Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1986/02/12 - Agenda Packet
t `F i t z x °; ro � ; n � H t-I N 0 o ; N � N r w _ r- En j "... co O rn Z 3 r V R G: ?. CITY OF '`t'G RANCHO C[;G11I0\ 1 }; a L tING CO,NJjv11SS10 AGFNTDz. 1977 TWEDNESUAY February 12,_1986 7:00 p.m. LIONS PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 9161 BASE UNE r RANCHO CUCA➢dONGA,CALIFORNIA ACTI0N L Pledge of Allegiance It. Roll Call CommUssioner Barker X Commissioner Rempel X Commissioner Gaitiefl X Commissioner Stout -X— Commissioner McNiel=X M. Announcements IV. Approval of Minutes Approved 5-0 Janeery 8,1986 Y, Consent Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without discussion. If anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. A. ApprG._d 5-0 A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT POLL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-48 - CARIJ The development of eight, 8 industrial multi tenant buildings totaling 1472160 square feet on 8.9 acres of land in the G-feral Industrial (Subarea 3) District located at the northeast corner of 7th Street and Hellman Avenue-APN 209-171-7,20,36,49-56 VL Public Hearings The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and erldress. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. B. Approved Revocation B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-08 -VERNACI-A*proposal Resolution 5-0 to locate:. a single trailer"for a caretaker's facility in a ` wholesale nursery located in the Edison right-of-way on the ' north side of Base Line,east of Rochester-APN 227-091-41.' r t C. Approved 5-0 C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-29 -TRANS MEDICAL-To Parking space parallel to unit establish an ambulance service facility within a multi-tenant to be restriped for ambulance commercial building on 2.4 acres of land in the General parking. Commerical District located at 8270,, L dte "M", Foothill Boulevard(Bear Gi ch Village)-APN 207-101-17. D. Approved oyed 5-0 D. ENVIRONMENTAL.ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 LABAND-A custom lot residential subdivision of 151 dots on approximately 85 acres of land in the VL District, located on the: east side of Haven Avenue, north of the Hillside Drainage Channel-APN 201-121-24. E. Continued to 3/26 E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13114 SCHULTZ -A 21 custom lot subdivision on 5.5 acres of land in the Low Residential.District(2-4 du/ac)located at the southeast corner of Vineyard and Calle Del Prado-APN 208-921-03 and 04. F ro A ved 4-1 F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9431- Fiag moved to south, equestrian HARRISON - A division of 2.94 acres into 4 i" Deis in the trail as cxhi6it F-9, 15' driveway Very Low' 2 du/ac)Development District locate, in the east with;remaining 30' to be land- side of Beryl,south of Hillside Road-APN 1061-611-04. scaped. G. AN AMENDMENT TO THE ANNEXATION AND G. H. I. Approved 5-0 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS_BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND THE CARYN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,'KAUFMAN AND BROAD LAND COMPANY, AND MARL90ROUGH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - Relative to properties located between the extension of Banyan Avenue and Highland Avenue c a the north and south, and between the extension of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on the east and west -• APN 225-141-08, 12-19; 225-151-01 through 03, 07,08,10-13. H. REVISIONS TO TENTATIVE TRACT 12642 - CARYN A residential subdivision of 470 lots on 115 acres of land,which is part of a larger master-planned community, located between tht extension of Banyan Avenue and Highlanu- Avenue on the north and south,and between the extension of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on the east and west-APN 225-141-08, 12-19,'21-28. I. REVISIONS' TO TENTATIVE. TRACT -12643 - HALL -& FOREMAN - The development of 463 single family lots on 104;acres of land in the Caryn Planned Community(Phase 11), located on the north side of Highland Avenue, south side of Banyan Avenue, west side. of Rochester Avenue, east of Milliken Avenue-APN 225-141-08, 12-16,18, 22, 24,26, 27 and 225-151-3,7,11,13. ' ? VIL New Busing J. Approved 5-0 J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-52 AJA -The development of a 55,000 square foot warehouse manufacturing industrial building on 3.48 x acres of land in the Industiral Park District (Subarea 12) located at,the southeast corner of 6th Street and Pittsburgh Avenue-APN 229-261-60. K. Approved 5-0 K.. ENVIRONMENTAI. ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PREVIEW 85-50-EXECUTIVE CAPITAL-The development of a 33,884 square foot,ffice building on 2.1 acres of land in the Industrial.Park.Category(Subarea 6)located at the southeast corner of 7th Street and Haven Avenue� APN 209-411-01. L. Determined inconsistent L. PRELIMINARY RE 1WW 86-01 JAUNZEMIS The with Foothill Interim Policies consistency determ Ration between the Foothill Corridor 5-0 Interim Policies any. the proposal to occupy an exisl,ing abandoned service station temporarily for the operation t f a retailiwholesale glass tusiG c:ss in the General Commer,.sal District and within the Foothill Corridor Interim Polie"f-s,. located tit_9670 YoOthill Boulevard-APN 20E-153=05. M. Approved 5-0 M. DEVELO;?MENT REVIEW 85-43--CHRISTESON COMPANY- The devetopment of a two-stary cffiee/retail building totaling 21,000 square feet within an approved integrated business center (Virginia Dare) in the General Commercial District located at the northwest quadrant of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue-APN 1077-661-6. (Continued from January II. ,8,1986 meeting.) I VIIL IDireetoe-Report H. Report Received & Filed N. GRADING OF"STOM LOTSITBDIVISION€ . Direction given to staff to prepare-Development Code Amend.O. REPORT ON PERSONAL SERVICE USE PROVISIONS WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AND HAVEN AVENUE `r 0. Report Received & Filed OVERLAY DISTRICT P. Report Received & Filed P. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL A .,SSMENT - DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK Q. Approved 5-0 Q. TENTATIVE TRACT 12642 - KGB - Proposed modifications affecting floor plan mix in K&13,s portion of Tentative Tract 12e42/Caryn Planned Community. R. Direction given for R. 'INDUSTRIAL AREA, SPECIFIC.PLAN REVISIONS-Planning further refinement. om ,ippl rev'ew A er re oris and u dat to th ndusiriaa Rrea Stpecilic �an, art` �aubarea cveeh., rent Stendards). a a ` IX. Public Comments e 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. M Adjou rnment 11 c 15 p.m, The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations R tha2 set an 11 p.m. adjournment time. If items go„bsyor ;that time,they shall he heard only with the consent of the aommis�qon. E. I 1 n s Y b { < CITY OF RANCHO GLC1\IO\G.� a FLANNjI\G CO,NI4rISSIO T AGENDA 1977 LWEDNESDAY February 12,1986 7:00 p.m. LIONS PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 9161,BASE LINE RANCHO CUCAUONGA,CALIFORNIA L Pledge of Allegiance H. Roil Call Commissioner EiAker Commissioner Rempel Commissioner Chitiea Commissioner Stout Commissioner 1VMeNiel M. Announcements IV. Approval of Uinutes January 8,1986 V. Consent Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will 6e acted on Ipy the Commission at one time without discussion. If anyone has concern over any item, It should be removed for discussion. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS POOR, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-48 - c,9RLI - The development`of eight. 