: -:rr! -M'' l (iS33 RANTCHO CUC4 NIONTGA, ' TITLE: a PLANNING D;[VISIU" N EXHIBIT: a- SOLE r 1 SECTIL._ Loki i - _ eww.a nu•aw ��._,�,.. —ws row. CITY OF t'E&t�� R. AIN 0 CUCAMO i�sA TITLE- — t.AQV*4ft1A► PLANNIN DIVISICh`t E:�' 3iBt I °* S td- _ .VIEW OF H@IOHBOSHOOO 'STREET ,VIEW OF 'Inta4MA PAS% LANE f F VIEW AF sEIDN50(BOOD Si$EET - SKETCHES INE MEADOWS tt VIOTOBIA WII1Dp9Wy :uncAe wCgnen9f. CMi11e1A1f _ reran fa.. , • a.�rnn TACT NO. 12547 [ tiS93 'NE WMUAM LYON COMhANY CI'"Y . "_'I ATCHO CUCAMONGA . Trnp" "�'r *rm LAM� Pb NING DIVISION `j 0701 -0 o 2-13-85 PC .Acge da 0 2 {of 6 5 EXTMIONA SECTIOHKK 17 .MENSION5 SECTION LI. XIOTORFA.' F =,RK LANE- T, Q i EDISON Y0.;'fd�A PAfb(LME�EXTESJSA�N B .. TIJE11EACOWg at ,"(ICTOfig VINOROW9 T _ Ia.vuIW CYC.al011G�a C "it C(A, THE WICSIAM LYON COUPAKY IICA6 GYCMIOXpCV Calllafala CITY OF ITEri11: Is fll �ICHO C.TCAI ONGA TITLE' LA-M2 Q PLANNING DIVISIM EXHIBIT- SC,,, M, s 4 PLAN PLAN 627 SO fT 959 SO. tT, NOUN, CITY or, RANCHO C.TCAIINIONTGA TrrL D PLANNING DIVISION ExHiBCr--&---L scALE: a I i 1 i i 1 iLJ' 1 fill ELAN 1236 50 FT IPZ� 'CE-ICO CUCAMONGA nTLG: i PLANNING DlVbq(,I 1 REAR EMATIOB - FRONT ELEVATION I3UILDIHM TYPE .. V NORTH CITY OF, t "itaut: 's RANCHO HO CUCAMONGA: TITLE-, PLANNIW, DI14S CXN Fv.HIBIT- A-Z1 ,SCALE - C-LTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART iI - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DATE:_ , �1.eel APPLICANT: U' J 4&-4M �`1PdWtJ t�'B FILING DATE: f �' LOG NUMBER'S e PROJECT:-- PROJECT LOCATION: 'IMPACTS' I. ENVIRONMENTAL (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers ar6 required, on attached sheets). YES MAYBE NO I. Soils and Geolo£y. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions,. displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface contour, intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? 6 e. Any potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic -hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud - slides, ground failure, or, similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and /.or use of any mineral resource? 3 2. Hydrologv. Will the propooal have significant results in. r #f Page 2 YES MAYBE NO a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction Of flowing st -lams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels ?' ,! b. Changes in 95sorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amciunt of surface water it runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? -s z' d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water? e. .Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of grout;dwater characteristics ?' g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? -'r h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? I. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? — 3. Aiz alit . Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sources? e b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or Interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic - conditions, affectitng air movem =nt, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change: n the characteristics of species, including diversity* distribution, or number species of any of plants? b. Reduction of the nwpbers of any unique, rare or endangered specieil of plants? r � - Page 3 YES MAYBE No c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural production? Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including dive,,�sity, distribution, or numbers of any specieR,'of animals? i b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of snimals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? y �✓ d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife, habitat? 5. Populatiowl. Will the proposal have significant results Iii: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? / b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand far additional housing? _ 5. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have fi signicant results iat a. Change in local or regionl socio- economic characteristics, including economic os- -_ commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values ?` b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? ' 7. Land Use and Plannint Consideratiols. Will the proposal have sljn- ificant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? c. An impact upon the qu2aity or quantity of eY�sting consumptive or non - consumptive recreati--nal opportunities? j {� 1 Page 4 YES MAYBE NO 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: - a- Generation of Substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on- existing streets, or demand for new street Construction? C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? e. Alterations to present patterns Of ,Cjrr *e7a -- r tion or movement of people and/or goods? f. Alteratious -go or effects on present and Potential w ter- borne,,, rail, mass t,:�it or air traffic? g. Increases in traffic ba -:ards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have -_. significant results a. A disturbanrz to the integriCy of archaeological, paleontological, and /or historical resourrces? 10. Health. Safety and Nuisance Factors. Will the propotl. have significant results in: a. Cry .son of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Facposure of people to potential health hazards? _ C- A risk of explosion o, release of hazardsas substances in the event of an accident? d. An increase in the number Of individuals ---- or species of vector or pathenogenic Organisms or the ,exposure of people to such organisms? I _ e. Increase i-1 existing noise levels? _ f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? g. The creation of obecti �e p� #ors? osrab' x' h. An increase in light or ..4,.. giant,:, Page S YES MAYBE Np Aesthetics. Bill the proposal have significant YCS¢lL5 {.n: The abst= `�pn or degradation Of any meenic vista or vi�v? �S. The creation of an aesthetically Offensive site'?' M -- C. A conflict with the objective of <.esignated Or potential Scenic corridors? -� 12. Utilities ar3 Public Services. VilS the proposal have a sagaMcant need fOr nest spst.:,, or alterations to the follorwing: - a. Elect is poor? b. %atur;xl or Packaged gas? C. CotmmIui6 cat ,n3isystesn' / s al- d. Vater suppl�' e. wastewater 4-cilities? f. Flood coxrtrol structures? g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? i i. Police protection? J. Schools? %. Parks or other recreational facilities? ,e I• IW=euance of public facilities. including roads: and flood control facilities? .0000' • Other g°vernmental services? 13. Enemy aad Scarce ;2esaorces. Win the Proposal have significant results Inz a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? -- b. Substantial increase 19 'demand upon existing ---� , sources of energy?,' ,y. .0r' t. Xa increase in the demand for development of Dw sources „ of energy? -_ l d. ,2 increase or Perpetuation of the consumption of non­remewable fb=s of energy. " when feasible reaevable DOurces.Of energy are available? C -D 29 +�- \ Page g YES MAYBE NO e- Substantial depletion o£ "any r_onrenewable or sc4 _- a natural resource? . 14, Mandatory Findings of Si ificance. Fes' a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife epecies, = cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal, community, reduce the number or restrict the range of,a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate Important examples of the major periods of , California history or preys *_ory ?' b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short- -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A shots -term Impact on the environment is one which Occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long - term impacts will endvre well into the future). i c. Does the project have impacts which .are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed is connection with the effects of past projects, ` and probable future projects). s d.. Does the project have environmeatal,effects which will cause, substantial adverse effects o-t human beings, either directly or indirectly? II. DISCUSSION OF ENVIR02a4£2dT.- EVALUATION (i.e.., of affirmative the answerer _ta_ above questions plus a discussion of proposed: mitigation measures), 0- page M. DETER14I1TATION ; On the basis -o€ this initial Irra]uatian. }_ I find the proposed project COULD NOT hav�--.'a significant effect on the environment, and a NE {,ATIVE DECLARATION will he prepared, I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect ---a on the PnVironment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because fhe mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE Di' ;T.ARATION WILI, BE,PREPARED. ElI find the proposed project MAY have signi£iia.k- 'egect on the envirnment, and an ENVIRONMENT '' MTACT! lid PORT s rejui ed, ' r Date ypel r ture t T.tle l ` 1r 3 RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,j'',. CALIFui VA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVINt ' TENTATIVE TRACT Mki NO. 126 WHEREAS, Tentatii e' Tract Map No. 12832, hereinafter "Map" 'submitted by the William Lyon Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdivid na the real property situated in. the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of Californla, described as 135 attached single family dwellings on 16.9 acres of land within the Victoria Planned Community (Low- Medium Category, 4 -8 du;ac) - located on the north side of Victoria Park Lane and west side of Victoria Windrows Loop - APN; 2V- 371 -13, 14, 15 into 135 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on February 1°. 1985. . and WHEREAS, the Ci'��y Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set 'forth in the Engineering and Plaming Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Manning Commission has :tad and considered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered o ther 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 tc Tentative Tract No. 12832 and the Map thereof: 1, The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan,'Developm;.nt.CAde,,and specific plans; �. fI design or improvements of the tentative tract is .,insistent with the General Plan,, Development Code, N-�- and specific plans; f. (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause k substantial environmental damage and avoidabld 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 tentati�,e; tract will not conflict. wit", any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for acess� through or use of ::,the ' property within the proposed subdivision.,:, Tentative Tract 1283` Page #2 �i (9) .-That this project will not create ,:''verse impacts on the environment and a Negative Deciaration is issued. SFCTIO:N 2: Tentative Tract Mapo. 12832, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby ap —oved subject to ail of the following conditions and the attached Standard Co*aditions: Planning Division I. Each lot within the project shall have a mini my'p flab: (2`� slope or less) rear yard area from building to property` fine or slopti /retaining wa.1 of fifte -- .: (15) feet. -A _ailed .ffaal. site plan that indicates, slope and retaining 14,411 locations and unit plotting shall be submitted prior: to issuance of building permits. 2. Corner side yard f_ncing anchor retaining wx.11s -:hall be setback a'minimon distance of five (5) feet from the beck of sidewalks. All interior street .facing r?taining walls shall be constructed of decorative block: and all wood 'fencing installed by the developer shall be treated with.water sealant or, stain.. E 3.. Street facing side elevations and the rear of two story units facing a street shall be upgraded with additioanl wood trim, wood siding, or plant -ons where appropriate. Construction details shall be indicated on the working drawings (including specific lot numbers). 4. Prior to recordation of the subject map, a complete applicaticn shall be submitted for devc?opment of an R.V. par"ing facilit, within the boundaries "- r= ,thv Planned Community. Construction of a temporary or permanent R.V. parking lot adequate in sze to accomodate 25% of th,: lots within Tract 11934 and the subject tract shall be completed to prior ccctipanry of any new units. t, - - S. Final landscape and trail improvement plans for Victoria Park - Lane shall be submitted for review and .approved by the Design ' Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. 6. A Tinimum 20% of the required trees within Victoria Park Lane shall be sueciman size (24 inch box Pr iarger). 7. Roof material within the project shall be wood shake or the shake. Actual material samples shall be submitted to the Planning Division fi,. , review and approval to prior issuance of building perr its._ 8. Along the west boundary of the project,_the maximum wall height shall be nine (9) feet. Graded slopes andlor terraced Aft Tentative Tract 12832 Page ,#3 - retaining wails with a minimum setback of five (5) feet from adjacent units shall be.required in areas where the wall height would otherwise exceed this standard. 9. The final grading plan shall be revised to accurately address gradi;ig along the west project boundary. Drainage water shall not be directed toward the flood wall or adjacent residences, and an as- built profile of the existing wall shall be submitted to assist in review of the final grading plan. Engineering Division 1. A structural block wall for flood protection shad be provided along the entire west boundary of the tract including across the terminus of uictoria -lark Larn and Silverberry Street. 'The portion of the wall cro;,`sipg the streets shall be removed at the Developer's expense, Upon extentions of the stif:ets to the west.. 2. In ord3r to pro•rida a means for vehicles entering Victoria Park Lana on the: =north roadbed to exit on the south roadbed,- a temporary 4onnection across the median shall be provided at the -westerly ,ininus,` preferably on the Edison property to the west; or iatl acceptable vesicle barrier shall 'he constructed f rear the intersection with Victoria Windr�yws Loop;. Is. The following improvements outside the immediate tract I boundaries shall be provided with the.develo %aziii of the tre -:t or an agreement with the City shall be eXecuted to the allow deferment until a later date: a. The east half of Day Creek Boulevard from Highland Avenue south to the railroad. b. " Master Plan Storm Drain Line I from Highland Avenue south to the railiiad including sufficient off -site improvements necessary to ,provide the proper -` functioning of the facility. c. Victoria Park Lane from the west Tract boundary west to Day Creek Boulevard. d. Silverberry Street from the west tract boundary west to Day Creek Boulevard. 4. Improvement plans for Victoria Park Lane from Day Creek Boulevard west to Rochester Avenue shall be completed to tte satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to recordation of either Tract. 5. The dedication width of the interior streets shall be increased to provide 0.5 feet beyond the edge of sidewalk within the 1 street rigi -or -way (46 feet.vs. 44 feet as shown). _ n1 la, `V �n^LO day L"COY qA O�pq.C9 O dR •rL Y At C. � .. UL ny pGUC. ° c VP pU � a L T O L o a Y -2 +'f •, � 7.d ON4' "+II L NL Vy.. p L. ` O CL Y.CC. .'O O J 4J LOO t a d0 V ♦ bad CU AM il. d. d Y o 6 xC ym OU �.E.�O Y'G^U pqt..� NUW dG rC 9GY^ LUL Cd =�Y G A dW VQ 9 d� = N Q. .`.. cam n I ' . .- L r,•pYUn° Y r " u u- ^v Nwa. °pyo ^dT tea. o.N� .� _ ^u 'O N ��.L ^� ECCUGd pagd L SY ;pari' CC � d d9L. OLW.... d QL EYwp.Y Y�q - 4 VLY. un LYV w +OdiRgN O^ t a6L0 C V b-g p. 01 � Vwµ • NVOy VT � V � y'° SLY. EEO.0 O °�pGr n �GN^�+ r yNdi 1Y.L Q�GN m a .�L _.. O'y C w`EP gNUN y$y�m. o,rE�o LC 4.pq °yd. t •�O .. L� wLp �C ON CL- CO OG ° A ANN �^ �a .. EE Lp ^E• A�..`,P df9pC ��NEyE� C '�• wN �E•a C'a VOa N OCp°Ow 9I L�� 6C OM 2' LO JrA dpIC Y qa.° GRaa L�w-dL C i.�I. Go O� h ,O hS t4J L CE Oa ) YY q5 Yo iGL m U dOq C RO y�E p OCO Y r fififi° E Y.dut: Y c--w 6 �Yt•G e PdY Gw d Y L C � l L ° d6 d G as 9w u. 6 :Awl QO cl N ...p CO.V dU� n°' bU q.ANAY ..9.Od0 o+N•YNGV$ n�Lb =r 1-"o p.4iw .1Ulz V :Z-w- .•+z. aO.um {-t ni nu 4q n.Cn • o • N .. .. v1 b .. R 1 00 ! ^ E v f. Ce? S V. �sv -^ �E+L+=P.0 T =M Ll 6 N E y NR u =° W M� ekeee O aL� v p ° °a�=b� Y Me Z. tL O Ou.^O OCY YI Y. } C F� � G ? O04 � ��AUG QyO • MO dOFa N s� 9 = N d C E 0. = u^ 18 ^� �� C q_ P G� -CE at aue W a e p d o u ot F a� Aa c.. ° 2 •t. ^. '� E SN L ALLn °4 ;; V xv.T �4J d.Nq wG-N =Ep Fd Cq L' VQ��' Ny, .. �Np s Nana .�.,i F�Nw.~T E € 4 Log d L o y. MWF .- du •°i -.E,a L E�Y> qFR nhs itN!� d �n ?.y L y2 N d aG L -'O> qa� 4 V:.:- •O t+ qN�n xd ~ r....t .+: x�r c d2�n o ° L >° A� °' b N a'�.� L / c Q ° u 4 N N ♦- = L } 2 ° ` a. .� = w � ° r C S L c y `O rN gAEl C =aCC A ;. Z ✓..E ^�a N'y6 Pb y a •° d ° €a s TO t4uin LS C '+.o L �.; at N 4 �uyA III 4 m'4 G~ U (SAO LAT `+ ^2 N °x .Q d IT Nb 3 • G O� � ° w AEN�'Oya.O TRaL U�,^^ G'uJiO 6 NOd %N Eua d pLN U �d NdM4 � L @L Py. 4yL -^� EF 4 L Y NOrLAI -`Og�p ^H (' W�C� QA.dY O =d L y� ^SE�? L `M dAdn -L Q -M N N n O r• r� a P ..d. 9 2 O T Z d 'G3 �Fy` 4Sy° G GETOQM ° p ^EEW o C�qC L u .coo pp L � u tz CN•.i_.N.^ N.N Nd F %O LT Yx: dt+ c 4u of n 6Cyr q E' 6 C P u L �[ p J CpN .y U.T E� d1C .P u .+ L qtr. -c 6 L _ a2+O� b C Nd W� ^� p,= 6,]6L1 6w N0 4NVL.m V N. - � .mac. ao.. e•- .e Wc+c p u qv bud JS �p L� 'A •+ 4L qA �� Q tSSi��ECvEtLN D6 ^yC.1� �LQ �2 d G.�$ nY_G� LR Uu5z Fd"^ E CN. °Ce v°t dtlT pAET ti. 1x'9 •r E ON SL 4� GAY a' p nu °WY. tduEEq A4 na Cq° �6 °c d.°.- ..nnEO�b- �... A`.r,E^ °. x �Q atjwjW X06 dqG «G4 y~ „LU NrE^O �y9g0 dO' L�4 b6gW n NdOa ' Y NL OIIO� ~Ca �Gr� VM �dv y 0 4 J x O OC j�;d nQyn ^qr= L C� vC PG'O:AS D ONQ >LNL y .+ M� G 6� q� cE.G. q26 ^.QA G d C t r V Nw O 9� NLn ° •� C' ° U � C % Q O U �� u Ad � Nd S �nq ° VS • "� .tam ¢ � d J S • `.� y4 S w A d 4 Ca +n _ t x P O LS qyG a� n Fm.« N2 NG w_ p.E of p-V^gG Eye.. a dr_-u C o. r q =� W^ NY G qL oEQO O Lds yL y2i y y C NC. L d Wit+ 1'.y QT p pp tJ�° W O ^ V ONN id. O C V P 4yW ' ;I 6L • • COF° G4'AO Cy 9 4 W� ~6 C �C NOan 001 "Q� y b Q ' g C A a i 4 E E3, ` U. S > •� x6 I-'-F NC 6r NL hN KY dG0`6 L E °N:CA LL nyEO UN2 A m y O n°t •H ti R ~ b d1 A L d Nq �'• G } q Cr . L U N K J � Off. L- pFi= 4.1 C3 4CC N.N4 uy 'p RC O. Yl p�q- DCb. 3 - V 9pU NOL.VU a�.$°J qnV �' t y. Nit. Rita C'gyA Q' yet i G� �' d� q ti N 9 V . N n N E. .'q. r� a� •", St. 0. L �-. - Ali L•�j.^U M'O Lr -.« bti�F uaO NT rN qY Ga w� }q � V C N~ �qD� p L El •ri a4z OIqb N }LOQ. t• � t w ytsL >A� V M. 6 d l�.l Y..O C D w q p- t G b C u D c > r c a^' pa _ c R a '°,o..++ t D' y c n u- IQc �. �' �H '' s,.a i b.•+.,.t .°e r G9 O C ?�� �t ; �� ^ u m .°p.. Zh•p_N A L � cc vr_K � LL?+ Lqq F"- �Y uL d,C Vr46 q P 0 NMN Cb C d Db�pa bb K ��N. yC Ciw'" b. J, a D t Yq R� . QC D N 6 N a 6 D -M NT` C 6Nd H i a Y N Q�, da C�CPIQO C p�O Get C.Y Nt- di UH�'� �d49� Q T Y � � b qNt, f+db E' 6�fD.. �.CY�N NN Ya0.m4 La."µ w♦ Y. • A4a 4� Nq�Lp� w V qL 4. GOj wb DwVN: Der bN•.. h _W CUb bCCP h b 6 W ..aN q Lb ..U. `.♦d CN O. CC.0 p Q O1^ a L COttbf� OLNHiY «. 6a;i��q p bCt NC G� b EDL T�n�M V u.0 G ,ate w m d T V C Cib► y Q��a L o+Dr •��q NDr.Ctt �Mw.YV Nd Y'lt OUa M K� '4'N SVfWa Q'1U G4C. 4V tiy0e6N�N.q.Y� � M- �[.�w vLE.T I �C 4t 0� F mom. q NY Q r0 �ON..T L w• a a♦ daYL O 4 C Ate" pn�m OLU N6 Ay� i O U 11♦C' 'C,� aa C q Cb. N y O L?f0= b.dC4 d C� LNtb N�• w".ai L; V K�-0 Pt�pY t »qa Ct NCY�,, TiL awN$myE C q' ff C Q t qN V b C^ w O qS . C.. Val +ATOO w y Q L C.�. a aOVrni V r N C N O r q Vty YVq 4 q >G �• -�<s.. D O w i.A PCT aq b 464N d L yy t m aONCta pout q p,( iN� dG q' V V •Y L ♦ V 19 9 .+ Y YNWL bCbP iU�bbOa Oy N3 ,dpyp C4 PAC I NO qu q 0.ap Gry c«. C o_w ap CL q ya ybs+LG ECPeC•i ��' ' CN^A mb C q'mO' c y UNgMwC p ACODSgA �NC'1' dbC TWO w�- +L+M q .1f �'w,N b s ~ma p D�: V AN c Oo j6"w dNd a k q OmV 'Y EyA� tNagR3 y�.L,�. i qy y N 0�4 u L u Cnp�� qVa d Ada pia q i d^• ' tai 4 ?r r.�. Ll VA O v m° a ZDa dANad. "A m ti L L .C.�L H °� m NV O. T 69N dine �-'4N QV i �b ,,CC o'ci l�D tirq sa 4N6q oQ ta.."i♦ w x:c a•. LC c., c+♦ W aN00.t VI�NgN u N'u KNr SNO a }i+N:,C i N Z 4J U Q/ a CL - M by C 4Y GY:G ~ •�� y ^GO EE E {Cpl y•I bN OO r V _ o4'CQ '�nELq..., O4.d � 6; 0 • OO mt �G CC O m °U -'• O .Ar CO�.+N. L d'yY, Ld Y•V.' m' c N u� c Lyu nFQ< L Or tT. by. Y pYvA Y•� Ortq � Yba.r tT X. nY 3 Lti `T .QA « �+ rtc d OYY r. •T L _ �O atJ ) yli '1p•• y.0 'rY YErtq L YgtcO •• ^� rq Y9� _ Q cw 9 Z'9 Y.\ W y li' N Y <aei tV.. 9 M LOA` ••A''L w- .� m SY•++s C ilud c .--ru 9 QgYd q �q yvd✓ �� y« '-► d+�. rtY lib q.. 4E Ava re Oq g.YYq q$•,. ...c taucv a °. :r �' ISy ��� ' _ ^i: a c �`c uR. 'ws$ n.R+ Ytr7 Y rt C s. =ON N�W Y9 u Yd�d € p Y9 r.2 C=. Y� aRODCV 4Q L y wt N�CT� �4 wag N �w O.• d^g t y YCda t; �U� DO H� vTW w b rt y • ffn a °ib w C OmNO `° rt uEC 9 b ctT� c .c-.b b Ln UE vq My u= 2 t�iaWL t�06alti. N. —nz_ rt Lr qLO � a UO N-� WNp 4t.t Y9 �64��6 `L q d <w S Y N by C 4Y GY:G ~ •�� y ^GO ..V {Cpl y•I � OO •Y Eruo 2 • Y iYp c O.q c tS Ssg NL Y 4 O pYvA LVya t�.� `T « p rq ' Q cw 9 6 w Y.\ W y li' N Y <aei tV.. 9 M LOA` G YV gO•a`L O� ISy .. 29 Ytr7 Y rt C V OL &-.:5 =ON 9 N 4Eti. S° 0 OE iCG.1A a� � E °. wOY� n Y< A< NO L y b Ln u= 2 C EQC q Yw Y OdL ry N EO�L"1 3 LC qNf %tom l.Ow Sd T� �d Yry Vf'!. .79 ..f tiV ONO w Y9 �a0t1 b ALL OCaT . O E. tom. �q+ cm,c Y'O L au LY DUEL u d'e a° gc.. W�• tS Wiz' O�p06 L rg� n,Ydu qL ��'.�a:as. _N dVG .w K t10 * EG- :s i`s inn t-wrt Y N {, S 4 a O ' b0 OO 9W r `�LCT bN YCV� [� 01 9 V p y � °iy V Yb• 00. P n4 Y 40b 'C^ L6 a0�\\ aaLC Ati O Y N L U u u iN qE A,ub Cr �� ca GtV=•. A E 4. 4d OO b i 1 C C C g t .OF NC Y�'Nd T4 L ^VQCO ^t%�� ,?N^.d C yN .0 =.^-u y�'7x Sw 'r/,.i.M Nad• Ya ^v � e y � �� � � T� 4V � AU VLO °]01 �C PU •L �Q•��d c V 6 w C^'°" ° yN tOi i o C V d S N by .. y r b "_ c'° b^ N E m W V4 4A o A d b Kr�4i6. �4 VU 4C y.. a M� .. .. ' yi P d i �a PG06 ub giai m.c 8^ m' u '^u abr C to d12 N N H i- Yd'�u �6ar .Q �O'O� Lb il._ c o 4 �•.a mTo� Lq >> TOOT ma NyC �OYi o.A _ Q.;C - �. IeT Qa �. m d ^c ^ -.r4i b 9 oa D d w°.,a.3o A. C n pCL .o mac' ci o. -n .. dO Cr A 'g C ia°: d4. cs �• -..�- a4 O d Er` O ^du GO.-9 C, NUVOGAS bLA Q�b d0 EE = OI CG 6i1 �b N�V O� v 4' O r aC OcN .D Y°C or T.. . a4YAw i t u C a yE oc N qN O pe'a C O u` r c E Y C r N C Yp Y6s wL°•°iNC d.OE Y Lb yti yypp L ,.CE C qbp �tlG �.E �N �.@ - �4 6P a q Gp\ NL4.N u p C Oy O E ?COC ^ U a dbby Y. EdC N T d C O A 4..C..^ C aV� • O Eq �_. iIt ANgtr O"p. U A f—E Cb L^'D dC ,O qa p N 1 0 C q b POD b Oa a PNIL NA adu UTi C OAP to N. OOl• 4�V O O .ACr 4 V ~^ A 4 N ai.. 0 d 7 L EY�rN NV9Nv. N 6db� 6Agtl yYj O Oa E ^ O P L y+ C•�+•E 60'4. Labe L 4.Od EEVaa 40v rcE L Y G a V. F r q p. �' V � • •Nn O C � i O p a F C y aNi E C OI O Ya. r SO Cy CYW 40 ' NJ ?Q OQ OJ s G6 sw V c�1 eG N Y 1�1 C' y � III R�LEOV. j N •O Y t N� j V c L C 3 NL !aLi -.5 C V p � d O 4 O •n �GU ra. Nu uM q0 F NC 6 Y� t mV OL NE'L • N q CU L9 dCY Y q y� •+ V qa +� V Lam, 0.� c 66. Yq O OV9 E u LuT aY ^li AC Y Olga �cq LU. C� O" j0 Od Rn 0. LG 'd G �. D1V d� L 1, .L a c a roQyd OyQ A L �C L O y9 Opp 2 ' CCYr. 0.0 LON .O V Ci u 4 U C N N Tq u Of L-' G W S 01 Lw~.v q. a n aEo o yy { _��' B 0.N1.f NGW qt 4 P N �2 q W yC N EOC raVC n J ` Otu- YG W m QV V'O.O. = W i.l a q i. C 0 aa3 • L V d Rb.M N �YN y C 3 d C +qa Vwa�i GA Or ��� H LL d d 1 V QQ w V q G 6'� 1 4Y � C 4f.,1 6:Y Wy. ML Lt.I Xp �y .0 H1rM Cd N 3 O H F C y aNi E C OI O Ya. r SO Cy CYW 40 ' NJ ?Q OQ OJ s G6 sw V c�1 eG N Y 1�1 C' y � III R�LEOV. C' y � III R�LEOV. �` it t �90 N M qM C]L\I C 3 NL !aLi -.5 O m ,a=nd ra. (� N► N Y O A 4 b 0. d- O• - d L N S c 66. Yq OV9 t Li O.O �L10W Y L V � •• c r• =�u� N.13 yF -. L L O�'llllll�r �. D1V d� L 1, .L a c a roQyd OyQ A L �C L O y9 Opp 2 =.x �CA V E W L. 0.0 LON .O V Ci E � Cj�11 �' 4 a»O• U C N N Tq u V q c= OL drip ¢.ON O N •� p S V A L W c'• O .a� Y OyTY.. S 01 Lw~.v q. n O` _��' B 0.N1.f NGW qt 4 P N L M V�jOr� Lr Ny o� c ^ !1 n J ` n�r roME 0 Yu O ^ "Y~4 r O YO YL G C Y ^� ♦�o ox� ULN z °= u �J p9 uv Y� L N� o.m a W c Y v 4 Q� •n Y a x 6a � c � c 4 L 6 2C roME 0 Yu O ^ "Y~4 r O YO YL G C Y ^� ♦�o ox� ULN z °= u �J p9 uv Y� L N� o.m a COTY O M mM mOl a ta ii a qe �.s u..n o y " w -. omV•.' .gYC G � G Y E _ S Z y. 1' W u q _O we r LO W ip. Of Y � d L�y '1a-W 40.V ° G \40. V-42 N n u N B G e Y W L e o L`R O OW: A2 � bL�. O M C VV L� Nq LL N�.y I 4 Lu E'L YW V;3 V OY ET n 4Y Yy R& O' C� Oa n iz my OY c NY =^ FM rG iZ . 6N3 CLYy0 1a KC �y lYaYY CC VJ grw VV 6GG 4.�� E L CO O y tL ii < p - ♦a of a ... : l `I! a J! RESOLUTION NO. i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPIOVIWG TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12833 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12833, hereinafter "Map" submitted J by the William Lyon Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situa'ced in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as 117 attached single family dwellings on 14.7 acres of Land within the Victoria Planned Conriunity (Low- Medium Category, 4 -8 du /ac), located on the south side of Victoria Park Lane, and west side of Victoria Windrows Loop - APN 227- 371 -14, 16 and 227- 341 -16 into 117 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on February 13, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission � read and considered the Engineering and Plapning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the P1ann g it 'Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as fol107r ;` SECTION 11 The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract -No. 12833 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is_.__w. consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of develcpment; proposed, (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife o"r 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 Iany casement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or v' of the property within.` the. proposed subdivision. " '` \� _ 1 �1 Tentative Tract 12833 Page #2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impact= on -- the environment and a Negative Declaration is i ssue ". SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 1283x1 copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the fcllowing ari the conditions attached Standard Conditions: Planning, Division 1. Each Lot within the project shall have a minimum flat (2% :slope or less) rear yard area from building to property line or slope /retaining wall of fitdOl (15) feet. A final dotailed site plan that indicates slope and retaining will loGatiols and unit plotting shall be submitted ,prior to issuance ol.° building permits. 2. Corner side yard - fencing and /or retaining walls shall be set back a minimum distance of five (5) feet from the back of sidewalks. All interior street fating retaining wails shall be constructed of decorative bloc`: and all wood fencing installed by the developer shall be treated with water sealant or stain. 3. Street facing side elevations and the rear of two -story units facing a street shall be upgraded with additional wood trim, wood siding, or plant -ons where appropriate. Construction details shall be indicated on the Working drawings (including specific lot numbers). 4. Prior to recor4ation of the subject map, a complete application sh-All be subrOtted for development of an R.V. parking facility witntn the boundaries of the Planned Cewunity. Construction of a temporary or permanent R.V. parking lot adequaiL- in size to accommodate 25% of the rots within Tract 11934 and the subject tract shall be completed prior to occupancy of any new - units. 5. Final landscape and trail improvement glans for Victoria Park Lane shall be submitted for ,review and approval by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. 6. A minimum 20% of the required trees within Victoria Park Lane shall be specimen size (24" box or larger). 7. Roof material within the project shall be wood shake or tile shake. Actual material samples share be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building Permits. 8. Along the west boundary of the project, the maximum wall height Shall_-�c nine (9) feet, 5 feet minimum, where the wall height would otherwise exceed this standard. 5raded slopes and /or r, Tentative Tract 12833 j _Page #13 I terraced retaining `wails shall be required with- z minimum setback of five (5) feet from adjacent units. 9. The final grading plan shalt be revised to accurately address grading along the west project boundary. Drainage water shall not be directed toward the flood wall or adjacent resiC!-nces, and an as -built profile of the existing wall shall be submitted to assist in review of the final grading plan. Engineering Division 1. A structural block wall for flood protection shall be provided along the entire west boundary of the tract Including across the terminus of Victoria Park Lane, and Sugar Sum Street. The portion of the wail crossing the streets shall be removed at the Developer's expense upon extentions of the streets to the - west, 2. In order to provide `a means for vehicles entering Victoria Park Lane en the north roadbed to exit on the soutt; roadbed, a temporary connection across the- mE-lian shall be provided at the westerly terminus, prefer -ably on the Edison property to- the west, or an acceptable veh�,cle barrier shall be constructed near the intersection with Vittoria Windrows Loop. 3. The following improvements outside the immediate tract boundaries shall be provided with the development of the Tract or an agreement with the�City shall be executed to allow the deferment until a later dates a. The east half of Day Creek Boulevard from Highland Avenue soutr, to the 'railroad. b. Master Plan Storm -Drain Line I from Highland Avenue south to the railroad including sufficient off -sit - improvements necessary to provide the proper a!'nctioning of the facility, �,.•._,�_ C. Vievaria park Lane from the west tract boundary west' to Day Creek Boulevard d. Sugar Gum Street from the west tract boundary west to Day Creek Boulevard 4. Improvement plans for Victoria Park Lane from Day Creek Boulevard west to Rochester Avenue shall j: 'e completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to recordation of either tract. 5. The dedication width of the interior streets shall be increased to provide 0.5' beyond the edge of sidewalk within the street right -of -way (46 feet vs. 44 feet as shown). J' t b «s ti 1entatfve Tract 12833 Page #4 S. The design of the individual lot storm water drains within the public right -of -way shall' be subject to the .,.approval of the City Engineer. 7. Debris retention facilities shall be proAded for the drains from 'the Edison property to the west to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. APPROVEb AND AWPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF FE8aUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO WCAMONGA - BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman A:fTEST• Rick.,Gomez, eputy eF-- 1ry I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City r` Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that tM foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Cmrtanission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting -_of the Planning,ommission hold on the 13th day of February, ::9$5, by the following vote -to -wit; AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: 1' ABSERT: COMMISSIONERS; Y 3 Vcr UO dN� C6A .may C �:+° -C. NC p. d Ott Cc...y • _O - Gu Na �dO..IUU L2yLE U O C 60L qr� b� dtw. a6. iN ► iTy ►° ^g 2 aLir4 N' pp�� 's 6L C.� O dYM yM OL °!> q 'Gy an . 41 V LO °.pN u O A y° 3 G p'[ q► a° CAN NFYIi. C O O 6 Am y A E.,°. au d. aU C d L. A p Et A O rQN 06 EuR >OOq L O . V wV�� d G,,.•Y Eaa m`�.t+ u °W U� O 'rn G L ecf°.1 � d ► "W'�. c, °v" cud O� L a E u ►� E G C W` b= Cq v�� A UCACV dCW G L 4 9 E C A �'D E N� Z � A L�a°i d A 4X-C {L1 d6p, NC °.may I C F� C } W E Y► q N 3 ... O r 0 Y' u O` E U p u T a' ►OF . j L= ? E� W u� Y5m E A BOA =w nnG++•0 v NM SCd �0aJ0 RY4- N CNN r +. ud C06 G agG4. SwVV°i 0.°►� y C u N C y O G °�` d A Y Y N C A '� p H G► lL laO.�.E ♦i V °� � L H O C E M;G C.EY A � d�A► p�W� GY Y► CG L v LR Qq LN L al >\' YN a c30 d LC J qN p Y 6C :� ►y a O. p` ►ri CU T OY La a"'G d Q > CEga VN q p SEG.T p01p 6�Y F ��+. CWCtJp VI'«Y� a OrW O'a V'Y n° 'G aL VgCy[WY yUti O6EsC� O.Tyld 1 pg rg Y V d Y 6 G ► EE _ Y OG ?fin t E V d F b v G q ref d E 4� L _ b d O Q^ R. C uel o q �. L v N GT G d 00 -UU C C a ^� VV O O d UN64 YNL 03G FOOa=n YN C Yu3 40NmC Odic (C�a4.flU C L �► 4A6t q. AM Low =a u °112 G_GZ G L Y aELT °d'Ta � ' W ;2;; yl N EL v a 9. CAt. o A -- ,a= hp O C N V V► 2 doE L.UA a �N.W E � G O z O: E N 3 A E E ► L. 2 r � 6 L .. ► h A J ... �C C XpL � .0 pC UCWCa daNr _ f�l `i Y �- ►n � O. O.ri. r 9 E � q 'at C gGNgGW -,,a a .� 6 9'.InK 6� "SNq NF.CUN tra. � 4x W N �1_ J ••�� N lalrl1 ! _ J y i 1 iN y Y7 O Y R, L = Y O d q en o.n - a bO.N G> aj-.. O+ °y.� S �1.� E Y A°. Y ^y Nbd+O•. ..� °,. ..gdaY r ° c cv E cV.L o•� v SS ° oaV ao� G Lam r QO =4aG OCO. w W W Y N d va. QI.Y° w A q°Y«O• p.9 y,y d O•yT n q O C L L piq C�•a p d y d Y� •. O OU YNL 3a N< y�? II C C - Q M 06 C aC > bE S ru t °K J 0 • n V Y q .-. V d� d C C a ° 4..n NPC �aa 9 Y T Nwa Y. T -,; -• y aa C y z b b d Pp•.. Lqu. cav°I Y S C Im- oz o od. ...... a o tltl +6 Bt. LLC - em' N c iy L ..,• =n vw�° � v +� > U. �.A O,p iLW 01V °. -qC N PeF7.`. '-LA. y6q L S E '^ Y.Obe• G c ra N na a.lE<c <I o. c c S 4i do h 1 I-- YY.anNN ar o >a w 2 4.4^ NNO $ �O° Cll _ ai rnG O. L cu,p oM O OC' w c v NM oLdc d Y p16'U` W o4 c �ty QN • Sw C aTNM p C d ° Q o W LdaE g. ;aN .Oq OSpV 6Y�W aM • a. uZw. aU�q NC N [Gi PO O00 6.s =V <N NN q'S pr�YL E> a u ~L p 'U 4 -C C�tb'� C.d Cfi0.0. c4 1 1`aV �c qLn ERx Y N C N� HE ¢�av>oVY am.5 oo ocu °O.o1°q nm �a l e ... .9 WC.. T L10 L YaY. �O. M. 06. N - g d.CC q1� 0 O1L dpl <Cl P.O a C N E CL da O27 d11.y L >F CO 4 CO " ` x nN ay N S G ^ q �q�exj�0 t C.G C^ Of u. Ag a� . E pr C sdT OIC� uCV i N Na qE f!y�0 d I m Vpv q Y 4 .. �, da.} � '¢ `o O.Y Ca L+' pp °'aq .-p i'1 � •`p. nfV C q6 E 4 +•� Oa w -. d a K <O �IIq a°u'6 f1ib n 1y Cpd y � uuo ��. -J.• ... 1 b A� N 01y '.' L Y ..-••° OI Yq'O ay a G pY.O q n Y3C9d O A C O m0~ xA • N C � Y � OCO•C^ . CEt1- ' d,N UT= u r y i °� N� T .cq-M q EdE q A 8 L L Y.'s av Y A C p .o 1 d a d C r < C H N N 1 N bU 2Y.• d ,b y. --.o a0. y L'. 3.sN L C6� N. d�a.C. 1CU. OLdO -G 1C I a Cly .C.. Nq ' A U N.°. CN /.,. •aC^ C C C' N ay dR a ° ni.:t0 Lbdpd 001ti t'1 CNC1 L.. E'9 �^ �y °y YOC1 Ml.ly b0 - NAA Y��. u qEE d '• 3 :O,I. y C'OlY N U L �6u1[1 1 ^, 9 - 4 O> 6Na N Ca r h� d4i `yam O 1� 71 �yQ Ygfl dp,W. L b q ... C4y.,d b1>i1 C Y•+> dddq O Yb'0..,C. � 6bN Id O. udi KLl CR �ON+n �rpp s L •CMII1a �.�.°d un qN C ` i E 1 O1 L+L -nGa3 v1�Nq N.. C G >a 'C .4.1- > YL.N C q � C mu V O L G oa N poo^ arua °. LN dE a y i L ?cn Y 3.0. -° nL�npyd NYC dated n° 6�O �L gwyd R N aGa ^'°'�� ��SG °.EO -� �4= �l OqV Vdge C "Ny K^ ! 1y L LLY o,rL �q'° yYQ °z�^ V .'f Q Ld .oyQ O >pR aa,u ail. OC ^° Fy i. COOa ,o =� La~�c. °m AO c':=n. y .L• .;o °oca <� --y-q` ! OE °qc av oa C-eF7 �•^ c N yu�3n dys �..�WY irE =`iC q+°+N TLVYT y Cp y �E...(a sdy Ny ,aNia . - d and cw N9(L�N�N q L�dV agiAa � w 6VUa0 'eLU'eNNa .pEia QR.� m�� VUC,^., QN(i L •.$ � u� �j N �r �`G�a,t dO u$G �� o � RSV E NT °p Y4 GYr cgVp EtL q q dOy —^ VC c�QL Y N adi LN N ay„ .29 �NLE �C d V L N C Y a n > a N V C u T w° --f; R p R q ECa �d L. Ou d 6 L a O1 E Y S K CVQ r f� V rp E ° d w a H Gap ti a L W OI uL V g YT = 9 E6 y Qu P E po C vQi V d f y p H 4 L N X G VU Y a c �W NNY •°+. +G.W� -. ^._ �CC�6U �N NOC ^ g^ r qwm G V ?L �u �.Cq YY UG d^ q aG •MV W� L 594 CL V nn k . -^ v 91 E a oqE uL ~ a(m4 C J d _ � Vn,y � W - O Yp V- O S� N y 0 U L Y d 'np. '• E E ~ O C V YiN NL Yu C � E^ ... L j q Etl N(n Vq q u ° N Et°i q�3 .��..�,..�- diapC w+�°'q vd. a.QQ. ^L �� d aC' C a Np Lj^,•°( 2q..." W. NEdN NsC E� a: ca° ,noznq m- Od G° u. NO � G d� °Y y•n EO. VO NO aVGQ 2t.5 Y =du Lp'V.j in � N V aNN Lq��� l> OBE a••q _ .p. C. AK NLW C RNN CT O d U V... L G •+ Y V aTi� L q uc N Y ry V� V4 a E E r.1 at GS,^.d'R ua ^..n•�i CV d V a =OQC N^ y V R COL V V .81R �iC of E Y u Y -a V T� rC, • ° L °5.,'. L y C 01 c p N u =o.�QO yiu •a uau a 6v n ow c c a(A vqY c a oc yO pY a �sca G••c ' _ q tL-f ++N6 HL N6 �� N'Aq a LG > >. L T QV Y CU. .°!•+a OY A�L1r�" N:°- pD un�..ga W ,CU VN O . �u fti nw Ep Q;°, cr L/q-V +N.CN gCgO CEwa.q C -,� yq M - _ l e, a 4.3 LL 6000.' x »�L. v�iyN 0 1 .CV O A qi�N a{ '� tW a�gtr ~ aiE �`y.NMC T mb Lb NE Lq NT.a:. qL. O 5Y p t aya v cTU ae E... caixi �° 1gpsm NA Y by Y.'^A✓ bCpJq '.c N.d aw �. � 01V a n 7I � h d CLLLTT C04'� ubC 'Og YO NGGV gyp rEq ay.n S;;2 p cW O O C U a s n O LA �na ivs L4 q ~.9 =c iN aH O OmLa Ld 2. .Vasa OYS'O.A p Daw M.0 .r bC .yb D!•N. IF A T �L •nA 41 O OCAI(�. 4i O+ -Qa.q V1 -.N O. Y.q WN.9 4iVCf 74 {:J �.G3 4+�. � �j � W 1 ,�I e r euw q� _ c cme ry.o a.-p.. b� ar m'o °�,cc ccm`p pz -all A! m �d 332 a me-,- � » u T O Gc O a A ul aas c K. g n'.., y aim z Es n oN dv VIX '�O d. eS� ` bLC'r • ,CyN p9,. .p .4b Etai iV N GG V. VN i. T L C aVL U.T. dC �BgYWP+ 4,L L.QO ba Ou vE O.Cyd �E Vii.'° d V N.^ OWVVC. Of 0 �O LOC E ti^ �V C'VU 'OOb E0Y cL .' N.� Na aC V �� ^LL CL �dLd Y 1R...W NE�yM. C'QQ rnW Cc Lm LT4 4 � Yb _" L b+r �t AuV ^Q� ~y a GOp • 3 aO,r ..rot. NFL C � =N CC v NC ['V 4Z.rK� �Q+ pp u4 WAY blf L C S j E E O a s b T 0 L E V E a y b1 yEt Q6� C4 V �Ly YYEY 0.aMY 1�b ��.RaLi p. ~Y..i.N 4: Zaa V 3 LLLN G rAA M A _ � 3 � N L � 1 c O C b A C O C om• T.� ac +La- y 0 G u � L. y d: d °ac N d e.yq 3u C ate- 2w °. wL E uOd ad '.•L � a o o �s y u A wo epUV - cp0 C� �G. m °a G �a$ c, npC 9 d.^N A' °^ 6• a d GC d y d :N.. L y Ird a b w � • .d+dl"IL c cT0 + D �' y G L^c E O =NV� �. O.O Y ? �a np 6 "m =L up � o o yy a� acv 'e u$i_ ar °ou ♦F1m .G 2y b � as oq do Lo 6 c< w wu ca ^a 'T V ui _ µ y� ti u>p t!Y d G a y.0 q E -,4 Yd 01. p x SO q d V L° ^ L UO.q S. b yE. > O Y G d E b O O!N ♦' ^ Q • �,W =c N M w ' oGw O l up Add dAw LY Y O j Ell G '..`. v Of =.O- c 9.im c y Em ¢u au c.L O. o+L.� 2 Gv�.4♦R ° u °A N¢ cj E C y0 O .n .. .mow tati Oy �y .c00 O CYt L 6 C d0 .2 .54 p A d E d V CLAY 'n9L L N= ,.+ • LCYq aN. p a L �-nuyL L L 6 y y •'C.CC� GQY.E L. bd N y in aq W D1 6 E° i OtV OW L S m �d9 N c..5.5 3 ^6N C.. u c r rL aO Ey c �d u e.o Vf.I w= ... A ti A Y CC O N A q L .°+.0.. O.O. ct .qC q �c0♦° L;l V Y S.--4 Ob NClyb dTaO= -GE q2 ^O n.Y d. w q.,Q d'uU • wm. y w�.^^A, 6L.v a G •°.G tr2 E N t n �E _ d N �s yoN n N NO oeb aE.uu EpOn E .°. Ga °c:°.v LGN. �c - GNCLEO� °'4 du -O5uq D OTC cT �'y nO CC NN qp L by Yt.. G+°i3 d iJN� nN yC'D�AZC N . q7 Tp NO 00. 4 b A..bO w p Nr aap �. c 09 c m'oa a �pd� G GL c N �.. p O rq-QI O Y^ l u u �EYdN L O O 6d9 4AAC y O ? C ^NEOu�u L d coc A d�O,� - Q1Ob 'UN IA.V9Nm' A 06 +Er L 4.mzV- COYYO N c O w w 1 10 t o c ud L d and _ Ir. O 7 G9 m p.. 2 Cl Dr N m C T • WN C� �J p C tW b L C F� NP Q.p C L bm c1 N2 FQad 1 b IL.� ^ d nNp �q�aM q L ' aw 1°rP p�`ly' Y'am A 2 GTay yC a� d«' W `N �+ vftl n V }. OITC C EM q.yb W �� d I.� L u' � �FN G � y_ dF b C ^U: •O �dlLE4 E o 6 O �\jC Y° p C� b m t1 N a u 4 �m3p as W l' 4 � yl Y C, {la V E RNV• "a 4 6 buI wsL Sao pELE .-�� L 3 s q � wu =nm � cz Ty•c' E aY `...ICU. yN N °uaO >n m °L big a cc zaNd• o °�o��au`i d� .. "a u o.°,. <a ° ay . o nL.r Cir s'..`- WM NaY.iu xn cgv c� �`q c PPY vo�o °� jL m 1 10 t o c ud NM C�' ~ U m}} L Ir. O 7 G9 m p.. 2 Cl Dr N m C t]W 40 WN C� �J �o 06 y r Y c1 N2 U� IL.� ^ d nNp �q�aM q aw 1°rP p�`ly' Y'am A 2 GTay yC vftl 1 10 t o c ud NM C�' ~ U m}} L Ir. C G9 m p.. '0 c rN N m C E y r Y IL.� ^ d nNp �q�aM q dpc 1°rP p�`ly' Y'am A q GTay yC OITC C EM �\jC T pPW YUpO i NUaO N T.�N mgcm 2 �m3p as W l' 4 � yl Y C, {la V E RNV• "a 4 6 N M VhfOur 4 a O�T V V � waLi� a a. • pr . mu ' 3 a� { .0h 9. U-1 � A � d.p WQ ��t9 L Cis 4.V. R�+. Q aV f.CE .•xi � a d u Y°a' �d M Q bu Oy �c � '� Hd,, -' ve iw o y•- u¢� '^ iq. 4 o:Lq €,• ay 'T14 am e m f� it s Od p CCd9 7Yb C +d dEa ^d imp a !} MO, ias-c. n.c +IibV �_� r m ar 3. �m`R o"n = yyd� V L ab Z .- y ro ao i e MN �. n(r 3N3 rC.pwd. Kc �3 4ss /aGt'L.y n �. S Lb a ad M �nC - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT O O E M� z U A 1477 DATE: February 23, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning G fission Flom: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATiYE TRACT 12802_ LEWIS. - The development of 221 single family detached Domes. on 41.5 acres of land within the Terra Vista Planned Community, designated Law- Medi�i, and Medium, located on the south side of Mountain 'View Drive and the east side of Spruce Avenue.- APN 1077- 091 -023. 03, and 1077- 421­,�03, 04. fi. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTIONa A. Action Requested: Approval of a subdivision map, budding eievations, and issuance, of a Negative Declaration. B. Parnosee, Development of 221 single family detached units. C. Location: South side of Mountain View Drive, east Tide of Spruce Avenue. 'L D. Parcel Size. 41.5 acres E. Projsct Density:. 5.3 du /ac F. Existing_ 7eiogs Terra, Vista Planned Community, " e� stignated _w- Medium (4< dulac) ,:and Medium (4 -14 du/ac).."' , G. Existing Land Used Vacant /Vineyard H. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Tentative Tract 12385 Under Construction (T)wnhouses }, vacant /vineyards, designated Medium -High (14 -24 du /ac), futur-a school site, and Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 du / ac) South - vacant /V)neyards, designated Medium (4 -14 du ac). Low- Medium (4- 8'du /ac), park cf _ ITEM E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 12802 - Lewis February 13, 1985 Page #2 i site, elementary ktchool site, and Medium- I High (14-24 du /ac) East - Vacant/Vineyards ,!�ow- Medium'(4 -8 du /ac) West - Junior High School; site, park site I. Terra Vista Co unity P1an�0esignations: r Projeet Site - ;Medium (4 -14 du /ac), Low - Medium (4 -8 _ dula6) North - Medium High (14 -24 du /ac), elementary school site, Low - Medium (4 -8 du /ac) Solth - Medium (4 -14 du /at , Low- Medium (4 -8 du /ac), M-24 and elementary school site, Medi um- + ;soh (14 -24 du /ac) East - Low - Medium (4- 8- du /ac) a West „ Junior High School Site, Park site, , J. Site Characteristics: Project site is currently a vineyard with no significant natural vegetation." The property slopes southwarrd at ,approximately 2 to 3% grade and contains no structures. K. ApcI cable Regulations: Terra Vista Planned Community permits one dwell ing unit per 3,000 :square foot minimum lot size to approximately 7,200 square foot minimum lot size in a conventional subdivision in the Lou- Medium and Medium Residential designations. i; II. ANALYSIS• A. General: The. proposed tract is consistent with "the rea Development Plan (Exhibit "B "), conceptually approved by the Planning Commission. .Of the 221 total Tots, 72 have a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet, and 49 are a minimum 4,000 squae feet.` -- =The arch.tectural program proposed is -4 ntical to that previously approved in Terra Vista, (Las :Flores, Parkside, and Orangewood), as indicated on the attached Exhibits. In addition, a greenway pedestrian trail will cross north /south through the center of the site and along the south boundary to Spruce Avenue. B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee :reviewed the project and was concerned about traffic circulation through the site, fencing /wall treatment � ,` along the north /south greenway, and timing of trail PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 12802 Lewis February 13, 1985 Page #3 KI III. IV. improvements along the south boundary of the site. In response to the Committee's concern, the applicant revised the alignment of street "A11, to discourage through traffic; provided-a detail of the wall /fencing treatment along the greenway with alternating walls and wrought iron; and agreed to a c,indition requiring the installation of temporary trail improvements along the south boundary of the site. "he Design Review Committee recommends approval of the project as revised and with the Conditions of Approval as indicated on the attached Resolution. C. Technical Review Committee :: The Technical Review Committee reviewed the ,project and determined that, with the recommended Conditions of Approval.' the project is: consistent with all applicable Standards and Ordinances, Conditions of Approval have also been added to assure that each lot is provided with a 15 foot, flat rear yard area, 'nstallation of front yard j landscaping by the Developer, and City Planner review of the final perimeter wall design. D. Grading Committee: The Grading Committee approved a conceptual grading plan as revised, subject to a number of conditions necessary to "-:neet City Standards. E. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant. Staff has completed the Environmental Checklist and has found no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of this project. If the Planning Commission concurs with this finding, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the Terra Vista ° anned Community and the General. Plan. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant - adverse impacts, In addition, the proposed use, building designs, and subdivision, together with the recommended Conditions of Approval, are in compliance with all applicable regulations in the Development Code and Terra Vista Community Plan. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public bearing ;n The Daily Report newspaper and the property posted.: To date, no correspondence has been received_ either for or against thisF-, ojest. PLANNING COMMIS31ON STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 12802 - Lewis February 13, 1985 Page #4_ V. RECOMMENDATION,; Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 12802, subject to Conditions of Approval, through adoption, of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration; Resp.ctfully suutled, ick me?- ity Planner n RG:CJ:cv Attachments: Exhibit "A"' - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Area Development Plan Exhibit "C" - Subdivision Map Exhibit "D" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "E„ - Grading Plan Exhibit �F" - Conceptual Landscaping Exhibit "G" - Greenway Trail Exhibit "H" - Frontyard Landscaping Exhibit "I" - Perimeter Wall Treatment -_ Exhibit "J" - Elevations Initial Study - Part II Resolution of P.pproval with Conditions i 1 i i —M N`_,•.. M OP 1 M LM d! I LM.a.weMr.e.rrr use Ff rwrowir wu�uu LM \p LM t, Lei H wu�ee+sn wwww 1 P E LM Ccw�..ec� M LM E wa.nmm..ew MR M LM �}F3 RC tarmoa. JfH x M M W LM 1.M. tM e.sc'+.w�er.mma i F Cp Lm P E ,kH OP E UK LM F, ■aem� twos o,.,,,. pp H p ..m cc p [ lop. HO ,MJ�iC FIGURE 111-17 Land Use Ilan M -z3 v s N101 ' CITY 01' RAItiCH() CUCANMTGA PLANNING i:?IVLS CN- EXHIBIT: -- _ SCALLE SITE UTILIZATION AND NATURAL FEATURES MAP YENTATIVE TRACT. XO. 12802 IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA tliA.lafatVlalOa NlRailal0..taa uwl..w Va N:KTIP 1. alasYUtta0las . W a[atlila0 Wf Ka2a1M >Jtaa Ctaa M tlulpKp.Y s� d a""s .amps N a.arn ae aox as ar ruin m a.a Nrlti a sas mwaa aamaoaa or aaa aewcm. mi.:a..:em tt ••••,^�• NOVEMBER. 1954. `41.5. ACRES 72 . LOTS OF 6OUG S.F. 149' L075'8_ OF 4000 S.F. I W a S _ 7I15K SCHOOL STM t ./ V NORTH CITE' OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE:�: ►may' ��c PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. $_.SCALE "° 1 '►� �► \ r� .� _ as =�'� /off �h�����I'_� ��.�''.j -�.�`� d- J- _'.w,��-���j �� ,mss► f � r V V NURTH ` CITY OF RANCHO C.1CAMONTOA TITLE. _ g- w-P PLANNING DIVISON EXHIBM-6—I_._ SCALE: °°— s till °- "_ "° �c--- �= _�n°°. R . l K^�. J rvru"R_ ► � .Ai.�. `9\_ NORTH CITY OF ITEM (? RANCHO CUCAMONTGA TITLE: -M-A--�r �✓ PLAi`SIMI`v'G DIVISION EXHII31'i =� SCALE- ,-4 - 121 IIE�'! LL�� 1 tsl Cl��t1�FiC1laal� ill {rsi N 113 '1 Irw .i —�E Ell s q s • PRELIMINARY GRAB ;.'48 AND DRAINASE PLAN �- TENTATIVE. ..:_ JioYTx.zs..... '41.s Ac.[.. TRACT —.. Y.107. 0140001.7. "....o:. c...a.e.r. NO. lea D2 TA TT.' CM OF SAWCUOQ COCAHOtlOA COVM OR W S¢.A.OI.O .. STATE Of CALLTO.ON. j FIK L TOM CITY OF ITEM: `I'r I2f' RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE= _6�t�l�� PLANNiI'\'G Dlvls laN EXHIBIT: !9:- Z- SCALE= rururT UrnseuK�ca.a nA4 . .tIAH.tWNWr• �L,.1L1�T1.t T1.V.u,s.. aryl tul ,.M+,� s -wiuu cat twa+. r..awn,u C= uT. g6A MAIL DESI WESr ORE,,; CONCEPTiOAt LAPOSCAPE PLAN TENTATIVE. MOv"r TM 17241 - 1 43.3 ACHE! TRACT (y LOT, all C.000 M.T! NO. 12 i10 2 LOTS Or 4.000 M.T. IM TUC C"T.OF MANCRO CUCANDNOA COUNTY OF *AN MLMMAMOTNO. - AMC O! CALTTDMNU. { . E <..DeMA. mnaw FUTOM PARK NORTH C -YQ ITEM- TIOJfll�TGA, TITLE--- � ►� �tts.?���t,'Tra i I ur4�`juI`�TII`.rG DIVISI N EXHIBIT- IZ- SCAM 7 i, e ►1 b i�,=ORTH CITY CF ITENI- AID , CUCAMONGA TIT D PLANNING DIVISION - E�IIIf3IT:- �' SCALE.,- 17 MOUNTAIN VIEW a DRIVE ,.o NURTH 1 j CITY OF ITEbt: Tit' L z_ R C .T,` IVIQNCsA TITLE. "l-.-rr`_ PLANNINU DIVISM EXHIBIT -F - =SOLE= E TTPICAG oSO. FT..�tft 31�CAC ¢.P2 SO. FT. i.OT At CUI. DE SAC F•r . /3keAWA 3L�yyy iCAGCMOE SAC IOT AOdAC£Hl TO S'IA£ET NORTH CITY OF RANCHO CUC:gMONGA PL.A.NI'�TING DIVISION Fxt4iBiT- --h -L scp zF, ! . 000.50. FT. LOTS kwc: �rr.rr .�...n TYPICAL t000 40. LOT AT�DE as • NORM �? CITY OF ITEM RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITIv: PLANNING DIVISIG X LXHIBIT-. SCALD __ an IX.; �� - te F- IX i gg W z fuc r 4, t- ' ` C j 1 ITEM: RtNet I tom ,MONTGA TITLE: 'PAY► PL.ANI` INO !mV`L51`r E.1xIF3tT: s' c 1 IUD'; r4 �i !C i; n3 I 7 r x s' 7 _ J � iTi� ai- a -a Oil i sia x713,} t!i L:: i( iii w i i1 a�j r ljai yy if. P gg 7 :laf v.S � - � � �.. _,_,� t.r� � � � a� 5A �� •ilit:tll a2� m _ ( a (.34 pp i' i CTri OF ITEM; RANCHO CU i NCi TITLE- ef-Im PL.ANNINtG DIVISION c?CHIQIT x- __SCALE= "" t" x +'x3.NiU",�;;Y.ff r.0 VM� a .•c` #�!•"Ss.tar.FiiYN� sEL�V�tICN"� Q +'Yt4 NORTH -' CITE' OF ITEM, �' 0 CLTCkNIONGA 'TITLE: PLANNING DIVISION EXF ..'?(T: � __ S�.LE •°'� ;e�1. t" x +'x3.NiU",�;;Y.ff r.0 VM� a .•c` #�!•"Ss.tar.FiiYN� sEL�V�tICN"� Q +'Yt4 NORTH -' CITE' OF ITEM, �' 0 CLTCkNIONGA 'TITLE: PLANNING DIVISION EXF ..'?(T: � __ S�.LE •°'� FRONT ,FLEVA T ION FRONT ELEVATION' NORTH CITY OF ITENz: RANCHO CI ;CAA/10, GA. TITLE: PUNNING DIVI` laN EXHIBIT= .4 -Z SCALE.'— � . T i i i . i i LED f _ rt' + a r i'.x.y�, 2;,Y ...�0. -ri'_ �Sia��W"�r�s. ��-�� j �,.j -•• •- . ry Wiz, -.,r. -'•t�N�x41�El�YA7lOi+Q r_; NORTH CITY OF ITEN't. Tr maz 6=0 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TiTCE:, �Aj PLANNING DIVISION EXHI:3IT- �1-''. SCALE; c ..ice- �� > Y 4.�•• = ^�• r . �„ �.ER.CTt7�Fi�Ei'ATIQ2('.��i" -t •�5.�.r I •^fir ,� � :, R+1�["iI _ • --�' � _ FRONT ELEVATION NORTH CITE' OF ITEM: FI DITVEON EXHIBIT -.--"-J:f 1_ SCALE-' r1 U il'-e =vt-P 1� FRONT ELEVATION 1 l FRONT ELEVATION �r •� � '� � � � L�.'.� _ -, ;fie -'�Ar � N. r.M" FRONT ELEVATION V � 1\�RTd -i PLANNING DIVISION SGAIE h r=am �agay T[2TIAte 6TYCtA CWBtT � 1a ' j•� V�tNit•iiiTWlYa TUC :a - � fse non -TTncu LJ �. =Jg�J� � �•— t+ew+rTfsraa :oawew ewrvcY FRONT ELEVATION // eaw TUS pcoc ,u;-+` ate'• / Jw arse rcfnata �k g`yrR wtac sostas /� l aa•eleWa fUnrtaree rtnr „�•' m.aWSansruscoarni s -5 s _a•trnesc 1 ees:. Tnc afar ragas 6�t6[ FCAa00- FRONT ELEVATION • -- arsTawrnwat _smaaTCn rest ai LaraWis reaersce afuccc va. as tanssaruT. •. .. NORTH FRONT ELEVATIOIN - 4 CITY OF ITFNI RAN O CUCAT NN(; A TITLE: PLANNING DIVLSrAN EYIIII3tT = -SCALD E: +� LZ D �NRcYUaES STYq;p r rCpLC, YY1 MtNl! G( /r Yila r.cel .. EuaEwuon " TTSie.G Y..—.- \— "=- TtiT(KEO Mc--3 L l�ow =Q FRONT ELEVATION {{f 4 r E�rcETlwee E*ucco - -- -- ' Ca.0 YU[.a0r alsr <sn +a ' .E.aE.aus �- +314MENT(Erpl(O yTa�t - � Lnruuaovcar... u�wv rYEnmm stucco us Tn.- va . a cu.ro sun - trncu L4 Y Y.fPrtfatk `-i FRONT ELEVATION nnuc =z7= (L� �� it iJ NORTH CITE' OF T C R� - ; 0 CLA,IVIOJNGA TIC: PLANNING DItWON �YHI:3iT: J --�.- SCALE= �' FRONT ELEVA? IOM FORTH CMY ar ITEi�I -1E RANCHO C�TCAMC)�TGA TITLE =�. PLAANNIN g DI��I�ICA�I E,YHII3IT SCALE =_° r r , w lu PRIMAW�� ' � �,1ii T%1{6 +iTPICAC j;� SAANSHTE %NAEDSNCtp� CITY OF T � r ITi:���i� �- '` '�'''�E5 - fi�Al�-IO Ct,C�Mti�GA TITLE =_ �s�v PI..A,I'+iNIT`G DIVISIQ1oI EXYHIBIT Sj:! - _;SCALE: � • - 31 CITY OF RANCHO CUCLMONGA _ X—X II , INITIAL STUDY ENVIROMMNTAL CHECKLIST DATE APPLICANT: FILING DATE: L2; �LOG NUMBER: ;PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATION: , Y �'a /s' e�'cs rI/"y ti`meo I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS i i (Explanation of all "yes" at:d `maybe" a sheets). nwers are required on attached I S. Soils and Geolor. Will 'the proposal txve significant results in a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologto relationships? b. ]Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the $oil? C. Change is topography or ground L rface contour intervals? d- I't:e destruttion, covering or modi£ical3or Oi any unique Reologlc or physical features? e. Any potential increase in wind or Vatcrr erosion of soils, affecting either on :.r off site conditons? z f. Changes in erasion -, Atation, or dep�sf °ion;? g. Exposure of people or property t- geotogic hazards such as earthquakes, landslidE:s, mud- slides, ground Failure, or similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of 41stxacSion and /or use of any mineral. resource? 2. bra. lobs*. Will the pronosal base significant r� resiil.tr in: c YES MAYBE ' NO __ __ Z !11. Ell r Page Z YES MAYBE Na a. Changes in currents, n- the course of direction of flowing strums, rivers, or ephemeral stream �. channels? h. Changes in t,,bsorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate of surface water runoff? tZ c. Alterations to the col-.:se or flow of flood waters? / d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water ?' 1G a. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteratim of surface Water Suality? 'sue/ f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions ,ar with- drawals, or through interfere,! ?e with an aquifer? Duality? Quantity? - h. The reduction in the amount of cater other - ;eisq available for public water supplies? %Z i. Exposure of pec'11e or pr -party to +rater related harard'u such as flonding or- niches? 3. Air QualitZ. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile t indirect sources? Stationary sources? aL o. Deterioration of ambient air quality ando'or interference with the attain,�nt of applicable air quality standards?` �,✓ c. Alteration of local or regional cl:Lmati -y coaait+ons, affacting air movement, mo. =cure I jr temperature? / 4. Biota I Flora. Will the proposal have s;gti`ificant result: _ in: a. Change in the characteristics of species: I includtug diversity, distriov.Gior, or number of any Species of plants? 1 b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique.-, rare Or endangeredspecie;�,of plants? ✓' r, 2 0701 -0 o 2- 113-85 PC Agen, d `0' 6 f Page 3 YES MAYBE NO c. Introduction of new -or disruptive species of plants into an area? e d. seduction in the pote;tial for agricultural production? Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered speLles of animals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, of result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? / rf d. Deterioration or removal of existing fiA or . wildlife babitat? 5. Population. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the huwan population of an area? ✓ / b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing?I 6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal nave significant results a. Change in .local or regiaual socio- economic characteristics, Including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? 1G L. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? K b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, policies, or adopted plans of any.,governzi!. t%l / entities? �I c. An impact upon the quiaity or quantity of existing Consumptive or non- consumptive recreational opportunities` ?� /' Page 4 YES MA;'BE 1,10 8. _Transportation, Will the proposal have significant Generation a. of substantial additional vehicular, movement? b. Effects on exj,sting streets, or demand foY,' new street construction? c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? ' e. Substantial Impact upon existing transports - tion systems? e. Alterations to present patterns of circula - tion or movement of people and /or goods? f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water- borne, rail, mass transit or f air traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bz�-yclisrs or pedestrians? f 9. Ziltural Resources: Will the proposal have significant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological,� paleontoicgical, and /or historical resources? _ 10. health, Safety, and Nuisance Factors. 'Will the proposal have significant results in: a:. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of-hazardous substances in the event of an acci -ent? ._ d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? �! e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? g. The creation of objectionable odors? h. An increase in -light or glare? ✓� mac.. Page 5 j YES MAYBE N6. 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in: - a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic f visa or view? ,f b. ne creation of an aesthetically offensive site'. c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? f 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal leave a significant need for 7ew systems, or alterations to the following; a. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas?', c. Communications systems ?' d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f_ Flood control structures? B. Solid waste facilities? h.. Fire protection ?,/� i. Police protection? J. Schools? k. Parkes or other recreatiorzl facilities? I. bfaintenance of public facilities, including tea.• -_._ roads and flood control facilities? Z m. Other governmental servicest ' 13. Energy and Scarce Resources. U111 the proposal have significant results a. Use of substantial or excessive fuF-,1 or energy? b. Substantial increase ir. demand upon existing sources of energy? c. An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? �� ✓� d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non- renewable forms of energy, when feasible { renewable sources of energy are available? f Page 6 YES MAYBE NO e. Substantial depletion of -any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14, Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade, the quality a` the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish, or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or'animai community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or elirtiinate important examples of the major periods of California history or,pretistorv? b." Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of Fong -term, environmantal goals? (A_C, ort -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a reldt,;-7ely brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure WPU into the furze). .f c. 'Does the project have impa,.:ts which are "' Individually limited, but cumulatively �+ considerable? '(Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are - ,considerable when viewed 11 in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable futrze projects). d. Does the project have environmental effects_ which will cause substantial adverse effects oil human beings, either directly or Indirectly? II. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative rae" answer.%Oto. -__ above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). K�� to !d'/Zti�r 2.JSJ ;5.Af? Fc?e Y r Page 7 Iix. i}ETERMZNATION On the basis of t,is initial evaluation: I find the proposed project CO= 'NOT have .a significant effect on the enviroument, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case becausa :the m$tigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE 49CLARATION WILL DE PREPAREA. I find the proposed project MAY have a signifl.ca t effect an the envirnment, and an ENVIRONMENT MPAGT P-EPORT required, DateG !&nature Title 1 RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12802 Y `, WHEREAS, Tentative Tract heap No. 12802' hereinafter "Map" submitted by Lewis Homes, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property, situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San rernardino,'State o California, described as 221 single - family detached units on 41.5 'acres of land within the Terra Vista Planned- Community designated Low - Medium and Medium, located on the south side of Mountain View Drive, east side of Spruce Avenue - APN 1077- 091 -02,03 and 1077- 421 -03, 04 into 224 lots, regularly came before the Planning ;Commission for public hearing and action on February 13, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Division's 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- CommisClion makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 12802 and the 4o thereof: u (a) The tentative tract is consistent W; "t,- Oe General Plan, Development Code, and sr 4r%ic plans'; (b) The design or improvement;`of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, 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 1,viidlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The desigr of the tentative tract will riot 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. Tentative Tract 12802 Page m2 i (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on - the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. S0-710N 2: Tentative' Tract Map No. 12802, 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. Eaci. lot within the project shall have a minimum flat (2% slope or less) rear yard area from building to property line or slope /retaining wall of fifteen (15) feet. A final detailed site plan which indicates slope and retaining wall locations and unit plotting shall be submitted prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Each lot within the project shall be provided with front yard irrigation and landscaping including street ;trees and seeded lawn. Details shall be provided on the landscape and irrigation plans submitted to the !slanting Division for review and approval prior; to issuance of building permits, 3. Corner. : ^ide yard fencing and retaining walls)';shall be set Aft bar< a minimum distance of five (5) feet from the bark of sidewalks. . All interior street facing retaining walls shall be constructed of decorative block. 4. Street facing side elevations on all corner lots and the rear of two -story units facing Spruce Avenue, and Mountain View Drive shall be upgraded with additional wood trim, wood siding, or plant -ons where,appropriate. Construction details shall be indicated on the working drawings (including specific lot numbers). 5. Low level lighting shall ue provid °d along the interior 6reenway Trail sections. Construction details shall be provided on the improvement plans prior, to issuance of building permits. 6. Construction details of the retaining wall and perimeter wall- treatment along Terra Vista Parkway shall be submitted for review and approval to the Planning Division prior to approval' of the final grading plan and recordation of the Tract Map. The cap block on the perimeter wall shall be a dark brown for contrast. 7. Lot "C" (in between Lots 121 and 122) on the east side of Spruce Avenue shall be landscaped per City Standards and a pedestrian walkway provided. Park credit for lot "C" shall not be granted. Tentative Tract 12802 Page n3 B. 6ieenway trail improvements are raquired along the south boundary of this project from Spruce Avenue to Lot "B ". Said improvements from Street "F" easterly to Lot "B" may be temporary in.nature. 9. final design anu construction details of the greenway trails including landscaping, irrigation, walls and fencing `shall be submitted to the Planning "Division prior to issuance of building permits. Engineering Division 1.: The applicant shall construct the following off off-site access roadways, with a minimum of 26 foot wide A G pavement within 40 feet of dedizated right -of -way: a. Spruce Avenue from Base Line to the site. b. Church Street and Elm Avenue from Haven Avenue to the site including a bridge across Deer. Creek Channel. The cost:of the bridge shall be credited towards the systems development fee for the Terra Vista.. Development. 2. The following pertains to the drainage from the southerly cul -de -sac streets; a. A drainage study is required to document that increased ;'lows are not being directed to the south. b. An easement or acceptance letter is required from the property owner to the south. c. A velocity reduction devise shal) be installed at the outlet of the drains to reduce ;erosions downstream. Maintenance of the facility shall be the responsibility of the developer. 3. ' All greenway trails shall be dedicated on the Final Tract Map. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY.OF.,RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary Tentative Tract 12802 Page #4 I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 13th day of February, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMA- iSIONERSc { NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: f i 1 Z C3 d Q. P�1CA LN g � »u <i bPr Vi °• 4 gO AL> L �4Q A»u.+r LO.D <Gu _ G aaY•OV wM qw :+d a'.. ° q6�� �'✓ Pt A C» 06�w m �QZml ti.<'y n. C °DaV m O <y�Y C4.0 4E�.4 OC4pC Qc.r .?, uQ; GQ 5r p��D Y:u b, 4CKy`y LT LL 8t? �u<m g�Yb+ LDa p c m C � d d 6e�9� g !- r0 tl-t1. r e. C^ A AL S tlE AC C'iy W SGV L L `3 CGr A >p4 C 4 'GYLgiQ1. AR'9�a M~� bi.p'.w yyJ OCL'Pl Rr �u IIG W�Z GYQLQ tl O b� ^O tlga C yp� AO7'aa ub EeVi^m N 7.Q .1M..O. O1 6Y n ha C 9YgPN E Syr Or 1 4 OM Sx^ 6.p, y^ t,u Ry Ogm -°Mw ZVuL sL`V b° 4ti Vw"�- Q» N g +r ^b D .At y0 Qgm <a. zp. NrA' CCU ail64y srQ O.'g�V.L�a�6CK° 9u y C LL, ��( w...Nr9. w ^�L EO Zz Y 4 b p• 4 L� y° Q° a O N y p O V w ..0 � Gt � 1 a; ,� C 9 4 Pt^g r qCy gOQp C�g tlCQ � 4qG � Edt� dtl y.E RS � A Pry °N O Pie. GoT 14°hq �y •� Ac S a5 R c� e..„ ^a �t +fgN °°-aa i it ago boo as � o�A �Q °`•» <O.:m'e'Ya NCGeu Pc R°LnD Cdr 4- a.1vi' C4.£�^ daH'F L YoOC >a O b »LT b�H Sg aAG P O inGy VgG'Cd%»Lg2" n,iO�.K Y a6L�0 r O Y. �4M 4ur�fl.aAi# [y �'OCiri �C d v m� l-L 416Si �C g GAL 4 �r. m r O L n� v,.Q Eim !- r0 S .Ct 4 i G d Q r ^ V w 4p. 41 QO 'D CM p. u as gg a o a i c s • o °v r v Q � r. acv �r. Z NQy � A Q gDy � PO g L r C 04.^ O i L � Law i M N« y pOp �GxS O 6 4 _LQL�r HIM1 Lam} ' .i- O L n� v,.Q Q - -o- >I� 3 � ✓a. .�+i a �' a'. a.°+ b Z So. = LaC Q L C £^ S ✓ ®6M L� 4pR +'ls CL a� L. 1c� r i Os4 rY a aC4 w. was —✓ � �� LplC E cim�G p a.5 w, Eo °u S. ✓ 8� ¢ -- -- r Gi �`yc _ _^ >I� 3 � ✓a. .�+i a �' a'. a.°+ b �q9 d s�^ LaC 3 + ®6M L� 4pR +'ls t'9 2 1c� r G0.6�. —✓ CO ��- �� LplC s Eo 'ate yv - aE Z e. aka ua -" s' S 4✓ F IR �o -a ��S tea' E ✓� a ✓�� iii +. °m nc:.= g w O �� wO•Y0 C y �`yc _ _^ >I� 3 �� ✓ac=t's nY_a ��r ° °c. �. 6a�s�OGiE. Qii ✓C a L12. -. °6`x.4 L =y� L� 4pR +'ls t'9 6m ✓ da�3 G0.6�. Z-= s v�ViY{4i 4i� zL 6a aw�pj.N w O �� wO•Y0 C y f3L 6✓ ��E�Za`� ✓d ^'O��'D w w p� 9 4 w C�Gt y�'° 9_0 a✓ a ° w. Cg y G R tr7ff- c``a cjs ,oz °° p i✓ ✓ V G a6 21.t y� 3 6 is v O° ��. p L� 'O O= °rG qrsi✓ .L s� - s +pa S+%t�:., as a.ra ° sa cc�°.✓ u 6 °... a p ac a.G -w V 3 - a >0 -. YE z r So-so o to- c. .r m. C am° ° C ""' —S.- _ =_' a4- qi ..., O20 3a- yG aN ra V. 4pm"Y'�G1 gLLC Rr`ap m✓ ® cc� aai a� �vs". s, -^°`_¢ Q �-� o4opa c�u. a 4w4> �„4ai yc: 4 °a�iu.a a cs" uapisa a y +.w a rL M� :c...wo w4 wv 1Lan ax.. -.. �.e snrs LCD �s m I;rc m4� c.► s..�+aw4sc 4E�si r AM -v aq h G �V OlO 9RIf" z . LEi3. msjM paID ail S <pryr HE*v,, 4 '°'dd: 4Gd = Ff f 'a ziis°s ^asiaoz < w� G wppa L 4 _ G o 6L0 =Lry r rr.8 6Yy L f0.. Z; R - d 4x d pww 7 Aw L ar GGE S g Q! G ^� wiY 4j V - 9C.1�C aewe r` wa d Orh C�w d. wR ^� 4c wD Rw�� L6CC 3 } Q .344 R9m'L JO<rr iG ^, =C C= Ty Q S PM gy. 4,y �TC •°GSw4. 9 dewy £r G Ls•_s w a. i i -wi o ✓,GR.r _ `M said w� C 4 tCQ6� c 6� •i.�Cq{ C 6�.�� 40, psy`v0 i it t!i 4 CY RL aT�S SR6�i w G�� yyyyp i� 4r wr dt r C ^ sp "rr 9wZ94 4 CC < R O � ^�p Oy3V6 40 9 �DY way .�GTrG: w gw_ Ci9i E6.. - ^Oi uuasi "S.O'� ^4 yww6.a iyYM -�- v = 40yy +wC Vw `'mod cr sy. 9 y —Z ra. V/S 11444 Cd dG Or dso is 0 r i o c.. C L er6'��• _ •r- .v y ! w y4 t eo wed Y G p 3 E- R i9 4960 i ~4 aGS �~ gq��d9 `'ra 0M -O z-.-, tp ! Xe�O Rae L j 9 0 Z >� r $y qy 44 S may � Om. C 4Ld ffi G�vws w4Y 3•a ^�_rt � � !� 4C6�. 4rwY ~� S p r wq Oy 6 R gYs GG� xw� N4ip Ca w' y 4 Ys ,A i�6S rw r ^i0 ^ter x'q s ym us® �r ^�. liir. °. .°• 'anima 29w ri[jmw° its `a } V/S 11444 Cd dG Or dso is 0 r i o c.. y^pi �t;.�a y w9 .v y w t eo wed Y G c SO C 4-' ma e aq CSC ^M wY 4960 i ~4 aGS �~ gq��d9 `'ra 0M -O z-.-, tp ! Xe�O Rae L j ssi +aio > 4 rd. Yz-QS O Y Sy Lz� , Ya a w r - C S wYa '' Gr> tmy R,i 1 l'J O1 N i'ti'C .� °q• dCtC - tvra�q OYUV a li CC 04 ua G 01 �� � -g =O.m cu ya. i. L o mS E O .GQy `N Unp�a, �. Cq C q..: a d w C a� � i= 'w o� Ggnmacx mars p _ 0,4 d�q L ii �� p6F Y�r N•- O n NI ^N4a C.... .IR.'. y� ` bw w d a tip Y �w R, L .. O Uay V Gwc Y, V. ., d ^.. q".YU pa omdy •c y` z,° au• yQ nw Oy GCYy4 q. OvGAC i,,. �€ tSp� d0 �. 6 t w•CC'Gwy. O .Gtr° -Op p V �� wVp v.� 4O� >' f.. V p l7 EV q:. C+O• .iC `,O >CaCC a y� y N'C � w9G p� s t� � Y Wy °> COpd.! m' w 92 uo vuC °u. q4 v •- O• =`y M�+Y +gL°xm a V S�S�°t °I.O+ pj °qyq L4 N C 'O pNL. Lea E Cq � O �� c Ga 01 C EU� w q o Y ° rwtu s. .rOG M1 nrI YV.N a 6L.+rzgWpL N L yt ° 6Y0 CC W�.\`s q xYY �6 q t't�62 KM sup •° cuV o.q-( °� d �i r- MO Cq iii _ a �F..^4i' cop'a.tu n °q wi n _uu O w C E 8.9 q L w aN,LOE up gGg 4 w. C C �� E y '• U (G° O u vLL T n° wrn4 _G L L 8-t a L w . dVt C~ z dw.l r_- 9' �w,o aqE ° 0ouyyp °^m.+ y L _Y �O •^�., ° Cd�C O 4t Cq 4 6 yG yY:y tL aq FW a q° s io io o n'a sy4 oyv 'G"u ut°.i Lp_Y �y ai yi m o ice; L. won n�.t..a .°. BE M 4.Y Ep1q iC aW .TOM ° �+ �u'2T `4q•4J NO {y aC�Y CV{�eti `CLG�pYpS' DL 6yy ygg Q0 E VC• p�V •L L6� OY U. G WI°L v1. W i0a+U' 6 '71 {1 L u3Yq.2 3LWNQ L ^Q 1�4q. • cz - i& 0 — y aYOC o _ d .YO .JL. •CO CO Y NW.. Y by �. 9N NAgY '+' a r•Y o.m'' �u r � o � �.� .Yi�ow r -v � 5x'. i�. ..+► a ¢� =a C a •. 6 i. iu -00. ` �.E F 'ia pva �� 4t. %k.. w °> `. N A ^fly. �u c`h'• an« .:. p+erau M.c °i._�^ «... d w I i y ycy aLG C Y a °n m Y 4 C y a q .,G. w 6` 6 x cu. pit w.q Y.p } p - `'�. yy G O� K YN�a 6a A D.q w l.,.xi12� Y e¢lu CA y-V B R; V Y CC r Ntg C ° M O O.d C Rd NYp .,.04 9 YL. NCIOD +. NO dR� C N.• 'OC[� •� na CN .Cq^ , R6gOx YMO °^ M'Yy N ter"G OR O w p Ltr O Gb.tr Z-2 CEO •\I C q ^ , Y O E bb -. t } O C T btlf- O.s LOiO C4' C «4,L 6.iYM Yw TY f! �Cp�b NNN �� ' _ 4PL W i L Y cRYC R:L N `fix' t \nv, •,. ' • z fl R Y ° LL`Ci/ G NY bE ti0. pv a = N:..Y ryry rrr,,,ttt V i L CmCC �. z x oar., N L L L L✓ t°rTa c� Rr ° S Yu�� O S� q«w L� ✓ NR �� dq V L @~ND NU C NLap= YGa Wy O� �G y+r o:�a. 1 GA b A x R p[ uRN V p p0 O U 3 c dT Ot GgyR1y N. C YV:+` LGti Y -0��L 6N d°i • [r q.Y.q O.y ° yd �Yy hRa4. AGO r- AG } a q. R M6 LG � O Ya uV VY.aNa Ot..° OCI. GOE Rb EE V. D. 6. y L R. t Y r •O' C (y n N y Y d N ! �A S W a,p O. q a n g er cw � O O N N.4 y� Y b,► G L L![ Y' V C E� �.d;ur aVl1N Ota f..1NQ 9. R.N .Ca Y+• Qt ^. Y��w Y L.b fV.d O RG.O�YO u °p n 4ND =� bgd aC[O RgiC Rq NY COL qb. iN G. R L y HGN �,E 4 Nw C Y�L�m L6 O +Y+aZ9..0 �O O C Y N Lw R V� O U N d. p � °� aOE G U+C {. G C• -. L.GY 4N C NUANT KRVO G6w br*L 34 NO�y <Ol 40LYYq p w'R 9 V = d G'F I I Ln Q z 41 U N a t L a C U d i g .Gn N b c d Yw wbd e p v.- G O Cx oy £6 atdi d d N v O u r �' Cdr tL L Va 40 •` '1 6 x Nd N a arV L� 9 �q < RLUUY� »W L '� .Ie 9.q N-0 OS Oi ti 11 bTb.I L.NL C {t C W tY 4ldc d�C'L LA y K° `G. j M .b aC O p.� FN c Zrod C.;. G � A 4 u '� d yNy V b Y dEZ 2f b a- x C60 quO 20 q CL t N' >(L� � Y r 2Y dY L A dya LW tT OLC.c.0 + K < Vim. G w9 G4 O a. y°u „d„ Ni Y O � »9 v.W d U�. C L qE L • r- N Owr G6.1 _ Yb LCU O. V9 L� u dVC Yd 1., Z b7b 'y 4 Pqi 2 CN dd ro ..C..4V .E. QtL Ec � C EuR HOC O VrTL C d w.axt O� ubro °w 19k bLA. tli q v�r � NOMOGi yy ,DCVO C \ \ \°NL9 �� CL�. Ny L..ELE � W� �� F Ye 4q.O q. JA q "01 EG W d Y °d La ad 1Q•. II�sd- .ON C LL = T qdu _2 N G VO u eta � ,.. d A ^W y m NA' _ ❑ v � V OGU. tea4 d .- b } C. � V D tJ L N b C U °t O� a VA Z. '. el 4 Y 4 xU Vq 4 4. �.. 1 dO CO. bS d A4 C 4b. yiU AC 4^^ • Yy-Y sfLUW WY »l L6i •-b ZO.. � <. Vb b te. Z� 4-Z aCi did 4 w bL22 69.N 4N ML �S q Q rw ti V�-•i d z L a C U d i g .Gn N b c d Yw wbd e p v.- G O Cx oy £6 atdi d d N v O u r �' Cdr tL L Va 40 •` '1 6 x Nd N a arV L� 9 �q < RLUUY� »W L '� .Ie 9.q N-0 OS Oi ti 11 bTb.I L.NL C {t C W tY 4ldc d�C'L LA y K° `G. j M .b aC O p.� FN c Zrod C.;. W0. atdi d d N v O u r �' Cdr tL L •` '1 6 V 9f N a arV L� 9 ro < RLUUY� »W L '� .Ie 9.q N-0 OS Oi ti 11 bTb.I L.NL C {t C W tY 4ldc d�C'L yd; qV `G. L L V A.44q d M J O p.� FN c Zrod C.;. G � V A ..� b. x C60 quO 20 g 4 L b p iv ro'eY L Y� V. Q A V O T y o� ^ C: C d y a. jjd3U n »d E� b w• a q'� u 4.. Ali a gt; N dim L A O � � E NSW nw tli q v�r � NOMOGi yy C \ \ \°NL9 �� + ij s, y u� N a A d l dN oN= i - - °1c do Ua N V cam° II iT N Cr Ld: o � Y YV .. •a O O ♦.y i u ` A. n .a. E q a ij ♦. TT � d a, O L.C' L6Y dq NY�Y Ny yS ~y O'°^ Gy df vw N 1.9 reIE. A d yw y ^f d9 11 y c N € 9V` �C'i �tJ OLCLLtY �° L �dQ LqL C y A 0�Cr d >Cf'q �N Ca oW tY '.iC 424 NO urF t NCt° .-. tl cz 5 — - GIM OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAIRF REPORT, (J , p d a- xr U DATE! February Is; 1985 1977 T(9: Chairman .no Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Curt Jchnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVI:`:OPMENT REVIEW 84 -22 A 'B NTa N e de,,e opment o 3D �ru1t�i= family units- o, 5.3� 5 n7Y acres of ,land (phase one of a 525 unif development on 58.3 total acres) in the MH District (14 -24 du /ac), located on the north side of Highland, south of Lemon, east cf Have',) ":%N 202- 271-59, 60. ENVIRONMENTAL "ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12922 LAN BENTSEN - A one lot subdivision map for condominium purposes' in conjunction with 308 multi- family units on 15.35 acres of land in the MH District (14 -24 du /ac), - located on the north side of Highland, south of Lemon, easy: of Haven APN 202- 271 -59. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESC IVTIUN: A. Action Requested: Pevelopment Rer -lew approval of architecture and site planning, Tentative- T, act approval for condominium purposes, issuance of Negative Declarations.. B. Purpose: Construction of 308 multi- family units C. Location: North side of Highland, 500 feet east of Haven Avenue D. Parcel Size: 15.35 net acres (58.3 acres within Master Plan area E. Project Densit Phase One 20.06 du /ac F. Exisl-inq Land Use & Zoning- Vacant Marcel, zoned Medium -High Residential 14 -24 du /ac j „ c ITEMS F 8 6 F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12922/DR 84 -22 - Lan Bentsen February 13, 1985 Page 2 G. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant parcel Tentative Tract 12873 submitted), zoned Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 dulac); single family tract to northwest, zoned Low-Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) South - Future Foothill Freeway, zoned Medium -High Residential (14 -24 du /ac) single family subdivision, zoned Low- Residential (2 -4 du /ac); vacant property, zoned Low- Medi =im Resie.ntial (44 du /ac) East - Vacant parcel, zoned Residential (8 -14 dtdac) West - Vacant parcel (CUP 84 -31 submitted), zcned Neighborhood,, commercial H. Genera ?, Plan Desirvattions: lsraject SiL� e - :Nnllium-High Residential - Master Plan Required du /ac) . North - Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) South - Freeway Corridor, Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac), Low- Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) East - Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac) West - Neighborhood Commercial I I. Site Characteristics: The project site is' undeveloped with no structures or existing improvements. I Eucalyptus windrows traverse the site in an east /west fashion, and a variety of indigenous plant materials consisting- of coastal sage shrub varieties P;ist, The site 51.opes to the south at approximately a 5 percent grade, J. Project Details: The project consists of 40 buildings one, two or'three stories in height. One-story buildings are located adjacent to Lemon Avenue, with the majority of the three -story buildings located at the - south end of the project. Six floor plans -ire proposed ranging in size from 627 square feet (one bedrooms one bath), to 1,118 square feet (three bedroom, two bath). All of the units are stacked flats with the exception of the one story building. The architectural progran consiL�s of ten Elevations with exterior materials existing of tile roofs, stucco, and wood trim. II. ANALYSIS: . A. General: As indicated at the top of this staff report, two separate public: hearing items have been advertised for this` project; a Development Review application and Tentative Tract' { PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT i TT 12922/DR 84 -22 - Lan Bentsen February 13, 1985 - Page 3 , Map for condominium purposes. Although the applicant is intending, to rent the project for a number of years, a tract map was submitted to a:low the future sale of individual units. In addition, the site plan has been designed to meet condominium parkinro requirements which are greater th -,%' apartment standards. The Development Review application . ;s being processed to allow issuance of, __npemits prior to recordation ow the Tract Map. Appr&af r nlications will allow the construction of 308 multi- family`&arits. The master plan presented is a .requirement of the Development Code and outlines the basic circulation pattern and open space areas within future— ,development. Prior to construction of any additional un °r >'s east of phase one, specific site plan and architectural approvals will be required. 1 B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Cc:,:mittee reviewed i the project on two, separate occasions and discussed the following major issues: 1. Open Space: Create a central and contiguous open space spine to link all three phases 'of the project and the westerly shopping center. To accomplish, this, building footprints were combined to consol?Jate open space areas , and the open space corridor tr:ds coordinated with the � westerly shopping center. - 2. Aesthetics: Views from the perimeter circulation aisle were dominated by carports and parking stalls. Tek accomm, date this concern, additional landscaping was provided where possible around ti;e perimeter parking loop and at the entry to the parking courts. 8. Architecture: The Committee recommended the use of stucco on bottom fiaor patios that are adjacent to parking areas, and repaired furred -out walls on certain side elevations; �Q to enhance the window treatment and provide additional R architectural relief. D. Technical Review Cc.- 'nittee: The Technical Review Committee,', reviewed the project and determined that the project is \`,, consistent with all applicabin standards and requlations �/ subject to the Following conditions: (1) Construct a portzor,',' of the masher plan of storm drains along the south boundary of -the project; (2) provide a- temporary access route to Highland Avenue. This route is located along the south boundary of the project and crosses Highland Avenue at the southeast corner the Master -Plan. The applicant has indicated a' preference ti - - -' AOL mu-ve the connection westward to the southeast boundary of the - J PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12922/DR 84 -22 Lan Bentsen February 13, 1985 Page 4 - subject phase; however, the EngIneerinp iJivision has determined that the required crossing will better serve the ultimate development of the Master Plan. (3) Construction of the south side of Lemon Avenue, including a left -turn pocket, and installation of the tra,'.ic signal at the 'intersection of Haven and Lemon. (4) The ' "achnic:al Committee, including the Fire District, applied a ;lumber of other special conditions as listed on the Resolution to- mitigate any potential areas of environmental corzern and public safety. E. Grading Committee: The Grading Committee required a number of significant changes to ti)e Grading Plan to meet City standards, and recommends approyai of the plan as revised: Special conditions include ccrdinating the final grading plans with the westerly shopping center (CUP 84 -31) to avoid_ any unnecessary slopes or retaining walls, and providing decorative block (versus precision block) for retaining walls. F. Environmental Assessment: The Planning Commission has reviewed the environmental assessment for this project on two previous occasions. At the first review in July of 1984, the Commission directed the applicant to prepare a focused Environmental Impact Report relative to land use, density, traffic /circulation, and to identify land. use alternatives, The decision was appealed by the applicant and in September the City Council modified the Commission's decision and required the preparation of a detailed circulation study to review the overall circulation impacts relative to the Bentsen project and surrounding future development'. study, which was reviewed by the Planning Commission on December 12, 1984, recommended specific public improvements which have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. In addition, other mitigation measures are indicated on the Resolution as a result of the environmental study presented by =he applicant. Por reference, the July 35, 1984 'staff report which - summarizes the potegtft(T- -- environmental impacts . and lists mitigation measures; is attacheu. If the Planning Commission concurs with the proposed measures and conditions of approval, issuance of a Negative Occiaration iould be appropriate. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Before approving the Ten*11ve Tract Map and JevElopment Review application, the Planning Commission must find that the project is consistent with the General Plan. Further, the proposed use, building designs, site plan, andi! subdivision, together with the recommended conditions of approvaT.And mitigation measures must be in compTiance with all applicable regulations of the Development Code. In addition, the design of the project must not he ,detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant Qnvironmental advef,. impacts. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12922/DR 84 -22 -_Lan Bentsen February. 13, 1985 Page 5 IY. CORRES". DENCE: The Development Review app,iication and tract map have bEp,; advertised in The 'Daily Report newspaFier and the property posted. In aflition, the ap_, plicant., has helii two neighborhood meetings to disc,Fss the project. In addition, 4„June.1984 petition requesting that the density on the subject, property be lowered to Low Residential (2 -4 du/ac) is attached: -'Also provided for your review are the minutes from the Planning Commission and City Council hearings on the environmental assessment for this project. V. RECOMMENDATIdii: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review all input and elements of this project. If after such consideration the Commission can support,the( facts for findings and conditions of approval, adoption of the tw6j "iesolutions of approval and issuance of a Negative Declaration woul&rbe' appropriate. I v Respectfully subm'f ff ed, i Ric Go z Cily P ahper R :CJ:jr A tachments: Exhibit "All Location Map - Exhibit "B" - Natural Feature3-.Map Exhibit "C" - Detailed Site Pli(n Exhibit "O" - Grading Plan Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Landscge Paln Exhibit °F" - Floor Plans Exhibit "G" Building Elevations Planning: Commission Staff Report December 12, 1984 -- Planning Commission Staff - Report & Minutes - July 25, 1984` City Council Staff Report & Minutes - September 5, 1984 Resolution of Approval with Conditions - TT 12922 of Approval with Conditions :DR 84 -22 r r, 1) l x n F- , Alk L U40 LM FC C LMO 4.: 1 S r..:k•..;. ,h }..:..W y 4 9 k 4 Yx w ?i .?: h♦ .. y. ` = nor pcSE .T Ci i _ M1, --PC M w I L# 4 • _ o n M M L Z, i - i M o° FC V.P.C. "Mm 0 ,- I F LM o0130 -s i. 70 a�nE101313 LM NORTH CITY OF 1TEibI:� -Zz RANCHO CUCAMOI GA TITLE : rrtOd pAA-vO PLANNING DR I5IaN EXHIBIT.--A— SCALE' -- -- (10 M' r L.VI\IRIHAVEiV s ®i�/IMIJi011TV �,., ..1 4�ANCHO CUCAMONGA. CA. +` MRTH__ - CITY OF ITE��i• .� - ZL ]E A— N-CHO CLCAMOiNGA TITLE:. Asn to mA-ry -s5 PLANNING DIVJ,SIaN ExHIBCI' =, SOLE _ M T• F• •.- IIIj � x -z fro 1I 2>. 