8) industrial multi-tenant buildings totaling 147,160 square feet on 8.9 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 3) District located at the northeast corner of 7th Street and r Hellman Avenue-APN 209-171-7,20,36,49-56. VL Public Hearings The foilovdng items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. r B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-08 -VERNACI-A'proposal r- to locate a single trailer for a caretaker s facility in a " "wholesale nursery located in the.Edison right-of-way on the north side of Base Line,east of Rochester-APN 227-091-41. if w C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 55-29 -TRANS MEDICAL-To establish an ambulance service facility within a multi-tenant ' commercial building on 2.4 acres of land in the General Commerical District located at 8270, Suite I'M", Foothill f+ Boulevard;(Bear Gulch Village) APN 207 101-17. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12332-LABAND-A custom lot residential subdivision of 1 11 Tots on approximately 85,acres of land in the VL District, located on the east side of Haven Avenue, north of the Ir Hillside Drainage Channel-APN'201-121-24. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13114-SCHULTZ A 21 custom lot subdivision on 5.5 acres of land in the Low Residential District(2-4 dulac)located at the southeast corner of Vineyard and.Calle Del Prada APN 208-921-03:and 04 F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PAP.,CEL MAP 9431 i ?iARRISON - A division of 2.94 acres 111 1 parcels in the Very Low b du/ac)Development District located on he east side of Beryl,south of Hillside Road-APN 1061-611-U4. G. AN AMENDMENT TO THE ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE'' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND THE CARYN DEVELOPMENT { COMPANY KAUFMAN AP7D BROAD LAND COMPANY AND MARLBOROUGH DEVELOPMENT CQRPORATION' Relative to proPerties located between the extension of Banyan Avenue and Highland Avenue on the north and south, and between the extension of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on the east and west - APN 22Z-�141-08, 12-191 225-151-01 through 03,07,08,10-13. H. REVISIONS TO TENTATIVE TRACT 12642 - C ARYN - A residential subdivision of 470 lots on 115 acres Ff land,which is part of a larger master-planned community, located between the extension .of Banya1 Avenue and Highland Avenue on the north and south, and between the extension of Rochester and.Milliken Avenues on the'east and west-APN 225-141-08,12-19, 21-28. I. REVISIONS" TO TENTATIVE TRACT 12643 - HALL do FOREMAN -The development. of"463 single family lots on 104 acres of land in the Caryn Planned Community(Phase lI), Y located on the north side of Highland Avenue, south side of Banyan Avenue, west side of Rochester Avenue, east of Milliken Avenue-APN 225-141-08, 12-16, 13, 22, 24, 26, 27 and 225-151-3,7,11,13. VII. New Business J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-52 - AJA -The development of a 55,000 square foot warehouse manufacturing industrial building on 3.48 acres of land in the Industiral Park District (Subarea 12) located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and.Pittsburgh Avenue-APN 229-261-60, K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-50-EXECUTIVE CAPITAL-The development of a 33,884 square foot office building on 2.1 acre3 of land in the Industrial Park Category(Subarea'6)located at the southeast corner of 7th Strcetand Haven Avenue-APN 209-411-01. L. PRELIMINARY REVIEW 86-01 JAUNZEMIS The consistency determination between the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies .and the proposall to occupy an existing abandoned service station temporarily for the operation of a retail/wholesale glass business in the General Commercial District and within the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies, located at 9670.Foothill Boulevard-APN 208-153-05. M. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-43-CHRISTESON COMPANY- The development of a two-story office/retail building totaling 21,000 square feet within an.approved integrated business center (Virginia Dare) in the General Commercial District located at the northwest quadrant of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue-APN 1077-661-6. (Continued from January 8,1986 meeting.) VIIL Director's Reports N. GRADING OF CUSTOM LOT SUBDIVISIONS O. REPORT ON PERSONAL SERVICE USE PROVISIONS WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AND HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT P. FOOTHILL B3T,EVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AND -ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK Q. TENTATIVE TRACT 12642 K&B -Proposed modifications h" affecting floor plan mix in K&B's portion of Tentative Tract 12642/Caryn Planned Community. ri R. INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN REVISIONS -Planning Com ass o rev'ew ��gg er re ' ?& and u dat to th Indusria Brea�peeifiean, art taubareaeveelopmen�£ Standards). f 4 UL Public Comments This is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission— Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda: M Adjournment The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. K i r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION ' NUTES Regular Meeting February '12, 1986 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 Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: P'"ESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel, Herman Rempel, Dennis Stout ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Curt Johnston, Associate Planner; Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner; James Markman, City Attorney; John Meyer, Assistant Planner; Dino-Putrino, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds, Secretary: Alan Warren, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Stout announced that Janice Reynolds, Secretary, had been selected as the City's Employee of the Month for February. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to approve. the January 8, 1986 minutes as presented. a. * * * * - op .. CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEV€LOPMEN1 REVIEW 85-48 CARLI The development 'o -eig t industrial Multi-tenant 551 ings-Totaling 147,160 square feet on 8.9 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 3) District located at the northeast corner of 7th Street and rellman Aventse - APN 209-171-7, 20, 36, 49 56. Commissioner Chitiea requested that Item A be removed for discussion of the plaza area. She was concerned with seating areas in the pedestrian plazas. Bruce McDonald, representing the applicant, lave an overview of the plaza areas, and indicated that he would continue to work with staff on the development of acceptable plans for the plaza and seating areas. Brad Buller, City Planner,, advised that in final plan approval, staff will make sure that the plan address concerns raised by the Planning Commission regarding the plazas and seating within the plazas. Motion: Moved by Rempei, seconded by Barker, to adopt the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried PUBLIC HEARINGS 8. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-03 - VERNACI - A proposal to locate a single trailer for a caretaker's facility in a wholesale nursery located in the Edison right-of-way on the north side of Base Line, east of Rochester - APN 227-091-41. John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Mr. Meyer recommended that, should the Planning Commission,_recommend revocation of the Conditional Use Permit, the app7icant be given until Monday, May 12, 1986, to remove plant stock and restore 'the site to its original state. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Chairman Stout requested that the photographs provided by stafi.be made a part of the record for this project. Planning Commission Minutes -2 February 12, 1986 A Motion: Moved by „Barker, seconded by Rempel, to approve the Resolution revoking Conditional Use Permit 85-08. The applicant was given ninety days E- (May 12, 1986) to remove plant stock and restore the site, to its original state. Motion carried by the following vote; AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, REMPEL, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE II: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-29 TRANS MEDICAL - To establish an ambulance service facility within a multi-tenant coianercial building on 2.4 acres of land in the General Commerical District located at 8270, Suite "M", Foothill Boulevard (Bear Gulch Village) APN 207-101-17. Dino Putr-2no, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. r Don Reid, 9650 Apricot, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the applicant, advised that Trans Medical would be relocating to another site in approximately 60 days. He was concerned with the recommended ambulance parking location at the south side of the project site and requested that it be moved cloy to the $ unit. r There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel suggested that when this site changed to being office uses, a bond was posted to correct the parking and suggested that staff Look into the situation. He recommended that it might be more appropriate to restripe two spaces in the are, where the ambulance is currently parking so that it is ,parked straight in the -?ace. Motion Moved by Rempel, seconded be Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 85-29, with a modification to reflect the restriping of the parking space parallel to the unit for ambulance parking. Motion caried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CHITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE r_.arried Planning Commission W—tes -3- February 12, '1986 D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - LABAND - A custom lot rest en is su di_Msi,,.n of 151 lots on approxima e y acres of land in the VL District, locate! on the east side of Haven Avenue, north of the Hillside Drainage Chann?1 APN 201-121-24. John Meyer, Assistant PlanrQr, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout was concerned that the landscaping along Haven Avenue adjacent to this tract has begun to deteriorate and suggested that the developer or Home Owner's Association replace the dead or dying trees and shrubs. He ;hen opened the public hearing. Phil Douglas, 316 "E" Street, Ontario, representing the applicant, stated concurrence with the staff report, Resolution and recommended conditions of approval. Mr. Douglas was unsure where the responsibilities lie for replacing the existing landscaping. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Brad Buller; City Planner, advised that staff would look into the landscaping f concern and take appropriate action. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 12332. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13114 - SCHULTZ - A 21 custom lot subdivision on 5.5 acres of landin the Low Residential District (2-4 du/ac) located at the southeast corner of Vineyard and Calle Del Prado - APN 208-921-03 and 04. Chairman Stout announced that the applicant. for this item had requested. a continuance to the March 26, 1986 Planning Commission meeting. He then opened the public hearing. Charles Rich, 8930 Balsa, Rancho Cucamonga, was concerned that drainage be adequately addressed. Chairman Stout advised that drainage was the main reason the applicant had requested the item be continued. He suggested that if possible Mr. Rich attend the March 2Eth meeting to see if his concerns were mitigated. i ` Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 12, 1986 There were no further comments. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13114 to the March 26, 1986 Planning Commission meeting. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9431 - HARRISON - A division of 2.94 acres into 4 parcels in the Very Low u ac evelopment District located on the east side of Beryl, south of Hillside Road APN 1061-611- 04. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Michael Harrison, applicant, stated that it would be cost prohibitive to parcel into four lots with the cul-de-sac and requested consideration of his original proposal of 5 lots. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel stated that he didn't have a problem with flag lots. He suggested a possible solution of putting the pole of the flag down on south side. He further stated that the drive area should be totally lanscaped. Commissioner Barker stated that he did not particularly like flag lots and was concerned with adding 4 more driveways onto Beryl. He stated that he was satisfied that the trail connections had been taken care of and that since the applicant indicated that four lots was not financially viable, did not believe it should be a consideration. Commissioner Chitiea stated she felt all along that drives should not empty onto Beryl; however, with this configuration and especially with number of lots the applicant can afford to develop, it really doesn`t become viable. Further, the Trails Committee recommendation of switching the flag is appropriate to make the trail connections and she suggested that if this particular configuration was selected the driveways be combined so that there. would be fewer drive cuts onto Beryl. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, was concerned with shared driveways due to possible homeowner disputes. He pointed out that the amount of traffic would be the same. Commissioner McNiel stated that the problems seem to have been resolved. He agreed with the layout of the trails. Chairman Stout stated he was totally against hammerhead driveways and adding any more u;;veways on Beryl, therefore,, could not support this project. i. E Planning C emission Minutes -5 February 12, 1986 Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, to issue a legative 'Declaration _ and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Parcl-T Map 9431. with modification of moving the flag to the south end thus making a through connection of the equestrian trail. The trail is to be developed as proposed on Exhibit "F-9". The drive shall be a maximum of 15 feet in width with the remaining areas adjacent to the driveway to be landscaped to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA NOES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried Chairman Stout announced that the following related items would be heard concurrently by the Commission: G. AN A14ENDMENT TO THE ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPM,NT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY OF RARGRO- COMORGA AND THE EVEM E9T-CWATi(Y, LAND COMPANY, AND MARLBOROUGH DEVEI P rTP--CORPORATLON - Relative--to- properties kocated beti vn the extension of Banya-5--Wenue and Highland Avenue on the north and sou"i, and between the extension ot• Rochester and Milliken Avenues on the east And west- APN 225-141-08, 12-19,; 225-151-01 through 03, 07, 08, 10-13. H. REVISIONS TO TENTATIVE TRACT 12642 - CARYN - A residential subdivision of 470 lots cn 115 acres 5f land, w is s part of a Targer master-planned community, located between the extension of Banyan Avetlue and Highland i Avenue on the north and south, and between the extension of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on the east and west APN 225-141-08, 12-19, 21-28 9 I. REVISIONS TO TENTATIVE TRACT 12643 - HALL & FOREMAN - The develpment of 463 single family lots on 104 acres of land in a arym Planned Community (Phase II), located on the north side of Highland Avenue, south side of Banyan Avenue, west side of Rochester Avenue, east of Millikeni Avenue- APN 225-141-08, 12-16, 18, 22, 24, 26, 27 and 225-151-3, 7, 11, 13. Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. James Markman, City Attorney, suggested additional language to the conditions of approval. He advised that the intent was to acccmplish an adjustment without the necessity of bringing it back ba;ore the Cemmission. His suggested language specified two numbered lots which would be deleted from one tract and moved to the other so that substantially equivalent lots would be added to the other tract. i Planning Commission Minutes -6- ry 12, 1986 Februa t" 4 da, Commissioner Chitiea esked if the school play areas would be open during times when school was not in session. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Joe DiIorio, Caryn Development, advised that Carlton Lightfoot of the Etiwanda School District had committed to keeping the school play areas open during weekends. Mr. DiIorio-thanked City staff ai.d Mike Romeo of Marlborough Development in working to resolve difficult and sensitive issues. Mike Romeo,, Marlborough Development, thanked staff in working to resolve problems. With regard to the City Attorney's proposed amendment, he advised that he would have no problem with identifying the two lots to be relocated. Dan Coleman advised that the lots would be 75-C and 75-D of Tract 12643. Mr. Romeo stated that he would, not have a rrobiem with iddentifying those two lots and eliminating the word "approximately' but the key issue is that it would be deemed in substantial conformance. Mr. Markman agreed that "deemed in substantial conformance" could be added to the condition. Mr. Romeo advised that Condition 8 of the original conditions still retains language relative to the park and suggested it should be eliminated-. Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, advised that the elimination of this language would not be a problem. Mr. Romeo advised that the original Resolution also makes reference to the County Transporation Department and stated it should read City Engineering Department. Chairman Stout asked who wok responsible for making revisions to the Caryn Planned Community Text? Mr. Kroutil advised that a condition of approval last year on the original agreement deemed text revisions necessary. He stated that it would be helpful now due to the number of changes since the text will be used as the zoning f ordinance for this project.' f Chairman Stout stated that since the �.ext is to be used as a substi�ute for the General Plan, it is time to bring the text up to date. He asked Mr. 'Romeo if 90 days would be a sufficient amount of time to revise and submit the text to the City. Mr. Romeo replied V,;kt it would and that he would submit an 'up-to-date text within 90 days. There were no further comments; therefoge, the public hearing was closed. F`ar:ning Commission. Minutes -7- February 12, 186 �V. Commissioner Chitiea stated_thit the change is appropriate. Chairman Stout stated that the City is in a fortunate situation since this is a perfect location for a school and the City is getting money for the park fund while still getting the same benefit of open space for the community. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel, to adopt the Resolution approving the Amendment to the Annexati,n and Development Agreements, Revisions to Tentative Tract 12642, and Revisions to Tentative Tract 12643. Motion carried by t�^ cowing vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, REMPEL, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Chairman Stout announced that Item Q was related to the above projects, therefore would be heard out of agenda order; Q. ATIVE TRACT 12642 - K&B Proposed modifications affecting floor plan 1z,"n s portion of Teniative Tract 12642JCaryn Planned Community. rr' x 1- til, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Commissioner Barker pointed out that this modification increases square footage of one model from 1142 to 1236 and eliminates one model and replacing it with a larger one. Chairman Stout stated that the City is getting a better product; therefore, would have not problems with the modifications presented. Commissioners Chitiea and McNiel indicated they were very pleased. It was the consensus of the Commission that this modification was within the param.-ars of the original approval NEW BUSINESS J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-52 AJA - The development of a 55,000 square foot wareiouse manufacturing industrial building on 3.48 acres of land in the Industiral Park District (Subarea 12) located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Pittsburgh Avenue - f APN 225-261-60. 4 i Planning Commission Minutes -8- February 12, 1586 as Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout`invited public comment. There were no comments. Commissioner Chitiea suggested that the lunch area go back to Design Review on consent calendar. a Chairman Stout stated that this building is on the' corner of approximately 100 f` acres of which the owner is in process of discussing�scussing a master plan coacept with the City. He indicated that he highly supported the master plan concept r and if done correctly it will make it a lot easier for the Commission to review the individual projects when submitted. Lotion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and .Development Review 85-50, with an amendment to the Resolution requiring submittal of the lunch area to the Design Review Committee ca the consent calendar. Motion carried by the following vote: E AYES: COMMISSIONERS, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT' NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried 8:20 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed' 8:40 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RENEW 85-50 - EXECUTIVE CAPITAL_ - The eve opmen - o a 33,88A square toot o 'ce u>Iding on 2.1 acres o land in the Industrial Park Category (Subarea 6; located at the southeast corner of 7th Street and Haven Avenue - APN 209-411-01. Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner,,-reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout invited public comment. John Willard, representing the applicant, concurred with the findings of the staff report, Resolution and Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Rempel thanked the applicant for his cooperation during the review of this project which shows that a project can have a mix and still have good design. Planning Commission Minutes -9 February 12, 1986 Y Commissioner Chitiia stated that the applicant had done an admirable job of translating a tra0 tional style of architecture into urban design which the City is looking for i.n the Haven corridor. She indicated that the design was very creative and shows there can be harmony and diversity in the area. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental- Assessment and Development Review 85-50, as presented. Motion carr'ed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, -DEL., STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried L. PRELIMINARY REVIEW .86-01 - JAUNZEMiS - The consistency determination between the Foothill Corridor Interi olicies and the proposal to occupy an existing abandoned service stationtemporarily for the operation of a retail,/wholesale glass business in the General Commercial District and within the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies, located at 9670 Foothill Bouleyard APN 208-153-05. Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout invited public comment. Ed Jaunzemis, 7747 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, came forwz;rd to respond to Commission questions. Chairman Stout asked for clarification of a wholesale glass business.. Mr. Jaunzemis replied that he would stock sheet glass which would be cut and delivered to accounts. Chairman Stout asked what the retail business would entail. Mr. Jaunzemis replied that retail would include window and screen repair. Commissioner McNiel asked if Mr. Jaunzemis plans to relocate in 12 months. Mr. Jaunzemis replied he. intended to stay approximately 13 months, depending on what improvements would be necessary. There were no further public.comnents. Commissioner McNiel stated that he would not object to a temporary use, given that the location would not be a permanent home and the area would more than likely be targeted for redevelopment before Tong. Planning Commission Minutes -10- February 12 1986 �r pz r : 15 .. I Commissioner Chitiea stated that in terms of consistency, she would. disagree since other projects that were 'determined, noncohform ag and' needed a great deal of improvement have been ,iven direction by the Commission to not proceed with fur_i*Qr processing at this time. She indicated that if this were allowed to stay at this location, the improvements would be costly and she could not see it as a -permanent place. Further, .she would prefer to see him move to another, location initiaily than to ha•,;e to make determination in 9 or 10 months that he has to move, which might be more expensive, to him then. Commissioner Barker stated that at the conclusion of the Foothill study, this location more than likely will not "it in with what the City has in mind for Foothill Boulevard. He did not believe this proposal-fits the interim policies. He was, concerned wit' talkUIgi about .13 months and then. re- evaluating at the er;d of that time. Heagreed that the applicant should look into finding another place to do business since a tremendous amount of time and woney would have to he placed into this locaticn. Commissioner Rempel stated that he could not support a consistency determination'at this time since there are some serious problems with this location. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, to determine Preliminary Review 86-01 inconsistent with the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL ABSENT: COMMISSIUNERS: NONE carried M. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-43 -E CHRISTESON COMPANY --The develop ment pment of.a two.- story of re_ai ui ing total ing _, 00 square feet within all approved integrated business center (Virginia, Dare) in the General Commercial District located at the northwest quadrant of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue APN 1077-661-6. (Continued from January Fi, 1986 meetina.) Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout invited public comment, r Planning Commission Minutes -11- February 12, 1986 Larry Tieman, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project. Mr. Tieman'_addressed the. Design Review Committee recommendation that a texturized pedestrian connection be provided to the Del Taco.,Restaurant across the circuiation- aisle. He indicated that he did not feel this requirement necessary since then, was really no place to put this strip of sidewalk. He asked that the condition be removed from the conditions of approval. Commissioner Barker stated that some time ago when the fast food restaurant was proposed by the developer, it was presented to tha Commission-:that the movie theater people wanted and needed the fast food there. He asked how the people would get there. He was concerned with the developer's.inconsistency in now saying the access is not needed when it was once a major part of developer's argument of allowing the fast food to go in that location to begin with. Further, that the original case presented by the-developer was that the .fast food was needed, should not have external access, and: was to provide service in particular to the movie theater. Commissioner Chitiea advis,9d that initially the fast food was to be on integral part of the project. She questioned the developer's logic in now requesting to isolate that use when everything else in thav development is to be interconnected. There were no further public comments. Chairman Stout asked if a condition should be placed on this building with respect to building permits upon completion of,parking agreemep : Jim Markman, City Attorney, advised that it would not be necessary due to the condition which is now in effect to control parking. Chairman Stout asked if the theater was-a part_,, of the agreement. Mr. Markman replied that Edwards Theater would be a party of that agreement. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Development Review 85-43, as presented. . Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONER;;: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: CO!P/,TSSIONERS: NONE carried Planning Commission Minutes -12 February 12, 1986 �t, DIRECTOR'S REPORTS N. GRADING OF CUSTOM LOT SUBDIVISIONS Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea referred to the flexibility clause and asked of whom it would be at the discression. Mr. Cook replied that staff would_propose that it would be at the discression of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Barker referred to the property on northwest corner of Foothill and Vineyard where it takes a tremendous drop and stated that there needs to be some sort of direction on the part of Commission to provide some alternative for the 15-foot. usable rear yard space, such as use of decking. He suggested that some sort of alternatives need to be provided to taking large amounts of earth away from sites. Chairman Stout stated that the idea behind flat usable space was to insure that people would not have banks up against their house; it was never really indicated that the land had to be perfectly flat, but had to be something usable without having a steep incline or slope. Commissioner Chitiea stated that flexibility was iieeded so that solutions could be created for specific locations, and recommended ;;hat staff move forward with an amendment. Commissioner McNiel stated that we shouldn't deviate too far from the code. Commissioner Barker stated that he didn't like the idea of gigantic amounts of earth moving and his direction would be to investigate gate alternative means of `. achieiving the objective to provide some 'tort of usable space. Commissioner Jrempel stated that the objective has always been to have as �.. little grading as possible thus creating unique types of settings for home designs. Fe suggested that providing adequate drainage should also be looked at. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the in+ent of the language should be clear. Chairman Stout agreed and advised that conflicting policies should be stated. a Chairman Stout invited public comment. r* Planning Commission Minutes -13 February 12, :1986 7 Wally Schultz, 8513'Red Hill County Club Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that he was developing a tract in the City and was looking for input to give direction how to include mass,grading on Tract 13114 and projects like it where it will end up to the best interest of all eventual homeowners to have all grading done at one time. There were no further comments. Staff was given direction to proceed with a Development Code amendment. 