4 e� 1 2 + tpt-o VA . •'3 f i r. E lilt, 9 MIN fit �I� {j ►��i o tip.... i■� R "T �J f �T�t� ��1' .a^ y " y CITY OF i RANCHO CUTCAMONNGA TITLE., ve7r4IU50 PLANNIM3 DIVIRON _ CITY OF y0 C r /� 1� 11LT _��OI�GA 'TITLE: ry r- 15P-( Yo P -A PLANNING DIVISIOiN EXHIBIT: SC ALE: I r T_ c q i COMMUNITY RANCHO Effia i� CA r ac>nrwzuy� ' i l Ir r, fl [t6 f JJ:. .s ititC rvw� CTWM T%.-Ar -dia aatia':r -arm . •app` 1 t E i.l..����✓� - S`TS'. {fs�ays, �1 1 LL 1Va {i -- -L ssou. � .. �,. ,i G 29 I Y � �� �SY/sr f7t�L`l/Si _ ti1U�4VR MIa6 t%411� CITY OF ITEM, RANCHO CUCAMONL GA TpTi E:, i4Tiexh� PLt3NNINU DIt'ISIQN EXHn3rr- SCALE: r ;;� 3 Llt"NNEHAVEid{ � --- COMMUNITY ■L■VATIf7Ny3 - >:0V8Rifl Plig4:1N0 "YCRYCTIJq■ 1p 114' � 9• -0`�'�...2 l ecasva.rlesnvla�atmnwo sctm'aw".Tw+ er � 1 THE lw- ewt■uooaveexaalna _ �Cr * /■'.a• -et-.F L..: �;...„ f FORTH CITY OF ( RANCHO ��CA. O1� A TITLE• r--C.C?VA -am3c� PI.At\iNING DIVISKIN EXHIBIT- °f SCALE: _ F- 17 s uirr ur nalvc;�v �UCA1���NGA STAFF REPORT 6W 1i DATE: December 12, 1984 TO: Chairman and Members of the FTanning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Tim J. Beedle, �aenior Planner SUBJECT ENVIRONMENTAL A5SESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -22 BENTSEN_LY VEN APARTMENT PROJECT A review of the Environmental Assessment far a ,proposed Master Plan for aiproximately 924 apartment units-located on approximately 58.3 acres or, the north side, of Highland Avenue; east of Haven Avenue in the MH Development District APN 202 -271- 59, 50. I. BACKGROUND On July 25, 1984, the Planning Con fission considered The determination of he Environ+mentai Assessment on the Initial Study regarding the p, °oposed development project. At that meeting they considered alternatives to concluding the action on the environmental determination. It was the decision at that time to move forward with a focused environmental str-9y on several specific topics. That item wa, appealed by the applicant to the City Council. On September 5, 1984, the Council considered the appeal and directed the preparation of a detailed circulation study which analyzed overall circulation impacts relative to the proposed project and surrounding future development. This study is complete and findings are accompanying this report. The item is being brought back to the Comn't'ssion for recommendations on oonclu�sion of the Environmental Assessment. The-- Commission, with new information, now has a choice of concluding the environmental process or requesting additional information as it may relate to. potential environmental impacts. With the conclul4on of th;; environmental process, adopted mitigation measures can be incorporated into the design of the project. It is anticipated that the applicant will now proceed with his plans through the Design Review ;process in order to incorporate - recommendations as expressed through the environmental review process into the overall Master Plan and 1st phe_ a development - program. Attached to this report is the detailed staff summary of proposed mitigation measures that were presented previously to the Planning Commission in addition to those acr.;4;panying the traffic study. These mitigation measures can be incorporated into the revised M t Pi d as er an an Cond_t- ons of Approval should the Commission' accept these mitigation measures with any additional conditions. F 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPdAT t`. OR 84 -22 - 8entson Lynn Haven Apartment Project 1 -December 12, 1984 J Page 2 IIy RECOMMENDATION: The Ccmr►ission should direct staff regarding completic� —o he environmental processes and .mitigation measures which should be considered during theipesign Review of the proposed project // Res t' s muted, M.. Rick Omer. 1 Ian �r ' RG :TB:ns Attachments. Traffic Study Planning Commission Staff Report - my 25, 19K Planning Commission Minutes July 25,;1984 City Council Minutes — September 5, 1984 Aft %t 'i CITY Or' RANCHO CUCAMONCA cUCAM0 TUTP.U®D A xTnTnts O f U� DATE: December 7, 1984 1477 TO.: Tim ,seedle, Senior Planner FROM: Paul A Rougeau, Traffic Engineer � r.� `f'R REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -27 - BENTSON Backgrounds In July, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for the purpose of determining the adequacy of the environmental assessment on the Lynnhaven project. At that time, the Commission considered the assessment- prepared by the applicant's planner, Donald King and expressed concern about the project's impact with respect to land use, density and circulation. The attached copy of the July 25 staff report provides a summary of the contents of the original environmental assessment. The minutes of that meeting are also attached, listing the concerns of the Commissioners. The decision of the Commission to require- a Focused E R examining land usq, density and circulation was appealed to the City Counc` ;!. by-the applicant. The Council's decision regarding the appeal was to require additional information on circulation, including a look at other densities, but nzr necessarily conforming.to the requirements of an Environmental Impact Report. Additional Circulation Stud The City contracted with the firm of Donald Frischer and Associates to' provide f an expanded. traffic study for the project. This study estimated the traffic impacts that ►:ould result from the development of L�nnhaven and other kngwn —_ potential projects in the vicinity, and to recommend. any needed mitigation measures. Traffic conditions were examined at tyro' points: 1) completion of Phase 1, 316 units, by 1986 and, 2) project completion and full occupancy in 1981 of 934 all units. A copy of this report is included herewith. Pages 6 and 7 show the additional development assumed to be in place at these times and contributing to the traffic volumes in the area. { Specifically, this expanded report analyzed the effect of all this development upon the traffic volumes on Haven Avem!e, Lemon Avenue and the signalized intersections on Haven Avenue with Lemon( Highland and 19th. The report does not comment on the subjective aspect of neighborhood tolerance of traffic levels since this is not within the scope of an engineering analysis. - Neither does the report examine conditions at buildout the of Foothill and General Plans '.+-cause of the great time span between that date and the planned' completion of the Lynnhaven project. i l �- ao Memo to Tim Beedle Revived Environmental, Assessment for Development Review 84 -22 Decej,%'jr 7, 1984 _ Page , Circulation. Study Conclusions The study has concluded that, with the recommended - street improvements, traffic associated with Lynnhaven plus other proposed residential and commercial deveiopments would be accommodated at acceptable levels of service during peak traffic hours (the so- called "rush hours"). This conclusion is based en the assumption that 75% of Lynnhaven traffic will be destined to the west and so h and that the initial phase of the project will send_ all its traffic t, - ?ougn the,, LemonfHaven intersection. The ► complete project will send 36% of its traffic during rush hours ,directly south to Highland Avenue. A reduction in the development densi':y to 14 units per acre was' "xamined and found to have no significant affect on the level of traffic service. This is because of the predominance of the traffic from other development. However, Lynnhaven will be responsible for 45 to-50% of the traffic on Lemon Avenue, if Lemon does not extend east to Milliken Avenue: Alternative access to Lynnhaven from Haven Avenue is discussed on Page la of the report. Such access would be undesirable ' aecause of its affect on the shopping center, the conflicts generated between the two traffic types and the impact upon Haven Avenue of the second access point. The alternatives of az access to Highland Avenue would take traffic off of Lemon Avenue, as mentioned' above, and it is rec4;mnended at the east end of the project. Mitigation Measures The study recommends the following mitigation measures for circulation: First Phase 1586) Haven Avenue and F9ighlrwrl Avenue f Both approaches of Highland Avenue at Haven Avenue should be widened to provide left -turn lanes for eastbound and westbound traffic. The westbound approach should be widC�ted additionally to provide a right turn lane. The existing traffic signal should be modified to provide a left -turn phase for westbound traffic and the potential to add left -turn phases for the other approaches in the future. Install traffic signal at Lemoa and Haven. i Staff recommends an additional measure to reduce off -peak tr aHic on Lemon Avenue. This would be to provide a pedestrian access into the adjacent shopping center which would incurpo�'1L additional parking j beyond the normal guest ratio. This would erg, `ourage dr "mi ng to that point from elsewhere in the project, thus producing a greater usage of the-pedestrian access. Memo to Tim Beedle Revised Environmental Assessment for Development Review 8442 December 7, 1984 Page 3 R: Subse cent Phases (2991} Maven Avenue and Lemon Avenue On the westbound approach, designate one lane for left- tu',lning movements and one lane for left- turning or straight movements, 4t the driver's Options. If feasible, widen the roadway to provide a Might -turn lane. That lane would not be needed for capacity considerations, but would be a convenience. On the northbound approach, stripe the existing roadway to provide a right -turn lane in addition to the two straight - movement lanes and the left -turn lane. Modify the traffic signal to provide threw phasest one for all `r eastbound traffic, one for all westbound traffic and one for all northbound and southbound traffic. Haven Avenue and Highland Avenue f Widen the eastbound roadway east and west of the intersection to provide a second straight- movement lane. Stripe the existing northbound roadway to provide a third straight movement lane from south of 29th Street to north of Highland Avenue. Modify the traffic signal to provide left - turn phasing for all four approaches. Haven Avenue and 19th Street Restripe the existing northbound roadway to provide a third straight - movement lane from south wo 39th Street to north of Highl ;,nd Avenue. Stripe a southbound right -turn lane within the exist7t � roadway: Construct a southb.,Iw?d left -turn lane within the existing median. Widen the westbound arpn i=i to provide 4� second left -turn lane. Modify the traffic signal to provide left-Urn phasing for eastbound and westbound traffic. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Commission evaluate the new circulation information. If the mitigation measures, along with any added ones the COWission deems necessary, are sufficient, then the staff may be directed to Prepare the necessary environmental documentation for Commission consideration Prior to project approval, PARjaa i1 Attachment ' y; i I u I E -- CITY Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA o �I ccM�Mc 9 w O 1 G1 1377 �I' � •gip' .,. I R L Y , < N 1 ''' lA��' CoNFiGURAT�aN mnN'aAV N9AV K LEM9N .41E / . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAi1IONGA STAFF REPORT DATE :: July 25, 1984 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning 'Commission FROM Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner' SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVeLOPMENT REVIEW 84 -22 BENTSEtt LY— VEN APAR EENTS - A review of the environmental assessment for a proposed master plan for 936 apartment units located on approximately 58.3 acres an the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven Avenue in the Medium -High Development District APN 202- 271 -59, 69. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Environmental determination of the Initial Study. 8. Purpose: Environmentai determination for the development of a 924 apartment unit Master Plan. C. Location: north side of Highland Avenue,_ 500 feet east of Haven Avenue. D. Parcel Size: 58.27 acres, gross; 45.42 acres, net. E. Project Density: 15.85 du /ac, gross; 20.37 du/ac, net. F. Existing: Land Use and Zoning: Vacant parcel, zoned Medium Hi9 esidential. G. Surrounding Land Use and Zonina� North - Vacant parcel, zoned Low Medium Residential.' Northwest - Single family residential, zoned Low Medium Residential South - Proposed Foothill Freeway corridor; single family. residential, zoned Low-and Low Medium Residential. East - Vacant parcel, zoned Medium Residential. West - Vacant parcel, zoned Neighborhood Commercial. H. General Plan Designa` ions: Project Site - Fledium "High Residential, (Master Plan required.), 14 -24 du/ac. North - Low Medium Residential, (4 -8 du/ac). 'C- G o it PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and DR 84 -22 - Bentson + July 25, 1984 Page 2 South Low and Low Medium Residential, (2 -4 and 4 -8 du /ac). Fst Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac). West - Neighborhood Commercial. I. Sitte Characteristics: As illustrated on Exhibit "All, the Lynnhaven project site is predominantly vacant with the exception of various Eucalyptus windrows which transverse the site in an east /west fashion. Presently, the site is undeveloped with no structures or existing improvements. The site contains a variety of indigenous plant materials consisting of coastal sage scrub varieties. The site slopes at approximately an 8% grade, north to south. J.. Project Description' Master Plan: As illustrated on the site plan, Exhibit "A ", the applicant is proposing the development of a 924 unit apartment complex or, 15,85 acres of land in the Medium High Residential District. The complex will consist of three phases of approximately 300 units each. Units will consist of one -, two- , and three- bedrooms contained in one -, two -, and three - story clusters. Total open s�race consists of 18.86 acres. Access- to the project is via Lem ?. Avenue.. Four access driveways 4vte been provided which lead to an interior loop circulation system. Phase ,1: Phase 1 consists of a total of 316 dwelling u nits .` with an overall density of 20.58 dwelling units rqr acre. Usable open, space equates to 6.95 acres and 620 par'36g spaces have been provided. Dwellings will consist of one -, two-, and three - bedroomm units located within one to three -story units.-.,-­­ II. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: The following Environmental Analysis is designed to elaborate upon the potential environmental impacts listed on the Initial Environmental Study, Part II. The analysis includes a description of the - environmental setting; identifies potential environmental iripacts; includes applicant's proposed mitigation measures, along with to additional mitigation measures which may be appropriate as identified by Staff. The Planning Commission will have to determine whether a.Negative Declaration should be issued, or whether an Environmental impact Report should be required, for the proposed project. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REi�ift Environmental Assessment and OR 84 -22 - Bentson .July 25, 1984 Page 3 A. Geology /Soils There are two potential sources of future ground rupture within 11 the City, these being the potentially active Cucamonga and Red Hill faults, (Exhibit "B ".) The Alqufst- Priolo Geologic Hazard Zones Act of 1973 requires that special study zones be established around potentially and recently - °active fault areas. The project site Pies outside of both these spec_ "al study zones. Soils within the project site area consist of the Tijunga- Soboba variety characterized by deep, well drained, and rapidly permeable soils. Development constraints related to soil characteristics appearviminimal. The topography of the site, Exhibit "C ", is characterized by a relatively flat geologic,,, prate tilted in a north /south direction. The drop in el;�-;cation across the site (1,350 feet) is 69 feet from north to south, producing an average slope of aproximately 6%. -impacts o Unavoidable adverse impacts related to seismic activity. Potential for a 6.5 - 7.5 magnitude event is possible along the Cucamonga and Red Hill faults. o Increased on -site erosion due to project grading, cuts, and fills. Proposed Mitigation Measures o Strict adherence to the Uniform Building Code Seismic ' -. Standards. o Strict adherence to the requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga grading standards. Additional Mitigation Measures o Provide an erosion and dust control plan. o The site shall be graded in accordance with the City grading standards as they relate to the following topics; Restrict slope to A feet in vertical height, per City standards. i PLAIWIVIG COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and DR-84-27- - 8entshn July 25,:1984 Page 4 - Encourage 3 :1 slopes to o�-, used exclusively. �! - The site should be designed to accomraudate grading by providing a series of steps. - Contour grading principles should be utilized providing natural apPearipq slopes. o Retaining wall should be provide&`' reduce slope impact. S. Hydr_ L1ogy setting; As illustrated in Exhibit "D'he project site will receive hydrologic -flows from as far ncx`th as the Chaffey College campus. i,i applicant has ;rovided two storm drain alternatives (Exriw t "E ") designed to accommodate drainage generated by a,25_year storm. The first:' alternative advocates providing -a drainage pipe contiguous to the southerly property line, which would gather stormwater' runoff and ccf;vey it i'a the south under Highland Avenue to the Deer Creek r'`annel. The, second alternative advocates providing a r•'3c? pipe contiguous to the southerly property line, . ,c conveying stormwater runoff eastward, alonj Highland Avenue to the Deer° Cree', --hannel, The project site does roe fall within a 100 -year flood plain, which- is that area of land subject to flood 'hazards from a storm whose intensity occurs on the average of once ever 100 years (L:ihrbit "F"). y Impacts o Increased residential development could accentuate the - City's flooding problem by decreasing the amount of permeable ground surface and increasing the amount of water runoff. o Increased erosion due to on -site excavation, cite clearance, utility trenciiing, etc. Proposed ,I-litigation Measures - I o The applicant has proposed two drainage system alternatives to accommodate on -site flows, and drainage generated off- site to the no,th, n- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORf�� Environmental Assessment: id OR 84 -22 •. Bentson July 25, 1984 — Aft Page 5 Additional Mitigation Measures o Provide additional open space designed to accommodate water percolation. o Provide an _ erosion control plan designed to mii',gate on- site construction erosion. o Provide temporary on -sit-�� `sicitation basins designed to c0trol erosion. C. Biota Szttina: The project site ;`> located within the zoasta', -Sage Scrub Association characterized by perennial grasses and native plant materials. Accordiag,to the General Plan Environmental - " Impact Reports development east of Haven Avenue, and north of Highland Avenue (project site) should be sensitive to the site. Builders are required to ensure that grading and construction practices minimize land alterations and reMoval of native vegetation_ The Environmental Impact Repart also- encourales preservation of existi -g Eucalyptus windrows (which occur on the site) whenever possible. Currently no wildlife or plant species found within the Rancho Cucamonga area is on, or officially proposed, for addition, to the Department of interior's Endangered Species list. Impacts o Loss of native plant materials, o - Elimination of habitat (cover, feeding areas; open °spaces'" " for small mammals such as rabbits and numerous birds that occupy the coastal scrub association, forcing migration. Proposed Mitigation,Measures o Windrow prese,,rvation, wherever possible. f Additional Mitigation Measures T o Provide windrow preservation plan. o 1Jse native, indigenous- plant materials wherever possible. a? PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT �� 4 E'nv'ironmental Asse- sSment and OR 84 -22 - ;8entson July 25, 1584 , - Page 6 0. Traffic /Circulation Setting: The project site currently abuts Highland Avenue, which is -west I a major east arterial. In the futQyll�; however, the proposed Foothill 'F eeway will traverse the southerly ef.ge r f of the project site, separating Highland Avenue from, - -«the project site. Primary access to the site will be provided b4 Lemon Avenue whiclr�vill extend to the east with each phase �f ; development, and t,nen veer south under the proposed Foothill' - Free«ay to ult ma,Eely? connect to Highland Avenue, west of the 'treek. Deer channel (Exhibit G ). Lemon Avenue e is currently a collector street. The_ )applicant proposes t.,at Lemon- Avenue 5ecc,4e a secondary highway with 80 an foot right -of -way. In addition., the applicant is proposing, the inclusion of a left turn lane and traffic aignal at Lemon and 'Haven Avenues (Exhibit H) The applicant has projected verage daily traffic generated from the Lynnhaven development to. be 5,710 average daily traps, with projected average dai7+,,,tgips for Lynnhaven, the and surrounding area of 15,910,. ° Im acts o Increased traffic -on Lemon Avenue east of 'Haver,: (Increased vehicle trips par day of up to 5,501 froml_ the Lynnhaven project,) Proposed Mitigation Measures o Lemon Avenue to become a S!condary Highway designed 'to accommodate the increased traffic (8Q ft. row, G4 *!;, curb- to-curb). o Installation of a traffic si _+ _ 9831 at Haven and Highland;, °"y_ Avenues. a Installation of - -a left turn only lane, an optional left' turn /through lane, and a right turn only lane Lemon Avenues. at Haven and Additional Mitigation Measures a o Provide the Lemon Avenue easterly loop (to Highland Avenue) with the first project phase. j - a q PLANNING COMIMISSION STAFF REPORT - Environmental Assessment and DR 84 -22 - Bentson July 25, 1984 Page 7 E. Noise Sett ina /Facts: As is evident, the proposed Lynnhaven will abut the proposed Foothill Freeway; a noise source which will create the most significant change in the noise environment of the City. As depicted on Exhibit "I", future noise contours adjacent to the Foothill Freeway- wili,,reach a lever of 65(, Ldn. According to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, it was assumed that noise mitigation (by CalTrans) would be included in the design of the freeway, reducing the noise levels by 10 dBA below what would occur without mitigation. However, even W,_ "'_ the 10 dBA of attenuation, ' noise levels will increase at 'dw,llings backing up to the freeway corridor by as much as 10 dBA, raising the average (Ldn) noise level to between 65 and 15 Ldn. (A 10 dBA increase is perceived as approximately a doubling in loudness.) As illustrate& in Exhibit "J", Land Use Compatibility for Cammunity Noise Environments, multi - gamily residential developments may be exposed comfortably to approximately 60 Ldn; `noise levels between'60 -70 Ldn require ttaw construction or development to be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in, the design. Noise levels between 70 -75 Ldn are potentially unacceptable. If new construction or development does proceed in the 70 -75 Ldn noise contours, a detailed analysis of , noise reduction' requirements must be made and needed nise insulation features included in the design.`~ Outdoor areas ;rust be shielded. Proposed Mitigation Measures o Require an acoustical analysis showing howw noise standardsr.-•--- of 65 CNEL (exterior) and 45 CNEL (interior) can be met for dwell -ngs located within 100 feet of arterial streets, and 400 feet of the proposed freeway corridor. o Use of glazing and wail materials to reduce noise (dBA). o Buffer the interior of the development by carports and three -story buildings. a Reduce construction hours between 6:GO and 8 :00 p.m. Muffle mechanical equipment. Additional Mittaation- Measures o An additional acoustical analysis shall be /.'required,pri to scheduling the project for subsequent Planning AOL fCommission approval, The analysis shall include: = ii 30 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and DR 84 -22 - Bentson Ask July 25,-1-984 - Page $ - A detailed future noise contour map of the site, illustrating noise contours generated by Lemon Avenue and the Foothill Freeway. Dwellings shall be located_ outside the 50 Ldn future noise contours. Outdoor areas shall be shielded from opotentially unacceptable noise levels. A 60 Ldn noise level shall be acceptable for exterior noise. Providing berming and intensified landscaping adjacent to the Foothill Freeway corridor and Lemon Avenue. _Increasing the distance between noise source znd te proposed buildings, (;lacing non -noise sensitive land uses, such as parking lot, between noise sources and 4wellings. - Using non- noise sensitive structures such as carports to shield noise - sensitive areas. Orienting buildinils to shield outdoor spaces fromtnoise sources. - Placing noise sensitive spaces (bedrooms) away from major noise sources. - Providing noise barriers or -walls between noise sources and dwellings. Providing construction methods such as sealed windows, thicker windows, double glazing, sulk core doors, walI.k_ rgodifications, etc., to reduce interior' noise. F. Services Utilities: Utilities will be provided to the project site by the Southern California Gas Company, General Telephone, the Chino Basin Municipal ;dater District, and the Cucamonga County Water District, Impacts- None. „ .PoTicelFire: Fire service is provided by the Foothill," Fire District. Response times to the site are 5 minutes,.for Station No. 1, ,9 minutes for Station No. 2, and 8 minutes "for Station No: 3.� Police facilities are provided by the County; Sheriffs Department. a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and DR 84-22 - 8entson July 25, 1984 Page 8 Impacts- 0 The project is located adjacent to afire hazard area. An additional 122 calls will_. occur annually due to the Lynnhaven development, o The proposed project will add an additional 324 calls annually for police responses. Proposed Mitigatiot Measures o Fire resistant I" ilding design. o Removal of vegetative fuel due to site clearance. o Plant fire retardant plant materials. o Adequate fire hydrant spacing, water flows, etc. o Cash contribution towards the Fire District's fire protection fund for new fire stations. Additional Mitigation Measures o Further information is necessary to determine the need for _additional fire and police personnel. Education: The Alta Loma SchOl District and the Chaffey Joint` Union High School District provide K -12 public education for this section the of community. o The project will generate a total of 145 students to be^~ absorbed into the Alta Loma and Chaffey School Districts. Proposed Mitigation Measures o School fees will be levied on each apartment unit. G. LAND USE Setting: As illustrated on the site plan, Exhibit "A ", , fhe •Lynnnaven development is divided into three pages ,of approximately 15 acres. Each phase is designed to accommodate approximately 300 units an-,, 6 acres of npen -space. Overall density for the entire project equates to 20.58 dwelling units r per acre. However, the applicant has attempted to transition I I - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and DR 84 -22 - Bentson t July 25, 1984 T Page 10 the density from lower density, 6.98 du /ac adjacent to Lemon Avenue, to 24 du /ac adjacent to the Foothill Freeway corridor (Exhibit K)'. According to the applicai,t, each phase will be distinguished from the other by different product types (floor plans and elevations), in addition to variation in architectural theme, unit design, materials and siting. ;;Each of the three phases will be separated into two distinct sites by a circulation spine which traverses the site in an east /west fashion. The northermost portion of the site will contain single story structures adjacent to Lemon Avenue„ with lower density and larger oriented units. The southerly areas an the site are designed primarily with density levels of between 17 -31 dwelling units per acre (Exhibit Impacts o Neighborhood compatibility with existing and future single family structures, located north of the project site, o Increased traffic generation on Lemon Avenue. Proposed Mitigation Measures o Transition of density away from Lemon Avenue (7 du/ac` adjacent to lemon Avenue). o Single story units adjacent to Lemon Avenue. Additional Mitigation Measures o The Planning Commission may request various Master Plana - - -- alternatives designed to provide a greater transition of density; greater distinction of product types; inclusion of additional open space; alternative site configurations, etc III. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission needs to determine the appropriateness of (1) issuing a Negative Declaration, or (2) requiring a focused Environmental Impact ,Report. Aternatiye 1; "Negative Declaration: Alternative t describes the 1%Euance of a Negative Declaration only if the Commission agrees thA the initial environmental - analysis is complete. and that the ' ,'(bigation measures proposed (which ,will became conditions of PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environment a1 fsse;�merii and DR 84 -22 - Bentson July 25, A [� Page Il f project approval) adequately address and mitigate all environmental impacts. If this<;alternative is chosen, the Planning Commission E - shall:, direct staff ­to > prepare the necessary: environmental documentation for Planning Commizsiun consideration prior to project approval. Alternative 2: Environmental Impact Report: Alternative 2 escrihes the requirement for an Environmental Impact Report. If the Commission determines that the environmental assessment of the Initial Study has not fully addressed the issues and that further environmental information is needed prior to project review, then an Environmental Impact Report should be required and shall include and identify vaa•'ious project alternatives, growth inducements, and cumulative impac :s, as well as additional analysis in thosa, areas identified by the Planning Commission. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised for environmental review in The Daily Report newspaper. In addition, persons 'living within 500 feet of the project site have been notified by mail'. In addition, the Deer Creek tiomeowner's Association and members.of the 19th Street Corridor group have also been notified_ Res ctr 1 submitted, RckGme - t P n er G_FD:ns Attachments I ri 5 - �u .,rte, �WOF RANCHO 6i1CA1 PLr1tNNING DTVjSICyN L i it It �I poi I ITEM I. JIQ�vf TITLE SCALE- EX t GEOTECHNiC?+ u HAZARDS ♦.ti > car .......... _ ~ t EXCES$W s.D.�. 140%1 IT A EA •• �,•• "" � , a u isr asaot� . zow SEWr CC ^t i a. � ( .• •a'` ---t- lYW: y - ..� S�CWSiIiOI�ESR7NF.' - lwu r S - f•• = i j NORTH CI T'Y OF T 1 T 1: \ I: RANCHO ' � l �Q r� GA TITLE DIVLSM EYHIBIT =--3►z SCALE! - - � .3 € �i�. -d .. .s jai_, •T „ai:.d�! �• _ •L: ' -�?�”; Sri � .� Sl 411•' �1 ; a w��' -.t•.i AV y r ...,Ly �. •t4�ir�i {, �. Sd' �L,cl.. may' z 13 m 4 yn. Z^ a .s >23.1 i S ,�' yEjd LNORTH CITY C -Yo tTE.N I; J CUCANAO1GA TITLE - < PLANNING DIVISION Ex►1trlT; G ` 0 r 1 ®L3 @1 ®�A0 E � TRIBUTARY AREA El iz m �.;v �r•. @ - _ _ rte.. B3i'4 19c. vanue. r to SAW �3 t ez txtlac7\ ��• ; t i • f! 331 it,. sJ i a° 79f• ® 21t2 AC i i� 26 .:43� 71 t>te� ,iwasc Ell. f • L82 tat ��$� q r-l� lli 7il i 8 1MW I 111 luYlll tza AMWA ACJ PROJECT ;tom__ t i�3v Fact # M -AITIE ARE • !� % t t .� 2t � 53 t r 1t30 VJAQ �` � E } 61 t 116 �!a �• =. _i I$IIIil.lti I�lilill fiililillll[IIIYIIt31ltl11! ��� '�_ . CITY OF 1 ITr—% f= F PLANNING L)IZrISjo, -q EXHIBIT.-JD SCALE -- - zt rj a a NORTH PL'I, INI\,r, DIVISK>.N E tIBI = : /J °r i Ir MON. -po wz 011, EN I F41h !e Y.ete� fi >G�iTH RANCHO ...<LCAANIONGA PLAT NiL G uVOON E.�iHIM s °abvin Avenue 00 WD - 3 1 t ,tnoq Avenue 6,710 1t';C} - Iti ;-nothllt Free, +ay zCiv` y� J4,uoa v=o Aq ightaitd evonuar�• j. ,ry ---th Street X02 CIT, 'i ITEM= - ` PLINNING .,IX, .1'HiBIT � r T FUTURE NOISE EXPOSURE' is CONTOURS -tan METRIC ` —a — NOISE CONTOUR •PRDPOSED COOTHILL FREEWAY CONTOURS f ASSUME 10HH ATTENUATiON NORTH dery or ITEM: 1 L�' T 1�x GA XG DIVIK�LA Eftiil3iT, } INTERPRETATION "" 2IRRMALLY ACCEPTABLE t riecified land us: `is so .I fectory, based ;Von the dtaumptim that my buildings involved ore of normal E emventionat construction, without my special noise fjnulat ion requirements. - CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE. ' Row constructim @' cevelopment should be undertaken F[ after a detailed drily €is of the noise reduction uirements is made: and heeded noise imlotion fea- tt��yyrer nctudeek in the design.. Conventional construe - tthn, but with closed windows and fresh air supply +}stems or air eondittoning will'normol[y suffice. out - , door environment will seem noisy. rM I NTIALLY UNACCEPTABLE New emstrwtion or development should generally be diacouroged. It new construction . or develooment does.. proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction- - requiremr is must be made and needed noise nsulo- - tion features included in the design. Outdoor areas must be shielded NORMALLY UNACCEPTA61-E New consfruotlm or devrloprnenJ should generally not be undertaken. 'Consiructim costs. To make the indoor environment acceptable would be prohibitive and -She' Fi-ure V -9 Outdoor envimdment would not Le usable. - t LANAI USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS NORTH CITY QIi ITEM* RANCI-10 CUCAjN j0, .GA TITLE: ,TLANNVNG DIVISION EXHIBIT-- SCALE• 4_ -5/S'' taUgLnnM WISE LAPOSLRE LANG LSE CAIECARY. LCA OR ME, AB Yf be RS ::a IS s0 'RESIO sent LO.DENSITY %%Att FAMILY DUPLEX, MOBILE NOMES RLCIDINTIAL -MLLII FAMILY iRAV1iEM1T1004114- t I wis t a, Nat ELS 1 MI RbILS.lib4 ARIES. - t CnIR!NEsIRhVITAtS. %t RSI \GNOMES ALOIT0RI61S.COKERT (. NALLS VORIS ARE \A OL10009 ` SPECT.10R. SPORTS PEA 05. M1FIL"tlUR11bUIU1O0DIARRS CALF LE.MS,51101NG SIABLIS M A TER RECREATION CEMEltRIES OFFICE BUILDINGS. BLSINES: • L OMMER"AL ANO PROFESSIONAL Do"STRIAL, MANUFACSURING uTILISI[S, AGRICULTURE } INTERPRETATION "" 2IRRMALLY ACCEPTABLE t riecified land us: `is so .I fectory, based ;Von the dtaumptim that my buildings involved ore of normal E emventionat construction, without my special noise fjnulat ion requirements. - CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE. ' Row constructim @' cevelopment should be undertaken F[ after a detailed drily €is of the noise reduction uirements is made: and heeded noise imlotion fea- tt��yyrer nctudeek in the design.. Conventional construe - tthn, but with closed windows and fresh air supply +}stems or air eondittoning will'normol[y suffice. out - , door environment will seem noisy. rM I NTIALLY UNACCEPTABLE New emstrwtion or development should generally be diacouroged. It new construction . or develooment does.. proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction- - requiremr is must be made and needed noise nsulo- - tion features included in the design. Outdoor areas must be shielded NORMALLY UNACCEPTA61-E New consfruotlm or devrloprnenJ should generally not be undertaken. 'Consiructim costs. To make the indoor environment acceptable would be prohibitive and -She' Fi-ure V -9 Outdoor envimdment would not Le usable. - t LANAI USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS NORTH CITY QIi ITEM* RANCI-10 CUCAjN j0, .GA TITLE: ,TLANNVNG DIVISION EXHIBIT-- SCALE• 4_ -5/S'' THIS DENSITY TRANSITION SHOWN FOR 0HASE ONE. IT IS TYPICAL FOR ALL PHASES ':ibis area to the north is zoled LM 4 to 8 Units per a;re _ LEMON AVENUE 2.25 acres net ! IS Units: 7.11 units per acre net 2.80 acres grass / 16 Units: 5.71 units per acre grass center of drive j2.84 acres 140 Units:' 14.0 Units per acre n et center of drive 4.86 acres not d g0 Uli ts: 18.51 Units per afire net i center of open space spine I Tv:40 acres net/ 170 Units: 31.48 Units acre l per net 3.22 acs res gross 1 170 Units: 20.68 Units per acre i gross . t L TOTAL SITE y { �. � reserved far foathi� ffesWay 15.,35 arras rtt !6 un�� -' s{. .,; 21 a�i`�r acrei ' 8.72 acres 'rd�RS ! �:� i' tiE S: "� 8£3 t`tmts '1" . p acre gross HIGHLANQ A _t —� _ DEI+ SIT°z Aft t 'r =• tap- fag - �saihlarij Aver; NORT L CITY Or. ITEM RANICO . ry� �� G EM. OIX `TITic.. FLANNIING DI kgSJON EXHIPAT= SCALE- DEVELOPMENT REVIE11 - ' LYNN& H:+VEN PROJECT COMMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA SHERZFVS STATION By DEPUTY JOHN SCHLABACH 989 -6612 TRAFFICS 1, There will be an increased workload on the Traffic Unit, The unit will be receiving calls on traffic collisions and will be expected to _enforce traffic laws within the Also the increased s elect,; flow Of traffic outside the project will increase the enforcement load along with more,accdents. CRIMINAL ACTIVITY; With the influx of many new famf;ies the crime rate will increase with it'_ It is recommenat,.R that proper -securi:ty - locks be installed on all doors and °:`windows. Doors have deadbolts must with one inch throw hol,z and free flowing cylinder guards installed.: Windows mu'v not be removable' in a closed and locked position. The 'eliding; portion of the windows and sliding tracks. glass doors must be on the inside Any child play,' areas must be located to allow good visibilit from surrounding homes. Any community y swi;,rim ng pools must be clearly visible from homes and the street. LIGHTING: Any Play areas or community pool areas must have sufficient lighting during darkness. Sidewalks should have at least five --foot candies of 1 +ghting during darkness. Any parking tots should have five -foot candles rf lighting during darkness. If a laundry room is proposed, it mjst -have large" and should be located dthe to allo-,a ��isitdlizy inside from street. It must have sufficient lighting inside an-e- outside., Lighting in parks, pools, Parking lots and launc r�on areas should have light sensitive swtchers. r CITY OF RANCHO CtjCi l -VIOl\sA �tcttJp r� r OATS; July 9, -19$4 — :? T0- Tim Beedie, Senior Planner � F. 'aui "Aougeau, Senior Civil Engineer; SJBJEC,T: Environmental Assessment for Lynnhaven Project The following are comments on the adequacy of the Environmental Assessment prepareo 4y Donald King & Associates for the above project: TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION 1. The trip generation rate used for project traffic isfthIe acceptable for analysis. City J t uitan volumes for determination, of prc,t�-ect condit conditions, o the�caiculat ons need not be repeated Iith more desirable rates at this time. Z• The analysis of traffic impacts on Lemon Avenue were done using only the project traffic. Traffic generated by the area between Lemon and Sanyon and the area east of the project area should also be included and .:istributed appropriately. It is felt by City staff that neither the master plan cross section of Lemon nor the ViVen /Lemon intersection will be adequate if the 'impact area mentioned a1bc " ;, is developed at upper end densities.. Impacts and mitigation should be *,gsessed using all traffic to determine if Provisions for 4pgradiog these fAC Mties should now be made. 3• Temporary connections to Highland Avenue nave been proposed for each as interim access. Such access points would b@ „phase of the predominately southerly orientation bf craveafromCihespsojeGuse area. The elimination of this access by freeway construction ,,,id /or the realignment of highland Avenue to the swath could tlijus:'cause a considerable problem for the City. Theve should be an assessment of the effects of the creation of a dependence upon these temporary accesses. flYOROLOGY The hydrologic assessment appears'adequate, subject to confirmation of quantities at later stages of plannin . Provision of an adequate storm drain, systemeShouidaalsos a further the supported'in any planning documents for the project, PAR:jaa 4 r it F— 6 a ti y P.O. Box 1135 Ra Cucamonga. C.- 917dY r_< duly 17, 1984 Mr. Frank Dreckman, Assistant PlarLaer City of .Rancho Cucamonga P 0. Box 807 encho Cucamonga,. CA 91730 RE: The Lynn Haven ;'roject Proposed 936 units on Highland k enue SU&7: Conditions as set forth try the Foothill Fire District for approval of said project Dear Mir. Dreckman• In addition to the information and comments provided in the initiel study l of the Environmental Impact Report, the fOlIOwing conditions shall also apply 'Fhe paragraph on page 57 item 3.10b impact, 3rd'paragratin shall be corrected to read as follows: it has been determined by the Fire District that this project will ,,ave sigrificaut impact and will generate appr 122 additional emergency responses annually. _ oxiraatelar L. B. I. Development, Inc. brmst negotiate with tbc Fire District a fair and equitable contribution toward the District's fire protection fund to mitigate °ama.ges. The standard fire district impact formula will be used to determine the degree o? contribution proportionate to the nead created. Correcticn number 2 a ppears on page 58, section 3.10c- under ,miti tin me paragraph number h. The figure 1,250 gallons me t; as'ures, struck and corrected to read 2,00r) Per minute requirement shall be inch for 2 hours , gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square On page 58, section :3.20c mite + reads: Z:ase mess:•. gaming measi +rES, under psra -xaph 5, the sentence struck. zs have not ,yet been in_temented. This sentence shall be New sentence shall read: Prior to recordation of the first tract, the following Shall be accomplished. Item a, fire hydrant sl'cing and fire flow shall conform to district requirements. Item b, L. B. I. Developr.,ent, Inc. shall contribute proportionately based upon project impact to the corstructior of a fire station and facilities and to the Ongoing operational and manning , needs of said station. Item -e, L. B. I, Development, Inc. shall contribute 5623 An-- thystSt., Rancho Caramo fga; C&'91701 Mr. Frank Drec J lor3n, Assistant Planner July 17, 1981_' Page 2 — Pr'Qoortionately used upon project impact to the purchase of fire aprsratua and equipment t4 properly man said station. It= d, all aspects of the relating to fire and life safety shall conf'arm to local conditions and standards of the Fire District and the Most recent adopted edtion of the Uniform Fire lode. In closing, we look forward to meeting with - epresentatives'of L. B. I. Develop— meat, Inc. and stand ready to essist in any •m—, possible. With-vlours tru✓lly, Jim W. Bowman . Fire Marshal, CommunYty Develo t./ pment cc L. B. I. Development, Inc. Mr. D. G. King, Assoc;ate,Planners JB(mg i r� Draft- Excerpt - Planning Commission Minutes - July, 25, 1984 PUBLIC HEARINGS B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -22 - BENr;�V L. °NtiHAVEN APARTMENTS - A review of the environmental assessment for a proposed master plan for Q36 apartment units located on approximately 58.3 acres on the north side u� Highland Avenue, -east of Haven Avenue ir. the Medium -High Development District APN 202- 271 -59, 69. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the styff report and explained that the purpose of the hearing this evening was to make an environmental determination and not a decision on the project at this time, C1 Airman Stout opened the public hearing. Don King, 9375 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. Mr. King advised.'that the environmental document prepared aid distributed prior to this meeting was the third such document �o be prepared for this site. He further stated that tha Commission has ,adequAte environmental documentation to make a decision now without the requirement for additional environmental_infnrmation. Mr. King stated that this project would generate school fees for{ school expansion and would also contribute towards the construction of a n'ew fire -stat big.. Hz further stated the Sheriff's Department advised that "this project l.rould not create crime problems in this area and would not have a significant impact�.on t'.e Sheriff's Department. Gordon Brickan, 1621 E. 17th, '- -santa Ana, Californi?, ,representing the applicant, addressed the Commission stating that traffic njise level studies were prepared for this site and that there are no problems associated with this project which,caarot be mitigated. Herman Ke=0 3300 Irvine Avenue, Ne.t;,ort Beach,,Ca`lfornia, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission stating that nis tint had prepared traffic stuo'-zr, for the environmental document presc:;jed to the Commission. Mr. KF=el reviewed the traffic impacts aAd mitigation measures. Peter Pfeil4r, Pfeiler Engineering, 1749 Euclid, Ontario, California, representing the applicant addressed the Commission regardin& the drainage and hydrology impacts and mitigation measures for the project. John Futsaher, San - Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, Rancho Cucamonga Substation, addressed the Commission to clarify Mr.,Kina's statA.ment retarding crime ,impacts. He stated that the fact that - the, 90C units were apartments -' would not be significant; however - 900 units °woul,, 'rive ' impact on law erfore.ement capabilities. The following individuals addressed the Commission;; in opposition to the project based on concerns regarding increased crime, impacts on schonls compatibility, traffic, acee$s on Lemon Avenue, and drainage. „r Cathy O -ees, Rancho Cucamonga Daryl Nicolay, 6245 Dakota, Rancho Cucamonga Mary Dodds, 6709 Mango, Rancho Cucamonga James Hill, Rancho Cucamongr John Garira, 9633 Highland,'Rancho Cucamonga Craig Nelson, 10560 Lem -n, Cucamonga Laura Nelson, 30560 Lemon, Rancho Cucamonga Mrs. Beckman, 1031 Liberty, Rancho Cucamonga Additionally, a petition was :presented to the - Commission which contained the names of over 200 individuals opposing the project. Don King responded to the con`cerns of 'the residents. He stated that those concerns expressed regarding apartments could not be addressed because apartments are provided in the General Plan for the city and this applicant is trying to design this project in a manner consistent with those goals. He advised that this project would mitigate traffic and drainage for the entire area. Additionally, the apartment;, _are 82t adult units and would only generate approximately 40 schoolchildren, of which only about 25 would be K:`,8 grade students. He further stated that market studies show that there is a need for apartments in the City. Commissiiner Chitiea asked if the thought had been given to working with the commercial group next to the project to provide a second access to the southrestern portion of the project. Mr . King replied that this option had been explored; however, from the City's traffic: standpoint this would riot be desirable due to the location of the freeway on and off ramps. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engilreer, clarified that ,:;,e alternate presented to :he �`v proposed an at,-ess point dt the southerly.' access of the shopping centee; however, an access point at the center access m ;aht be a gpod secondi.ry access. Hr: King stated that this site, is a neighborhood commercial Center and to�put.- a road through the center would mako. that particular site unusable as a neighborhood convenience center because there would not be adequate space for parking or good marketing. Chairs =r It, it closed the public hearing. Counissioner Bar -�rr stated 4dt taking into corsideratic^ the surrounding prop, ties including -she recent change in the spheia, of influence to the east he woo-; feet more comfortable if the issues were lo," zed at it in ;treater detail. He addifi onaliy stated that i-A wckld like to sde other alternatives explored and 44srussed so that they could be compa;.ei_ and w;,uld recommend a focased Environmental Impact Report. i'` EI F 0701 -02 o 2 -13- 85 PC Agenda o 4� of 6 Commissioner R3mpel agreed with:! Commissioner Barker and stated ' that the_ traffic and circulation needed ,,to be further explored. He additionally requested that more definitive data be provided r,i how fire ar�d police response tines were arrived "at,.and'*a comparison of these calls bet%^ �n single family housing and apartment units. Commissioner Chitiea statecf' that she would 'like i *o know whether the fire i,esponses were keyed to exterior or interior fire's'. She further requested more' information on the type of. formula used to determine the number of students generated by this project. conb;issionar. Barker explained that there are standard formulas used by the schot 1 ;�.stricts to determine the estimated number of students. Commissioner McNiel stated ,..that his concerns here the swae expressed by the other Commissioners in the that the density is excessive and that traffic is a problem. Chairman Stout stated that he could not make a decision on this project without the requirement for -a focused Environmental Impact Report. Motion: Moved by Stout that an Environmental Impact Report be prepared for this project focusing on the issues of land use, traffic and circulation,` and density and additionally should identify other land use alternatives. Motion seconded by Barker, carried unanimously. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEAr t4r.NlEL, REMPEL N(' ES: tdAMISSIOERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE it i . r,. r CITr* OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA °LCA110 STAFF REPORT ��9. t9:; DATE: September 5, 1984 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner 5Y: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RtPORT 1:: 11 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW'8' BENTSEN YIVHAVEN PARMENTS A review of the erwironment Nassment for a proposed master plan for 936 apartment units located on approximately 58,3 acres on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven Avenue in the Medium High development district - APN 202- 271 -59, 69. BACKGPRUND: The applicant has appealed the Planning Commission's e3— cision to require a focused Environmental Impact Report for the 7Wve- described project. The Planning Commission, at its meeting of July 25, 1984, held a public hearing to make a determination whether a Negative Declaration should be issued or a focused Environmental Impact Report should be ?equired for the proposed project. After considerable discussion and review of the environmental assessment prepared by the applicant's environmental consultant, public testimony,. and staff report, the Planning Commission decision was to require a focused Environmental Impact.Report to focus on the areas of land use, density, traffic /circulation, and to identify other land use alternatives. To understand the Planning Commission's decision, it is t_ecessary to distinguish between an "Environmental Impact Report (EIR)" and t-ke- -�-- 'Environmental Assessment" prepared by the applicant. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines define an EIR as "an informational document which will infr -m public agency decision - makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effect of a project, identify possible ways to mitigate any significant impacts, .Ind describe reasonable alternatives to the project." The Environmental Assessment is a compilation of technical data and related information - { that the City staff and Planning Commission can then use to determine whether an EIR or, a Negative Declaration should be prepared. The Environmental Assessment is eat an EIR. Attached for your review and consideration is the Planning Commission staff report which fully outlines the policies and issues applicable in this case and minutes of the July 25, 1984 Planning Commission meeting. Also attached are the environmental assessment ,and master plan prepared by the applicant's consultant:, CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Appeal - DR 8422 /Bentsen September 5, 1984 Page 2 _ I RECOMMFNpATI": The planning Commission recommends that the City I Council require the preparation of a focused Environmental Impact Report in the areas of land use, density, traffic /circulation, and to identify other land use alternatives. Re ctful bmitted, is Gomez City P'ranner f RG :DC :jr j ' Attachments: Appeal Letter From Applicant Planning Commission Staff Report - July 25, 1984 Planning Commission Minutes -`July 25, 1984 n L haven'Envi a yn r nmental''Assessment Lynnhaven District -Wilde Master Plan ,l l f _ / 1 C cc -mot_ C3 associates + planners ? City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga California 9173(3 3 August 1984 re: Environmental Assessment for Development Review j Lynnhaven Community APN 202 -271- 59,65 ' Lan Bentsen Interests Mr. Mayor, members of the City Councils After due reflection and consideiation,'t t is our sincere belief that the Planning Cormission erred in deciding i require an additional environinl +,tmtal assessment of the Lynnhaven Community development project on 25 July 1564, Mb As the authorized representative of Lan Bentsen Interests I hereby make -i' appeal to that decision of the Piar, -dng Commission._ ?; 4—Trut Donald �% King,; Ph.D. Principal CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADW11141STP 31O14 AUG 31984 AN VZgIMIU11211121 %4 6 ! 3375,k4h;�,�jd Avenue, Suite 212 Flan kc Cucamonga, California 91;`30 1714)9877077 . *i CITY OF R'"NCX0 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AUG 3 0198a RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL 71 P The Rancho Cucamonga City Council will be holding public hearings at 7 :30 A.m. on ..eptember -5, at the Lions Park Community Building located at 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, to consider the following described project(s): APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO REQUIRE A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW E4 -27 - BENTSEN - The development of a 924 unit apartment_ complex to be buiit,,in 3 phases on approximately 58.3 acres of land located an the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven Avenue in the MH Development District - APN 202- 271 -59, 60. Anyone having concerns or questions on ariy of the abo'.e iters is welcome to contact the City Planning Division at (714) 989- 1851, or visit the office located at 9340 Base Line Road, Unit B. Also, anyone objecting to or in favor of the above, may appear in person at the above - described meeting or may submit their concerns in writing to the Planning Division, City of Rancho Cucamonga, Post (Mice Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, prior to said meeting. Rancho Cucamonga City Council August 24, 1984 Date for Publication 0A R '7 4r/ i f City Council :!inures September 5, 1984 Page 5 5. ADVEATISEDPL'BLIC HEARINGS 5A. APPEAL OF PIAh•N:NG COMMISSION DECISION DENYING DEyELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -Q$ - R res of � The development of a 12. unit apartment Complex oa 9.03 acres of land in the Hedium.Residential District (8 -14 dulac), located oa'the west side of Baker, south of .Foothill - A?N 20T- 5$0 -57, 58 and APH 307- 571 -79. APPlicat had requested the item be withdrawn, Mayor Mikels opened the meeting h for address the issue, Addressing Council waublic� P caring in case someone had come to- ;: Sherry Konya stated she had come to ,address the item and wan pleased this had been .withdrawn. She would [Ike this information back to the homeowners. Thcre being no further public response, Mayor Mikels closet the public hearing. .'ACTION- Item had been withdrawn by applicant. +/ w is * ♦. 58. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECTSIOH TO REQUIRE A FOCUSED E� IMBA Ri ruR oEVELOPYENT REVIES7 84 -22 - BENTSEN - yLROMYENTAL (' unit apartment complex to be built in 3 physos an approximately p58.�3 acres of land on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven in the i41 Development District APH.202- 271 -59, 60. Staff report presented bin -Gonave, Development 3lanner. _ Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing.: Addressing Council wa,e :. John Maanerino, representing.. Lan. Bentsen Interest, stated they. were determine whether or non ,the Planning Commission was in eror in require A focused environmental ,impact report specifically on the issues of land use, traffic and circulation, . density, and the identification of :other land uses. Also to determine whether or not ft wocid have been more appropriate to give a negativ�( declaration or to 'consider whether or not the resolutions of tbose issues are more appropriately determined in design review and not in envk�ronsental review. They were requesting that they bp allowed to proceed to 4esign ravi,4 piece they felt the . with the General Plan pwrsn!7 — to in Environmental' Impact project Complied Report eert?fied by the City COunciL c,.ni': Donald King, .olanning consultant- located at 9375 Archibald Avenue, addressed th., 'issua of adequacy of information. Eavironmenral Impact Report prepared by Sedway Cooke in The a C% Ci cyid and 1980 that an V28 cart' by 'the City is 1980. There was a study area which included this project site from approximately Highland Avenue to the northern city Limits from Haven Avenue to Milliken Avenue, The immediate project vicinity projected 1200 plus apartmedt units- which should in udder some growth management procedure g p cedure h which required could b y uld the urban facilities and . services e provided, there would be no significant impact. Their proposal is for 329 units. s They felt chat 1200 units Would not create a significant impact and that same information "is Still Valid. A traffic 4 engineer was done,. at the same time by DKS Associates, transportation engineers, for the circulation element of the General Plan, For this particular area they found no significant traffic and For impact. Relative to Iand use alternatives, the State law atatea that if You do an EIR you must look at 'alternatives. For th" Environmental Assessment which is required by the City, they felt vent `beyond and Provided a report equivalent to a draft environmental impact report. cisw.Council Hinures Se shat 5, 1484 PAL 6 ; J Lna Sentseny Chaizm�n 'aF the Board of Lan Bentsen Interest, develope high- qualit Tamil communities. x of They felt they were'not the typical apartment developer. They provided high - quality, multifamily, housing long -team for people who could nor. afford homes. security Develo systemn, both in -unit Anil,�eramecer nsubstaclude security syatead -` level- 'Of on -site amenities. The first site in California which to develop in they chose was 6ancho Cucamonga. They first did their research, determined they wanted to be here hired „ consultants to be sure they were doing everything right, They want to bra provided the opportunity to proceed in a timely fashion tq perform as they would Like to. Jack Sylvester, former owner of the property who sold the Prop. erty'to Lan Benrsea- He urged Council to considering letting this project go forwald. . Mr. Nannerino- requested' -.thac anegative,. declaration be issued for this project, that it be P laced estd on may P ro t the next d review hearing tin8 so they d v ith desa design if necessary. David Barker, vice chairman of the Planning Commission, stated that the Planning Commission felt strongly about their decision and recommendation CO Council. The Planning Commission does not always come decision, but u this tn a animous in instance their decision was mad e on a 5 -0 o s vote. They questioned the adequacy of the information so they have naked that a third Party, an independent agent,, . present a focused EIR in the. areas the staff retort. outlinad in Dennis Stout, Chairma,, of the Planning Commissiogl ;raced the Planning Commission felt very strongly about thisprojecc. He' stressed that they needed the proper tools ,10 effectively evaluate this and encouraged Council - to uphold the Planning Commission's decision to require a focused. EIR. Bruce Ann Hahn, 991G,>_ta Vine SCreet, Aika Loma, neared' that she had attended the neigb�.r`hood meetings when Lan Bentsen had their traffic engineer present. When he was asked what the -be6� way was traffic _ to move the out of there, he answered that ultimately the best way would be to go through the commercial site and up in through the project. This does not show up on the plans at this time; they show it all going out onto Haven, Zn Exhibit 3 of the traffic analysis it does show this option. felt eh is area she should be studied because of the additional traffic. Jeff Sceranka, 6211 Phillips Way, expressed that the City hat already through the Flan, ,General gone and EIR approval process. Specific site plan mitigatioa measures for' circulation, design issues . and relationship to surrounding uses should'be done in design and development the reY process which needs to be followed. The eavivonmental asses sgFgts have Shown the iaformatim'.; which was necessary to take the project to the next step and it is a tw;al obligation for the City to consider seriously why they would refuse at this poin_ to not allow the project to the legitimate process. COneaLa go forward to review design s of the residents can, be met through Darrell Nicolay, 6245 DeCota, spokesman for the neighborhood were concerned about uhe density level , seated they is they that area, and feel char is when the General Plan was adopted but in the past 4 -5 years c' have been many changes. They feel the area does not warrant this type right of development now and felt there should be an EIR should be done. - - James Barton, 552 Canistel, Barton Development, expressed that the City has gone through master planning and environmental impact reports in order o 40 planning for future city growth. As the City grows, City Council changes occur. The and Planning Commission has within its power to review areas and say there these is a change which is taking place from what our original intent was. Aa a result, we must look at the specific areas and re- review our decision of the past. The City Council areas shoulI decide Which are in question and make them special Study areas, then make it know publicly so a developer will know before h, 6 purchases the Property. Darrell Nicolay also opposed the shopping e n ter which was supposed in adjacent to the to to apartment complex. pa felt there were too many shopping canters in that area. City Council minutes September 5.19E4 . Paz) 7 Dr. 9orran, expressed opposition of the requirement of the Elk and felt the d development should proceed. Chris aorcarol, 6214 yalinda Street, -did not want apartments or multi f;lmilY units near his home. There being no further response, Mayor Mike" closed the public hearing. Councilman King . expressed concern as it relates to transportation, ingress, and egress, but us$ not sure an EIa was necessary to get this information sicae the information could be provided by further study by staff and more information Provided by the applicant. Mayor Hikeis read the report and was concerned basically with traffic. He felt there was rao much traffic coming out onto Lemoa Avenue. He felt he needed mare information regarding this before he. could make a decisiou. Councilman Dahl stated he, had problems regarding the project as a whole and the balance of density within the project and how it will impact the surrounding areas. On one hand he supported. the Planning Commission's decision but on the other hand he could not set why stquire an Elk an the project vhyn he felt th_a problems could be mitigated sn design review and. Planning Commission level. He did cane Council adhere to the Master Storm brain Plan for this project, Mayor Mikels stated there are four areas identified which were concerns by the Plmnaing Commission which were: land use, density, traffic/circulation, and *'Cernacive land uses. The EIk for the General Plan was done specifically to identify alternative land uses,. It does not take an EI[; to identify density and land use alternatives. However, he needed ;are information for traffic knd circulation. Councilwoman aright felt the only question was that the Planning Commiss felt so etrongly that they needed it Chat it vas. reueated 4n a 3 -O vot a Therefor, it should be granted. Councilman 0uquet expressed he had some eoncernd with the project, but not to the extent that he felt that a Eocusgd Ell needed to be done, MOTION: Moved by Ring . to giant. the appellant's, appeal as it relates to 'land use, density, and other laid use alternatives; deny appellant'g appeal and affirm the Planning Commiss�bn'a decisipa as it relates to traffic and lack sae and require a facn`tied Elk for this one issue. Motion failed for Mr- lark of a second. des n, neriaa stated that (tounc" has only raised questions relating to design, not concerns' whicb would be chi subject.,q� an enwiron$EYitYi- impact report. MOTION. Moved by King, seconded by auquet to uphold ehg appeal as it relates to land uee, density, and alternative land uses, but require an independent analysis of the traffic and circulation element of the development and' that he aralysis can occur at thclsame time as the planning and desigm process cud that the Planning Co=isaian tan proceed with a negative declaration. Council asked Mr. Stout if this would provide th* Planning Commission the information they -- ,eeded. Fir, Stout felt the, traffic and circvlatiaa informatior would be needed before the development'rlview. Mr. King stated of the motion wax that everything should not c A screeching halt while the analysis was being done. pae to NOTION: Previously made by King, seconded by Suquet was passed by the fallowing vote: AYES: augaet, Mlkels, Dahl, Ring NOES: Wright -1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLAN41NG COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 84 -22 LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HIGHLAND, SOUTH OF LEMON, EAST OF HAVEN IN THE MH DISTRICT (14 -24 DU /AC) WHERt'is, on the 1st day of 3une, 1984, a complete application was filed by Lan Bentsen Interests for review of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 13th day of February, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above- descrihed project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTI�jN It That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in _riccord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and 3. That the proposed use.is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts ort-the- environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on February 13, 1985. i SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 84 -22 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. The final detailed site plan, grading plan, and landscape plan submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits shall be drawn to a scale of 1 " =20' (or larger). 2. The wrought iron portion of the wall /gate at the pedestrian connection' to the westerly shopping 1p center shall be expanded to approximately sixt (60) feet (the full distance between parking spaces. Resolution Not DR 84 -22 Page 2 - J. 3., Special landscape features, such as undulating mounding and specimen size trees (both eveglreen /pine and decidious canopy species), shall be provided: (" at entryways to the parking courts; (b) along side building elevations facing circulation aisles; and (c) to enhance views into the open space corridor, particularly near the pedestrian walkway to the westerly shopping center. 4. Patio walls facing a parking lot or circulation aisle shall be solid with a stucco finish to match the building. 5. Fur, u out walls from the ground to the ridge line sh be provided on the side elevations of the two aua three -story 9-1" and "C -1" units to enhance the window treatment. 6. Variation to the exterior stucco and trim colors shall be provided throughout the. project to reduce t the monotony of a single color scheme. 7. Landscape finger planters (minimum 6 -foot outside dimension) shall be provided along the main circulation aisle between every ten to fifteen parking stalls. 8. Retaining walls throughout the project shall be constructed of decorative block. 9. Buildings 32, 33, and 34 at the south end of the �� r site shall be set back from the parking lot -a minimum of thirteen (13) feet to provide additional landscaping., 10. Additional windows shall be. , provided on the side elevations of the "A -111 and "A -211 units 'facing the main circulation aisle or recreation /open space - areas. 11. Low level lighting shall be provided in all open , space areas. Construction details shall be provided prior to issuance of building permits. c Resolution No. DR 84 -22 Page 3 it 12. Storage lockers for individual apartment units shall be incorporated into the carport design. Carport construction details shall be provided prior to issuance of building permits., In addition, the detailed site plan shall indicate final carport locations. 13. Trash enclosures shall $e p;ovi`ded with overhead trellis work for shading. 14. The seven (7) foot high retaining wall south of BuildinL shall be reduced to a maximum five (5) feet with the use of graded slopes and /or terracing of walls. The height of the retaining wall and slope south of Building 40 shall be reduced approximately two (2) feet. Said adjusLments shall be indicated on the final grading plan. 15. The final grading sh;,!l be coordinated with the westerly shopping ce %ter (CUP 84 -31) to avoid any unnecessary slopes or retaining walls. 16. A 6 -foot block wall shall be provided along the south project boundary, and 6 -foot wood fence along the west boundary (to be removed upon completion of Phase 2 of the Master Plan). 17.. An erosion and dust control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of building permits. 18. Noise standards of 65 CNEL (exterior) and 45 CNEL (interior) shall be met for dwellings located within 400 feet of the Route 30 freeway corridor. An acoustical analysis shall be submitted with the construction drawings prior to plan checking. 19. Intensified tree lslanting shall be provided along the south boundary of the project. - ENGINEERING DIVISION 1.. • Drainage: a. Drainage runoff from the project (all three phases) shall be directed to Master Plan Storm Brain Line 4 -N. ,_, Resolution No. DR 84 -22 page 4' - 4.N from the site south to a Line shall be secured J b, Easements for a public Tabu, ',ding ford the connection Tract Prior to issuance of any of the project or recordation frirst or whichever orcurs so that drainage �s1shall be designed s West can C. The PrQe� adjacent property 4 N A minimum from the to line for these ` eventually be directed easement ended 12 -foot wid_ drainage It is, recomm rovi ede with the Property Purposes sha�e�s Pbe necessary storm that ran en to install any Pipes' the west such underground owner to dying to eliminate future drain facilities lot p 4 prior to Parand expense. disruptions in time to serve not construc� basin system is d• If Line 4-N is a reteni, ton aired for base, Line 4 -N is required the the first phases which shall Tude t e acceptable. phase be any subsequent p retent °;on Wisin• Shail removal of the improvements asin to the downstream outflow retentian provided from the En ineer• satisfaction of the City g e control and interim draina9 approved other temporary in the final to the e, All, r recommended lemented devices study the City Engineer- drainage satisfaction of Z, Traffic and Access: tY a standard one -half street addition to Avenue, a 14 -foot sidz - T a. In a an•the north improvements far Leo rovidedortion of pavement paved lane shall be Provided P en upon of the centerline• to cost reimbursem- shall be subject to the north, development of the property constructed at the signal shall be avenues with the b. A traffic si9 Lesion and Haven construction cost of design and Development intersection °f the System first phase* e redited to shall be tees- 66- Resolution No. j DR 84 -22 Page 5 C. Pavement of -emon Avenue U'- width stated in the traffic study,, or as otherwise approved by the City Traffic Engineer, shall be, provided along the property to the west to Haven Avenue with the first phase of development. The cost of this pavement is subject to reimbursement from the property to the west upon its development. F d. An interim secondary access route shall he provided from the project to 'Highland Avenue. It shall be located directly south from the portion of the site.- designated as Phase Three, with a connection within the site to Phases One and Two. Approval from Caltrans for the connection to H.ighlars,-'k,.Avenue 9s required prior to issuance of building `pc. 4 ;t s. e. A left -turn pocket shall be4 R ., provided on the east side of Highland Avenue (fit the HighlandlHaven intersection with V4, first phase of development. FIRE DISTRICT 1. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following fire mitigation measures shall be accomplished: a. Fire hydrant spacing and fire flow shall conform to District requirements. b. The applicant shall contribute proportionately,_ >.__ based upon project impact to'the construction of a fire station and facilities and to the ongoing operational and manning needs of said station. c. The applicant shall contribute proportionately based upon project impact to the purchase of fire apparatus. „and equipment to properly man said station. ,. d. All aspects of the project relating to fire and life safety shall conform to local conditions and standards of the'Fire District and the most recent adopted edition of the Uniform Fire Code. MR Resolution No. DR 84 -22 Page 6 ;l APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Ric Gomez, Depufy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 :Comm ission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Co, rm ission held on the 13th day of February, 5985, by the following vote -to- wit AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERSs ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS :, k {{IIf J n l.7 kY p� I, U IV •O 1• O. m a �7 d,nb d1e wC dcN° Q° _m pZ''y.€p �E `oa da oba - o m m.wt+:� ° a.c •n° p a� ,,�:u t c o� �..a� >N > °SCpG�q� d O p Y G�i q.�Y O O. •tY.� pjY d "� L pr o p c m g ' Es coq ° � •L o y O� E-21 N d.V.�m cV G pay Sp ap ��'� 1�u L Cd Oc.r A ° �• a U .�b.G d Y W: et L w.ZL c�.i. oL^ y�w.o mvc ca Tos� �p,:d dEtgO m�rb r w La mb 01Lq EaY a .S 4 _w s ii b...dcE c�'yTY db °�. do n ° Lgya.^YU 2 ^-• u0 °wb. d d Nb ap A ^ r p0'pq >vq b LU,N Yrw Epd.N Ca °YO •° USN L i� AC - -C c = Nd4 > CD. x°61 C .p Ep ON,�N - C.�dmN T b °� Of C� p C Epp.• C T.�Y C�y '. '° °1 a C Utz Y 4 0 L 6 c p" i� 6 �• C d 0 � C '. A E'•' L� U� u^ b �. i O^ wNL. TO tam^ dO.� O Y w u N ai E fr U d 4 0 'e C p O O� ^p y O eeE C�� O u O U d C Q E Q •• T.' E L 3d �3 L Y °C _ UT^ CCdq ' Cu qY L7 '•-•d OY d + dN ^" bd '!�U =b. �iV °^ .G UdV U >_gg q� �•�YN6TJ2u0i. L92� O I�OgO N 6YM <N+•dMi QOn� o 1 wu •� Y L T E Qq w 1`1V'• 3 ct� i0 � �aNR° T�+_ .. mow„ C o£ � � "CY ' dL wdN dWYwOL V p a . - G Y V p EE W O r cpE � A SY C� Nqd 'O s� a did v v i NQaCi. L@ o p p pou� Yew. Qj � w �i 6si O Q °��u W�3�q+nLY� • • � c ro -� V 4J Cl .O n � CYq0y �L L C C. U LO nC a.`CN qtL pN� °A-3! M•�a�1 y•• ws`C en �dM •°;I_O op- v ya•+. 'E 6a d. °}' d.0 Ui o Wiz. -°•qt 'noc Onr°O GLp ROMa q= 9 dam- O"�.' ^ Fb NL Y b 6 �y al �p> Yyxj ^."O b` y, ro nNjt W r°i �f dLT•. � a:2 `'p _.p YQ b L >C= b 0.9 YN =Y yE NCO. b�0y dd`N CL L Jby�. 6QC b c b u � T q •� Cy E� by `.Y x qy� C � N•� E 9 e :V— lag, =ywy� dd« bW t rogg C.°iN C tY C w Q OY. Lt C L ay, my ^edj yn ro. ei.L+NO Nr dL - °�n = U- -'s u .� b 4Y cE y Y ^ro T NqN be aw- ctv yb La•c du � ao co �'c°bi tarsi cb". Y•N �i L °s > d COW C E „ piG �NN LO ba a Lqn Eu d�TU qr-. p�gi d Lt 20 GLIC« ° y''�+ 'C • E O O « � L t � S1 0 d - «t �Q O t dga � a04 � A ,y l tai 'tN d C6.ci Gtt. °rL dE > yrl fV ^ ^; Oy CbO d d �L Eb- 6r nN. N L« Od YU� dt, Y ,p �Y a b . ^ "�Gy C O VEC b: t dL u Lop Tip ^° 5 C • vim. d d CL� ° E.Y.. L y t b Y d C O p E G p'a O T n•i y L n n.Y O n °a•� pp b x,- a, u�a i C Ud.• H.«tOn Ni224 Yt°i G 4W ww.d w�G W�r�= �C Q3nG1 qr NO 6w:am V 1 na q c b6 .YbY.b• YW vV �Y�. ' N' gOL.ro N.aydl dTdN O.dC aTi .=+a pia °C Gb bCn n � O yM.OL L� ZOC L/2 Ca ~�. C O 9 A _ L•b. 4a ro dS 3WD E «L 6 CA. �Y u'.. aLro� by 0✓.O _w+aL. «u.. « L JY R. I G N Y V N ui u N. ar L s__u bw� "noa 000E uy Nit �. FdCt4yW m� tl �Gb OtcY �«o Aa� O .. roM bL CE S'> Y tOL �Yd` O •+ dL ua `m.°c°" rgs� dV bY.•C"M NdC O.O 40 #.Nr c Wb SNO • p: On J b bb0 O = Y 6 b 0 0« Z ro L.+.. L b W L it t♦ 'C Y O aU 't• O Y ' C 9 � C� b O S! C F C C E O N d C �Cq 4h Ow °En' .o 4.M,yNU KNW 6L O > b e c b c c n b a n Y y L n w N -4 'rqd = d'LL aq. Y cba >c t c> q aW V� aO. L' ae vM W O° o n> n` =�c•� _ 6 Ht NO a.°ma 44,. ��b nY A «p��.E. dVY Vcn EO c dAE r6K. .. i - ' p qR4 Ly�a=m+ oa'r. u. anL- a °uy s+i �. Y Y�V 72 T.!t N 'O m - a iYOi C m ,O - OY�n TMT Cy. NNaa S 06 ,° a'DU i a T N RCS 9 E t 'S'. Z «. uu V ad n- 3 i isNn v E c L A �aoa ui W N V N a°aFc T= C a `. d s* n °Q, C E R.2 n9 {ydd N. W Ns tb 'a V•U- L A • C� =fN L n '� P ^�MC n =�. 9 --59 . N.Sao . d.. L. �w j • r�3y �! m�Ti. cpTV. ..O. i•�cp QOM^ m�.s ZS6 „C„, NG c° 9 oL ApIQ�Y NCY �l F TVA Cm- ^ z0..°. N •O. Y N00 LNNN.� �A .�. C t% A i q A CY NL.,C V^A 0 ti i . vc �� O6^ ao ^ n C ^ L mnoc TL o.YF oa qmv �� pp • ^L ao.. D yyi =o a^ C W c S °1 O^ G:° C a. p2 Y n° W B L O C T Y D E LnC L m° m� «, N c m M +• C v Cya„ o E' ^� ^L O-- C m A c9 mN L ° m TOC C N D mY L �C O.t A Y.� ..gym �`.•.., -- t•Y _N Y L NN + a Q a m.. _ y. v c °o a °a NCi„c, >ET nqa YV Np °L U y~ Y� U � A A Cqc m ma dAp `O�� X all ne C,- t 1 N ^ S d 9 m. O O A L t q. 00 M 9 - L r T C Y - fij 1 y Au y y mY L D o� d AQS ETYa ��y ~�{1jD m� 4m O A^ AE E W L4 °> A n L D VVV"` nnn � a O D.Ld 'D pYL D pL9 i .+ L 5.5 D A X N T c i° L G D Z Cu E D aG^ �•°Y n Ou Vmdi '• ^t0 cYm m mdmgU C l Q Z V N d O[.-.b G'. V O[q O.� V d U O• b� L.p[ eY Y. � di: wO.Sb¢ i Cam'^ A i•C E EOL 1x nLL _ qE c b •U W� q D V 9 L G Gg d 4 Yo .v pI n E L J mot. yu:.a L N N yGL� L �. ENY..Y b 9A ` e a� i a e w 'c ._ems ds n N - Y . a v S � 00 uN. R Fd X000 OZ Cd ` '•3.U. n O O[°•. du py h• c V+- G j ...G u A d Y-.d NN.Y.. p a. a7 Cad A Y�. QC Dl. a s N CY• Ly C a � G� Op N'o yl GEt w Nq Ubd O�aVY 1:r s.S L L NYE O .G ... LYW i LC U +x L06.ODWN y 4 %eO. C, y.'.4 UG. WNV W YV ° LCi+• ,G. 7b t��¢2. dw L Cb •U W� q D V 9 L G Gg d 4 -OyR a 9 L L C ... L J a. .5C .�.. yu:.a Y opt - N N yGL� L �. ENY..Y b ` e a� i a e w 'c ._ems ds n N - Y . a v S � 00 Lid 0 L � CIVL r I Ell EE Hy 66 L Cb N 6qi 6 i G 7ti E�= AO aLS .. E y n01 uc Y 9.9 .c Y` �. J= v mt .dr new LF u °o L W y'V N u'20 wY O 4 i^ Y YI.;: � YJ� 2 0 r la ui G L N y Lbi L.0 N q N .-. 'SYOM 4 w NTYO YU .-• Y T••S• L 'f )301,10 a LLL U L Dl Cp^ YE Y� u^ fit,0 CL�.. 66 nNY pY 'u 4 L1 Ct NEOQM QOY 6q. D do.a3 LG Gto+ d LO u�4� tYCY. 67 OS P.Q oar u YY gym° CQ4 �. �¢¢.'c.[m �� � � QY G..C. Y•••.OL 2LLLNti dy z NA+¢O.. ro n 0 7P- « L N et c d .^v I-V ^ }1 c u • 6 4 i8a« Nipb CE L ae l^y-fy, A- qp r 6 u m b O C O'...-} . ri • i • n.. � 0 0 d 0 d o f m A °� °' ti ooR «$ r L� N w F U D G o N N y 2. u i" qqb d u �. a m L q = O N E m= ^ 63 m N n > � t �a1 = i �m xk -• mH 29. m •- q G E T GO ° � « W a o O1� :-YO°. � W � � N _ � � I 0 6NDLOd 6 ^E= DLO p «C f\ b N z E_ Et UN.. Q tiN- l'p QNN IC «6L? GYU p= a QQL WZ 'G9 O'U aNNC. EpI QL • 1 I N� ''1 ^� �1 � �� H N Y O - m� O m C�Ofi O N X- C mE 09 fq °C+qi O�bO .. q di b � O�uGt6 SIPy d R a'm 0.N.0 VFL mL °f"06 n m5 Loos L 2.2 . c o .d. mq u�i0 = 1 C !tl d a4i "'Y Vd O.N a °oE yt d a aC. br E L CN •LV . T. VRN G 04 it �= 2 00 Eq NE Yo mt Qom' my°i}Can NY - m YJ 0.q d..NR Sq N p0 a•0 ..,. ux' Eq pppp C O 4° L ..G. q y Ob 0.N 01H °� V'an^ aK... = qd ^ C > O Jt0. b O Rq Od a0GF qu 6 pC w. m � c= L m C m I M. Lam+ Y P g. t p c g O E s m ttj Yo o cE w 0 o 000 oz _ HO GJ - m_Wr- is =QN J L w Y vi GS! (Za 1/IJ ` \l 7K G6 ca L V L OY W� na J\ Y Y m T9 L x 6 � ¢a u N E ° N j 1 W p a c A �i � u� r rn� q 2 W Z - V r N 222. u Lc + .O J� 6� � Ny ° A c0. L' M•p 6 O Y:W L N °'O �y q T. L - (r C c O� Y cf� 9. bcY L E G VO d9�+ Y YC m.QO ' N G O.N L•.' 0... Sit v� d Rtl; CC6j OC mL eW N T a Tm Rae p C E 6NC,1 V1.6W .cs.� C ` 6 N M % Z L M +x 5s. A, T \ `6 W OM d� NM d0 C L m V V I W.••. CpC O yd— O 9'O c V V a 9v 2 +� ° Y LW Nm' V na p�VV <W LZ Ll V1Vmr � Sq Y 6 CL9 C L� W .� Ate. • m T d ^ EN T T s + 'O C 1C O LL Oy m L QW L O 4 •.M @�[.) c 6 +. V d+ i WY.•��.L LL. Sd .0 L d a.0 q yy i I i I g O E s m ttj Yo o cE w 0 o 000 oz _ HO GJ - m_Wr- is =QN J L w Y vi GS! (Za 1/IJ ` \l 7K G6 ca L V L OY W� na J\ Y Y m T9 L x 6 � ¢a cN 1 W 3 °�W.O �i G6G LqI u� r e.� q 2 W Z E E O O r N 222. L ° x�ou y o 000 oz _ - m_Wr- is =QN Y p� L. L7 ca L V L OY � dL.GV Y Y m T9 L x 6 � Pc fir. 3� cN 1 3 °�W.O �i G6G LqI yd e.� q L L L E E O O L ° + C Y aqd Cw Eu m 4 C OgYd A. y ' e ' m o A o uA OZ. T a Tm Rae p C E 6NC,1 V1.6W .cs.� C ` 6 N M % Z L i 1 A .H n, 4 b� oNy 2� n rY I c AM f N d b• O y .Y NA C OZ. C U A Y 1 N6 i E •.. rid Ty Cf�.• � L A O•" U O 4V ��l A �i y y �e a � '°.°°^DLO• a W o Cy dT 4 N d Y i Y. Y t o O L O O �" o C Y Cy WL V N ac V'�N a vH �pp96��' A d> wE au b COV � I RL LE�� by V� G S n _C N Y �y ➢!� CC6��NC �q '�•J[ C L ui CL NC � NU r . ^ YN � Tr• yN � Q' L Yr p2 wY C� y. 6 i l G � .-. ^' G. Gq =aL �.• � NC Y N YY �" RY 4N wY c �Qd� d I�c 4.d 1 • 4✓ LNG. .¢•.a :dam nd+3. ov wa G o a•Y w� N � RESGLUTIO4 N0. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA CONDITIQKa,LLY 'iPF�ROVINI1 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12922. �? -- d WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map ,No. 12922, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Lan Bentsen Interests, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the -real property situated An the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, \� Satie of California, described as a one` (1) lot subdivision for condominium purposes in conjun(;tion With the development of 308 multi- :family units on approximateiy 15.35 acres of land in the MH District (14-24 du)'ac), located on the north side of Highland, south of Lemon, east of Haven, APN 202- 271 -59; into one lot, regularly came before the Planning Commission far public hearing and action on February 13, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the .Engineering, and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and - considered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning •Congriission,tof the City of Rancho j Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTT')N 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to TQ;tat9ve Tract No. 12922 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific P lans- (b) The design or improvement�s <`of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan., Development Code, and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of tta subdivision is not likely to cause substantial e�iironmental damage and avoidable injury to humanbJ and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is net likely to cause serious public health problems; 7� Resolution ,No, \ TT12922 Page 2 (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 a�� the property within the j?roposed subdivision. (g) That this project will nut create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Maki No. 12922,a' copy of which is attached .hereto, is hereby approved subject,to all of the following conditions -eons: and the attached Standard Cory PLANNING DIVISION 1. The final detailed site plan, grading plan, and Landscape plan submitted for review and approval pelor to issuance of building permits shell be drawn to a scale,of 1" =20' (or larger). 2. The wrought iron portion of the wall /gate at the pedestrian connection- to the westerly shopping center shall be expanded to approximately slxt (60) feet (the full distance between parking spaces. 3. Special landscape features, such as +undulating mounding and specimen size trees both evergreen /pine and deciduous canopy species), shall be provided:.(a) at entryways to the parking courts; f (b) along side building elevations facing circulation aisles; and (c) to enhance views into the -open space corridor, particularly near the pedestrian walkway to the westerly shopping center. 4. Patio walls facing a parking lot or circulation aisle shall be solid with a stucco finish to match the building. 5. Furred out walls from the around to the ridge line shall be provided on the side elevations of the.two and three -story 118-11+ and "C -1" units to enhance the window treatment. S.