0. REPORT ON PERSONAL SERVICE USE PROVISIONS WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN ANDBAVEN AVENUE OVERM-013= Alan Warren, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairrian Stout invited public comment. Lloyc, Wedblad, Plaza Tr, ol, urged the Commission to retain the Conditional 'Use Permit requirement in the Haven Avenue area and to consider its implemcrtarion in other areas of the City. Tim Beedle, 9520 Business Center drives Rancho Cucamonga, supported the concept of Conditional Use Permits as, a requirement of the Personal Services uses. Jim "Barton, 8409 Utica Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, also supported the requirement for Conditional Use Permits. There were no further'public comments. Commissioner Rempel advised Mr. Wedblad that because a CUP was required in his case, it doesn't mean that another CUP cannot be allowed for another travel agency next door to him; in other words, because he obtained a CUP, it did not mean that someone .else cannot obtain one. He advised that the Commission cannot prohibit trade. His intent was that the Development Code and J Industrial Specific Plan are contradictory in that the Cade states that 1 personal service (i.e., travel agency) is allowed in the administrative professional area, which is what the City is making out of Haven Avenue Overlay District. Further, that to require a CUP of a travel agency but not of a florist is ridiculous because a travel agency is associated with officelprofessional. Chairman Stout stated that he didn't see where this process discourages travel aop,ncies in any way. Further, that the Conditional Use Permit system is basically to assure that the Haven Avenue office/professional is'protected; therefore, would like to see the process retained. Planning Commission. Minute. -14 February 12, 1986 f Commissioner Chitiea agreed that she would .not 1` II g like to see the process eliminated since the City has a good balance planned for Haven Avenue and she would like to see that balance maintained. Further, Personal Services covers a broad spectrum of which travel agencies are only a small part. She saw the Conditional Use Process as one 'which is not meant to discourage uses, but provides an opportunity for the City make sure the use is appropriate and that f circulation is adequate. Commissioner McNiel agreed that the Conditional Use Permit process provides r control and is no restraint of trade. Commissioner Barker agreed that the CUP process should be retained but pointed out that Coumi ssi oner Rempe7 hate a vat i d point in that the objective of a Conditional Use Permit is not to provid.? protection of one business over another. Further, that the City should not be in business of regulating trade, and this should be understood by applicants. It was the consensus of the Cor isiion to retain the Conditional Use Permit regulations for Personal Se►-vice t'ses-within the 'Industrial Specific Plan and i Haven Avenue Overlay District. P. FOOTHILL_BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK r Curt Johnston. Associate Planner, v'gave an overview of the Foothill Boulevard Spc.ci4%ic Plan and scope of work, Commissioner Barker expressed appre.iati:on for the amount of work to date put into this project by staff «-d particularly to the thoroughness of Mr. Johnston. Commissioner Chitiea commented that the draft scope of work prepared by Forma was concise and well organized. She stated that the firm selected should have a tremendously creative abilityand be able to look at diversity and find a creative solution. Chairman Stout stated that information should be provided as to which individuals within the organization would be_comr;eting each task. Mr. Johnston advised that a matrix would be provided by the consultants which would dr -te tasks and the persons responsible for the completion of those tasks. There were nt- .her comments. Planning Commission Minutes -15 February 12, 1986 R. INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN REVISIONS - Planning Commission review of general revisions and update to the Industrial Area Specific Plan, Part IV (Subarea Development Standards). Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. The Planning Commission expressed support for the revision to the Subarea Development Standards, with the following exceptions and/or comments: 1. Remove Automotive Sales as an allowable use in Subarea 17. 2. Subarea 16 regulations need to be reviewed at a following meetino to determine if an appropriate transition will be provided to the single `amily area north of 6th Street. 3. A letter in support of the 4th Street median island shall be sent to the Ontario Planning Commission or City Council requesting their review of the issue. Said letter shall be :signed by Chairman Stout. The Commission agreed that the median should not be eliminated with input from Ontario City staff only. 4. The Commission expressed serious concern with the Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial designation for Subarea 9, and directed staff to prepare t options for addressing concc-nls related to aesthetics and land use transition. In addition, the City is -ommitted to existing businesses in Subarea 9 and ways to guarantee their continuation, such as Development Agreements, must be considered. r 5. Consider changing the land use designation on the south side of Whittram Avenue, east of Etiwanda from Heavy Industrial (Subarea 15) to General i Industrial (Subarea 8). Staff should prepare analysis for the following meeting. e 6. The Haven Avenue Overlay District and possible 1-15 Overlay should be Located in front of Subarea 1 in the document. 7. The word "loggias" with the definition ;n parenthesis must be replaced in Section B-2, page 1II-35. 8. Further review of major topics should occur at a special workshop- in April. F Planning Commission Minutes -16- February 12,'1986 ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Barker,-seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to adjour' 11:10 p.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -17- February 12, 1986 AC(<:L — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C!CAnrob STAI'F REPORT a, m Fi1 � Z DATE: February 12, 1986 1.97 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-48 - CARLI - The development of eight 8 industrial multi- tenant buildings totaling 147,160 square feet on 8.9 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 3) District located at the northeast corner of 7th Street and Hellman Avenue - APN 209-171-7, 20, 36 4 - 56. I. PROJECT AND S2TE DESCRIPTION: A. Action R.quested: Issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zaninq: Worth - Single family residential, General Industrial (Subarea 3) South - Single family residential, Law Residential. East - Vacant, General Industrial (Subarea 3). West - Vacant, General Industriat (Subarea 3). General Plan Designations: Project Site - General=General Industrial. North General Industrial South R Low Residential East - General industrial West General Industrial D. Site Characteristics: The project site is a vacant corner lot which slopes gra ual y to the south. ti !; II..•ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed project consists of eight (8) industrial multi-tenant buildings designed to contain 54 leasable units. The first issue is sufficent pedestrian orientation and ' amenities. Both the General Plan and the Industrial Specific.' 1a� n encourage pedestrian/bicycle orientation through landscaped open spaces integrated with pedestri ,, walks :to i create a campus-like settin!j: The Industrial Spec;fic Plan and Development Code policies were developed to .require that { ITEM A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPPRT DR 85-48 - CARLI February 12, 1986 Page 2 pedestrian access is coordinated and logics;.,, .inked to provide a comprehensive circulation system. Further, the Industrial Specific Plan indicates that the pedestrian area shall be harmonious with the design of the buildings on the s1te and shall enhance their appe;irance. The proposed site plan includes small pedestrian oriented areas convenient to only three (3) or four (4) of the eight (8) buildings proposed (see Exhibit "B", "C", and "D"). The second issue is the use of buildinq colors. The applicant has proposed seven colors for the large building accc-t bands. The intent of these colors is for each Euilding to have its own identification markings, thus, each building accent band is a different color (colored elevations to be exhibitedat the Planning Commission meeting). B. Design Review Committee: The De::!gn. Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed this project and recommended the following conditions be incorporated into the City Planner's approval: 1. Relocate and increase open spaces equipped with benches and/or other furniture to create an outdoor -eating plaza, 0. All plaza areas to be located out of the public right-of-way views. 3. Use less intense colors for the building accent bands. 4. Building accent bands and reveal lines to be continued along -the rear of the two buildings along the north boundary line. 5. Landscaping to be provided against the buildings along the fronts of buildings "A", "8" and "C". The applicant has addressed some of the above recommendations. A revised set of Colors has been submitted which is significantly less intense Loan the original proposed colors (see Planning Commission meetin.1 exhibits). Staff finds these colons a more suitable design i%:ient for the proposed building accent bands than the original proposed colors. A new open space plaza area which was located at the main entry area was relocated to the northwest quadrant of the project site in order to keep thisvarea screened from public view per Ahk the DRC recommenoation (see Exhibit "B"). However, the overRll „ number of open space plaza areas and proximity to all buildings ` h4z not been improved. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 85-48 - CARLI February'12, 1986 Page $ Aft Additional 'landscaping has been incorporated along the Hellman Avenue and 7th Street building elevations per the D1C recommendations (see Exhibit "D"). D. Grading/Technical Review Committee: The Grading and Technical Review Committees reviewed the-project-and determined that this project is consistent with all applicable Standards and Ordinances. E. Environmental Assessment: Upon review and completion of Part I and II of the Initial Study, staff has found no significant adverse environmental impacts related to the development of the proposed 8 multi-tenant industrial buildings. III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission issue a Negative Declaration through minute action. Upon issuance of a Negative Declaration, the City Planner will grant final approval with conditions. ReWtfully subV tted', Brad Buller Cit.; Planner ' BB:DP:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" -Site Utilization Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan . Exhibit "C" - Central ?laza Area Exhibit "D" - Relocated Plaza Area Exhibit "Ell'- Elevation Plans r Exhibit "F" Landscape Plans Environmental Assessment Initial Study, Part II w e e U 7 a..� El a �x L=DCl Go `p t 9 t ElC �'• r _. .. y +—• a fit. w, tJ. ,,Rcccaaa�31 E ,!S�1.T I I a•J � I �•I�XI.- ! �l�/ :,.y. p 1 Ci--4 _ - .II; 2NAtM1'FTp1 w-.��r rRn�s. • - r ,. o.�.. T — 7 -t�, .aa 'j, ZO weals �- N '�F��� e��t �� ri�f.� '��•: � is Sa\ L, rD "rim, Too IV rr16 F c'�1 a.• .. � �4 a -� I ••: ���•• 1 �Q -�'€• _•s•p• •j,�-� 'C�j• .,i}� sy� r -d+.ti�e�� -t.-ri� - �°y p Q,1• C 1• > i�.�' A».:k.Y rz•�' [y �CC'i.,.�tt,,.�i`•aJ 's t �-4''yr'i•""a-:r..-,- ,{,to rrr PAM zg- Aft • T .. rr vC b:Lr 6cj...� Ej•,� y�y�P]"i.$6 tYR.�+e �F•as+i .. }! UN, ♦ i'�Sr _ 1 mot+ f ..��y 5.. Yx'� _ 't ..� ..+c. �+'.f!.'-. '.eai.Sa +$.6��3a ���b �"''� "h T, 'rF•'�T `�i�� •t wr' t h� �• :p II 1 ... �C•cl ,t OR ca AM Q2 �O-,C.`�( tlr; 9i ro-,61 �0-�2� uoibl poi I s-• �- 0 .- ae� t•t��t+F � �" V.`.•�:1 ' ��K nisi 0 �'I .,t` j'+i.'\% �"�"'. � , ' t `1} p!'�� •Gy. • ;aF 1 'i �� �..�' �..i (ham u �+r t :1 ..r} r „tis,Y_r r'N r�a•? <• c F� _��. - rr >, Ly„fit+ i Y 41••j ".,}'.p r"'Z t,t��.�}„J �� , K Z� � +'. • .. �:z^fi.k it' '�'14 + r�h�.4 t+�6 "�h •'•.t�� aa'E,.i�ii-�-i} '7' e ty,+.r �j e.+t.•4s 'N�+ 4 Wit" "`y,� s*Y •2r's. ,.•..; •h"�'^'`Y i�c. �??�'� 1 Y'vgt;id.*� -..t: '�tt'+'. iw�. T. .?f1H+ J' i3•°-!P S.t'.r• < [z. I ia�� r J� f `21.2DNI.Le d ti •�w ��,�,�,,�,®`�: tlt r`g1•nt••y �� -+.::� � ya•_ ,/x�- •t•^sy-...a. 4:i�y7� ��' '�%••i•:•1yt{! •`•4tr F. �,.p0®_.lam i'C }� . .:••^••�.'F`t}... �p��G� - '" ` ` � �'+M .. OF'et �y-s.;lF.$_ a ,t' >r, a�1". . �ra:..y'.r; ��+C,dr YK'•� A �,`� •� -.s} >�";:=fit:,_,,.� •. >; a�aa.# � �-1 a� ,] :3 r M r ' T 4 - ���y, T• 'r�' 'ti:;• e.�t ez3. t.•'rt �.L �tiSy.`t t•�.r . } •,y.� � 7�•�f.-,4 � i1+. x`. S� t: Lf is � b • k7. f. y� '�w- ! �y j.•• ` is 1 F SItiO?t'.+ Y+r- � j.. cc ' Y .�� ►`�� �q�rFR: f yr' �t:7 r tOn Qi:4 LU r. t �r r't $SIt G 8: .y y� x < 3' +�► '+�i.7•.•�.,�i '►r � c 'TiS i n t.. � ��1 �C i.if'}�'t.' � I •-1 T• ' - ¢� s y, k'�ttr-a,f Mb ti �wj 2t'j}l y F G ll 1 raS y7�6 `j[ f..r }4�. .\V_ys'zS�.� Z^ /+ 'Wjf.•a�S 'r t�i 3` Y.�.t. :`i y 41 - ity t � Fen - s r3r,�i t e-. >�. r £ •.r• r f:, ilk. �K.+' ,rr5 ''74 "�4•ct'�'a .a 'd4a + t. o f f 1 r FIr t: 1�, '4_3,�' i'G'rf fn:7f•a_+i..�+�r +'y„io�e - ,`�•�.+R{ ✓�£�� S rYi, + er � - T � O : ry'Y � .'-i-.,�� Z yrk� •ra St .Yr�� ":�' J. '!-Y �' �� itV .. ak .i #' ,y,rFay.-+i• nt1 rP: �� .� � ,dc ✓ S.- "i�}�'�5: 'f�'j,.r�'at{i.�r•:;i1yFy `• �`. 5.�' ,� } �� r, ; - 5�.1. � -.�� �� ����a�. •Ys•�.tL.�'J°t;'`���. y�ya�'� +-.rr, s'�ir'-,.j i (,�'® r L3 L Try ,'�]-<�q!a"]+st$N�tY" ✓ "R'i*�`t'.< r � •A�t 'Y ;: k•'�'f:r ti x'..#'. .IyFq^, � :_ �f�•'i ". �`?i i •'$�aY is'�n�4.lHt•��� `7��y'i'�.��,Y i3,���'�`yt,] .?�c n'( -t;,�r�i �� iy '��f', � '-7• 1 "{Y e•.. rp.�" G.. ' as �sid a�En s•IZ'ta'Y�•�t� �f�•1v'y a: t .{-. 'i.r} �•` l 2 Y r etz1^yam" Y 4 tria;, nitLIM ✓+<r r s t rP" r 4yr P VK}L' ter 7, ,tiY { �a :•. hit _:^i F•+� FL ♦.Y..Y..t>t'�f'3�t•{ 7 P'� J. (.1 a{ � A•+ }�i' 4-1 j�'a�e��� �'r'�tt L.� t �..]s•_.� 1 'f+ 't a<� h r a 'Qr �d s� ,�.,1t�.�,yy���a.•{��. 1'q�'�1`I��.ap ��tf <� . ,t4- JS-] l� - r . R' -A'- « �'+'�'3"'�,rr��rt,e%=•T't"f.�i'r� �ia,� -�.tyu fi�au'�- ��,�.s�.J.:ic�ka} �i p {N+ Y. ■ J9fi'7.'...Nt?' '��TL i �i,'t4 C.i y,1W� n. ,�•��.t.��yr'�•PY'IW�i�1,f.�r��y�^�� M._.l 'i�%f-] � "+ ;���� �j('rlr Ii���5�'GG r`` NN ,1I ►may � y -YE -' IS uj I El " � ii '.tg'h-w4•,Fn sr Pr �;w fir.."•�i �, _ ;+ it 4!nT sg �i�� '-fir•' ._ Yj o,•w )I 9�"•`�Y' _ ���';,,�_ i•:s• •,� _ t�''q��-tM•�JG �.'•.•f;�Q- �,Y'f. .•C�iA, ' 7 ?T>r._a • • � a^ •: Ott�. :� � �, iL- � t *"_ t tip. { � _ • � (jj a :a� �'� }'"'y"'y'^•v�cx�w"''h' r t s.. .�•ii t � to�rt ��,iq.,r�.e , _ ;F f 7 � 1!i{L�t��+.w � �'�L�.t'�;t��"t y� a j t rc r.7L + „ "" �F K r,�7 x ' t >•.. 'r3i /-1 j,�y��' � ,a•-.+St•,4.x s"r�y+� ,�y'r'+,w.Y}��;:}+ "�rr4� i33. �• 9•?.ti.• � � f;-�_� .R' r ,ec 1�.--lfjd«.••�� �a ice, a� s�4 cl� :,� 9;i- �yti�j��f` � ��►`-}t 't '�-++•'�' s �w�3R...« t •��r"`�t� 1-• � r i a t'- (�l � n .i 'r'.� 'i'. y� r•• + a qr ,� ri LZ i ! Ytii 1✓t �•t )S I ���y iv ��:a•bs �•.Z�•�ssit. L�.� •l• 4�•)� � �t ��I ••1 I / 7 t i �.F'�Y�J�•�•.T yi jam-. )1 �-~� C/r �=•Y •'iy �!—i "/I' rU AN .. KL��f`r'4,t�s 3��'-J 4'�• f R '1 L.:` i )Y• •4■ •� 4� � ►-1 � s tom. to )�"�i�'..d"''�;��r+< "y`=a ':ir i�•{ ..:.;-✓; +.fti TK-ti'Twi ¢+V''L?+?`' 4t•. .. a��y.... {`• e.i ..' J =* F• )` • o� •f s �c��L�'i Tt' fi 3`° :"v,rAw� '." C �.•sc �- ' .•>.aW'c::�. .p t 1 F` )) "s•M�..'�. �,'r•mot C:• -r-..��•-'ia��'"�c,arjy.•�'3;. '`a .r�•fa-...�.�'A.'ao-�;!�.a �a:-�Yt'�)lt� .�� � '! ��.'h`�'cY"ti a r T +� :�r.� e- .�.;r, .`�•r '..;' ��. Y' ..rc'wc tt a. Qr ilk it .S,s V .3rrR'�y�.Mc t�"^ii;c'+�x• a.: ,s wr�F�' fiv "#�.i�1L' lam. :�. ' n�< v :tea .,: 7. .(• �t�?i�t';� rt,•i ,,,r'�{,�:xr i•st}n �a�1 •' •Jt-�Lr y.G T+,,.i lra✓t.. '. , 'su ' `•z: n��'ro"/K ,.", ,:.5 `'�='"�i aYf�''e ti! "A,"�i'•' b-r. ♦ fa s`1 R- c.',�"'-F rtc PR �•r r:�?3ris�},R•�,`t ?L rT-��r 4 I a'Rt+�J��•„?