• Variation to the exterior s'tucco and trim colors shall be provided throughout. the project to reduce the monotony of a single coli�r scheme. F-0 77 Resolution No. TT 2922 Page 3 i C7. Landscape finger planters (minimum 6 -foot outside E dimension) shall ,be provided along the main circulation aisle"between every ten to fifteen f parking stalls, 8. Retaining walls throughout the project shall be constructed of decorative block.. 9. Buildings 32 33, and 34 at the south end of the site shall �a, set back from the parking lot a j minimum of th,Ct4 n (13) feet to provide additional landscaping. 10. Additional wir'dYi)1s i�hall � e p.ovided on the side elevations of. "tN" "A -l" , - nd ' "A_k4> units facing the main cx<culat do aisle or recreationlopen space areas. 11. Low level lidM ing shall be provided in all open space areas. details shall be provided prior to issuance of'building permits. ` 12. Storage lockers for individual apartment units shall be incorporated into the carport design. Carport construction details- shall be provided prior to issuance of building permits..- In addition, the detailed site;;plan shall indicate final carport locations... 13. Trash enclosures shall be pi "Ided with - overhead" trellis work for shading. 14. The seven (7) foot high retaining wall south of Building 1 shall be reduced to a maximum five (5 ) - - - -- feet with the use of graded slopes and /or terracing of wails.. The height of the retaining wall and slope south of 8nildin9 40 shall' be reduced approximates;- two (2) fig:,." Said adjustments shall be indicated on the final grading plan. 15. The final grading shall be coordinated with the weaterly shopping center (CUP 84 -31) to avoid any unnecessary slopes or retaining walls. 16. A'6-foot block wall shall be provided along the south project boundary, and 6-foot wood fence along the west boundary (to be removed upon completion of Phase 2 of the Master Alan). rc 79 Resolution No. - TT12922 Page 4 17 An erosion and Just control plan shall be submitted for reviewv'and approval by the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of building permits. 18. Noise standards of 65 CNEL (exterior) and 45 CNEL (interior) shall be mst for dwellings located within`;_ 400 feet of the RoAi 30 freeway corridor. An acoustical analysis' 46all be submitted with the {l construction drawings p.rior to plan checking.' f' 19. r, Intensified tree plantU114j shall be provided alo (9 the south boundary of the project. ENGINEERING DIVISION J 1. Drainage: a. Drainage runoff from the project (all three phases shat,,be directed to Master Pl- R.Storm` Drain Line 4 -6 b. Easements for Line 4 -N from the site south to a connection to a public facility shall be secured prior to issuance of any building permit for the project or recordation of the Tract Map, whichever occurs first. c. The project shall be designed so that drainage from the adjacent property to the west can eventually be directed to Line 4 -N. A minimum _ .. 12 -foot wide drainage easement for these purposes shall be provided. It is recommended that arrangements be- made with the property owner to the west to install any necessary storm drain facilities, such as underground pipes, prior to parking lot paving to eliminate future disruptions and expense. d. If Line 4.-N is not constructed in time to serve j the first phase, a retention basin system is acceptable. However, Line 4 -N is required for any subsequent phase which shall include the removal of the retention basin. Temporary downstream outflow improvements shall be provided from the retentio)t basin to the . satisfaction of the City Engineer. F- 6 7? Resotist',on No, Ti'12922 Page '5 e. All other temporary and interim drainage control devices recommended in the final approved drainage study shalt be implemented to the satisfaction, of the City Engineer. 2. Traffic and Access: a. In addition to the standard .one -half street improvements for Lemon Avenue, a 14 -foot wide paved lane shall be provided on the north side of the centerline. This portion of pavement shall be subject to cost reimbursement upon development of the property to the north. 1 b. A traffic signal shall be constructed at the intersection of Lemon and Haven Avenues with the first phase. Cost of design and construction shall be credited to the System Development i Fees. c. Pavement of Lemon Avenue to the width stated in the traffic study, or as otherwise approved by the City Traffic Engineer, shall be provided along the property to the west to Haven Avenue with the first phase of development. Tk cost of this pavement is subject to reimbursement from the property to the west uptin its development. d. An interim secondary, access route shall be provided from the projr!ct to Highland Avenue, It shall be located directly south from the portion mr the site designated as Phase Three, with a,tionnection within the site to Phases One and Tro. Approval from Caltrans for the connection to Highland Avenue is required prior to issuance of building permits. e. A left -turn pocket shall be provided on the east side of Highland Avenue at the Highland /Haven - interst-ction with the first phase of development. FIRE DISTRICT• 1. Prior to issuance -of building permits, the following fire mitigation measures shall be accomplished; a. Fire hydrant spacing and fire flow shall conform to District requirements. , 4 �1 Resolution No. TT12922 °Page b b. The applicant shall contribute proportionately based upon project impact to the construction of a fire station and facilities and to the ongoing operational and manning needs of said station. c. The applicant shall contribute proportionately based upon project impact to the purchase of fire apparatus and equipment to properly man said station. d. All aspects of the project relating to fire and life safety shall conform to local conditions and standards of the Fire District -:and the most recent adopted edition of the Uniform Fire Cade. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS. 13th DAY OF, - RUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMU,-A.. BY. Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST. Rink Gomez; Deputy Secretary I, Ruck Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning 'Commission of the City of !cat,;. -- Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and oeguiarly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commissionlield on the 13th day of 1-ebruary, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISIONERS: NOES: CO ISISIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ( f' _ Y/ J 0 �U a.+ U Qi �O L IL IC .. 2 x q edY onl.a. D *xn�L °l Or eV.L A L m �A y°y D xW �. A OmID. L y •w O Y CND q OY Oy A' .E .O °^ q u A o �u YV r �x 'OLEO • by w.q.0 AC Y ,a ^ u y�yO �a OYY� ^V p0 °pC�C1 LG~ppA� VFW dLLOCd �C� C ^u�. n Yy.7M i° -uAV�. L~ Lam°,. CV1r VC�Ya W an u .r3 x... L'c'c^� ^b s ACA .r. a'a 5u. G °ACC �Ly�: ma5 rdw. V °p GCLLL uuA. S Cp 4y•m -a°i y° ggg vx•°Y =o L ppu� cca, x �aKp: a'?. =y°(j cca uqt••. Acx ^,nM1. �U.L �'^O iKAC it�Ss' .��•�. a ° r �Y d mY n- ..>...r". m.A xy rc d`Oa ac...,. -CCJ TCN O P{ r L C CAY �qC • °Qz m.Y a M A.6 v ¢f o1 dpt c cx.N q�EN Ypx U.%= .. °SL� L-- Ln ° ^��• � �M pC.. -C�O J q OaY.r N a°. ,u.^i.t ap Y�� a`q j. �eYC �•O xy g � L°cY0 Yp �O LpnLCU .N CCO p+•. x U. %r m O CU �am�QYtt 06 y LOAUL V£'CgE AOyL O.q ^� O C.gC�A04 x °� p OCO.y VYEE4� VREtn �T�H .4Y'�T f�ac. n ° •° 'm a. •o,YW F- uc. >+ ■x. •r.uNnV:SMLN2� OOa M n4� �+NT Y..Z n^ •_ °T °6l:. -p ne uw to °cza N� m S i 0 i o F .~a Z 42 O � � u u ° o 1 2 y a N \ Y. xu > p,rC Ny.Ey aEu m oti x�T.o V J VJO�p 3 � :ao CC prn « L u. f ax. EE.is dy ra w. ° qu Ocpas ^ m.NC iq�R 24,;5 =LA°. 324,; an° xo rSm.r. 1 g � EE 2NY�:� 0 Ste z O S �yJ � Y xo Y u ~Lz n 6a��oLE'n N COr Eba GV a Y GsF N NOC V. yNa as +<6 n C N p O Oc ° -a r�a g6YE i °uv �d 4douaa� 4°a oa U.a unp<na N6 /i..LNG 4 ^y.d NVN <• +. dY a YC 3EO CYT Fi r. u A °1 H n ti H F - G 93 - oyn^ EV u°C ° y yq rd a'aaau aou: � � +.Lb U a as 6 Y.q V ^ 01♦ Nu ° Ns� Lu 6N � . .G 6 ^C u �.. 0 r Up�iOyv U� °o ` N qN N E. ao' ^ N G CyL MN'L La? 4 4�a u � bum A A C °•9 da � . i e �.LV� Ln i C a uv^ . . . . U ON1 L d� L 21 `QUA td'IN =Y. GG gyp. . �< L ; O r — C'Oy� a +deY . `yy y yLpj^ C y ^d CNC a0 G � a ud y Y C T� 01� E i •� W W O1 Y u � a Y a� N. d n» 7; .1 wVV. N ^0= i ^Sdayq v d- Y C C d0 ��C A A� p 9Q O C hb0 E du NY yEtY G yu N. OL .+^ 4 4L rG d° D r r•• l �� O q e C 6rA �—Oj 'L P ^ S a < Y Gd '.. L Y� ° °C'q ' ` p. nV L LMMG VY-• MM a 523SNNH G Gf�N N no yyc a='ui e° - —9 � �e a¢Vt:ara. aC = LO la` 6y < =d9E N NOrui Vy�.<� E E1ouA yL d <=L p C..Gy NyQ gda'n � �aYy- Y.0 dP •.GL U G G V a E' C OV d M M L ^ I �L r3Y Y6 ^ nw ^ V L ti.COOE i I qL aa-d cEO C =.6 O O .or Nan�Y ^ ^d4d.0 .:5.5 O O.Y� �^ Q < .<Vr O Q CQ < �0��. - do ^ ... Cl n[L,�N G GNdu Hs ^YVY G G u« d d trWCq Oa O O Ede^ .°.. I I A; u pp O u -58 - V _A U g, N ,= y t t,s -UL +u m9 -s to 6t.9 O •� to qx n aC go M cc Yar+ oaa°. NT EL a. i Ybo `.� ov d n oA a s EU = •- v °v _N o" a'oo Kga„G„` -t s q ^a��t oN vo Nn yqr> rniY L ^S o„ A .72 Y r Y V 4 N.� Otr. °um G.a A ° g�Q > cc riNO aE.Ua a''. UO1e'o a. i L °� m a V° b dt -KC uc d A.o ry i U'r• ,..i q 1OT y .a Z U `°° aTi00b. yaa A °u danN A. UA° "' zaTr q. . ^NS bN. a+ 'e cda C.i ZU -'o N �qu'.c o u c .•cN ►� cv 9 a N a. oa G .. c.. y L.L U.• a w '.. L 10 ytt. °od NGn' "c uy pd L'ep a O d TG° E UU y V C Ly LG M U a t w °u ;L � x ` d L ° pd �o+$u%,w '°° ,,,mdc c,o " c L a ci ° YR Se2 - d C i pA rr al.Y N V yN ° ^C xd aex dyd` • = G V EOY ob N ' NUCx rTT OC. LN tTaNNy 'TMG dL p 6, qty. YpbjTU S N O'O�T tr V O Lnp6 � Gp. 6N. ° rn C�a� � G H C�pAO a^ T�dM dn''•A.� ♦-tt.. dtTO C 4 C mY �.� G c d i O00 -0 ^U u^iN.° -1 qat ie a.. -n-a+ uG .0 .... Es Sar 6p�. N r y V x n A b p Y Gear °q Cu^ 61° 31n u m Y' LL. O A I-. I Ailk I I L] 01 G. C G m r E. C Q }b bz p` TT p CRe > twQt m9 -s to 6t.9 O •� to qx n aC go M cc Yar+ oaa°. NT EL a. i Ybo `.� ov d n oA a s EU = •- v °v _N o" a'oo Kga„G„` -t s q ^a��t oN vo N yqr> rniY L ^S o„ .72 Y r Y V 4 N.� Otr. r � G'�. G.a A ° g�Q > cc USA tyx1 ' N oz. xy AL A T 4 p L V° b dt -KC uc d A.o ry i U'r• ,..i q 1OT y .a mM p L G� N p b T^ d ° °� gA�00 O yT„ 3 ° L`p Lk A.•. Oa•-0 L a tTC V.I j C UN 6r3 C« -.2,94 OOa Lp Ea�O. LO ..G.° S q� . ^G -2 Lda_ u�6ua TuUt'! b'OC a ^m6x aii v d. a.2. ;L � x ` d L ° pd �o+$u%,w '°° ,,,mdc .x .ti cwd SS a M > .a R v!:'-.- G N b y w - i d u .b.1. " v° V c c W n. 'O a t °. F p? u ii p R Y d Yy • C y Y y w u `n x W W u rt VO LYd md. SL �C Z gouR U ^ x y b r =� r m~ E µ ti °~ d@ Q. Y =yam Ay L 6 du L � i4 6Y m6 mo EV a � C dR 2Y Eer. W �^ r C �iPax Sng ^. ip. Q sE'c°6"Y` .aY..0 cam 2 x~ _°Z ' .p °qo f u €ma v U ...w xi''y -a t` ' mOUx xEe 5 u, bxCm' d 6 �C OYl b�L L.V ... 'L�c m '^� L tE°3 � • any. b+ 6 pLL E yo Y b A L d eiN w �3F o NiO ip L , v 9 L n O R N Lt Yc C x C Z ax N .+ C O �t°iWL 6064. -..Ct q b0 MNN 6 4. FtiO N Ft3G WNa LY.0 _96 i ska L cff�2 Can 21 S r m�ou - S Y W L EY a... a. ,� Yin yon. •d po =° u I'il O mE x Y. y' dC Y ^ YC[y i4M^ Eb p 0.9 E . •��` x Y U¢r L y a Lm x x - p L T u C g o-Z F .nom V —b bd Z TL ppL =e CVA b CLL L= ° y m O ._6 O rL xp w V� i C �u 2 c nom. 6� p Lu x0 W� a dL Y r C^ O ay x =G Q O.� S•L+Y •LL•G ems.. gUW�0 EEC COW 9 0 W L Y b x Q d 0 4} V .� •u cL � d t cC aii C H'q.. pcL OG 4LL mL h 4'd mfnpl i a Y 7S umV EO NL VN^ N 20 v C� 3_'i �' �O Out d G¢ Ur 'Jf.QU pm L'O' .tiY 4U =� ` UUmNO aY�a.4 m O �3 .� Yn qE cp Lp^ o 6e. a°i All, C i i CV �mLL E Y a C U a aq Y6 LL� O EY ^o Y Op c c E G Ya}� � �r y .j x r O O J J N N xd 6• ^. Y w' y c c x y,.. . x { r A bM M. 9 N a 5uxC0 q0 y u by =:� ON vV w w t OU A :�� c o min «a�N. Ct w II+IJ La b �Oa dv U �M Ni O. QL^ aQ =o u^ y L•+� ^ A ► E N'OA ip. V9 Q '^ Ot Cw bby� qqu E 4 b A j6 L i 9C9 Cam. ryj tY CD ^ti: "a--- +EAG sV r, W � Li '- � HQ JC6 »�C „u c� Yd UN W� �ryCO dnO �@ Ca O� O. V YC .~. C. Oda dt Ny NL)L AGI r0^ tip +/ iy tc ZS LCab2 r ` OQw EE P ayu ho j ' 6.0 �' �n '� ►� �y sL OE 4�n >; uP �iU i E ?c1 »2f _Cy j N ` 1 _� r, �� ♦ b 1\. !p p� H ,E„ y .„fit( 4 AINk I Om. �^n M L .. CfObU W.Npp.. qb lr Md LQw » qy��� YQQ �C Cry,C» N 'jl UC a p F S d L'y qM. N b 4 W G v 6 i rb A O. ', aq Q d ► N O�Y ®p SD .Oqd �+U6 a vpE H`WL' d b.�T1° .0 Op,G',� ilk i Oa4.n bua ^b E ,c.. V Q Os AO, C O" R� d c U CC N M.�� + GC °Q -%E- O q6E \byuyr ^A O bey -19z; q rn �a t l.T.N -. N y L -..A d W NC a..y �a►A N. qpy... �C•<.'.'+!'. q E» d{ w ► » N r - y. 2 - S ^ ^q Nd y N� O y O C» 8---3 C L`9. . NDt� GTa E�6gn G 4-C On ua0 p�t1 Q E G q 1v .Oq V 6� � nC4A �w p0 ►a9ynt. M T :..C. p C C QVyb U d btu." ., N 46• +fib C'1 ..C.q Ob UL N »^ dA .^ �0�. � b t:L d � U 4 ?a C L,uEq-y6�U� `pip.. •di U t' d p'N OI p1H � C rObq wi � � NFU Otlnp 9 � KYV� +" cdb> 6AALry »w> S� qG +E�4 -.i .r. X04 Ged.V kK. r+ A LLN�V GOU.Up y�q zo >' Q y� ,6 A y' 4i N bpi. 1f i( W z 1 �'. R (O W V O 4J V a •O L .O a C S o 97 v 2� un a vN e y N U C p N L ..• y J N W i .a° a N y p Sq V NO y N9 V6w 'y U � dyG y LW pNQaY U N •L,, V V° Cy d N� Q N • °� o�..U- 4 L Y• u a _ Y C Ndd. G �ypC .per N cpV n� cE i�a,u« a i ou° +• y uap a Qc a� L V :OWa p Ea � I I oW V (! LNU Nyf N.6W CF3Y _LW LL 64:N 6 W VLU 3G, VV.Z' €gyp C - .O a C S o 97 D.q 2� un a oN �..•t) u a C u y .E..d g C r a 6 y L y J t� m W i .a° a N y p Sq V ZL Qo o u V Od L m 9p l +- t W~ Asa NJ / N E �6 oa L .^. y q 6 N ay^ y.� 4 L Y• C Ndd. G �ypC .per N N VS ' yp Qc q L V :OWa p Ea I I oW V (! F N.6W 1 0 d � 1 N q W p p ... L y p a .- ^ N A q 97 D.q 2� un a y V O+ �..•t) u a C u y .E..d g C r a 6 y L So m. V.L EO O. t� m W i .a° a N y p Sq V ZL wu q V V o u V Od L m 9p l +- mI d O q i L �y � mil ^ Nye w L uy L C cum u'.ci L qL apCIL NL _ W s.O�w°iU AU u° 4u` c y i 9 ; D V 97 u V L .^. y q 6 N ay^ y.� L Y• Ndd. G �ypC .per N ap q L V :OWa p Ea N.6W 9 ; D V 97 i V 6 L d+ nv Ld b C r .e L C' �E L a Ab Sr � d ou L�yM t••'• d ci a . d a ea �JUA Vi i r en T it W b y N .eC C Cq. N C oG +•M p. y b L. O ..•.� Nb �. N 4 NW Rau Q. � ro d> La. g1 Lu qc ... 4'n •• y w T v a• u v L.c s v{r 5% Yp N.•. i W .A.. {ypy Tat �lLAb uNn Ma gg N C .0 roq A GY c U ( wy it 9sV LI G Q.u•Y '� L l V O� N.M y w d Y qw Vl 6wN Yw n V:• 4 y N i ---- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA c��o STAFF REPORT o, o FDATEFebruary 13, 1985 1977 TO: Planning Commission FROM:. Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer' BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician' SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8891 - GARASICH A division of 1. R acres of lTn into FPO in the General Industrial Category (Subarea No. 13) located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, south of 7th Street - APN 229- 283 -3 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action _Reuuested: Approval of Parcel Map. B. Purpose: To divide 1.224 acres into 2 parcels in conjunction with the development of 2 industrial buildings which are on tonight's agenda as- C.U..P 84 -39. C. Location: East side of Rochester Avenue, south of 7th Street. D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 = 0.724 acres 4 Parcel 2 _ 0.5 acres Total T.224 acres E. Existin conin : Industrial Specific Plan - General Industrial u area No. F. Existing Land Use: Vacant. G. Surrounding Land Use: North Vacant. South Vacant. East - . h-15 freeway - Industrial building West - Existiag plant nursery H. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code'Uesi nations; North - Ge-,ral Industrial - ubarea No. 3.. South - General Industrial - Subarea No. 13 East General Industrial Subarea No. 14. West - General Industrial Subarea No. 13. I. Site Characteristics: The site is relatively flat, sloping approximately i 1 in a southwesterly direction and contains abandoned grapevines. ITEM' H PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 8891 February 13, 1985 Page r G II. ANALYSIS: Parcel Map 8891 divides 1.224 acres into 2 "parcels. 'Parcel I is to be developed under C.U.P. a4 -39 which is on tonightks agenda for Planning Commission approval. Rochester Avenue WTI 40 improved at the titre of development of each parcel. The parcels; will be drained to RociiiA6P Avenue. U', ENVTRGNMENTAL REVIEW Also attached for your review and consideration is } Fart I of the initial Study as completed by the applicant, •Staff has completed Fart II of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist; and has conducted a field investigation. Upon completion and reviay. of the Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found 6" adverse impacts on 1 the environment as a result of the proposed subdivision. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper, Posting at the site has also been completed. V. RECOMMENDATIONz It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the attacted resolution conditionally approving Tentative Parcel Map 8891 and ( authorizing the issuance of a Negative Declaration. Respe tfuily submittp , LB -BK* Alta etas: Map Vicinity Parcel Map Resolution Recommended Conditions of Approval Initial Study mwl� c 'r --- FOR IrUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL USE ONLY ow S" grr oHLV i TENTATIVE PARCEL, MAO' NO. 8891 _ IN THE CITY OF RANCHO UUCAMONOA BEING A DIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOT 90, MAP OF ROCHESTER, W T'HE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAUONA, COUNTY OF SAN. pEP.gAADIN(�, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 9. PAGE 20 OF MAPS,,IN Tae CF'FiCE OF THE RECORDER W+ OF SAND COUNTY, LYING WESTERLY OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE PROPERTY 4 CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORMA AS PARCEL KW IN DEED RECORDED S.. NOVEMBER '"$ 1972 IN 8009 HOTO PAGE 32, . OFFICIAL T.'cCONDIL stwtrr -ra- . OWNER•DEVELOPER SERVING UTILITIES 00" GARASICH ELECTRIC i �1 84818 F00TMLL 8LY6 O4:THENN .... NIA. ORISON C0. RANCHO CVCALIOH&A.CA ASI ," A,.114 _ 90+I93s.IODr ONTA0.A]. CA. W76D. AT7N: GIGO 90PER j.. SURVEYOR 9000 ssc3ea - + s•' T17.ERfCPl;bYREAM TCLEWYE CD, 1 RONALD "'• HOUR CUCAM"ELL L CA.. 91Ta0 CREAT4VE SOUIUARIES AITN JNL0.tEY IOyfE UPLI EMERSON SC (7141 In VAL 1.51 Zia INTO& - lTfrf ss6 -Tap ' SLUTNERN DA•JFpINA "S Co. " stD..wEp FOUpm SE *nrwe :: • SAN BERNAA �.eMrafv.T .rR INCH MANN - AITN: TER4'^IAN0.440N.O0.0 � RANCHO CUCAMONGA.- LTMf 904 -1204 ' an IED; III-& %IIW 8 CUCAINA4" COUMTf WATER OWIMT ll"V IISLI7I WATER 2441 SAN KCMAROMN ROAD RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CA. 94730 • i sAi -ATT R: U3ELL SILVA L£EE10 041 2s4 _ —Nwa `\ mCAW N . t ai• F � i 1 icy � 1 y 1 - -, kj ow !-1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL S TUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET! - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment },teview Fee: $87.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed an,ci submitted to the Development Review Committee through% -the department where the, project appli��ation is made. Upon receipt of this applic4tion, 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. Tie Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no s`gni- ficant envixonr;ental impact and a Negative :,;claratior will be filed, 2) The project will have a,?sgnificant environmental impact and an Environmental..ImpSct Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional, inforpAtion report should be supplied by the applicant giving.f4urther informa- tion conca-rning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE:_ T,y ia,J 4�A2Y1 CICI.� APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE.- 24 b >9 .� t of rAnaSicl NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OFSr5RSON.TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: rAA16 ,q r 41�n Loh- - _ I - LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND AS -*- SOR PARCEL NO_) !Va E A I ag- 263- -o3 - . LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSTJING SUCH PERMITS: t;..l r, 1 vs,• Aff"I,L# ..r. c__ it /- _ _ , -- v f ,, I -1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AC;REA -m of PROJECT AREA FIND. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: VxI< /T" L '•.. e firs n �,�a -��xt} _L�}z__, �??_�ti a« EraeM DE,cICRIEE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INtlo ATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CtILTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES+ AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCI!URES ANf THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): i 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? I -Z A r Irv) WILL THIS PROUECT: YES NO 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? !\ 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or geteral plan designations? �X B. Remove any existing trees? How many? 6; Create the need for use or disposal of Potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above; �,,,�n e+, nL Age •- 1��---- 1��'FG S' Asia��, °- —urz, TA a � S�+ f,C i.✓ Zr lil IMPORTANT If the project involves the construction 6'f residential units, complete the `,arm on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my anility, 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 evaluation can be made by the Development Review Committee. DF.te 1 - -29 ` signature % ./��✓.�.� �tl RE:3LJTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 8891 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 8891), LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ROCHESTER AVENUE, SOUTH OF 7TH STREET WHEREAS, Tentative,Parcei Map Number 889I submitted b Mr. Gar } y asicfa and consisting of 2 parcels, located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, south of 7th Street, being a division of Lot 90, Map of Rochester as recorded in Book 9, Page 20, County of San Bernardino, State of Califtrnia; and WHEREAS, on November 26, 1984, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above- described - Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 1985, the Planning C"omnission 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 followiny::findings have been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan, 2. That the Improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the 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 2t That this project will not create significant adverse environments impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on February 13, 1985. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map Po. 8891 is approved subject to the recom'endeT—Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED 7iIS 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: j Dennis L. Stout, Chairman A/_ ATTEST: Rick Gomez, -Deputy _Secretary - I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of ,f Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly a,ad ! regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning C.,..Zssion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held 1' on the 13th day of 'ebruary ;, 1955, by the following vote-to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: GOMMISS!ONERS. l , CITY:,OF W%(.;h6 CL'CAMONGA /f RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF AP01VAL LOCATION- East side of Rochester Avenue TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 8891 south of 7th Street DATE FILED:- November 26,1985 LEGAL. DESCRIPTION: A portion of tot g), Map NUF3ER CF LOTS: 2 of Rochester as recorded in Book 9, Page 20 'GROSS ACREAGE: 1,224 as recorded in the County of San Bernardino, ASSESSOR PA.RCBt --ha; State of Ca ifarnia 4c** :kieitie�ciFickitie9Eis*ic�i�Y* *its ` �** it* 3r*** �: ik�F' �' k***** 9c* �:: 7E*** ie*** 7l'* k 'kY** *�i*�iFic:% *irie** *�k*kft DEVELOPER OWNER i ENtINEER /SlJRVEY6R Jorn Garasich SAME i Gerald W. Heil!(, 9688 Foothill Blvd. Creature Boun aries person Street Rncho Cucamonga, CIi Voland, CA 91786 --_ _ improvement and dedication requirements in accordance with Title 16 of the Municipal Code of the City of fiancho Cucamonga inc?ude, but may not be limited to, the folnu.ting. A. Dedications =1 Vehicular Access 1. ' Dedications shall be ,nadeyof all interior street rights -of -way and 511 necessary easeif-6its as shown an the tentttive mao. 2. Dedicattnn- F�,Ai be made of the fallowing rigfi;s -of -way on the following streets: additional feet on additional feet feet on additional feet on —.. 3. Corner property line radius will be required, Ier City Standards. 4. P. T rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated as follows:— 5. Rlgci.procal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring ac..ess to ail parcels_ and joint maintenance of all common roads, drit�� -s or parking areas shall be provided by C.C. &R.s and shall b� recorded concurrent with the map. ..I_ 6. All existing easements lying within future right -of -way are tn� j[^ be quitclaimed or delineated cn the map per City Engirl-,er'sV {� requirements. X 7. Easements for sidewalk for public, use nhail be dedicated to thn City where sidewalks meander throe h private propert g R y,;, I!! B_ Surety X 1. Surety shalt be postWd ' and an agreement executsii to the satisfaction of the City Enginfer and C,ty Attornf*k, guaranteeing completion of the pub',iic improvements priot,�to building permit issuance for each iiTdlyidual parcel.\ 2, A lien agreement %As: 5e 'executed P�Ior to reco ing of tC�e.mao for the followings _ �c 3. Surely shall be posted znd an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of all on -sitg drainage facilites necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Qivison prior to recot-ding for " I= and /or prior to issuance of building permit ,or C. Street Improvements Pursuant to the City of Ranch 'Cucamonga,Municipal -Code, Title 16, Section 16.36.120, the subdivider may,,enter' into an agreement and Host security with the City guaranteeing the required construction orior to recordation of the map and/or building permit issuance.. 1, Construct full street improvements' including,. but not limited to, cuPb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive apprG;aches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior streets. 2, A minimum of 26 -foot wide pavement within a 40 -foot y "yde= dedicated right- of,way shall be constructed for 01 tialf- , section streets. X 3. Construct the following missing imprvementsc Prior to building permit issuance for each individual parcel. Curb & A. C. e- Drive street Street A. tie zan _Street Name Gutter Pvmt. Walk 1ppr. Trees La hts Overlay Island *�Gther Rochester X X X X X X X *Includes landscaping and irrigation on meter a _ � i X 4. Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -way, p fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained 4 from the City Engineer's. Office, in addition to any other permits required. X 5. Street improvecxbt plans shall be prepared ,by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance or an encroachfyant permit. 6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, gay for the relocation of any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary. 7. Existing lines of 12KV or less fronting the property shall W undergrounded._ X 8. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs,, striping and markings with lo,- `tions and types approved by the City Engineer. `' X 9. Street light locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern Califrrnia Edison Company and the City of Rancho' Cucdmonga.` Lights shall be on decorative poles with underground service. X 1Q. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permit. 'a X 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. 4. D. Drainage and Flood Control 1. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or,;noticed on the final map. 2 Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. S.. to fz lowing storm drain shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer 4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study for the project shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review. 5. -A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain increased runoff E. Grading X 17 Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted,f grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading plan. 'I X 2. A soils report -shall be prepared by a qualified engineer . licensed by the State of California to perform such work prior to issuance of building_ permit. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application- or grading plan check. 4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Grading Committee and shall be completed p-�ior !:o recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance pf buildip -1- ermit whichever hexer com es .:.first.- ,., X 5. Final grading g g plans for each parcel a;�e to 6e submitted ta:the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of , building permit. F. Geaeral Requirements and Approvals X 1. Permits from other agenq {es will be required as follows: 1 %� CalTrans for San Bernardino County Flood Control District _ X Cucamonga County Water District for sewer and water X San Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required prior to issuance of a grading permit) 2. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and::Restrictions (C.C. &R.$) approved by the City Attorney is required .prior to recoral$tio'n of the `snap. 11 1 X s: Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, . water, electric power, gas and telephone prior to street constructon. X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems sha`sl be designed to Cucamonga County Water District standards. A letter of acceptance is required. .. 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval from CalTrans /Sass Bernardino County Flood Control District., X 5. /approvals have not, been secured from all ,utilities and other interested agencies involved,' Approval the of final swap will be subject to any requirements that may be received from then. Y -4- _ 1 X 7, The filing of the tentative map or approval of same- does not guarantee that server 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. 8. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provided in accordance with the Trail Plan. A detailed . trail plan indicating widths,, maximum slopes, physical conditr6ns, fencing and weed control, in accordance with City trail;' - standards, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner prior to recordation for and /or prior to building permit issuance for - X 9. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the as'1:mssments under Assessment District 82 -1 among the newly created parcels. X 10. At the time of final map submittal, the following shall be submittel. Title Report, traverse calculations (sheets), copies if recorded maps., and deeds used as reference and /or showing;ariginal land division, tie notes and bench marks referene jd. X 11. Request' to vacate 8.00 feet of Rochester Avenue, a Zegal description of the portion to be vacated and the appropriate fees shall be submitted prior to recordation of the final map. 1 I CITY UE RANCHO CUCAMONGA LLOYD B. HUBBS, CITY ENGINEER by- 1I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAJONGA wCAMOA. STAFF REPORT n ' z .tom„ w � O Z DATE: February 13, 1985 1977 TO Chairmar? and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Howard Fields, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -39 GARASICH - To allow the development of -3 buildings of approximately 4,000 sq. ft. each for purposes of both industrial warehousing and administrative and professional offices on about 1.25 acres, located on the. East side of;; Rochester Avenue, north of 4th Street ti the General Industrial (Subarea 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan - APN 229- 283 -03 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a precise site pan and architectural design, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Purpose_ Two -phase development of 3 industrial buildings of approximately 4,000 sq. ft. each. C. Location: East side of Rochester Avenue, north of 4th Street. D. Parcel Size: 1.25 acres. E. Existing Zoning General. Industrial (Subarea 13) of t e Industrial Ares Specific Plan. F. Existing Laid Use: Vacant. G. Surrout�ding Land Use and Zoning: North Vacant, Industrial Plan (Subarea 13). South Vacant, Industrial. Specific Plan (Subarea 13). East I -15 (Devore Freeway), Public West - Vacant, Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 13). H. ueneral Plan Dmi nations: roject ite - General Industrial .North General Industrial i"South - General Industrial f ast I -15 (Devore Freeway), Public West - General Industrial ITEM I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit 84 -39 - Garasich February 13 „,1985 Page 2 1 % I. Site Characteristics, - The topography of subject site gently slopes at from a northerly= to southerly direction. Presently, the site is vacant ;rth no significant trees or other vegetation except for scattered sagebrush, and lies' adjacer',t to the I -15 Freeway. I1. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing a two -phase Industrial development in conjunction with an associated Parcel Map within the Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 13). The Parcel Map will create two cc,;tiguous lots consisting of .71 acres and .50 acrem, respectively. The first phase of project proposal envisions 2 two -story buildings consisting of 4,,000 square feet each on one parcel: The second phase will comprise one building on 'Parcel 2 having identical design elevations and 4,000 feet square feet in gross floor area. In reviewing the floor plan, Staff notes that the first floor is slated for Industrial warehousing activities rid the second floor will house the administrative and profeAl onal office uses. Both parcels will be served by separate :--driveways and the applicant has provided an access easement to the adjoining parcel for internal access within the project site. B. Design Review Committee: The Design "`Review Committee discussed the architectural design of the project proposal, in particular, the visual impact from the I -15 freeway. The Committee felt the north elentioil needed additional treatment such as scored block, split -face block, or similar decorative materials. Furthermore, the Committee members epecommended expanding the landscape treatment,; into the Cal- Trons"right-of—,­- way, thereby, aesthetically enhancing the buiiding entrance. Lastly, the Committee recommended special landscaping along Rochester Avenue to partially screen and buffer loading areas and provide a visually pleasing entry statement. C. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee has reviewed and approved the site plan, however, the Committee has requested that specific conditions be placed on the project to ensure compliance with the codes and standards of the City. These conditions have been included on the Resolution for the Commission °s consideration. 0 Gt;ading Committee: The Grading Committee conceptually approved the grading plan with only, slight modifications per the Conditions of Approval. The applicant will address these items on the formal grading plan at the time of development. _a PLANNING "COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit 84 -39 Garasich February'13, 1985; Page 3 E. Environmental' Assessment: Part I of the initial study, was completed by the applic :at. Staff has completed Part II 'of the environmental checklist °d found no significant adverse impact on the environment as - result of this project., if the Commission concurs witli said findings, then issuance of a 'Negative Declaration would be in order. c III. FACTS FOR FINDINESe: The project is consistent with the General Plan and Industr a) Specific Plan. Thq project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties nr close sigrJficant adverse environmental impacts. In addition, the;( proposed use and site plan, together with the recommended'conditions of approval are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Development Code �•;� and City Standards, The Planning Commission must find that the proposed building design is con"-istent with the Development Code policies regarding harmoniops bulding design, form, materials a'nd color. 1 �4 -• _ IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in Tk.E`Daii Report as apublic hearing. In addition, the property ✓��was" posted an notices were sent to all property owners witbji 300 feet of the project site advertising the `public hearinr% To date, no correspondence has been F- ecOved regarding the pr. ect. V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use `\ emit , subject to Conditions to Approval through. the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration.. I IX iJ Re crtfu )jbmifi id, \l 'JG e Planner RG:HF :ns \ Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location flap \` Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Elevations ; Exhibit "D" Grading Plan Exhibit ' "E" Landscaping Plan Exhibit "F" - Floor Plan Initial Study, Part II Resolution of Approval;, with Conditions I; I' n Vii: a TERRA VlS-TA PLAN Ely ?4?NfhlttSN'Tl` -�' n� tl r� ;V.P C J GC OK- yI�YY�CafRNa! awaisr �n�• - � OP � iffffffhi /affa y -'�'� ���t / /llifffiB{Sff / /O■ Yom• tt X INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN NORTH CITY Or i 'RANCHO CUCANIONGA TIT>r>±= Zfe,V X-le'Al rrr.gP , PLANNING DIVISION N MXFHBIT. ` HOW 1 - 1tOK_ YYM f10DA SIQOA 1 t1YMR NY7A 3114 �• Eiii ��7�i i �� A' 1 }o qqN -• J!EN s= t 3 _ .r r' a rs ( •s X fill , 1 �,: �,, <a .. ,+tR r�4 Hi ..., r t7RRd iYYM>t KMSd RNIRWR 7YRldd?NOR • w°'�'wawo�w +IY.i1f L'�.7.7 � " �y } �Y � • R � ^.'�i ate, ' l i } r` N_ F � i E -Al LEF 1 F _ Mu NrMS a 1t � ; UTM 1 �A_pNp�g�Y l I/ Q 170CJ O4 NVMt Aft LY'1'ft 11C0-a �l V Atli i� r' s 5 SO I CITY OF xmjc1 o cucG L,16 NGA I� �.- Pin II - NITIAL sTUDY. G t; EWIRU1*CRTaL CHEMMIST ; APPLICAIdT:_ aifi` f ..l•!fj/(�""`ti,4•+/'G's'rYr..R� MING DATE: a �.. f rr .G!y� LO,C .rNMBEFt: C PROJECT: �Ea3= e�tstC ✓y- p .may 3K�Gr3i..t�- F o lea $ jp" - �-- �"�,�'i�"!�C:y e.> eS=iC�'1esG�s'r .t`� ,e.o.�d O �i a •O � ,�� o-�:= ..i�eL�i:.�,y.2,: ?.. s'T PROJECT �•'�f f.� •S ft ��- �.`5 . .9 ;(i it<'rTa2�f I: ENVIRO;I;SENT�1: IMFACTS`� � (Explanat?an all "yes'l and "maybes' answers are reruircd: ^n strached sheets). :t YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and Ceo?oQV. Wil;'the proposal !: signi icant results in: Aft a. ;.itRStable gzoued conditions ou ",Ueolog c rala r inj' in ps t Y b. Diszuptons, displacements,; compaction o, . .curial of, the Mil? c. Cl4ange In topO�gr ,I , PRY -.ar gxouna surface ^ontol r,;_�- tervals? ; d. Size t� txr,tioAi caver£iig or modification of any a 1quF _�, ;�gic or physical features? e• Alay potevtiai income - =_gp fa w{zF3 or water erosion O soil:, affecting either on or off site condztons? f Chang:, In tirosion siltation or deposition_ ?�' g. Exposure of peaule or pzaperty to ` gei lohazards .scti3 Asearthquakps, iandsl��eSg, ic s - e `8 tou • m ad e o iar hazar4s^ nd aiTi ti Jr ti \e rate of extraction and/or H drol��,r k. ne pirokQsal have significant �. Rage Z YES M-4,YB)z, ND a. - Changes in curren#,;, or'tbe course of direction of flowing strears, rivers, or ephemeral straam, channels? t b. Cianges.in absorption rates, drainage patterns_,) or the; rate and amount of s:Yrface water runoff: c. Alterations to the course or flaw of fliod` Waters? / ✓ d. Change in the amount of surface )wa ter, in any %1 body of water? e'. Discharge -,into surfac�ratei?'s, or any riteratioii,of surface ).;Ater qua"ty? % f. Alteration of groundwater charac�ari- I f? 9-'Change in the quantity uf groundwatersi - eitA through direct additions or wi�� a wall; -or through nti >rference with an ; Z� }�j quality? �• 1� Quantity? AOL h. Th-- reduc, ion in the" amount wa -er other— raise available for public �s`.upplies% J i. wate Exposure of people or propeiity to mater related ha ads such as floods o`or seiches. 3. Air vality. Mil the proposal;` -nave sign -ficant j results ia: 1! a. \ _ Constant or periodic emissions- from`a;obil�d or indirect sources ���',' 0, Stationary sources? vi b. Dei ariorat,.ton of amb� "';iv qur <ity and /or interference, with, tf� attain? -ant at applicable air quality {.;tanda, its? , c. AlterzticY o£,id 6; regional climatic i b conditions, aft ii $n fair movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota Flora. Will the aroposal have signifi.�inG ^,salts $. Change In the of species:. including diversity,; distribution, or nuu+6er,; of any speies of pltnts? r i 'ry ie. Reduction cf Cie numbers of an u �?or endangered ygec� es� of 1xlanCs? ' �'que, rare . FAge 3. YES :3A1TBEw`, yp - C , Introduction of 'rew or disrtptive species;of _ Plants intt, -,an area? �'. Reduction ir, the Potential for a „zlcultural Production? Ff • l sauna. Will the proposal have significant reults in: 1, a. Change in the characterlstics of species, � including diversity, distribution, or aumbers Of any Speczes of ariiaals.” b. Reduction of the Numbers of any unique, rare fJ nr endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of rew or disruptive species` of + - animals into an area, or result in a barrier, to the migration or moverint of animals? Deterioration or removal of exisx� g fish or- wildlife habitat? 5. Po ulation. Will the proposal have significant : results in: a. WW, the proposal `alter the lweatioa, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate;of the human population 'of. an area?, y/ b. All the 'Proposal affect exi wing housing, or create a demand for add *.tional housing? _ r, 6. Socio Economic 'Factors. Will the proposal have S� significant results is a. Change in local or regional socio- economic char : :cteristics, 3uci -'ling economic or- Commercial dii'ersity, tax rates an4..property values? {- _ ,r b. dill - project -Costs bs..equitably` distributed among project btnefii;za:;ies, 3 e ,' :buyars, tax payers or projzc. users? y t i.,; land Use and Planniri$ Considerations.~ Will the proposal have significant results in'# ` a. A substanL•ial alteration of the present or Manned land use k an aria? - b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, policies, or adcptc3 flans of any governmental � entities? a � c. An impact Upon ,the gulai,tp or quanr" of a existing consumPtive'or nonticonsusptive recreational opport :inttles? Page 4 MAYBE ND + 8. Transportation. 'Will th e proposal bavi significane- „� results ins ' a- Generation of substantial additional v "`iicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, a demand for new street constriction? ._ C. Ef €ects on existing Parking fcilities, or demand for new ? pa ;king. d. Substantial impact upon exist+ g transporta- 4< tion systems? e. Alterations to p resent patter�r df circula- tio.- or movement of people aa"or goods. f, Alterations to or, effects on present and — potential water - borne, rail, mass transit, or air traffic? { ✓ g- Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources. ''Will the proposal have significant results in: `J a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological., paleontological, as /or hi morical resources? 10. $eAth. 'Safety„ ., and Nuisance Factors. - Will the proposal have sIa, I ficanz.res its ins J a. Creation of any health hazard or potential - health Hazard? - b. Exposure of people to Potential health hazards? `t V C. A risk of _ o r explosion or - elease of hazardous substances in the event of in accident? d. An increase In the number of indl;'Vidnais or species of vector or pai6nogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? e. Increase in existing noise levels? J f. Exposure of people to potentially, dangerous noise levels? ;# i i g. 'the creation of objectionable odors? i l) h An kncreastt in light or glared �k � ,'iIy> J Page 5 YES MAYBE No ]1. Aest^ hetics, Will.the grnpos.l have atgnffi� ant results. in'o.'., - - a• The.obstruction or degradat 'vista or views an of any scenic b. The :reation of an aesthetically offevslve site? _ 1 Z. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic Corridors? l 1,2. iitiiities and Public Services. Will ahe'progr'aj have -a signiii: ane need -iFor new s aiterations to•the following: stems or,,,,. f i a. Electric pover? b. Natiiral or packaged gas? C. {.)=Unication systems? d. Water supply? o e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures?', ^facilities? $. :Solid trade i,. xire protactjan4 i. route protection? Schoolw? k. Pail's or other - recreational facilities? " ' I. ifaintenaace of public facilities,t�3iieltiding -goads and flood`cpntrol facil3ties7 M. Other govatnmental services? } c �'rand Scarce Pe-ources. will the proposal have significant results y j .in: a. U e of substantia,� or excessive'fuel or p hea? gy ' b. Sujjstantial increase in dema nd upon existing / sources f 4 of energy? , c• An lncrease'la the demand for deveicpsent of -" new sources of euer8y7__ An increase nr perpetuation of tie cansumption of non - renewable fortis of energy, when feasible xenexab3e sources of energy are available ?•; }' i Page YES MAYBE tytj e. '-Substantiai dgpletion of any nonrenewable or scarce -natural ))tesoura- 14. Man datoiv�Findings o f ificande,7 ! a. Toes the project have t „ he potenti�.to degrade' the-, qual.j =t}* o the eiivironnent,l substantially teduce;;the habitat of fish oz :,iidlife specigs,. / cause a f`%sh car wildlife poguiation to dro'-)/L111 below self sutyainang levels, threaten to � eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare c;r endangered plant pr animal or eliminate :r important examples,of the majas periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the _potential -to, achieve w short-term, to: ;he disadvantage of av loth ; -t?rm, eiranmential goals? (A shn *Ft -tern impact:cv the enviroruue''ait� is ui,�'wttic6 occurs in a relatively J brief; defiiitive period of ti^ term while long- nt iapa is Will, er.3ure well into the future). / C. Does ;he pxa�ext have impacts iWhich are ihdzVidually limited, but cumtta�ativel ' cansiderable? ,{Cumulative) considerable nsiderable means that thef�tncrement ;jl effects of an '1f individual project (r$ considerab a vheti` viewed In connection 9-.th) tote effects of past projects, and probable'fut-ure projects). d. Doe a ro "e* _ P J -t have environmental effects ` which will cause substdnatiao adverse effects oi. human b.aings, eithzr directly ar icdirectlylJ aI. DISCUSSION OF ENJIkOM EE'NTAI, EVAhUATIa:I F �- _ (i.e. a 1 :ire above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigi�n easufe f' ZZO .m'yx.v �� G RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION OF THE,r4ANC"O CUCAMONGA PLANNING -COMMISSION APPROVING, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 844 =FOR- THE DEVELOPMENT'OF.3 BUILDINGS OF APPROXIMATELY 4,000 SO. FT. EACH FOR PURPOSES OF BOTH INDUSTRIAL WARE USING AND �- ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES LQCA ED ON ;THE t` EAST SIDE OF ROCHESTER AVENUE, NORTH OF 4TH STREET IN Tttt GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (SUB!.aEA 13) OF­-THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SrECIFIC FLAG' WHEREAS, on • the 19th day of December, 1984, a complete application wa,j filed by John Garasich for review of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 13th day of February, 1995 the Rancho Cucamonga Planning C Commission held a- public hearing to considsr the above- described project, NOW., THEREFORE, ~tle Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows; SECTION 1; That the following findings can be met: i ;. Inat the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Indust -4,1 Specific Plan, and the'Oi_°rposes of the district . which the site is located. '. 2 2. That the proposed-use. together with the „conditions applicable thereto, will not be OtItrirrtental t public health, safety, or welfa.4e or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the - vicinity. \,t 31 "i'hat the proposed use complies.- with each of the applicable pr ,30sions of the 2ndustrial Specific I P Plan. . SECTION 2: That this orojbct w li�not creato adverse impacts on the enviroht nt and that a Negative Declaration i's' issued 'n February 13, 1985. SECTION 3: That Conditi6nal Use Permit No. 84-39'1-” - approved subject t tv the €olowing canditions: ENGINEERING DIVISION 1. Pt's ^ride access easement to adjoining parcel. 2. The project Sall accept drainage fiov �s'fram the area to the north and provide; a proper system to convey said flows ` a through the site to an approved outlet facility or an alternate system shall be provided as approved by the City Engineer. --1 t Resolution No.��, r Page 2 '';;PLANNING I1T1�1SION` 8. Special landscaping treatment ,shall be, provided along .�ochester Avenue in order to partially screen and buffer loading areas. 4< Provide additional architectural treatment on north �evatiop„ with ' `` decorative block (i.e.. olit-face or � i similar.. decorative materials). 5. Secure written clearance from CalTrans for continuation :of landscaping treatment; within Ca7Trans right- of�.way.' 5. l 'Futgre development of Phase 11 Shall be consistent with she approved Master Flan and elevations for,. UP 84 -3§. Modifications, shall require reapplication for Gevalopment /Design Review approval.. a ,.J +OF APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS `lath DAY FEBRUARY, 19M PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 6F RANCr'd CUCAMORGA ..BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman , ATTEST, Rick Gomez, 0 @putt' becretary '. f`, 1, Rick Go�iez,. Deputy Secretary of the Planning Comission,of the City of Rancho- Cuca�znga, do hereby certify that the foregoinr�,'Resolution wis dulya errd -- regularly introduced passad, and adapted bar the ,PTAoning, Co issio�,of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at.a regular meeting of the Planning Comrtiss, rn held on the 13th day of February, I98S, by the'followt�sa vote- toiLw,_ : AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERSi _ ABSENT: COMISSIONERS: tlC3 Y,�u0iwi.�� Sow �� tf0 . � �0.. 4C •m.� yy ° YD _ nGr+a � � mTW p0 r •6 4 SPCC 'n�Y Cdpyy qY.c »QY. 9,Y -- - \ j V G3 •' gUO3G 'Y. q•� 6C. g�J A� LYW V•OwR.Yj y. �p•��C,( pn P'Yy ti' gg q'G p•i� RY. _� Lqu �:uM n� :�� b. ^O �D N OO..E �.,t t�•q e�46m LO O �ti O. H.•.R�MY 'V.. VmO CGi E ''° v Ni q U. ^,V eC 6 a.,. w:. SR u.� H ^ • ^tli c y i.4 T Y uq a ��� Y..O•`" Uyp «•., dO s v o -L: i- `n��V ..2y' m u c.T. �cY UU .cam. .°_was i H•$ V ut: Y c'ur EN3'� �Fi �RyYC �gifu it y OC Vp 4�a� 1S••.0 - Yap Ord° Vplr O q.^� U 'OV ACVt.O _ N'L iif °. Vqa =dU....t '�•a yw siy ^y _ aA+N .. ° t92•� OOYE��RgaL� LOi :V u C » � as +N e 9 yY,4 • °C VY b C Vn V mu•.G� >. c7 su E0E 1J 4 CC40i �f0 jq ^N�O 2 9 Q.�.. ��O L°C q C g C-, CO y ^ O R p .L 3 Na''C w ~O. VN tCG1!6 -^,'w L C Y V� U qy��M O•.>j�C . b.8 - i c U °J 4 q q •.COO Na . OI °1p�� r6 ..C�Cgc�° 9 V 9 � I �.•S {� \i aNi d ��� LO o�^q.- 3C0 :PQa�s•°a��•'' C CO° A Lr@• LRO.p 6i t au l �. �. 6 �O .A S y e: ;q ss T-_z • "• a4VUw ¢CCCq:m +r N6 c,aa e u NCryq � NOOI �R -0rY �E OiyiO �. Y'fl<E <0Y Or +"i •_' = ?. b CN ° 04NU. m c4 ~ ^�. yC a _ N' _ U.O 6CU quU wNpy SCU.CL•O;oayi0 sys.'niwi..c. U.•�. Fcn•�ay.' ^Y ,°G+ -NL si °ur n� UU �^ ;z ujs °.u� a n._ . `�omam' °o m or .. �L ° Rw. nca <m a.,cn 1 r, it 6 C7 y O7 Q � y [r} y OOw V aq y' �$•pp � r L 1••. �i d p •pn O. LO C04RLCZ9 pTp V � J vJ W i as+ un c2v+iu^ l.•. \• �.. a _ ' � �y, 'fl O. : W A.r•tx m qY ° Y' V � v m• a .�`- E �` JJ tZ ! OQ� m r L �= OqY gya•Cq l`� `tiy. f �.., • � nN cnai r� .a, q° rp n�.�s�9 sew \'t ,( _. a m y AS �- �o m � •c` vi ,y.{ dpwif. C aP^ P «t G�d9.b�YO Y.yF P «��. Jai- G L C a °" $< W O JD V ` �.O ^ d t V s ten. 4`A9VU Pu N}�,^� -0U+db w H <jcn w+ \'I d �, Z 'ZUV 4s Y< LN V tr, -Z 4-3 :.7. L PaV L..S GP. aV0 `yi '. byur „<- e"�La ago Uza P# ~bMby �.$„' o �xdcG ' 4 Oy.Oipt. Y «gib CI°^E hJ.Y L� Yy°.v qLp U ` a TSt U `. Y „NiA a F & N AGV -0Y�° N >.A -0.CVC^ 6.P V0 rw'RA7 f�•0 rbS.y. d <Pb� 4 A HG Ca'4�pp R b� OY. V NA0.pN wT uV Adud t i _ Y iaA < O.tlCOir`i20 mT�6N d ^4. A2yV i pQY t6 a L9 < OA.Yy N\ y@ d� "N d ^a E'S Yom,. 1SL N4a N U Y r. ..ap�.. Gam. dO iLLL O �ww~i U..C. iRiggw�arS'. SC' Y Uuyy ��.i. 9CC4Gy, y�Gr ^ AC N 4�4 lYy6� LY°�Wt tYi�N 4 ^p <�Y °YN �nO..PC 4p � .L.. aPe.Y �C � S x iV4bGU l . .< O . qAcAG GoY l aay..f� .. CT`1nuyyG ��.+. Nv.po <S T \O. u~z ^a, 27; �^ b a . vqe-.0 u_i "• tiA. �+ p - �C r1�1 ag yus a llu wu 9< b ►b .u' .. <dN aew ...:;= T ------ . = T•c �i �.c ° .°c °0.t• ��«, ='c.c�^ AP £wi Y .O AR CO °Q!gpgY CSS4.W CRO ayy0 %� L y�d V N7 < LLL Q .�V jF YVti KG b4. pC. Y 4N �rY. aTr AVU N >P\ Htl �i°.A +.0 i ua.Ox <P4 Q AV a0 mL Y^ OYN '<O^ V O PVLW'.� YP. udY. .17M L bge40y° CpC O..d° gEST VVL`A o.Ga 4 m da z;:=.a 'c.I.KZ p A pv ^„ F4 C° 1.�. G fib. N L 44 C <,a YvY O .<ir A p_C C s y Y �r. TO.Z T.Y S a /I ''{.'. C,�bN a %4L VG.L -0L «« P V N P C N (( Ly O ur OLnb Gy VZw oV .i�b A4 X�aYNCp tl4nn �w PL °'a < 1=.0 Np 6r V'< : =fir do vGC E tu4SYVY N ac °ny.'Ei tfs vV C - ' .. 1 �° � K N xb A� 4 ^b avL� Nouo y�.L c�4a � ev °dQ a bw l�i. a�..e. s7; ..� ; no N Y NY w O V Y 1f Y bCL ?.V O.O� C 4b dLYO w'?T «Q A Odw GUS G AYM iiu "Al 'C OIL Ut� tp N= GI AV G `D .T U A OYa YppC Yb Oab NO`6 rte' b"' C., LLGA E Q. °�w fl nL CV Lpgr // Q ^Q4 qwY N L Ui i � 1 .CMN bVY LL „d r N .��0 Yb,p y t0 = Y y G N N. 4 E ^W uuYf)w .0 tltlll CSC X14'4 iN 40 N� "lx- C uNf., YrG y�. G. 4tU �, Oy+ \, y nq 4y"�. G�Lp C bd ai. t G� i{MC 6' b R = •I, U t t� �v r���� yK.�✓ � -~� . Y.L 6YNM 4Tw.hC. 44' CBVfMJ 'QLV 44 b � Y YD'a 1G °ay. .Q hUAC : c G ��.: =p wcyT �, .. < �i 2 N it Y Y Dw �.. o Y Y b w y MW ..C4G M Y LNrn M.. •-• V O� O M p� b 1 L e r.-E DO• „.Li� C K � �R. 4 }� F Np.G . r ^�X.. O� �'L y� NOV A Y N10C :; WN �� MYtli O n °gam ff.A,QY 66 gI.CV �ls t oa 3y. .. O 44 =OS b 4N qLq tla� {4.3`SE 4 N I O QOM Cb.. O w LD MYLQ —�A- r ` a+ C w � .La NL'� C J c N� al4OL pbx nN� a'L 3.E &Z ='YZly ban.. � a �-.. :uq''0 C L qte' Y yo'n•"n EsY� `' �.ab.c i -o.N �o c q V. O � C u Yw't ab NY s �qb 3v. E.y�z 11 Y9a K�9 CY. � Q.y��Oe 44 = lc 4L YpY G M[Cac Y - t43 ya v- 4 5r YLiw.: �qD viY C Y a`q Y > tbp Masai {v _ LL uYx aqy. 4b1�0.H -w OqL� EE.Z..D Yq4 Y C OY �E. o r 4� � y�, V ObRn - r. "�"R'Y°FR LO � 4� �� wi �. y�Y. •� _ 1. r L' ms � � q°�$4L E.•:v>ia� ,sNR��i. c o.+ =t: dye .. �; uy N: y. O. S V�V3 �gLYe YC'C -1 q'�,�. _- __•^.y ram.. I0o V {G w 78' zt WY�Vd CYO ' w. V� m4 Y CNC RN F fir. �dt 4Q vuau iOY� �CC6 a3.1� MiM� OVT4 Vpa H =y>Y O•yr C O Cy a �B sih � Of M 6 ^ � m J-s O N V co VE� m4m� O C'a 'O� N~ �aW V xr. .J r�VQ 6Qn�u y Ji. v p:Y4 VO 1 c- Y ..�,,, 01 rw ...9:: c:A4 tf a�N may±' IF Zy Y K _V7 O24 V p QLV C d 41a pQ .~JV i VYN C�u.2L- n:: A�Vt{i LiAWV -J VL�C 9w.Y ONm N. O {'YWL L�LLIrN L+�p4C! N. WVF� WN9 W. 6 j h yy U i OY f 4Q Ot9 r 7ZA V R.CT ~r' 6~ 44 V s. G vy SY N �-r x1. L = �� np ..a q 0 Nti m.. V 9• .� O V 55-2 kL - ..9 CC `O'N"N '4N . ` O DLCt4M :L =M tj a.= cqa�> ai la M W Clg 3YY G'- �..4�C CzJWVO �Lr. - nc. tvr.. N.cxo vL fw"a.. C G R nY i ` ` ea lr ufi.71 4mwu �a '-fin.. s e~ ••a � /'0701 --02 o 2- 23.85 PG Agenda o 5 �of OD C i Or T. T R M Y q N gig aQ I-_' bYa'uy�... e t N y ' n EQ G N d V. y qn y O ^V L VOy .5Z:_ paA C N =V b a1T b YRfGntT d OY d b i b^ CY Yu abic Eq. O p � L� Z ti� w R•O aJ rdi. 0 I d M o ssR sa oa.a Z A OrQd d R NYbN :3 RQ 06•.�E ►} � V r; tit � v 111 I -.� O O R R b. 9 9► R R \ \ls ... O C L V V 1 it V V � � r a oaf .� _• i i +°• ' ',a � �(i.bo r `3`� o ci O O v v> b w w q q ►OM d O.� L6 �L � �mNO •W Gti T► � ¢�- E A A. b � v v bR . .- �' T � .-.� d d yyj L A A d d6 °�T .O�Q pEi abi away YY ^ ^'Epd V V LL � � N Nb� sa6 YC a� S y yRO �� O ON V C V N N� Grn ► ►E Q N N� ► E W4 ►F Q Qq O g gdQN L LO- C n C µi V E E� a Q O c ° ^�nOY O C 9 a+ as y 0 y 4 Y-.• 0 0 - O yy V ti=. V9 G GO ° °p46 CVO d9 1 — E E 1P tV2 2 � -4L r f 1 O O y y .. R RO C� y yb ys -. � �C�yOI•Nn'.. =4.t Ocw� - - - y L LY r .. - Q R. ^ ^ q q a1 ►... 2 IM ' ' nicd VM Q s,m - Y E CL O /��m� O E K KNOH / O1OCO:pLC L dOrn � �'d y yL..�..r� y C L d d►^o b b u GO yr.A ►O I I a c O O 6 d Y LOa 4L �` ► YN N N I • ` ODCt. Y p ns4' p. N tip. ol L isyi °ZN � 4 Y. a. • Q f C Y y ^ W ..L°..:' i stir ar v i e�cty � i $ pNC w Yy 01�A ,Y A _e Fs tT elf Y,m, Q: Eo ., L> A O cL E- rff L'�°<. � °• �. aL 2 '9 f:6- oa y1e ♦fit' Ec W ro N dam° L. sam ones n L ad. n A gTRs a ° �v N ?d Y= w hL V N EY 0. d d •� ,C y aVC ^ L r =tr O N N Ow 4-2 a Y 6V G", 6GN GN. �T O ti .r M H. ~ d O. L 60 Y L wn ate. 2 SipS 4].. o� .Nr v i €�€� o« ate. '°. •< 4 .ou Y— .a...; a¢ aGC E Yvy�W•- ^ ' ¢. Y <U Nd +i LL .°` a p.° nw � to E Y. 6�`/n .rprt.M A d CC L m 4. Y SAN E�AYW 9 � u u. < r S ° >. A ,N Ua Amok. S r'��j aL• p, X L y 0. 2 i•'O„ 4 44t 4Y tu b e ��a A p 4•i � CEy �L EENO aLY YY Y c _ ^ Y al Ali 6114 Y h r•E r Y d ONE W y. o b t r.' O .., y N• C C L� 2-61: a L ^.yN bt N q .O ,NT pcdo �N zz LqL w� ac v 4.� s^ c•N _4 wnx u�i q. nR E � y FW CM tl qty Cg1Y Y.d 13 4 VY CV iit� Lai z u 6 Nix• -. �1 � 6w 4 »� •t.•.vw. �w �,'i G7 Opy oCa ; 'CO �i -, - `` s - -- CITY OF RANCHO CUC.AMONGA STAFF REPORT n o DATE: February 13, 1985 l U > W7 T0: Planning Commission FROM: Lloyd B. Hunbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krail, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: 'ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND 'PARCEL MAP 8617 - THE CARYN,COMPANY - AA division of "107.74 acres into 4 parcels, a portion of a Master Planned Community knowf ; as Tract Nq: 12642, located between the extension of Banyan and highland Avenues, on the north and south and between the extension af,1 ochester and Milliken Avenues on the east and west - P.PN 225- 141 -12 thru 16, 18, 22 & 26 I. ' PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTIONS =% A. Action Regue5Wed; Approval of Parcel Map. - B. Purpose: To divide-'107.79 acres into 4 parcels forjaLhe development of a portion of the Planned Community approve by Plaraing Commission on Tract No. ,,1672. C. Location: Between` Banyan and Highlanei Avenues a►J Rochester and Milliken Avenues. D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 7;7 acres R Parcel 2 _27.1 acres Parcel 3 48.0 acres Parcel 4 24.3 acres Total TOT.- 'acres E. Existing Zon ing; Medium Residen):ial pisttct (4 -14 dulac). K F. Existing Land:Use: Vacant. r Surroundi:nv Land Use. North - Vacantu South 'Vacant. `,, - . East _Vacant. _ West - Vacant. H. Surrounding General f'' °n and Development Code Desi'pations: North - Medium Residexciat (4-14 du/ac);, Medium High R6sident al (14 -25 dulac). South - Prnposed Junior High School; Proposed Park. r, :East - Medium Residential (4 -14 du/ac). crest - Medium Residential (4 =14 du /ac). 4 ITEM J I. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant, sloping to the South at approximate y „. vegetation consists mainly of abandoned grapevines. - II. ANALYST”: The proposed parcel map` will ;divide Phase I of the Caryn " Plan n— ler'.Community Project into four large parcels, each of which will be further subdivided and developed -by separate developers in conformance with the previously approved community plan and Tentative T'rac't No. 12642. Public accoss to.-.each parcel will be dedicated ort, the final map. Improved access shall he provided upon development ,f `each P,xrcel and shall be secured by a lien agreement and a;certy;-icate :," the filial map. III. ENVIRONMENTAL-REVIEt: Also attached for your r6lew and considetatioq is _ _ }.• art I o t e iral Study as completed 'by, the applicant. Staff has completed Part It Of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist, and , has conducted a field investigation. Upon completion and review, of the Initial Study and field investigation, Sfiff found no adverse e - impacts on the unvironment'as a result of the propo�cd subdivision,, IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent'to surrounding property owners and placed in the Daily Report New.spapLrr osting at the site has also been completed. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission -adoot the attached rsothion conditionally approving Tentative Parcel Map 8617 and i authorizing theAssuance of a Negative Declaration. I Resp ctfully suofitted, I L H• :kro At achm 'its; Vicinity Map Phasing Plan Parcel Map Resolution Recommended Conditions of Approval Initial-Study } r, i' ell DEER CANYON DAY CANYON s COUNTY OF BAN BERNAROINO CITY OF RANCHO • \COCAMONGA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE " CITY OF RANCHO CHAFFEY - I. CUCAMONGA COLLEGE BANYAN AVE. ! ' PROPOSED FOOTHILL FREEWAY �., SITE- - - HIGHLAND AVE VICTORIA "PLANN�O BASELINE AV E. Y �• .•° :COMMUNIT x UN ,.:,.• FOOTHILL BLVD. 0 .tw'' > yzj Y W 1 Q W BERNARDINO FREE CCCA370, CITY OE RANCHO CUCAMON�A tMef As x t r P.M. 8637 p ENGINEERING DIVISION T sa a; vrrrr.fr.n.. ., X 1 PHASE I LpFI qg I! 1105 LO �� �i1} C L3Tfpi "Cv p SIDEN4TIAL j�ti.:"Q. �ft�•� --art :�%r'�"•�"c"^� ,.,.�.,,'\ �.,eci - ?.:r"...�",.t�,°•�, ! , ("�REJ DENTIALs s-.� t 1 1,,: -•� .s:.. txsa""` -� .__i.l - . •— - ICI PARK' - ('. _ 1•; `� 327 97 (` s 7 t x-12`=0 LOTS �.^r } kp lOTS �'r 3t-j�W Y C. R L=' t82eC FL_z_s D f - 1.,...596 LOtS ®RESIDENTIALE.:.. 7., NOT -� .$ 1SS LOTS, ' PART RESIDENTIAL =.d $ ffi },� ` -- YLO� T_ [+ a [,_ e-�• '.r3��, �' - 06TPARCEIS -' • ---r i { a1 y .LEGEND #T-t f 1..: efi!® PHASE LINE ALTERNATIVE LOT LAYOUT (WITH STATE R.O.W. PURCHASE) �o�cA: +roy�9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA�t CMA title,• r Phasing Plact o c EIdCsi1VEERING LiIVISIOIV �_a �7 f ��„ V�,V+ -� '�1.� r `,`Yl 41� �� %r •� •r.� 1,2 -mss".,, "'�`^•1/'� --jt �� /,..., •.'.�.r �.-1 Ai:D%:E .T:r., � er,..[t /may `u _-',����vi }�l•} _Jp li'""- �'"r�.- �i,•v� � ,,,` ✓P.L..L+ ,.�\ f dt✓s.f(r i., f \: 'r 1\. -•�"�. V t�Jl/ '/' - I .N,oLCCLLC1�Pj•r �•-.J 7�F� Fb j� 1 � \ 1.��,. -u �u/�. ,, v 1 � T �.i,..r�,� r,,,.��� r i- "',,,,�t, `: ,y_` }._.I�I� ;L --,... `—� 'sue- -�,aY.nt ��,,• i._ .. -v ,' J ,.v.,.� -1,1; '�.. -.- , .rem• F�.,c.. y e .)` E'1 - � fry ,. _, � y :• � ~� 1 � ' 1•'�1.�� ✓V.. ' t �,.1���� %.e /+.* -•y� � J_����'� mil ��� �, Li, e � friar ti �°� Z �.f. •L a• �.�r•�. --^1 r .� .r �, � stT'i • �' i •i �+6 y�.fa- f��a,/ ,( -�.�`� � .i•�.�,,�.�'- , �,rr- -`..J. ' ��"�"- -ti.+.' ) ` 1 R � ✓ � f, ;' r 1 µ...1,"•h ' ',nJ -��11 a- �I �\,. -.��'' - may, --r• �'-� -r A .ICS Af� �� 1; .aI �I, ,r`.� ;"`�.i� • �� ��'C�'.^_ -� •4EEEEAI..�:.LSL�•, _ .• .:�.1✓ ).�PYM[Lmlylm, T,I[.:,' �- "z, "OSS APEA io�.79 AGCS )1, lourtaP,brlPm nr 1; ra wo Ixln 111E rA=' uc. Zr "ALL QINC::S10N5. AxE AP7110xtNArz I TO M f.1 CA PI Ct 1M AlbAr Arc. - C IIY WTQ OIIIMIR' ,,I,, • U PUA fpTA K1P. G 9)II[ . 3. Ex11}tAS 2Gt11Ai AESIOEMTIAL 0 - fNl SAM EEWPOII9 POAO 171f) ADi•TSfT II 1 iilA)33 PAW MD IoNis; CA, V. P.C. - 6MUIS 6tuI+ GlEf.1, CA 1010 f S :' AWACEOT LLU USES Pwn MCATN < YACANI` 3WTWN CAEIIOWIA mism COrART SOON •• HIGHLAND AYE. "It [.IfAtCiS'pIK StEST VACANT MA U fUN ar aMraa.I .A.r ,p 6. S31TAL;AUaEx Oi P'AALELS's A U=110 11 ULUMM GAS w V" pit 1. sun piLEGL IEJ. 7. TIC t'mg PO DIVING AUILDMUS Ox TAEE �' PA. AO[ 1331 OP UUTEA IN 01AAfTEA ON GITEj , MAIN. G Oun [ +8. PNY INAWEIEAT AEOUTAEP SNALL SE 4E1} NPLICULE TEl[PIAaE 5 CITT OF AAKNO COCAMAGA 1TAMOMPI.. anw TELEINIA[ COWTIII �. 9e OMIT rAP iS FO.T.PIMN[IAL COMYCYAXCE PIMPOSEI AIAOD COG1. ^..3Tr 4 f1)b - E[GLL N"IATip, I S" wCr ;JL A.TOI • f YiiT. L.k i1sE IPMPUA14'pi'MLI %1 XOPSN. IANPC WiiN SIDEE Of WELD AN. 311. P. UST OF W THE i TASi a Gr G[u. swear AUraan 1p.M+.a.Tw)r.AAAI ([�((g��}���,t�nj ¢gyyy���1 •t' hi CITY Or- RANCHO CUCAMONGA _ INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT IMRMATION SHEET,- To be completed bye "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. stafr will prepare J Part II of the Initial Study,, The Developr5ent Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten .J10) days before,-..,the public meeting,at which, time the project is to be I;eard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1} The project will have no environmental impact and a WeV;nive Declaraf:'Jon will h riled,. 2} The project will ha-:is an environmental . and an Environmental Impact Repo impa' rt will 'he p repay -=P 3} An additional information report should be suppliEd+ by tsie applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. -� PROJECT TITLE: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP $517 APPLICANT'S NAME„ ADDRDSS,.TELEPHONE: THE CARYNICOMPANY 10340 FOOTHILL BLVD. RANCHO curAmnur -A. " �ii�a t14- -i'S97 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON To BE CONTACTM CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: HALL C FO2FMAN, 3185 -L AIRWAY AVE. COSTA MCSst CA 92525 (714) 641 -8777 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STRE'E'T ADDRESS AND ASSEPSOR PA -ACEL NO.j NO. EAST CORNER OF HIGHLAND AVE M_IM_I_LLIKEiN AVF _ ' � i?Rf7J`gtT #1ES£itiL3TTfi15T 1 DE9CRn)TYO1q OF PROJEC1.� AND 2 REMINDER PA6r= — ^L-LUW BALE OF THE 4 PAFk1"ELS< ED W1 TEiTATIVE TRACT 12&42 COVERS SAME AREA. ACREAGE OF PRQSECT ,R LiZ3a' I�, yDz SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ' E?�IS2XNC, AMD i PROPOSED BLDIG5, F'' AAnNfl*: i ACREAGE OF THE 4 3'A9CELS IS lU .1 AC_ DESCRIBE THE ENY�i?2O'4 �T'I�Tt`AL ;SET�'ik7G OF TEE PRtJZCT SITE 3:NCWDIB7G INFORZtlTION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) r �9AT BLS, ANYX CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCE' c ASPECTS, USE,i Q° SUILR UNDING PROPBRTJES, MW 7HE DESCRIPTIO37 Op AN . ESTINTG STRUCTURES AND THEIR 'USE (ATTACH NECESSAMt : J THE EXITING TOPOGRAPHY SLOPES FROM NnArN -n Gnfal+ F7i r Is the Project, part of a larger project, one of of emulative actions,, which, although 3.ndivicituo `?- series^ maY as a Mole have s' .YES, THE SITE IS PART OF A PGgNH� O al JU04�? r e If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICA'I'ifil�: I hereby cert-t r that the statements furnishec above and in,the attached exhibits present the data and information ;Fa, pi.red for this ianitial evaluation to the best of my 2'hx,lity, 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'' -Lo be submitted before: an adequate evaula-tion can be made by the ' Dev-lopmeut Review cottittee. Date Signature Title WLL MIS PROJECT YES NO y .. i. Create a substantial change in- ground,, t, contours? 2. Create a substantial change in existng noise on vibration? I 3. create a substantial change in demand for mvnicipa services (police, fire, watery sewage, 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? 5� Remove any exsting trees? 80 1Aa3at G. r _ Create the need for use or `iiisposal of potentially hazatlous materials such as tMgo substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of art YES znswers above.- 1 e If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICA'I'ifil�: I hereby cert-t r that the statements furnishec above and in,the attached exhibits present the data and information ;Fa, pi.red for this ianitial evaluation to the best of my 2'hx,lity, 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'' -Lo be submitted before: an adequate evaula-tion can be made by the ' Dev-lopmeut Review cottittee. Date Signature Title a ,L RESOLUTION NO_ A RESOLUTION OF�lTHE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THF. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAI CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER � 8617 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NG. 8617), LOCATED BETWEEN BANYAN AND HIGHLiND AND BETWEEN ROCHESTER AND MILLIKEN WHEREAS, Ten atiVe Company and consisting of Parcel Map Number 8617, submitted by The Caryn 4 parcels, located between Banyan and Highland and between Rochestgr�Zand Milliken, being, a subdivision of a portion of the southwest Quarter of Secti$n 30, Township 1 West, Route 6 West, San Bernardino Meridian; and WHEREAS, on January 10,., 1985, a formal application was submitted, requesting review of the above - described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 1985, the Planning Comrmission held a duly advertised public hearing for the - described .above map. FOLLOWS: NOW, THEREFORE, THt RANCHO C AMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS � - SECTION 1; That the following findings have been made: 1. That the map ?,.consistent with the General Plan. 2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan, 3. That the site is Pb sidally suitable for they, proposed development.. 4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause s4—. Intial environmental damage, public health problem — ave adverse affects on abutting property. r ,; SECTION Z: That this project will not create significant adverse environments impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on February 13, 1985. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 3617 is approved subject to the recpmmen a onditions of Approval pertaining thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985." PLANNING COMMISSIDY'OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: t ennis E. atour, Chairman i _ 10 ATTEST. Rick Gomez, Oepu ecretaiy 0 I. Rick Gomez, Deputy Se��Iary of the�:f�jnning Commission of the City`s a Rancho Cucamonga,, do hereby'�ertify that tie foregoing Resoluti'an was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adooted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting o- the Planning Cpmmission hRid d ' on the 13th jpy of February, 1985, by the following vote- tn••wit: i AYES: COMMISSIONERS, NOES: COMMISSIONERS: r, ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: r; r 1 } �l� 4 A, C�v ,, o CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOHGA RECOMMENDED COHD�TTIONS OF APPRW _._. LOCATION: BetNeen Banyan and Highland and TENTATIVE PARCEL PAP, NO 8617 Rochester and Milliken Avenues , DATE FILED: ,Jan =ary 10, 1985 "+ !LEGAL DESCRIPTION; &eing a subdivision of a NUMER OF LOTS: 4 a portion southwest Quarter of Section 30 GROSS ACREAGE: 107.79 Township 1 North, Route 6 West, San ASSESSW PARCEL NO:225- 141 -12 thru San Bernardino Meridian & 26 *�r5ttzk�l�t�ht�k�e tick*** y�; �rx: t; �k�Fkt�k, �st�, titt�t��ierx�r* �� #,ttica�ti�txtki�eaktYkt�r ,ter DEVELOPER AiAiF.it JkNCINEER/SURVEYOR The Caryn Company SAME Hall & Foreman,_ Tnc. 10340 Foothill Blvd. 3186 -L Airway Avenue N Rncho Cucamonga- 9173Q> Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Improvement and dedication requirements in accordance with'i'itle 16 of the Municipal C.)de of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may-put be limited to, the followingz R. Dedications and Vehicular Access X I. Offers of Dedicatiori,,shall be made of the intericr' loop street rights -of -way as shown ors the tentative map. X 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights,of -way on the following streets; 67 -75 feet Offer of Dedication Milliken North of Spine St` -. 7 feet on Milliken from pine St. South `35 -50 feet on pines ne street X 3. -,Corner property line::,, radius vi 134- be required per City Standards. 4. All rights _ef vehicular ingress and egress shall be'ded�cated as follows: 5. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and ,joint maintenance of all common roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by r.C. &R.s and shall be recorded concurrent'ilth the map. 3 �X 6. ' All" existing, easements lying wiil`An future right of -ways are'.to - be quitclafined or delineated on the map per,Oty Fngineer''s requirements. 7. Easements for sidewalk for public.Y.. a shall be dedicated to the -gh ? City where sidewalks meander thrau private prop rit G. Surety 1. Surety' shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and ';City ,attorney; 1 guaranteeing completion of the public 9,mpro+reme�Jt prior to recording for and /or prior to building permit Issuance for X 2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map for the access roadway iTprovements described in Condition •. 3. Surety shalI be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of ali_ on -site drai►iage facilites necessary for . dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Divison Prior t'o recordings for and /or prior to issuan �"of building'.oerm or C. Sik- et Improvemerts Pursuant.to the City of Ranch tiOGamonga Nni;cipal Code, Title 16, Section. 16.36.3.;:.J, the subdivider may enter into an agreement and, post security with the City guaranteeing the zrequired construction prior to,rilcordation of the man and /or building permit issuance. 1. Construct full street 'improvements including, but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk,; drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights4or aTl interior streets., o 2. A minimum of 26-foot, wi+te, pavemeftr. Within' '4'1- oot wide dedicated right -of -racy shAI be constvn,cted for all ''half ,section streets.;__x. X 3. Construct the following missTnQ improvements Upon development of each parcel, Curb,1 A.C. Side- Orive Street S � e� A e- Median Street Name Gutter Pvmt. Welk, Appr 'frees Lights &eriay ,,Isfand* iltlier MV.-Aftn' X IX X X X ''X X US pine:' X `X X" X X X *includes landtcaping and irrigation on meter -2. CITY OF RANCHO CU NGA / RECOMW XDkO GONDITION5'OF APPROVAL - LOCATION: Between Banyan andfA h-l-an � nd TENFATIVE' PARCEL .f N f,(0� 8611 r Rochester yynd Milliken Asend6s DATE FILED 3anuEy iOi985 . LEGAL DESCRIPTION; Bein a = subdivision of a NUMBER OF LOT 4 a portion southwest Quarter of Section 30, GROSS ACREAGE: 107.7 _ Township I Nbfth, Route b West, San PARCEL NO :225- 141 -12 thru San Bernardino meridian DEVELOPS -R OWNER =.`'ii6INEER /SWVEYOR The Car_yn'Company � SAX Hall & Fv emanL Inc. n 10340 Foothill Blvd. _ X18& a�rWaY AVeniie Rncho Cucamonga, CA 9i?30 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 _ Improveuent and d6dicatioluy requirements In - accordance with Title 16 of_ the Municipal Code of the City of Rancho CucBmonaa._include, but may gat be.limited to, the ,Fallowing: A. Dedications and Vehicular Access X 1. ' Offers._of Dedication shall be made o €:the interior loo9'street rights, -of -Way, as shown on the tentative a' X "' Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of -way an the (f .'67 iF Meet Offer of Dedication Milliken North of S ine St. ::' - feet on Milliken fray pine St. oath 35.50 feet on Seine S7ree , X 3. Corner yproperty dine radius will- be required per City j Standai�, s. 4. All eights, of vehicular, ingres as follows: and egress Shall be. dedicated _ c 7" fir. S. Rer,9*ca7 access easements and maintenance agreements ensgrrng access to all parcels and Joint maintenance of al< 0ttoVmosi roads,' +rives or parking areas ahall be provided by= C,C. &R.s— .rod shall be recorded cc. current with the map. ef X 4, Prior to) any work being perform - 'in the pUllic right -of -way, .....fees shall be ;paid and an encrwr ioent permit shall be obtained - from X64 the City Engineer's Off in additibn to any other permits required. 'shat X '' S. Street improvement plans "l be- prepared by a -Registered Civil Engineer, and approved .by the .City Engineer prior to issuance of (Vi--tarroachment pern.it. 6. Develuper shall coordinate: and where necessary, pay for the relocatiprrr of any power poles or other existing public utiisties as necessary.` �j 7. Existing lines of.12KV or less f'rontinp, the property shall be undergrounded. X >3. Tnsta"] appropriate street nama c�gns,;traffic control- signs, stripinn and markings with locations and types approved by the City Engineer. X S. Street light vocations, as required, arc lip be approved- by the SouthFrn Talir-jinia Edison Company and 'the Cit;.: of 11a6cho I'I i Cucamonga. Lights shall be -en decerative p014� with underground service. X 1A. L.� Landscape Snd irrigation plans shall be submitted ,to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of Wilding permit. _ 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not `cross sidewalks. Un P' ,itli a , .d,� ►d ►valk drains shall be installed to City Standards:- 0. Drainage and Flood Control 0 1. Private drainage " casements `for Gross -lot drainage shall be required and' s6111)"be delineated or noticed on the final map.. [ : 2. �►� Adequate provisior_s shall be' made for -acceptance and dispersal'. drainage of surface entering the prcper;y from .:adjacent areas. C, 3, the "following storm drain, shall be: installed to the . satisfaction of the City Engineer, 4. Prior to .recordation of the iiap, a hydrologic and drainage study for th,i project shall be submitted to the City.Enginear for review. 5. k drainage t`d;etertion basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain► increased• runoff �j s- E.raslino Grad^;ng of the subject property shall be in accordance with "the Uniform Building Code, City Grading ,Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grad=ing plan shall be in t substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading pl an. X 2• j A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to !, perform such work prior to issuance of building permit. 3• = A geological report shall be prepared by tt qualiffied engineer or geologist and submitted at the "l time of appl catian grading Plan chegi, r 4. The ,final gradidj ,, =_plan shall be subject t'ij 'ireview find approval by the Grading 'Committee and shall be,'•+,ompleted prior to recordation,;: of the final subdivision ma,� ,cr issuance of building,aermit whichever comes first. 8• Finoll.'grading plans for each parcei are to be submitted to the 8,J!Ilding -and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance permit. of F. 6�nera( Reguiremerat5 anri Approvals X L Permits from other agencies will be required as,, follo�s: CalTrans for ' I I'll San Bernardino Co—"' unty Moa, Contra Disttct X Cucamonga County Water District for -'Bernardino X San sewer and water County Dust Abatement (required 'Prior. to issuance of a grading permit) Other 2• A copy of 4:he Coti?nants, Conditions and Restrictions (C }, &R.s} approved by th City Attorney is required prim to recordapn of the map. ._, x 3. Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, water;: electric power, gas and telephone upon development "of each parcel a \\ 4. Sanitary sewer and water systeras shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water.9istrict standards. required. A letter.of acceptance is 5. This subdivision shall, be subject to conditions of approval from Ca3Trans {San Bernardino County Flood Control Bistr *ict.' x 6. Approvals nave not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any requirements that may Pe received from them: -� X " .. 7, The filing of the tentative map or approval of \�rre doesg,, guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will h4j vailable at the time building permits are requQsted. When building permits - are requested, the Cucamonga County Water District will be asked tof,certify, the availability of capacity. Permits will not be issued unless said certification is received in writing. $. Local and [ester Planned 'Trails shall be provided in accordance with the Trail Man. V- detailed trail plan indicating widths, maximur'slopes. physical conditions, fencing i weed control, in accordance with City trail standards, shall-4e submitted to jand approved by �, �h� °- Dianner vrior ' to recordation for 'building . , .irior to' Hermit ._ 'AaJ°e' 1 g 'Issuance for 9. Prior to recording, , a deposit shall be cast d It i,he City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the "assessments under Assessment district 62 -1 among the,mewly created parcels. X 10. ' At thw time of ,.final map submittal, the following sham be submitted: Title Report, traverse :calculations (sheets), . copies of recorded maps and deeds used as' reference and /or showing original land division, tie notes aid bench marks referenced. f ...t R 11. Upon the development of any individµal parcel, an improved access *roadway shall be proyided within the,decicat6d "right of "-f way Milliken Avenue; - >.rtt the "Spine" Street extending fra'm Highland Avenue to � most easterly boundary of .that parcel. The extent of 'i.nprc if shai:l be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. An improvement certificate to this effect shall "be placed on )ire final map._ X !2. The development of e�cFh I inaividual parcel sh-111 be subject to the Conditions of Appra,.as--for Tentative Tract No. 1252. .! CITY OF RAHf31O CUCAM NGA- ` LLOYD B. HL BS, CITY ERM -R J by., to All, (Y)'`. ✓ ,, t . 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ,y r STAFF REPORT - o O O > DATE: f- bru::ry 13, 1985 1977 TO: ,Cha rma��and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick,GGmez, City Planner BY> V.ncy Fong, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTAtIVE TRACT NO. 12895 R. J. ENT A total residential #velopment of 99 townftontps on 9.03 acres of land in the Medium Residential Distric �.,_(8 -14 du/ac) located on the west side of Raker, south of.`Foothi ll .Boulevard - APN 207- 581 -57, 58; 107 -571 79. - I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Re ueq� seed: Approval of the site plan, elevat_jons and is5u ncd o€ 'a negative Declaration. B. 'Zepose: Construction of 99 townhomes. C. Location: West side of Baker, south of foothill (Exhibit "A "). D. Parcel Size: 9.03 acres. E. Prodect Density,, YO.9 dwelling units per acre. F. Existing Zoning:. Medium Residential (8x14 dulac),. G. Existing Land Use: Vaca;:c. I H. Surrounding Land use and Zoning. (Exhibit ). ( =North - Townhouses; Medium esidentiai (844;du1 c). South - Single Family Residential; Medium Resid %ntiai (8-14 1 dur ac) . ll J( East - Townhouses and Mobile Ho�e'�, -?ark; Helium and Low IV Medium Residential. West .~ Single Family! Residentiai Low esidential (2 -4 ii du/ac). ��, t PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT - Tentative 'Tract No.. 12895 - R. J. Investments February 13, 1985 a Page 2 General Plan Designations') Project'Site - Medina Residential (4 -14 du /ac). Mort!.,, - Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac). South - Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac). East - Medium (4 -14 du /ac) and Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac), Test - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). J. Site Characteristics:. The project site is vacant and slopes to the southeast at a grade. The - .:site is traversed from nor%h to south by an intermittent strea�n and contains five (5) mature California Sycamore and four (¢,')\Eucalyptus trees, as shown in Exhibit "84. -A potentially actvie fault segment exists') in the not- thwest corner, see Exhibit "`, K. A$cpicable Regulations: The Deve4ment Code permits multiple.- fam�-Y_ dwellings in the Medium Residential District at 11.00 I dujac cinder the Bas*c Development Standards. I - II. ANALYSIS: ` A. General: The developer had prevf� y submitted development plans for a - proposed 127 unit apartment complex at th — = location. The Planning Commission, on June 27,, 1984, denied I, this proposed project based on the fiAdings thaw "the project was not in compliance wit,}` the Development Code in terms of proper density transition ,and re"ighborhood compatibility in- areas such as design, style, bulk, building hei�,ht, and neighborhood character. The developer has redesigned the site plan and product type basi!d on the Planning Commission discussions and neighborhood input. i` The new proposed' development consists of 99 townhomes with a net density of approximately 11 dwelling units per acre. The unit size proposed ranges from 1,027 square feet to 1,127 - -uare feet. Most of the units are grouped into four- plexes or fi4glexes within double loaded parking courts. One -story duel %ac buildings are provided adjacent to the single family If to the west to provide density transition. Both the one- -. story duplexes and the two -story tow'nhomes are of contemporary' style architecture that consist of asphalt shingle roof, (the appl`cant has proposed a thick -cur. architectural style) and stucco walls with colored trim. All units are equipped with uq solar panels, as required. The recreation area is centrally located with greenway linkages throd'ghout the site. The main access to the project is provided via Baker Avenue with two`° �`- emergency accesses through fernlea€ Drive and ilia Carillo Lane. The project prdposes an interior pri�ate'street that ,? ^' PLANKING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT _ Tentative Tract No�� 12895 - JZ,. J. Investments February 13, 119$5 Fagg 3 1 fJ - - r _ serves as a trunk . for the parkins courts:j�,'each unit has a two- ca with a8,,parking garage spaces provid�d for gues�� parking- developer proposed to install wood fencing with dense landscaping all around the property boundaries. Staff recommends that the wood fencing be replaced by masonry materials at 'the northern, southern, and western property boundaries. ,The developer should obtain authorization from the property owners on the west aide to replace their wood fence,J;% with a shared block wail. B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Comm7"ttee has reviewed the project and found that the overall site plan arrangement, style of architecture, open space areas, and density comoy, with the intent of the'Absolute Policies in the areas of transition of dens "ity, height, scale, architecture, and neighborhood character. ThC' / Committee has .rec6mme0dee, approval of _ the project provided,l that the following improvements be made: 1. More open space {inkages shall be pr!)v1ded to the recreation area. _' )1 I 2. More architectural details and treatment shalt tra provided to the front elevation of the one- story duplex. Based upon these _recommendations, the developer has: incorporated more open space linkages to the open space area (see Exhibit "I ") while two different roof styles are provided (hip and gambrel) for the one -story duplex to provide for variety and interest (see Exhibit 10211 - "K" for the proposed variation of roof styles).:._,__ C. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee has reviewed the project and determined that with the recommended Conditions of Approval:, the project is consistent with 'the applicable stdtt//�tdards and ordinances, D. Grading CoWIttee: The Grading Committee has reviewed the . project and o nceptuarly .approved .,the grading plan subject to � conditions. One of 'the conditi;!gs is to construct a storm drain pipe from the railroad track south to Baker Avenue and into an existing channel on the east side of Baker, south of the Mobile home Park (see Exhibit "G211). This storm drain is , intended to alleviate historical flooding problems for property owners to the south. All conditions have been added to the Resolution of Approval. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT � "Tentative Tract No. 12895 - R. d. Investments =� February 13, 1985 Page 4 E. Neighborhood105, Meettiin_g_ A Neigtiborhood fleeting was held orb —at danu ry 3 , the Lions Community Ce%ker. Approximately ten interests ~µ,idents attended the meeti A brief summary j of the meeting's 4SCUSSian is attached for ur review. ! F. Traffic: one of We cpncerns of the neighborhood residents is the increased traffic: along Baker Avenue. According to the City Traffic Engineer,.tbere is no plan for any signalization at the intersection cf Baker Avenue and Foothill Boulevard at this time. Also, Fooihill Boulevard, beUg a State highway, is %i under the jurisdiction of CalTrans.- In order to provide for any traffic,�-Ignal improvements n Foothill Boulevard, CalTrars . >. would have t view and approv� the plans'and to provide for 'i two- thirds of tie•funding for such improvements-while the City -' has to match the remaining one - third.., Further, any new project in the City is required io pay a system development fee which r contributes to a general fund that will be used for future ,.public works and traffic improvements. D Therefore,; tha developer of this project would have pai d for his share of th@ ' Cost of any future additional improvements on Baker Avenue of any future installation of traffic improvements at Foothit'! Boulevard. G. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant, Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Checklist and a copy is attached for your review. A supplemental fault investigation study was done in conjunction with the previous development plans (DR 84-04 ). The study ,had identified that a potential active fault segment located if the northwest corner of the site could expose people or property to geologic hazard. Other environmental impacts identified by staff are: Removal of one mature Sycamore tree and four Eucalyptus trees; intensity of land use (10.95 dulac) and differences in neighborhood character in terms of design,--- scale, bulk and height. Mitigation measures recommended by staff were: to preserve all the Sycamore trees and to redesign the product type through providing proper transition density and through providing neighborhood compatibility in areas of architecture, Scale, height and bulk. The developer has i ' incorporated a71 the i&jitified mitigation measures into this proposed project through the following: 1. Providing a building setback of 20 feet from the fault segment; 2. Providing additional it oil and foundation reports, to �V ;,~�.� be submitted for r�v :ear and appro� "al prior to r 7 issuance of building putts, ` - 3., PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT;; Tentative Tract`Ao. 12895 - R. J. Investments " February 13, 1985 rage 5 3. Removal of only one mature Sycamore tree and providing new tree varieties per City standards for number and sizes. (This project requires to plant at a rate of 50 trees per gross acre with 20% of the -� trees to be specimen size -- 2411 box or larger), and 4„ Pr ^vid,ng one -story duplex to the west side of the pr,:�`erty for transition of density. Based upLzs review`,Staff has determined that although the proposed tui � t could have a significant impact on the environment, t�re wiU ---not be a significant impact in this case beca ��th _ tion� measures described above have been added t(/n` oji and the Conditions of Approval.�� Therefore; issuance if a Negative Declaration would be appropria:R�. fIII. FACTS FOR F1 INGS: �e project is consistent with, the General Plan and Develo}� es %7;ode. p' The project with the added mit got Qn measures wild not 'be detrimental to the adjacent properties cause significant adverse environmental impacts.. In addition, thee proposed use, building design', and site plan, together with the ?- recommended Conditions of Approval, are in 'compliance i0th the applicable provisions'-of the Development Code and City Standards. IV. CORRESPONDENCE•, This item has been advertised in The Da'll�R_ep�ort as a pu?'f aring , and notices were sent to ar t e phraperty owners within 300 feet of the d eject site. .In addition, a 4 i=8 supplemental notit: cation sign,kas instaleed on site advertising the proposed development' and. the public hearing. To date, no correspondence has been received rFgarding the project. V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission issue a Negative Declaration and approve Tentative Tract Map 12895 by the adoptian' of the attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval. R .t "sa t+ted, R ck G ez I( ty 1$tiner� :NF:ns , r. LILA-.vv ,^ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF „REPORT Tentative Tract No. 3.2855- R. J. Investments February 13,198 Page b Attachments: Planning Commission Minutes of June 27, 1584 Exhibitf A” - Location Map Exhibit( ("IS" - Site Utiliizat on. & Tree Locjo ons Map Exhibitl1 "C" - Natural Features Map j Exhibit, "0" = 'Aerial Photograph Exhibit "tall - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "F'+ - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "G" - Conceptual Grading /Drainage Plan (2) Exhibit "H" Cross Sections of Site Boundaries Exhibit "ill Conceptl:�at Landscape Plan Exhiiit "J -�` ;tlevations (2) Exhibit "K" ',variation of Roof Style for Dupi�x Photograph of'4i x 8 Notification Sign Summary of Nei �:dorhood Meeting of Januar �` 1985 y Initial Study, Part II Resolution with Conditions of Approval a his a t PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8477 STEPHENSON - A divis n of 49 acres into 2 parcels its the Low Residential District ( du /ac) located on the north side of Lomita Drive between Hellman d Amethyst Avenues - APN -202- 081 -35. Shintu Boss, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the st report. Chairman S!tg4t. opened, the public hearing. There were no comments, there ace,,\ the pub hearing was closed ?J. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded' y Barker, unanimously eared, to adopt the Resolution. approving Parcel 8`477, and issue a Negative Declaration. AXES: C9tWSSMNE EMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT,, NOES: CO MX ONEES: 7. r, ABSENT: MMISSIOIERS: NONE carried airman Stout announced that the following items would be heard concurrently. j E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8506 - R.J. INVESTMENTS - A division of 9.028 acres into one parcel in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du/ac) located on the west side of Baker Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard - APR 207 - 581 -57 and 207- 571 -59. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -08 - R.J. INVESTMENTS The development of a 126 unit apartment complex on =3.03 acres, of land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac) located on the west side of Baker, south of Foothill Boulevard - APR 2,17- 581 -57, 58,, 207 - 571 -73. Dan Coleman, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout open +d the public hearing, Hardy Strozier, 3151 Airway, Costa Mesa, California, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. Mr. Strozier referred to a preseltation book prepared, by the applicant�:;^which was presented earlier to the Commission, and stated that the project is proposed at 13.9 dwelling units per acre and is designed under the Optional Development Standards of the Developmen Code. He further advised that the proposed apartments are market rate and non - subsidized. Mr. Stozier quoted From a 1980 staff report which supported a change of none for this site. In reference to thc� current staff report for this project, Mr- Stozier stated that Qtaff gtrted the Development Code out of Planning Commission Minutes -2 June 27, 1984 i 0 context In reg 4a to consistency with the General Plan., lie quoted objectives £rods page 29 of General Plan which he stated were more Jgstruottve to the Commission. He additionally quoted sections from the`;)eve;Copment Code which referred to transition and stated that transition refers to areas * <not uses as outlined in the staff report, which aot as a buffer between two lard uses of different intensity. He further stated that thi , project provides that transition. fir. Strozier also stated what: not one mea vrabl.e problem 2s identified with the project and accused staff of "boot straping" problems into the project with terms which he claime-1 did a disservice' to the Development Code. He again referred to the presentation boon prepared by the applicant and stated that each concern expressed in the Development Code was addressed:. along with how the applicant,proposes to mitigate egn?h area. Wilma Brenner, £8631 Ramona Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, addressed ties Commission in support of the project. Ms. Brenner stated that the Commission should, have concern for the future residents who could not afford to purchase a ftme. The following individuals` addressed the Commission in :opposition to the pro=s based on Incompatibility.,, traffic, grime, school impacts, density and flooding: Cheri Soya, 8365 Comet, ;Rancho Cucamonga Mike Motts, 8355 Comet, Rancho Cucamor;d Harold Doyle, 8404 Via4.irosa, Rancho �'ucamcnga Ron MoGleery, 8364 Come; Rancho Cuaamgiig Leon Schnieders, 8339 Edwin, Rancho Cucamonga E.H. Thoman, 8475 Cherry Blossom Street, Rancho Cucamonga Lenton Goforth, 8423 Autumn Leaf Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Phil Perd»e, 8651 foothill, Ranohq,Ct monga.. Gilliam Gass, 4$11 Canoga, ApAe int�k, Montclair Jeffrey LOMB, 8452 Comet,. Rancho Cucamonga ?lark Bader 8957 Cedarwood, Rancho Cucamonga Ginger Meh13, 8432 Autumn Lea£ Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Additionally, a petit ,1on containing 52 names was presented to the Commission' in opposition to the projeoy. .y,­.r- IM, Ea kir. Strozier again addressed the Commission and stated for the record that he melt most comments raised ,,by those in opposition to tat 'project were discriminating and based on a distaste for the type of people who 'could occupy the project units. He quoted a General Plan goal which stated that the City should seek to provide housing Opportunities for all people. mr.,Stoxier addressed the issue of access on Comets and stated that this was a requirement placed on the project by the Fire District and Sheriff's Department. Additionally,-he advised that this project would place approximately '40 ears at the intersection of Baker art Foothill at peak hours; and evert without tt project a traffic signal is warranted at 'this location. He further atat�Cyi' that he had never seen a :study which concluded that apartments generate crime. On the issue of £loading, Mr. Strozier advised that the prc jegh -, oul,d be required to install storm drains and flood control measures whioh�`zould Planning Commission minutes s� allevi,lte flooding problems for not only this site, but the surrounding area r_ as well. In response to a question raised, he advised that R.J. Investments manages their own apartment units. Commissioner Cbiciea asked when the applicant proposes to convert the apartments to condominiums. MC. Strozier replied that, b4sed on past practices,- uouve?rsion would be five to Seven years away. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was o1olsed. Commissioner McNiel stated that the General Plan, is a living document and subject to change. In reference to the 1980 Planning Commission decision to rezone this property, he stated, that nistakes, were made which are being 1:'led with today. He further stated in ii @it of the fl3ct that apartni is are 'heeded ` and that the project design and site plan• mceb,, the t.rovisions of the Development Code and General. Plan, he d3A ;not. _feel ii, met the ','rent of those documents and would have to deny the project., Commissioner, Barker stated that the Commission has been placing increasing emphasis on transition of..ensities and compatibility of architecture which this project does not provide.. He additionally stated that a mix of uses already exists in the surrounding ar6:r-and could not vote for approval of this project. Commissioner Hempel, stated that he appreciated the concerns expressed by the citizens, however :solutions could be reached on the acces3 and circulation issue3. He additionally stated that he would prefer to aee open space where people could have recreational activities than to see small lot subdivisions with; =-i house that Movers 90 percaat of the lot. Chairman Stout advised that the Planning Commission recently approved recommen6Ntions to !e forwarded to the City Council which, would amend the Development Code. One of the issues dealt> with transition of densities and that the lower end should dominate the contiguous edges an&-that this project with 13.9 dwelling units does not meet that criteria. Another recommenda ion stated that when s ingle family dwJllings exist An one side, large bulky apartment type buildings should not be placed next to them and that the architecture should be- compatible with the sings family dwelU gs; criteria which this project also does not meet. Chairman Stout additionally advised that the Planning Commission and City Council vet policies which are carried out by the staff and saw nothing in the staff, report which was at odds Uith the direction provided by the Commission. %. rther, that thnre was no necessity on the part of the applicant to point, ,aut- railings 'by the staff on policy issues since the staff does make policy issues. In reference to the 1960 Planning Commission decision to rezone this property, Chairman Stout Pointed out that the City yas less than thpee years old, and would likes to think that the City has learned something shoe that time. Purger, t4lat because certain findings and .decisions were made' in 1960, does not,pean that Planning Commission Minutes -4 June 27, 198A t' S r ,l those same conditions exist today.» in respect to the environmental issues he__,_ ,. stated that the intermitfpnt stream which exists on this peroel is one of the few, running water streams remaining in the City and would 'not like to see it \i channeled into a pipe and dumped into the street; He.,suggested that this might be used in a design element. He additionally suggested, that a >.Environmental_Impact Report might be necessary /'whioji would focus at the least `Further, or traffic. that this project has merit in some other.1"tion of the: City, however, could not approve it at this;aite. �il, .Edward Hopsoni Assistant City Attorney, reminded the Commission that it is .to take action on two separate issues; the parcel map, and ,the site approval. , Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker to 4gny' Parcel Map 8506. Motion failed 2 -3. Commissioner Rempel stated that there was, no reason ,,to deny the parcel map. i Chairman Stout replied that, the environmental issues have not been covered adequately to warrant approvah.` C4)mmissioner Barker stated that he had concerns, with the wording In the Resolution which states that the improvement of th!�,- groposed, subdivision 'is consistent with the General Plan an ,1 'tiat the site is physically suitable for the proposed development. _ Mr. Hopson advised that the word development does not refer to a si,,e�`ypeoific development but is language which comes from the City's ordinances which state that certain findings must be made. Commissioner Rempel stated tbit approval o: the parcel map to recot^d this map 'the • as one parcel requires that storm drains and �;`rhs and gutters must be installed and does nG more. Chairman S -aaut replied that the storm drairage requirement requires than elimination of the stream., Commissioner Rempel repLted that the stream Chairman'Stout referred to from Red Hill Golf Course and that if they didn't water so much, there wouldn't be,, a stream. Additionally, that people would probably prefer to have that water Mmoved.,.fnom the alter rather than have it stand stagnant, Commissioner Barker stated that if the direction was towards approval of the Parcel Map, he would suggest that the language be modified in the Resolution to read that the "site is physically suitable for development" and the woks "the proposed" are eliminated. F Motion:c: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNial, carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 8506 with language moth `cations previously �.� P � stated, and JJ the issuance of -a Negative Declaration. a„ K �,, Planning Commission kinutes" -5- Juripk-,27, 1984 .; AYES; COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, CHITIEA _ y NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, ",TO'i1T ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ,` - car^,ied Chairman Stow and Commissioner Barker voted no for previously- stated �= reasons. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to deny i; Development Review 84 -08. AYES: - COMMISSIONERS: _ „ STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL. ^ NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE' ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FtONG = 'carried 9:05 o Planning Commission' Reeeased `- 9:20 - Planning Commission Reconvened G.—S VIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP _858! - CARPENTER - A division of 4. Gres of land into 2 parcels in the Genera] Indur�rial category (Subar 3} located at the northeast corner of He. loran Avenue and 9th Street - F 209- 033 -12. Z. Shintu Bose, Assooi a Civil Engineer; ;reviewed the staff report. Mr. Bose stated that an amen t ,should be m.-de to page 2 of the City :Engineer's Report, number 2 under' rety,,whicb" would include undergrounding of 12 KV lines along Hellman and 19t Chairman Stout. opened the p c lartmg Steve Lucas, 1275 Elizabeth. Circle, Ut Iand, California,,, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. Mtn, C.,- asked the City's intent on ttie 12 KV line requirements. _ Chairman Stout replied that it is a normal - polier. on s nal.7 ,` to require a lien agreement until a larger parce develops to ma''vi -Ii more economically feasible to underground the lines. Mr. Lucas asked if other parcels in the area which do no have lien agreee�ients Uould havo to contribute to the undergrounding at the-time t is done, Paul RouL.:au, Senior Civil Engineer, replied that if a lien a^, ement existed on a parcel, it would have to contribute. He further, stab gci 'ha the reaso for a lien agreement in thi�_,particular case is that the ben it oust Planning Commarission Minutes -6- June 27, 84 '. ( V - t,' CoI RV 370RAGE .. /f.KSyA'..I,�' iGC1 At �tULikFAHILY� FS�fI�NCEaM' ,�R16LE i • t � V, .� - ^''t •� fY a ��'+,." L..H' n ° i�q�ikY i. flE3, � • ..+ o n Y ." �.�.,� f \�`� � �z Yu ='� ? 1d031LE NOME PARK - I �� La 201 3. i„ ID v • .� . � % • RODE R iM� 1ClYa. W. C, SRIOLC FMAILY RES. s / sa r¢ pp - 8 j 317E CUCAMON Ik G _• 9 - y . �� � �,. � � m ®� � � VACANT T :RRANCNO COCAHANSa + FaiuPiik' r lug +t. -%% p a +! "�' ' ° ^" ¢ y pa .�; p • ,,, p 13 » Silk LE FIMN Y.ILES Ek p f • � . a � r g i( •r � i u C O ® � � ®1.J •T V EY • CY' C 1 \)[Jt� \ \ \S i.,p X]w• MWwle.. h.q' l�i {�Y-,•� - �1Y \ YJaI h.e 1 \CC'• \ M. A v S APR kx v � ,.y F J IL i } It v Y't 6 I L12 -- ..,..>ei� . Tmria. °.+.''O TOPO MAP RANCHO CUCAMONGA APARTMENTS CITY Or, } RANCHO C, TCAlvjo 'GA r TL "i`ITLE. PLANNING DINr]SIGN EXHIBIT= - SCALE, �_ R, Arw - TRACT 0 ' 12895 IN THE CITY ,.- t�RANCHO CUCAMOAGA k• .�s+ - zz:„ri�kR fi`� • xuweswam,ae'as�.damuor wn sown aaeenw � ..�. h ciu a•n.r,t_ws, me carnarsw"¢A° ►'{"�.i` +aTx,.t VDWx ew LOl Kiw.s,L .RW Asa ••3 �.. . 4.'i�,, •; ( sad eagewx,ty lea � , —� ... T *%3 � �•- ( �F*e•..'..�.. y {� * �' {�.�.,ff'"pli•3r���'�'!y .Y Q��Fkok,�•'r4 :L�;. k Milk ALI VIA. 1. t L841 11j�.' f� ,.;l 13 ry a � � t is �l 60 an Rya DR "' sYsf�M ��iitF� ski `u.� f CITY or � i FLAMING bI «ON -: EXHIBIT - IYSCALE.,: -� a+ ;J =- - •J�wYCJ.....t - ar PNVAT2 9 D6LYae[ A IJW • � 7MH 24t2YeaT pg�{`(S SIN VIA OMWA0 LAMt� ee' SAO aWttt t]` SWUM A "emid 13 . Ta• uww•r�Y+we ii; 4;..• r. eltet2 }l tt 1% +.�►]nt }ST1 iwwr+�l5ai.1 waee l]tP etas CDYtT ST !S' r ]a' �" � OiIPCta i,; • 7nxanalu! Y7• 2V` tlp. �+rtT t}'eagoo, a• HPwant:Mi " wrawt }1S.} "— �� JwTSwt]]t.} i Ton ,t Tovraoi�ae 'IC 1r wttn- rAal�r j JaIDJRI' 7 u` nwSrPAwcY v � aeCnoN p �P}oPUTrrwt - - . `" • • fECTIdN g .. +n]etnrTttJ� n :I. - C• w- 1222.2 KiGa }AWIY _ 4C TDM'IDS�i`L L SUIaLt FAULT ti / I KCTION r' - +� Poopom w h NORTH 9 f CITY OF, ULM. Ct�CAA,10,NGA PLANNING DIVIS10,NT (, r T SCai.E Y r 4�o oa ( >11 , - W2�v- -, - ,�'• y )� � v o� ' �,�.Q, a� * yt.a � . A _ ' p � r s� t `,,� t '.. . pa �,. �.` ,: _ u .Q� _ r' ,�'• y )� � v o� ' �,�.Q, a� * yt.a � . A _ ' p � r s� t t pa �.` h _ u ,�'• y )� � v o� ' �,�.Q, a� * yt.a � . A _ ' p � r s� t Q ♦ F" cfi i PIN l" t u W SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD FLEETING FOR TT 12895 DATE: January 31, 1985 < TIME: 7 :00 P.M. LOCATION: Lions Community Center, Gallery West ATTENDEES: Developer Representative: Hardy Strozier' -Staff Planner: Nancy Fon , Assistant planner Residents: Tea Y10) Refer to.sign -up sheet) r, A neighborhood meeting' was held on January 31, 1985 at the `Lions , Community Center by the developer to present to the neighborhood residents the new proposed project. !Notices of such- ,meeting were sent out to property "owners within 300 feet of the project site`(gx notices). Ten residents attended the meeting. A summary of the meeiiylg follows: Mr. Hardy Strozier described the proposed proij ect to the attendees in the areas of density, product type, uni mix, security gates, landscaping and fencing. He also pointed out that this project has been designed to meet the Planning Commission concerns and the input �-om the neighborhood residents. The proposed preliminary prices for t �4,units range from $90,000 to $120,000. The proposed units breakdown are ` j? No. off; Units Type Square Feet _ 36 A - 2 Bedroom 1,027 27 B - 2 Master Suite 1,096 18 C - 3 Bedroom 1,167 18fd[rglEx) D 2 Bedroom/Den 1,127 The attendees had comments and questions regarding the on -site and off site draiiageC'_)f the project; the saving of the mature Sycamore trees, dense landscaping around the perimeter of the property for screening;_ the,;�etbacks of the townhomes from the property line and in relationship to�rexisting buildings; and, the increased traffic along Baker Avenge as well as any proposed traffic signals at the intersection of Baker Avenue and FGothiil Boulevard, .I ?; e 1 Summary of `neighborhood Meeting Tentative Tract 12895 Page 2 Mr. Strozier explained that there will be an underground storm drain pipe installed on site and connects to an existing pipe located at the east side of Baker Avenue to handle all on -site surface water; that only one of the -five mature Sycamore trees will be removed; that this project" will be planted with a variety and a;?�irge number of trees per the City standards;: and that he is not awa-,e of iAny requirements 'to install traffic lights at the intersectioi of Foothill Boulevard and Baker Avenue. Staff commented that she will check into the requirements of traffic lights with the City Tr�lffic Engineer, There was consensus that the design of this propcsed project has adequately met the concerns of the neighborhood residents. - ;eeting was adjourned e;t 8:00 p.m. `-2)r, II CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: _ °fr,�^ APPLICANT: FILING DATE: LOG NUMBER PR`'_ PRD.?ECT j,OCATION: Flpd,�.`(l�(�y�Q� I. ENVIRONMENTAL (Explanatiun of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are r;7quired sheets). on attached 'YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and GeoloQv. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic 'relationships? �+ b. ,DiskuptionS.- displacements, compaction or burial of the _ - ...__- soil? - a. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals ?r d. The destruction, covar,Ing or modification of any ?.nique geologic or physical features? e. Any potential increase in wind or water .V erosion of soils, affecting zither on or off site conditons? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? i(. Exposure of people or property to hazards such as.earthquakes, laud_ t landslides. slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? �'tt�• An increase in the rate of extraction and/or Jfi use of any mineral resource? 2. c.Nydraloey. Will the proposal have significant results in: Page 2 YEs M4YBE o a '1�ichaes,ia tbrresits, or the course of direction of fowing Streams, - rivers, :rnels? or ephemeral stream chan b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or, the rate and amount of surface "ter runoff?. % ++/ c. 'Alterations to the course or ov of flood waters? ,r} Change ,in the amount of surface water in any body of water?" f �f e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water, >Qssaiitp? f Alteratir, of groundwater characteristics? - g 'Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions.or with - drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? 17 s Quantity ? - �J j h. The reduction in the amount of water othar- - wise available for pu'?i,c water supplies ?' I. Exposure of peo ple o'c.' property to water related hazards such as flooding or.seit}tes? t 3. Aar Quality. Will the proposal have significant results in:. IL - ii s. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indiract'saurces? Stationary sources? s' b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or -._. ' Interference with the attainment ofapplicable sir quality standards? ts/ _I C. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moistura l or temperature? 4 Biota '- Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in: i qp a. Change in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plants? Tx� iteductiou of the numbers of as?p unique, rare or endangered species of plants? 11 4 .'d+ Page 3- YES MAYBE NO c • Introduction of new or disruptive species of � ' Ark plants into an area?, t,t Reduction in the potential for agricultural production? Fauna. Will the proposal have significant xesults in: a. Change in the chaiarteristins of species, 'I including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Reduct:4�, ry of the numbers of any unique, rare 9i or endangered species of animals( c, Introduction of new or disruptivolspecies of r animals into an area, or result in a barrier , to the migration or movement of animals ?;_ d. D "eterioYatiDn or, remov��i of existing fish or f wildlife habitat? ��� 74 5, Population. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, sari -� 6 6ution, density, diversity, orb �„r1� -74te of the human are ~" f '►+ population of an a? ,1 _�'`' b. Will the proposal aff8ct existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? �\ 6- Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have i sig— nificaiet results ins a. Change in local or regional socio- etonoc.icj'1 characteristics, including economic.ar commercial diversity, tax rate, and property l values ? - iNCO(J1i1M b. Will project costs be distributed among project beneflciaiies, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users',, 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned Land use of an area? " b. A"conflict With any designations, objectives, policiea, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? c. "An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive OF non - consumptive recreational, opportunities? Page 4 s MYSE o 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: v a. Generation of substantial ad6ltionaf vehicul movement? I ar � b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for / new street const a ion? / ( ` i c. Effects on exis.._,g Parking facilities, or demand for new parking'' d. Substantial impact upon existing transparta- titin systems? e. f}iterations(totresent patterns of ciresla- ti.on or movement of people and /or goads?. f. Alterations to or effects on present and Potential water- borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic ?' g. Increases in traffic hazard. to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resoure`s. Will the proposal have sigrificant res .ts in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, Paleontological,, and/or historical resources? 10. Health, Safety and Nuisance Factors. Will the Proposal have significant- res,ilts a. Creationof any health hazard ar poten 1, `)healtrihazard? b. Exposure , of people to potential health hag�ards l~� c. A risk of explosion or release of ;hazardous substances in the event of an accident?,/�;, d. An increase in the number of individuals , or species of vector or Pathenogenie organisms or the , ,exposure of- people to sc }ch organisms? e. IncV7ea''se in existing noi Page YES 11. Aesth ics. Vill et the ik�niyicant results in.- a - The obvtructl6n or degradatio n of of vista or -,rietf? b* The creation of an aese,�,, offensive Site? _etic� it A conflict Vith the objective 0 f desiSpateq_ or I potential scenic c 12. and PLblic have will the,$Moposal �* M. :lees;. a sIgnificant nell, for—, altetat!':ons tq,.,the followiuR* a. Electx-4c power? b, XI'tUr4 or paaka"d gas? e. co=unication!; 13' 'Water supply? Wastewater facilities? Tlood control �$'�tructures? 9k Solii Vaste fac:Uities? Fire Protection, q I. Police Protection? J. Park.,, or other recretional :Eac�',Ijtips? enaAaM of Pilblic fa' clUtles, Including roeds and floe� control 4acil -Other government" �'ervicesT 13. 7ilill the proposal resulra 'in. a. Ifse of s;uI__,stantIal Dr fuel or energy?, b- SU13kantw -(.ncre -upon existing Ase in demand Hourees C' An increase in tNt dezatd for devel&"Imenc of tetor sources of energy? An Increase or perpetuation of the consumption of noo _Tmewat�le fOr=,91 energy. when, feasil$_ie sOurtes, of an*rgy are avallettle? 0 J Page b !l t 'YES kfAYBE No 1, 1 e• 5gbstant a depletion of an : y:: non�eaet�a� i scarce natural riTsource2 .�� ,� � _ v lk. Handitory j i .)c Si ifica"'. it 1 =, a• POes the project have the potential to degrade ed quality of the environment,' substantially �'eduse he habitatof fish or Wildlife specie S,ause a�fish or wildlife Population tc: dr s below s'61f, sustaining, Revels, threatim to j f-limivate a plant or animal community, redut_ 'the numzi or restrict the ranee �+f a rate` or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? t b, 'noes the project have the ,potential to achieve short terns, to the disadvantage of long— terla,� environmental goals? (A shbrt� ;term impact %t the environm=t. is one '! ;hich occur, in .a relatively brief ; definitive period of sloe€ `�rhilp lang- term Impacts will, endure Yell into the future), . c. Does tfieraject have impacts which are indiviuti lY 11.dted. but cumulatively considerable! (Curaulatiyely cousiderable means that the incremental effects of ais Individual project are considerable - when viewed in connection with the effects of pagh n Viewed and probable future prajectn), t +! d.. Does the project have'.envJro=enta1 effects Which Will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? M DISSCUSSIO)" 'OF EMR01OMNTAL PAf ATION �.� the atbove ques liana plus a discussion af( propose o£ affirmstive answers to f d mitigation measures). I' Ct5 :Page T 7 ]}D '3iNAIION On the basis of this initial evaluation: • c 3 ffnct the proposed project°COULD NOT have a si.gpificaet effect , on the environment, and a Ir1CdTTtiE DECLARATION Lill be prepared: I find that although he ro osed - • 1{�Gfj�� {t � � p pra3zc�� could haves significant effect an the envitanment, there will not be a significant affect: F, in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the pojece. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PWAM. ; T find the proposed project MAY have a significant effetr;,on the envit went, and an EMitCi'iMM ,nTACT REPORT is required. f SSrpature �'?1�► /ztie C) ;a. c ac,T a... .'�457".,3`.� ti. .f^.�"�!j..v_.. �' . �,a. ;�^#ush'�...... r' , - ��i.r+�' „.:E•,� ,. ADDENDUM TO, STUDY, PART II � �+ Sons and =t eologv: i'c1 and (d) The site is try eraed from north to south / intcilmittent stream. The proposed project will cau! an fi ling and covering of this intermittent streartt. According tc the t tv {s °grading and drainage poiiales, the developmeeii of this will require instalIaVon of an undergroun storm dram that leads from the railroad track south .:' Baker _Avenue and ;r connects into an existing channel an,'�he east side !,f EAer ,' Avenue. This storm drain is integd,�t to 'deviate historical i't 1 flooding problevs -for prphA"fw . or ners tw tie 'south= "this mitiga art ntaa"re has ' treen'" incorported as a condition t,ef approva'i for the pr pased>projpi:t. Soils and Geology: ti A supolementt f rlt investigation study y done in conjunction with t­i previous development plans (DR 84 -08).. The study had identified that the 'potential active fatiit ,segment:iocted at the northwest corner of the site could. expose people \\-or property ta° geologic hazard. To mitigate this impact, 'the study had reioavo6 ded that a building setback of 20' scrodd d_ provided and that a: new soils and fo!tndation r�aort s�ould be sub�titted prior to is-14 of buiid3ng g�_bits t address the issue , liquefaction in Tight of the possible significant rice in ground: water levels. This project "has a buil4ing.sete -rk of 2011, and 'the developer has agreed to submit n soils `and fotmdation reports to address the liquefaction issuer { 4. Biota - Flora: (a) The site contains ?e maturt� California Sycamore and four { Eucalyptus" trees. _MTh is prof vci- �, +i II cause thf, removal of one I Sycamore tree and aji _ our of the Eucalyptus kr+'o.. Per City.,__ standards, this propos��project`is "required to grant 50 trees ?; per gross acre with'2t%'Vf' the trees to be specimen size. - - 241, box or larger. Therei�e, tats project has mitigated the removal 4f 5 mature tree;; by - prov:dIng for new tree varieties in p?,jmber -'and �;izese n 0 �`� F ♦iii d .. c 7 . RESOLUTION NO-. A RESOLUTION OF TOE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ,CONDITIGNALL't APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 112'895 h WHEREAS, lf�,tative Tract Map No. 12895, . here'inafter "Map's submitted by R. 'J. Invest-ients, applicant, "for' the purpose of subdividing tiiz real property 01pated lq the City of Rancho Cugamodga,- County of Sari Be htta_�dino, State of California ii deseribed"As the developrrcnt of 99 tow fuse unfit and tot I'of common area mi g.O3 acres of land ir; -the Medium Resi.d6ptial Restrict loce;ed on the wes ±- side of Raker, 950_feet south of Foothill 6o'dlevard, " regularly cam4 ='gfo're the PlannIng;Comrnission.for public hearing anj actlip on February %,; 79Ss�;and WHEREAS, the City Planri:r has recommended approval of the Map subjeci % to al 1, conditions' T "orth in the Engineering, and Planning � oAis _-fs r. -�Qrts; and WHEREAS,,, the .Planning, Cananission has read and considered the Engineering ay_.d Panning Division's reports and has considered other ;evidence -�� present d at_-t�e public hear „ { NOW, THERCFORE, the Planning Commission of, the City, of Rancho Cocamonga does-Tesolve as follows. SECTION 1, The PlaPW4ng.,,Comntission mikes the following fjndings in regard to Tentative -Tract No. 12895, and the Map;tthereef; (a) The tentative tract is icons ist,_nt with 5�e General Plan, _.Bevelopment Code, ark specific putts (b) 'The, fesign or improvements of the tentative tract is iconsisten{ with the C -neral Plan, Oeve,,%pmok�t Code, and specific plans; - (c) The site is physically sultabl _"zqr the development proposed; > (d) The design of the subdivision is riot Iikely to cav-se . substantial environmental damage and ava=dable injury to humans' and wildlife or their habitat; ' (e) The tentative tract is not, likely to cause serious pubic health problems;.; (f) The design;— -� the tzpt tiy, tract,wzll rq� cenfitct with an,*F NNe 4 "nt acquirdd by the :,public ac large, now, of record; for access throdgn sir, use of the, P within the prnr��; ;ed sabo Visiaft. - a +, j n rf . v t L Resolution No. �t Page 2 (g? That this a, ^eject will pot create adverse Vvacis on the envir�h menti,, and a ,,Negative_ Declaration' is -� SECTIC?`, t2• .' Tentativa Tract Neap No. 12895, a copy of which is` attached hereto, is hereby aporoved subjki to all of the followinT"Conditions and the attached Standard Conditiuns: _, 11 , PLANNING dIVTSIDN 1. The perm:tar wall of the Project shape ,:a masonry material. " The � developer, shall obtain authorization from the westerly, prbp�erty owners to replace the existing wood _ fence with a shared masOry wall. 2. Special ecorative wall treatment such as indenil- ions, reveals; �,aised planters, landscaping shall be provided to the 'weste�r,ly culZe sac -- F�rtlleaf Drive, Ricardo Drive and `Via Details of stiLh treatment shall be iraludcd irr he landscape plans and grading plans.. _ I. f Details and '•,,ccrops sectioni -of all seca.^#y gates trd the two emergent.. accesses shall be submitted. to tr,e Planning Division, Foothill Fire District, aRI S4eriff's Department for review- and approval prior to is%once of bt€ilding AftL permits, A copy ,.of such, plan !I-led off by the \Fire District and Sheriff Is Departmen iill be submitted }and kept on file ktith the project. 1 c' A.,Y Contiguous dense landscaping '` be provided along all property boundaries. � Jr. The project entrance at Baker Avenue'shall include 3 Sycmmore trees`to the minimum size of .36 "'box. . 6. Detai1c, . nd cross sect* of the roof'lshowjrg the solar , _ p nalShshkll be the building plans aad snail be :ie� �.d and approved by t'he Planning Division. All roof 'in�a4ntF�'; :lar panels shall be ar�clritecturally screQned wherei�r`i'easibie, _ 7. All fence height including the retaidiog wall portion r shall not exceed a I Resolution No. Page 3 ` `^ 9. The Grading ,plan shaI "include: cross sections of tae site baundaries,�to show any grade differential, deiO s of the perimeter block wall and retaining wall, lociu16h and desi"�n of security gates; and details and cross sections f of the Iwo emergency access. c 10.. Secondary sufface drainaga., to Baker Aven:ae " shal l be 1 provided. // APP ,ROVED AND ADWTER THIS 130 Vfi OF FebrL.1ry,` 1185. PLANNING CONtMISSION OF TqE CITY OF k4,NCHO':6t4a% Al Dennis L. Stout, Chairman f Rick omez,'�retary 7 k .�A� ' 41e ,Rick. Gomez, Deputy ecretary of the Panning Commission of the'City of Rancho Cucamonga; do bby',,certify that t fo.egotng „Resolution ,was duly and regularly introduced hasse�i, and adopted b he Fi'etiMlfi ;en, 0� Sion of the Catty of Ranchb Cuca[rronga, at a regular mee ;rfg of =tti�e._�ianning''C {pmmission held fl tff'=_ 13th day of February, 19855, by theNllowing�te -to -W3 AYE ": COMMISSIONED.' N .S; COMMISSIONERS.- ABSENT: CdMMISSIONERSc \ i \ .n n. r fj ^r Of 7 � kr L — t. i, r ' �oCa HOy.. +s .oti'�a71 j�J o p�Ld .Y,i m a qrN .G.am •Q A� d,�Nd a E Ct. tp NUJ. 06 E 4 G 1f EGRrYn Gd 4 C V a C.,,�� CY °,0 SOON. �+ '• A Ot a pq.�' .. 4q yl"5,,,4 L^ ativ �.Oi. �...,'a __ OGada.N Ya v"- da v... O m LLL n r dqp. F G a+u ar .A�Ya>• • al x}„a+ p L C �� ^d yw FNS Oq']au'O O^ L np G.0 9 �9 paVq n G~ O 16 L O i¢ R 9 Y V ayaN C/ EE 9NN d} ^ p 9 NCI L� E A C4 �NdG L_ E o d y o o4 Gxvy g:4:.5 L q� q `GR d.0 SdY' '. :to t'ms.� •O }OVN aRM.d NG •` ` T q .,�ddv .uia°a. J ti RRC CY. SO. 4y u� U Od. nc •,. o dCad.N �gya.9. rt0 ' Cc _.^ O n �.^ G p.a �l. 9�.y _mom a1 GE _ �N p .f IZ td J q ld �yOr O.OG�N 6 6y Aad >v d Lp9 p ^� S sit! .G. L•pjO p�Y. 08 �� u� I S Y. C L . O nRd T R Ur 6. GCAU d N R C, �Ual. C60C�.4 099 S OduL .1+9q EG � y Md dY EG OCC � _ do V V Cy rNi•;4 9 �d E4udi.y wKr V odM O MC: -4 R.G qJ qYO }F Y^., • a`.5•.��, RN \ j` O. L N d� F d�4A49YN td.g30 4.d Mr�- LLN NN QCIdN Ora! 9� V K4 ✓ "¢M+�VMY 4 6�p0 O,yGjO pp �JC 4 �.'y0 _F OR fa aYLaLi 6.m 6S^yp rD p Lc�Y rd'iiE a �. N � S ENO .. s so. v c a A�- '46..i 7'-a ^° x. 4+ c Rnu, c .. ecm. Nc1 —45 Im a y! � Y ✓- 9a.,nm t�.. n d n W qa'0 6Nd o d C S.F Nu yryO OG4�� R FI Ob 'ul G G<rr• L q t. m pp 3L L yE C-lCdTVtsi >� i '. G d gO...pDL .Q.• •� d <4• =a a m° 9 y0 qp q •� N r K 6_.,V C O O O L�'1 Y G Y 4 q u j C� d sY'd d' d`d 4 A S e _ N KAS�G < w LNL 9r•q ON cE n wFy V g a`°, L a 'W '> o3:a mr m'`.., `Y be 4 L oY yacQ ^o. � =`PLC V' =I, paa Oa Sq« u�Qq �Rd 4cLbCRma GCE °Cp° eSo^ .hod,. —Ryq b yao a. =EpC} dT a pp-,trg NuC ... ;N ya < R° aA E O C =d _uU 'Y JG> ° ° '{ W ` r 3m6 uoL' g �lwa p4 Rra.9.9 �` =.Y NLN F•+94R G. CE�6'00. �) TAObRTD a aGALL:A Ir. aa. o n.-- <mo° o.iQ . .oc'G°yada aai AGO a a uo.°= eau _ � e d EA i Q i 1 55bI O °NA= tiNQ L pp A a `R FOT Ce i`wa L N °pQ q L< AC N q « Z U U u G�GY.v .<Ly . T G ° 4,pi= °«i V a a aC y' °• O .b�•�aRY T +SRN ? +h a a n b bLa,esnt °Y o 4.�V.R xGO ,n3o Q Y �.yZ I I 'ZI d kcR�y d� ` `a°O d G ET Y Vflq OC °� M cH° YNAN V M1� ^Sd�LA c d COb S l�N i 4� QN CVI ad.l �qi E d�Ny - E L F FGV �I ^O d w L G 4a u G G� �C O LO O O � L •ir ` < d i � «R I I w�Y� N «v. aTiLS3uLi.Ytl R Rlw°.M MY+O.. `r`ILi, W. -.:.F CC ca °nca 4MMR = =res l 1 I N q° + C7I�V : : A G NRL q + 3RES�Le ^r' c cD�yEMJ E E« .° �.Q E F-x R.,°tie °„< ..� •u R REG -"Os �i _ J � q U Js^at� GR hi« NCO QC ^ ^t « ^y R v •n q <N D qi MO U Y gala y OUdD .+...Rd,.a� y Go�'c Z a l cny ibv�_ Ebd b w cD '°lNy LDMU � R 'U.Y O G.0 ee,, roomy D b J.H� t. LN �T RO TUi L4 4 .,tea �`c�,,,y, � db s,�' ►n..� � ��':' u. maw . }1 C Od Co r VR'^ S�M,c A^ Ap EE u b G n 4dDLN iu .rNZ R�r y�a 'o Np b •O �C bOf aaw 99 N.ptpL ro b. 6 p O.: Ocm q.'o� G�.� �r.C•+G"' L i tu.� SLU ♦ NL 1 C 9s: '91yd cn �c fi.iC O Eo: D Q QN qw �.mU 'I O CY'G E� nEf d'A Y. R.z Gj u'. L T. C l.1y IF °d_A nz �L SAO GroCd NU Lbtt U i N y Gd OD.y Od7N dql. NN'N �.r Oar.. GnG�O NdJ 4V G L. C 4>fT d G b V Clpyq ....pN I Ld'Uf{ y c,w o`."'O dv a.�q of std a a �w1f1 Nzro� dLa'a Gap�pp J R..0 AN.4 CC ^ m N C CS'CN T Tr • d.+.y gi. rK d ° yr C b H u V L r ' _ b U G Q UbC •.O. F LL d d k t ~� ro Nom= _�Y 1U YL!lJ. St!iN.d "C RyOL Cu. 4�OnCN l-Na YY N N q Zj..L.. �.nC 6TC - i" J 4 M vM ac L ae; g mrd.n ww uro .na°o �•�o n" a'�'.. - + G M E N v S q,�y p.G�. SN.�Gb L- Md•GY ^OA N4 pC ' N OF �¢Y. UYS Law Vd 7.,Q� >rN b b R 'Eo Rrrqq 9} LLmS NAL -LLiI, C iq CY n �4N RGV CC'.O -. 3C," �. ►.Y O QU..Crt OQ Mg- g;3 �L In 4... wN A Ad ddd. b Csiir Gj.'@ ycN cE.N wy lid dg� U� pCt a4 a� b C� d UO V�� OroCJ Ur G.DL�8y may^ 6Y. q. R A C: N b0 3CN6ro n0 tl4l- M C V O yd . U O� LAN.. d r� G�O.N r }4.4 au,��Gd•C O`O.O ,0y7g ��u <y c.° >uQq uz w C Nt'gR Cc u.. C d4 c UGC , = L W r O DNR 09pFFS E Yw> \' 0 MiA C 1 : V U R ua by wwro r� Riy.. c�L Ndm zEg c ;'� w.h at` dy Ol OVd roY ♦4 y E�~m! add. y .SCF L"q K:. QN OU COIUU VO S R rGyd r TM E L GwU ��.n . l M T L d'a; Y pd ky ddgD rc- '� L TR O .+ .+ ..CUC Rs \p� Tf�LR Yh =1..0� �ry{�.N� LLl dCA .iNµ LiD.irt 9 6ro vµi �6n�d'ti KR I+O »• R C�IQ iu ey aM1'PRD ary�N aN KNw..'1'NiC F�L. Xer L 1 6 T ' t (f (> 4 o yA .c.°a»rsx. a ZZ i- =c rs w m V Tom. +f y,� p gE . �L Y 6 �' `.' �• bra dE �ff �S[ 't1L V. iS3 mrT 'qO i"4 l?�m` >,^ -01 .Z O O a a- c��.i�i -c a. >_a °.�m°a. °�_., �.. +c ,so vm '? � wa mum.. a.3acw�I :n --�.. - :&S" :+its. - 1 n, y� m a GC �L^f L gipy. w c� +gym' Yai� i C M<>S Z. It pq. sLT.' KO p V ~'y �G pOC r BLS ��6 YC �� v. »m to � �NL EL m^ A9r ». �S•C �� r. m �� _M °v c Cp.�. c m LL c . inni g-o a� Yv� wx z`o: c ✓n.: o .- rm-E.. .mdc co. +.Lµ : .. Op d:s • cm C a p R '0 0� TL R"4VS ✓ C ; c ;4 qa aY.�py � - T ��r.eica ram r ..E c+ sq - v i 0 � t P i O > b u So v Z. O Y • 6 d °a6 PLC CE P� ...`p yO�.N Oo _ (y �s �° P aL Y rye L6 dr. O y17 P o i a a GO q9R L.e aE ^6 P� �= _ F CL m. E C TO Lp Y °y pR `�- O G U. , � 4 4ET 'cy y .2a �R. YStl LY. E'4p N 1 e II C L_' 4 M C PE e8 te.yq e 4 r'� O V� °e HCy A G.p.� aQtl OT I °G 7. _ V CYO•. ', rrP 4o C4 Cw�idKyr. R� 43^`V .eS �IL 4GbV¢ Gtr „ YA Ld. � ZZ Fit 75 Xg 9 tle °G a4Od VBJa C OY'. LE C4 at'� >r4 *+_ .' m .a. u_�. ° ».'? p z �,°y .�� as s Te, ♦ ' _. er � COY r,0y aYilC � 2 ❑ -i:�� Lam... A. v. 4• aE Y �Lrt 4 e4t:0r Ey O�, C.y Y=Y- tl..� L gFy afa. °moLviceo� of rye:+._ <j Lc £E tl O° P t i q 1 e y O q _ s 9 � ' o\ oil t QY ♦QO C V ~ u d - y i f Gh 3 - � } 01 v ♦E. is d nEro Y.. uW is $ V 'n r n v - my. A' 1r iCL AO 2 CN '.dd �. 4vU OQ d.i EL p V w a �. o✓ v o° G w..�. _Q y ,pso i .. 9V Y� yf ` to d:C L v.r-d. all 1 17- t en'v Z. >Y 1 g i V_��'Y O q C N p,Q p q 09 G L L q � L to C rl e' d D E O Y dr Hutt A C W L 1 01V dY i. -'' % O L L isle i C M1 ^^ L a O "..00 9 S `. 9b y N + I pp6 CY OCJn '.1 A. Ew z d a ^= nY dy n ti ° u 9y S 4 L R ac b J 9 IE n� LY.p -01 A a 'F ny' Y�o ` C ^ Orc� w9 y. O 1J �fS X .s o¢ u� V ;r 4 G d 2 N � f. T V• Vaw L O q c d E A A �' Y� o'. °„� a� o as t M m o ¢6 Ta d re V O w V n� � lip� r LY ♦ L� ino «« at w 1 O Y dr Hutt C � C W L 1 01V dY i. -'' % O L L isle i C M1 ^^ L a O "..00 9 { Or NLLY`..uy `. 9b y N + I '.1 A. u 0 ^ LO.N�= z d a ^= nY dy n ti ° u 9y S 4 L R ac b 16 - s i n 9 IE n� LY.p -01 A a 'F ny' GQ+E py 1 C ^ Orc� w9 y. O r L 6 xz O.W .s 9Y Al d dy 4 G d 2 N � f. T V• Vaw L O q c d E A A �' Y� o'. °„� a� o as t M m o F p •-u dam' Ta C V O w V n� � lip� r LY ♦ L� ino «« at Qi AyE •ry =a 3 •• CA- az C a 1n o Ei f Lv t > y.y N a 4S �•n Q Y NQ —t N A yQ d C - E.c Nom. � �.c.. �V b► o OV �` .•�+ �.r�._... +• A '9 Z N Y A M A a � L E � ZN •r•l yC �� y V L a �C`L, 1� '•a O� u�a OA ..9.W u. �U. J4E „ GQ u�- 'o Z. A Y E FAQ uu Ta a V Ask, ca•-° Nd` qm ^.a LN y 3N Nv ae,. m3 ��.y L v �o _ �' c o• y 4 n L Of. •.�. 3 L L Ot � C.... � a r a i C � G C C 6 .-y y uv NaQ N. i SL 31 �r CITY OF RANQ CUCAXONGA STAFF REPORT° Z' DATE: February 15,,198a �� i� - 1°77 TO: Chairman end Members of the Pla::ning Commissilon � FROM: Rick Gomez City Planner Dan Colemani:,C: �or Planner t SUEa'eCT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AN6` GENERAL, PLAN P,.MENDkf l* 85 -02 amendmea3t - to the Pu is Hea th and Safety ElPmFnt to I prWVr d co'nj Steney with State Law Provision 'of the f Alquist-Prolo,.Act; as amended. I � I. BACKGROUND: The AlquistjPriolo Special Studies Zone Pict, as mended, a _s intended to pr hibit the location,of certain types of developments :jnd struOlioes for human occupancy across active faults. In order, to implejhent the Act, the, date Ge8-logist � compiled maps delineating Special Study Zones for �irthqua,e faults. The City's General Plan adopted in 1951 includes a Seismic Safety and Safety Element within the Public Health and Safety Super Element. - Portinns of the Policies regarding seismicity within the Public `Health any;_, Safety Element are 1�consistent with the exemptions provided for by the Alquist,Priold Act. The language.in these . policies need to be clarified to refer to the Alquist -Prf io special Studies Zone Act and the policies�ind criteria of the State Mining, and Geology Board regarding de'Velopment within; the Special Study Zones. The proposed .changes are attarhed for your review and consideration (new text is boldfaced). l� II. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: `Parts Y and II of "the Initial Stud y ha 1 ig __ been compiet by Staf Based upon completion of the Initial Study and Environmental tihecklist, staff has found no significant adverse environmental impacts as a result of . tile proposed (� changes The environmental %P,7�Ct, of the seismicity policies of :the Gener:'; Plan were folly �r,il,yzed in thec.Genera1 Plan EIR certif�e' =by City council in 19811" .,. III. FACTS AR FIi4DINGS The modifications to the language in these P011c7es wuuia provide consistency with State Law "Provision of the Alquist-Priolo Act and comply with tfie',eollowi;ng findings: A. -The "'Amendment does not conflict With the goals and policies of the Public Health and Safety Element of the General Plan. yn , ITEM L 1 rS� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT peneral; Ptafr Amendment .+� -t32 } February 333, 1986` Page 2 J r ff D The Amendment does promote Ahe intent of Vii Alquist- Priolo Act; and C. The Amendment would not be detrimental to the Public HeOth or f significant adverse impacts'. t Safety,. or cause s� n�fi CORRESPONDENCE: Thos ,item has been w;'zrtised as a Public Hearing- •, �;`_n The -Q il' Re ort newspaper. To date no correspondence /'ioas been rereiv6d regarding,,the proposed amendment. RECOMMIENDATiONs it is recommended that the Planning 'Commission consider the proposW amendment, to the Public Health and Safety lenient..,_ ti Res tf ilyigubmitted, 3 R ck omez'' ty/ 1.4onH1, r r G:DC:ns I Attachments: Figure V -3 y General Plar Excerpt with Proposed Changes Wjuist- Priolo Act 1� 1n),` -a1 "•Study, Part i I = j �. Reso),�Mfi of Appr;,val of General Plan Amendment E� 0 z- i f � .�< Q a > W M L : .2 t w Q 0 § ^�. N ON b E &§ ~ n ) / § \: \K cc LU » .. § .LU co 0. $ : K 2) A. \ <�$$ LU \ O k / \k {/� m # \ t ¥q.Pw « lit �,■ � � ] \ � � } \ � I � ƒ 2 «® « 14111 < «.. �, . EXCERPT FROM THE GENERAL PLAN a and Welfare, and 3nteri;ity of use (see Table Restrict the location of critical structures and facilities from geologically hazardous" areas, unless no, alternative is available (_,,se Table a Support seismic research through apiropriate - act. %ns by all -,public agencies., ii o ttequire spe6a'l construction features in the iestgn of structures where site investi- atiars 6mfirm Atentiai seismic hazards. POLE IES, o Any major subdivision, emergency faciity, or other, f;'pe of structure tht" attracts numbers e:;t,peoRle, is open to the general' PUblic, or rWovides esst',tiai community services should=' not be Permi%Z�ed within, an Alquist- Prinlo Special Study Zone,:jas shown -, in Figure 1 3." o The < most- probable locations of future fault rupture ace, . within the special studies zone as &s gnaVea ' , the maps compiled by the Stag Oablogisl�-., .tinder the Alquist- Priolo ' :aoiog'ic ;Hazards =Sne Act. Any proposal fare evelopwlettt of a project, as defined iii Section �M,.6 of the Alquist- PrfoTo Special Studies _Zofies Act, with-In ZKO fdti6 $#01; A"i��W an Alquist:- Prinlo or City ad tel Spacial Study Zone, as sham in Piaure l sh tl inelp3e a report ,by a Certified engii,�dering geologist 0$ tffe 7440106 01% ' _ce :- istent With the guide] inve 'and crii^ter3�,> the Alquist= Prinlo Special' Stu:: es Zones J Act. \ o No strjl tures for ' ri�man nccupaac;Y, other tha singl?�F�ily wood' 'frame' x`Vgf -,Ufig dwel , na"� exee€diA,g tyn• ator�es,'.iyea such filing, is not pad of a des�elopmetA�I of four.: worms dwelltgs li v he, permittgf to be, ,ql:aced across . �� -trkd$ i'e of an active d �a�a( ^ Ad. -NA ?fault ra stru ry �� ILA14 , 0701 -02 o 2_23 --85 PC Agenda o 6-of 6 ------ --- ---- - _ -= Im 1� for human occupancy shall not be locate /t within 50 feet of an sctiVe fault trace. there fz tAts cannot be(- er ifically located, Gy the probability of fr,At rupture shall be r investigated and, where appropriate, buildings shal<1 be designed to acconmisdate foundaVon offsets while retaining strua,.ture integrity. 23 o Aestrictions which apply within state r Vesignated ; Fault H-4ard Speciai Studies Zones for the Cucamonga, fault shall also apply to the City adopted ,Special Studies Zone for the 'Red Hill fault, Any proposal for development of a.project, at defined in Section 2621.5 of the Alquist„Priolo Special Studies Zones Act, within either Special. Study Zone shall 1!40401! A f0d6ff Of fnfOWatfM 41 A 40911fod 06090offid 40470619% 09 W)'d OW Of fl)(It t AU% woof Ada gos flevit ,Tdl mol %Ko pfdaf�ffyf fadXf rdpdre fna 90 ,te4W1190e4 $001 AiKdfe ANHOW01 a x e 007 Ki 004)(00 to xeeo" o f0900AUM WW ° ffe .r�fafrif� f �t � e foy4ti v Dame` kith the Poiicies and u Criteria of the S "tel Mining and Geology - 84ardl witharnfos�j±r. to the .Alquist- Priaolo Special Act. 0, e o All proposals' t *o; critical structures, i regardless of ,'l eatzon in the City, shal;i _.include investlji.t ens :sf the geologic and i engineering conditions of the ,Critical" structures include those facilities ` requied to maintain order and to provide emergency se,vices following an earthq. ke such as polio and fire stations and , 1 hospitals. Whiere appropriate, building �- design,5ha[l include aTlow4P' %gs for offset of building foundations .1esulting from surface displacement. the City Building Official shall require critical structures within the City to be designed to remain functional following the makimum credible shaking at the site of-the structure. o Potential sites for grade separates interchanges .; on ) isting and proposed highway i-coniftructilin within the Algdist Priato Special Study. Zvn�s thaul4 be , reV id .� by the City: Engfseer� 0 � rt Z a All proposed maor ui1 rty Imes, including gas 1ine:�, power transmission l =,fi --- nes, water xi stribution (lines, and sewe lines, should be prevented from crossing a potentially ' active fault. Where altern6t6 routes are `— not possible, facility design must sat6iactorily demonstrate adequate systems 4 1� of valves, switches and ;_other" ,14quipment to, minimize danger to the c,�suri`ounding development„ Where ` appropt�', Stxh systems should include devices e of shutrrlg off gas flow in the ''event of a plpei %iae rupture, o The city should encourage cooperation of the County and surrounding,-;- comaunities in a program to 'improve /(the data base of geologic /seismic inforriiaation The data base ` « should be used as part of normal development revieri procedure, a The data, base should include information in fault locations Aft J/ it / 1980 FAULT-RUPTURE HAZARD ZONES Pi CALIFORNIA 19 APPENDICES Data are presented herein to provide City and County officials, property owners, developers, geologists, and others with specific information they may need to effectuate the Act in practice. Because the Act must be implemented at the local government level, it imperative that the local entities undetsmnd its various complex aspects. No parallel, case of statewide zoning has been previously legislated in California, and it is inev;table that a certain amount of confusion exists during the initial stages. of implementation. Appendix A ALQUIST— PRIOLO SPECIAL STUDIES ZONES ACT Excerpts from Califomia Public flescurces Code DIVISION 1. ADMINMTRATION tB) A single - family wood frame dwelling not exceeding two CHAPTER 2- DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION st-Jes when such dwelling is not part ofadevelopment of four Article 3. State Mining and, Geology Board or more dwellings.. and the Division of Mine and Geology (b) For the purposes of this chapter, a mobilchome whose body width exceeds sighl filet shall be considered So be a single- family wood frame dwelling not exceeding two stories. 660. Theteisin the department a State Mining and Geology Board consisting of nine members appointed by the Governor. 2621.7. This chapter, except Section 2621,9 shall not apply to 673. Theboardshall also serve as a policy and appeals board the conversion of an existing apartment complex into a condo- minium. This chapter shall apply to projects which are located for the purposes of Chapter 7.5 (commencing with Section within a delineated special, studies zonc j 2621) of Division Z 2621.8( -" chapter shall not uppla to alterations or additions i to any Sir, 't within a special Studies zone the value ofwhich does not ex kd 50 percent of the value of the structure DIVISION 2. GEOLOGY, MINES AVO MINING CHAPTER 75. SPECIAL STUDIES ZONES 2621.9- A person who is -Acing as an agent for a seller of resi 2621. This chapter shall be known and maybe cited as th-. property which is located vrithin a delineated special studim zone, or the seller if t o isncting without an agent, shall disclose Al quilt - Priolo Special Studies 7ones Act. to any prospective purchaser the fact that the property is located 76215. It is the purpose of.this chapter to provide for the within a delineated special studies zonc adoption and administration or Toning laws, ordinances, rules, 2622. In ostler to assist cities and counties in theirptanning, and regulations by cities and counties in implementation of the general plan that is in effect in any city or cr—�sty.The Legisla- zoning, and builrling- regulation functions; the State Geologisr shalt delineate; by December 31,:1973, appropriately wide spe- t uredeev, .csthattheprovisionsofthisc4api .are intended to ciaistudieszonestoencoin pass al potentiallyandteantlyattivb provide policies and criteria to assist, dties, couatties, and state traces of theSan Andreas, Calaveras, Hayward, and San Jacinto agencies in the exercise of their re#ponsibility it prohibit the Faults, and such other faults. or segments thereof, as he deems location of developments and structures for human occupancy suEiicieutly active and well�ned as to constitute a potential across the trace of active faults as defined by this board. hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep. Such. This chapter is applicable to any project, as defmrA in S:ction special studies zones shall ordinarily be one - quarter mile or less 2621.6, upon issuance of the official special studies zones maps to afrectedlocal jurisdictions but does not apply to any develop- in width, except in circumstances which may requite the State Geologist to designate wider zone. merit or structure in existence prior to May 4, 1975. The im- Pursuant to this section, the State Geologist shall compile plementation of this chapter shall be pursuant to policies and maps delis*eating the special - studies zones andshalt submit such criteria established and adopted by the State Mining and Geol- maps to all affected cities, counties, and state agencies, trot later ogy Board. than December 31, 1973, for review and comment. Concerned 2621.6. (a) As used in this chapter, "project" means: jurisdictions and agencies shall submit all such comments to the State Mining and Geology Board for review ild consideration (1) Any subdivision of land which is subject to the Subdivi- within 90' days. Within 90 days ofsuch review, the State Geoto: Sion Map Act, Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410) of gist shalt provide copies of the official ma s 0 concerned state Title 7 of the Government Code, and which contemplates the agencies and to each cityorezuntyhavinglurisoictionovi ;rlauds eventual construction of structures for human occupancy. Structures . lying within any such zone. . (2) for human occupancy, with the exception of: The State Geolo&Mshallcantinualiy review-new geologitlarid , (A) Single- atmilywood frame dwellings to be built on parcels scismicdataandshatr revise the spxW Studies tones ordelineate of land for which geologic reports have been approved pursuant 'to additional, special studies zones when warranted by new mfor- the pro;, inns of paragraph (1) of this subdivision. mation. The State Geologist shall submit all revised maps and .= 20 CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY SP 42 additional maps to all affected cities. counties, andstateageitcies for their review and comment, Concerned jurisdictions 2624. Nothingin this chapteris intended-to Prevent citiesand J and agencies shall submi: ail suehcommentsratiteS tateMiningand Geology Board for review and consideration within counties front establishing policies and erteriawhicharesttioser than : hose established by this chapter, orby the StateMiningand 90 days, Within 90 days of such review, the State Geologist shall provide copies of the revised and addition-.t o.Rid i Geology Board, nor from impgsing and collecting fees in addi- tion to those required: under this chapter, maps to concerned stateagencies and to each city orcounty having jurisdictionol Pr lands lying within any such zone. Z525- (a) Each applicant for approval of a project may be charged areasonable tea by the city orcountp having jurisdiction 2623. The approval of a project by a city or county shall be over the project, in. accordance with policies and criteria established by the State Mining and Geology Board and the fir linga of the State (b) Such fees shalt be set in an amount cuflicient to meet, but Geolo- gist. In the development of such l;due nnd" criteria, t Po a, he State Mining and Geology Board shalt seek the comment nottoe); coed, the costs to the cityorcountyofadministerin and 8 complying with the provisions of this chapter. and advice ofaffectedcities, counties, and state agencies. Cities and counties shall require. prior to the approval of a (c) The geologic report required by Section 2623 shall be in project, a geologic report defining and delineating any, hazard of surface fault rupture. If sutTeient detail to meet the criteria and policies established by` the State Mining and Geology Boarrl for individual the city orcounty finds that no undue hazard ofthis kind exists, comets of land. the geologic report on such hazard may be waived; with approval of the State Geologist After a report has been approved or a waiver granted, subse- quent geologic reports shall not be required, provided'bhat new zeologic data warranting further investigations 2530. In carrying out the provisions of this chapter, the Statt: Geologist and the board shall be advised by the Seismic Safety is not recorded -,' Commission. SIGNED INTO LAW Of-, ,EMBER 22,1972; AMENDED SEPTEMBER 26, 1974, MAY' 4, 1975, SEPTEMBER 2t(, 1975, SEPTEMBER12r1976 AND SEPTEMBER 27, 1919. 14= Appendix B - j POLICIES AND CRITERIA OF T� "E STATE MINING AND GN� , OGY BCIARD Gil With Reference to the Aaquist— Priolo Sp ,-ciAl Studie ;/Zones Act (Excerpts from the California Admint native Code, rtie 14, Division 6, Chapter 8, Subebopter 1, Article 111) 3600 INTRODUCTION. The legislature has declared in the Alquist -Priolo Special Studies Zones Act that the State Geolo• 2612 of the Public Resources Code, The special studies zones gist and the State Mining and Geology Board are charged under the Act with the responsibility ofassisting the Cities, dsignated on the snaps are based on fault data ofvaried duality. ii u, expected that the maps will be revised as morelompiete and Comities, ond State agencies in We exercise of their responsibility` to pro - videforthepublicsafe�Yinhazardousfaultzones geological information becomes available. Also, additional ape - studies zu %es may be delineated irt the future.TEte Board hz: ' .Asdesignated by the Act, the policies and rriteria set forth he- drafter certain responsibilities regarding reviei ''and consideration of are limited to hazards resulting from surface faultingor faultcreep, This limitation does not imply that other inazrsds those maps prior to the time that they are finally determined. Cities, Counties and State agencies have certain opportiluities geologic are not important and that such other hazards should not be consid- ered in the total evaluation land undtrthe Act to comment oil the preliminary map• provided by the State Geologist and these Policies and Criteria. Certain of safety. procedures are suggested herein with regard tp ti,ose raspon -, - lmplemcntatianoftheAlquist- PrioloSpecial Studies Zones Act by affected Cities sibilities and commenm and Counties fulfills only a portion of the requirement fur these Counties and Cities to prepare seismic" Please note that the Act is not rntrt+netivo ( Section 2621. T of the safety and safctg elements of theirgenerat plans, pursuant to Section 65302 (1) and 65302.1 Of the Governn, Public Resources Code). it epplies to every .proposed now real eslate development orstruc:ure for human occupancy that con -, t'Code.The special studies zot.es, together Will these policies • ;3 criteria should be incorpoa+ted into the local - stitutesa project" ass_ ieGnedunderSeetion362i .5oftheEYUblic Resources Code seismic safety and safety elements of the general plan - ' The State Geologist has compiled un4isin[he 3601 REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY MAPS. The State Mirt- ( ng and GeologyBoardsuggeatstha $eachreviev+inggovernM* rocessofcom il- ing maps dchnea+ tg special studies zot,es pursuant to Section tal agency take the following steps in reviewing the preliminary maps submitted For their consideration: b ` -` l9$0 FAULT- PUPTURE, HAZARD ZONES IN CALIFORNIA 21 1. All property owners within the preliminary special 31tilieszones mapped by the State Geologist should be (b) Application for a development permit foranypinject notified by the Cities and Counties of the inclusion of their lands within said (a5 defined in Section 2621.6) withinaspeciat studio zone Shall be accompanied by a gtQlogic repot[ pre- preliminary special studies zones P publication or other means designed toiuform a pared by a geologist regi.tered in the State ofCalifor- spro said property owners. Such notification shall not of nia, and directed to the problem of potential surface fault displacement through the project site, unless necessity require notification by service or bymaiLThis notification will permit affected property owners to such report is waived pursuant to Section 2623. Present geologic evidence theymighkhave relative to the preliminary [[taps. (c) One ( 1) copy ofall such geologic reports shallberii led , 2.- Cities, Counties, and State agencies are encouraged to with the State Geologist by tht,public'body having jurisdiction within thirty days following acceptance Clarnme the preliminary maps delineating speciaistud- by the approving jurisdiction - The State Geologist ies zones and to make recommendations, accompanied by supporting data and discussions, to the: State Mituag shall place such reports on open file. rod Geology Board for modification of said zones is accordance with the statute and within the time period (d) A geologist registered in the State of California, with- in or retained by each City or County, must evaluate specified therein. the geologic reports required herein and advise the 3. For purposes of the Act, the State Mining and Geology body having jurisdictions and authority. Board regards faults which hive had surface displece- (e) Cities andCountfesmay e<tablfsh policiesand criteria ment within Holccene time (about the last 11,000 which are more restrictive than those established years) as active and hence as censtitu:ing a potential hazard, Upon submission of satisfactory geologic evi- herein. In pars,, ttlar, the Boats! believes that comprr.- hen,+ 'jde gcolol;,.' and engineering studies should be Bence that a f ult shown within a special studies zone has not had surface displacement within Holocene regtured for any "critical" or "essential" structure as previously defined whether or'not it is located within time, and thus is not deemed active, the, Mining and Geology Board may recommend to the State Geologist z special studies zone, - that the boundaresof the special studies zone beappro- (f) In accordance with Section 2625 of the Public Rc- ' priately modified. sources Code, each applicant for approval of a project' The definition of active fault is inicaded to represent within a delineated special studies zone may be charged a reasonable fee by the City or County having minimum criteria only for all structures, Cities. Coun. t:es and State agencies may wish to impose more re- jurisdiction over the project. strictfve definitions requiring a longer time period of demonstrated absence of displacement for critical (g) As used herein, the - following definitions apply; (1) A "p dudes structures such as high -rise buildings, hospitals, and .ajal any structure for human schools. occupancy or new real estate development as defined mderSection 2621.6 of the Public Re- 3602 SPECIFIC CRITERIpt. The following specific and de- sources `ode tailed criteria shall apply within special studies zones and shall (2) A "structurefor human occupancy" is a build- be included in any planning program, ordinance, riles and regu- latiens adopted by Cities and Counties pursuant U said Special ing, as defined by the Uniform Building Code, which is expected to have a human occupancy Studies Zones Act: rate of more than 2,000 mart hours per year. (a) No structure far human occupancy, identified as a (3) A "new real estate development" is defined as anY new development real property which project under Satfon 2621.6 of the Act, shall be er- P milted to be placed across the trace ofan active fault. contemplates the eventual consauMon of tstructures for human o+.;cupancy.'' Furthermore, the area within fifty (50) feet of art active fault shall be assumed to be underlain by active (4) "Story" is that defined by the Uniform Building brinches of that fault unlms and until proven other - Code• For the purposes of the Act, the number w3ebyan appropriate geologic investigation andsub- of stories in building is equal to the number mission of a report by a geologist registered in the of distinct floor levels, provided that any levels State of California. This 50 foot standard is intended wriich differ from each other by less than two to represent minimum criteria only for 41 structures. feet shall be considered as one distinct level. It is the opinion of the Board that certain essential or critical structures, such as high -rise buildings, hospi- (5.1 No change in use or character of occupancy, - ;, which results in the conversion or It building tals, and schools should be subject to more restrictive criteria at the discretion of Citfe; and Counties. More- or structure from one not intended for human os- over; it is recom mended that a geologic report by a cupancy to one which is so intended, shall be permitted unless the building or structurecom- geologist registered in the State of California be re- quired for a single- family dwelling otherwise exempt - plies with the provisions of the Act. ' ed under Section 2621.6, if that structure lies on or (h) It ia` recommended that Cities and Counties transfer within 100 feet of the trace ofan historically active or other known active fault as shown on Special Studies _ special studies zones information to maps of suitable scale showing legal property boundaries,,with Zones Maps orby,more precise or detailed informa- tfdn :sown to the approving authority. advice from theCaiiforafa Division ofMines and Geology if needed, as an aid to show thezones at the parcelleveL Ci) At is intended that all State and regional agencies hi, tvY - f ing approval authority for projects defined in Section 2621. 6sha ll elf- comply with all pmvisfonsof the Actand -' these Policies and Crited& ADOPTED NOVEMBER23, 1973, REVISED IULY I. 1974, JUNE 26, 0175, AND JANUARY 31. 1979 GITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART,,.TT_. INITIAL STUDY = 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST BATE; f " —1Y ' = APPLICANT• r FILING DATE. LOG PROJECT: ° PROJECT 'tOCATION:. ,( i 1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" ans!rers sheets). are required on attached YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geologv. Will the proposal have significant results In. a. Unstable ground condityr ns or in changes in ,geologic relationshi W b. Disruptions, dispi burial of the s a�ements,.compaction or ail? \ c. Change is topograyi y -off grouno,surfar Contour interva7.e j d. The destrugt'on, covering or modification If any unique gea!ogic or physical features? f j e. Any potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? g Exposure of people or property to geologic - hazards such as earthquakes; landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? .e ,. h• An increase in the rate of extraction and/or . use of any mineral resource? . 2. tiydr_ _.10_V_- Will the praposal have significant ` results k Page 2 YES MAYBE NO AM a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, ;rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff ?' c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface „Water in any body of water? e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? 4. £. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? ' g. Change in the quantity of groundwa tees, - either through .d;.rect additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? r Qua ty? t. / Quan( h. The reduction In tbeJamount:.of wat��k other - � - wise available for,4ublic water sulplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water / related hazards such as flooding or seiches? L✓ 3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant results in' a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources?� Stationary sources?, b. Deterioration of ambient ;.fr quality and /or interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic ` conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant leoults in., a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity. distribution;, or number = of any species of plants? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique. rare or endangered species of plants? -Page 3 f. YES _*lAYBE NO C. _Introduction of ne;',or' disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the potential for agriculturalf production? , Fauna. - ,.Will the proposal have significant results Change "in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? f l c. Introduction of new.;or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier l to the migration or movement of animals? ' d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wilalife habitat? 5;. ER ular.lon. W{ll the proposal have significant e results iu* ;1 a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate o.1 the human population of an area? b. Wi?J the proposal affect existing hoessing, or create a demand for additional, bousing? R 6. Socio- tconomic Factors. Wi the proposal have significant results: in: 1 a. Change in local or regio secio- econonde characteri3tics nludi�economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and pror=� y values? i b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? ?. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have si,gn3f3cant results in ?. a. A substantial-ii-Iteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A> conflict with any designations, objectives, Policies, or adopted plans of any governmeptal entities? c. An impact upon the quiaity or quantity of `" existing consumptive or non - consumptive recreatiotal ,oppor unities? Page k I� YES MAYBE ' Na 8. Transportation. or�fon. Will the proposal have significant results in• a._ Generation of substantial addstional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing sir gets, or d g � s errand for_ ' , new street construction ?' < c. Effects on Pxisting parking facilities, or demand for new parking? / d. Substantial !=Pact Upon existing transporta- tion systems? J e. Alterations.,to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of People and /or goods? £. Alterations to, or effects ot[ present and Potential water - borne; rail, mass transi t or air traffic? g, Increases in traffic'hazards tq rotor vehiclesy" I bicyclists or pedestrians? 9 Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have Sir.'Ticant result,, { ; ' in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and /or histoti.cal resources? 10. Health, Safety, and 1?u4sance Factors. Will the proposal have signir`icant results in: ' a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event Of an accident? d, An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Eyposure;of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? g. The creation of objectionable odors? n_ h. An increase in light or glare! ' Page S YES MAYBE NO 1l Aesthetics. Will the-proposal have significant results in: a. The obstruction o'i degradation of ars, scenic vista or view? b. The:`;creation of an aetbetically o+'fensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? ' 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a'signi� f3canj need for new Bystem, car alterations to the follov4ng; a. Electripjower? % b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Communications systems? r/' Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? AOL g. Solid waste futilities? (� b. Fire protection? i. Ponce protection? - J. Schools ?' k. Perks or other recrNatonal facilities? 1. Maintenance of publir,'facilities including ...LLL ' roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental services? 13.- Energy and Scarce Tesou-cw;. Will the `- have si Proposal - gn"Icant results iaz a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or erergy? b. Substantial increasE in demand upon existing sources of energy? r y a�. c. An i=rease in the demand for development of Y new sources of energy? d. An increase or. �s „ Perpetuation of the chnsumpton Of nonrenewable forms of energy, when feasible ` t renewable sources *f energy are available? .YFt 4 � Page �6 � YES; Myg r, WBE 2o e• Substantial depletion oany nonrenewable or scams natur;il resou'ce ?l� ^ �c 14. Mandatary Findinsts of a � J(! -- --^. -. icni£iaznce. � f a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a; fish or wildlife population to drop j below self sustaining Level s. threaten to eliminate a plant or ani-nsal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate { important. examples ofi*e major periods of California history ar� ehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve I Short-term, to the disadvantage oS long -term, 4z. environmental goal% ?" Wsbort -term impact on the - .vironment is one which ,occurs in a relatively j brief, definitive period we time while long 7- term impacts will endure "weYl into the iutur g }, � c. Does the l project have impacts wi:cts are Individually Ti*ted,,,but cumulatively considerable? il4'CumulativeYy considerable means that theAncremental effects of an individual pFyiect are considerable when, viewed In connection with the effects of :past projects, and probable future.projeetsj, d. Does the project have environAental effects whit$ saial -fi a subst4�ntial adverse effects OIL human beings,_either directly or indirectly? ZI DISCUSSTon nr EsnrT,, ?i£-- SVAtViTIl7Y (i.e�s of ai�i ative answers to the aiiove questions plus a discuss}on`ox proposed Mitigation measures) * !� gage 3. DETEENINATION On the bas of this initial evaluation,, r l find Lhe prig posed project COMD NOT have a significant f+f£ect as the envircy=meut, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION WUI be prepared. LiX find that although the PT410sed project could have a sign3F�cant effect an the l,envisamaent, there will not be a =significant effect In this cas aecamse the mitigation measures described on an attached s. at have been added to the project, A NEGATIVE I DEELARsTI i3LI. BE PREPARED, fin3 the posed project S�iAx h e a g'nifi t £feet an the euvlrz ;ent, a�3 an ERVIROMMn ACT ORT Date T - tare ^�\ y L S ` .;Title � : a ' I o .a r q 1,f i� „ J RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF l RANCHO C. NGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL; OF GENERAL PGX AMENDMENT NO. 85 -02, AMENDING THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SUETY ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN, TO Tlf�;ITY COUNCIL- WHEREAS, thy_ proposed *.andment is necessary to provide consistency with State Law provi�;ion of tk4 Alquist-Pr4tolo Act, as amended; and - `` WHEREAS, on the 13th day of February, 1985, the Planoingt,Commission held a duly advertised public hearing,., pursuant to Sec`Lion 65854 of the ' California' Government Code., SECTION 1s The Ranchc`Cucamonga Planning Conmi >sion has made this following findings: 1. That the Amendment does not conflict with the Goals and Policies of the General Plan. 2. That the Amendmen`�does promote goals of the Public Health and Safety Element:—_ -% 3. Thai the Amendment wool not be detrimental "to the public health or safety or ca, a significant adverse �Apactsi7 SECTION 2:, The Rancho C f or Planning Commission recommends that the following seismicity policie`bf the Public Health and Safety Element; starting on page 236, be changed'rto read as follows: o The most probable locations of future fault rupture are within the special studies zone as designated on the maps c � fi' led by the State Geologist under.the Alquist -Prix Geologic Hazards Zone Act ;,Any proposal for development of a project; as Khne6 an Section 2621,6 of the Alquist - Priolo Special Studies Zones Act, within an Alquist - Priolo or 'City adopted Special Study Zone, as shown in Figure V-3, shall include a report by a certified engineering geologist consistent with the guidelines and criteria of the Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone Act. o No structures for human occupancy, other than a single- family wood -frame dwelling not exceeding two stories when such dwelling is not part of a development ;�of four or more dwellings, shall be permitted 4 be placed across the trace of an active fault. Woodframe structures for human occupancy shall not be located within 50 feet of an active fault trace. Where faults cannot be , C lJ ~' } j Resolution No. }` GPA 85 -02 `I Page 2 ` specifically located, the probability of 'fault rupture-shall-be investigated and, where appropriate, -.- builsings shall -he designed to accommodate foundation of;sr�.s while retaining struct,iire integrity. ; o Restrictions which apply within y Lateo designated Fault Hazard keeial- Studies Zones for Via Cucamonga fault shall apply to the City adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill fault. Any proposal for- development of a project, as defined.in Section 2:521.6 of the Aiquist- Priola Special Studtes,Zores Act, within either Special Study Zone shall,--comply with the Policies and Criteria of the State Mining and Geology Board with reference to :,the Alquist- ° Priolo Special Studies zones Act. SECTION 3: The Ranchu Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project wi not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends to City Council the issuance of -a Negative Declaration on February 13, 1985. l NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: „ 1. That pursuant to Section 85850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, tht the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho-Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 13th day ofnFebruary, General Plan Amendment No. 85,02:.: 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends thot the City Council approve and adopt General Plan Amendment No.. 85 -02.' 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and ra'lated material hereby adopted by the Planning Coraaission shall be forwarded to the City Council. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA . BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman _. ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary Resolution No. G8A 8s -O2 Page 3 I, hick Gomez, Deputy Sec�etary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly ana regularly introduced, passed, aid adopted by the Planning Commission of the ' City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regularmeeting of the planning Commission held on the 13th day of February,.Ig85, by _ he following vote - toy -wit. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMIZIONERS: ABSENT,, COMMISSIONERS: iD 1