+��, "�. -t,ri ' '' � 4 •�i � V] �}� } l�aR'< t�y�a"`}j .."z Ts" ;nx• �.,�c'+ v ` � '�h r-. O I�� ' �ti 5c`x. <z Y .�.'3 �.yY} rr n.f.,�.;•,i .te r, ?�r•S. � 7l 32+^,� _ its q s• 9 w.. -� t- ,5:dot �d1, ...'�•?.<:�e -.,: {..�•.. AIM !.. W 1M. C [�' �K .1, hj. ii •��y y ti r ✓ M _ ir=MM1I s •-�-�.•kJ;r'YS �:'r3 siX�;rr [ �•h�2��s•i�'f<s�x-'3Y`G"i3(d"t 'w1� '' rt '.�icr .,� i:� • rgt tt ,,a��•s b .,+cx'a�s t,. � r � ram•'R��s}i�t�1 i 1a 3 ro fi ea ;'v' Pir3`i��J.S7u'��""-3 .�<r�•✓ i►�I rs 4'yam�'����)`r A i _ A - ., t:�n �'� -- '�� . -._ n� .4''c' � - :► ��, ;�� ��� � � '` + ,� : � �,. , � l` � �n � 1l— w - �� 14+. + +�, �� q�s oti.., F Oro " 1; ► "�` � �% �' 33_. t�e �' �' �t` 1 "� �+ t � y �. ,r:m o u n �a �:. �''�'•aan�<xs7t_ �i. .y,�€T i?. C9l9'a` " - _ ^.�.a. ,,� _ m.,6- .� I" :� _ i ! � �� t!t � CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II INITIAL STUDY ENVIROh^IENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: APPLICAN'T:__ � FILING DATE: -LOG NUMBER:_4)/k g6-48 PROJECT:_B- A4LIrLr-7Ea/auT�,yrxrsr���L �3r1iLt��tifGS PROJECT LOCATION: / Old 6ag7-C©R���rZ '' r&s—c Y. ENVIRON%1ENTAL IMPACTS �76LL/�j/¢!- 4V=. (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES MAYP,E NO I. Soils and Geolozv. Will the proposal havo. significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions,. displacements, compaction or J s burial of the soil? ✓ C. or Change in topographyground surface. I contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification' of any unique geologic or physical features? '• e. Any potential increase in wind or water `h 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 increae.;e in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? 2. a rology. Will the proposal have significant results in: Page 2 YES MAYBE N0 E. Changes in currents, or the course of direction Of flowing streams* ravers, 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 .- water$? I d. Change in the amount of surface water in any •j[//// body of water? e. Discharge into surface waters, or any ~^ alteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, �~ ~ ¢ either through direct additions or with- dr.wals, or through interference with an aqui +r? / Quality? Quantity? h:. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property t^ water 'elated hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. Air ualit , Will the proposal have significant results in; a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile J or indirect sources? J Stationary sources? b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or .a., Interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic i conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota Flora. dill the proposal have significant results ilk. a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or number of any specieri of plants? b. Reduction the numbers of any unique, rare .ar eadangey Ltd species of plants? Page 3 YES MAYBE No C. Introduction of new or disruptive species of / plants into ^n area? J d. Reduction in the potential 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 species of animals? .. Introduction of new or disruptive species or ` animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? _ d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or - Wildlife habitat? S. Population. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the ltiation, 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 for additional housing? h2 — 6. Socio-Economic 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? e. b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, I tax payers or project users? ►/` 7. Land Use and Plannine Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? / a. A sutatantial alteration of the present or J planned land use of an area? b. A conflict s,-ith any designations, objectives, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non-consumptive recreational opportunities? _ A— F - Page 4 YES %!AYBE No 8, Tran�tatiot;. Will the proposal have significant results int a. Generation of substantial additional vehfcalar movement? b. Effects on existing streets,, or demand for new street construction? e. Effects on existing parking facilities, or / demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? e. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tio n or movement of people and/or Goods? f. Alterations to or effects on present and 111LLL potential water-borne 'ra il. mans transit �r air traffic? J. g. Increases in traffic hazards to motcz vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. 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 Nulsance 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?. l . c. A risk of explosion or rnlease of hazardous -JL 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 dangerou • noise levels? ., s / g. The creation of objectionable odors? h. An increase in light or glare? Page 5 YES X-,YBE NO 11. Aesthetics. Wi1 results in: 1 the proposal have significant - a. The obstruction or degradation^of any scenic / -eista or view? J b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive / site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors?' ' J 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric •jower? J b. Natural or packaged gas? C. Communications systems? V d. Water supply? J e. Wastewater facilities? i ✓ f._ Flood control structures? g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fir'.- ,->rection? J i. Police protection? J. Schools? I' k. Parks or other recreational facilities? 1. Haintenance of public facilities, including ` roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental services? 13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal hava significant results in: may_ a. Use of substantial or excessive .fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? c. An increase in the demand for development of r new sources of energy? J d.• An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non-renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources`o'° energy are, available? Pagn g YES .MAYBE NO e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14. Mandatory Findin s of Si nificance. a Does the project have the Potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substan tially tin reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop-ht;lcw self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal coimmturtity, reduce the nrimber or restrict the range of-a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of f California history or prehistory? V/ ! b. Does tb� project have the potential to achieve t short-term, to the disadv&ntage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term 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). J tc. Does the project have impacts which areindividually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable p means that the incremental effects of an E individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects): d. Does the project have environmental effects f which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings„ either directly or indirectly? ZI. DISCUSSION ue Eions t2ME,ITAi EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions olus a discussion of proposed mitigation weasure,,), { Page 7 • III. DETERS_ I_ NATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project _'OULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, 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 he a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. _ aI find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect :on the envirnment, and an ENVIRON:EIT LNPACT REPORT is r ired.• Date_� � 1 ig atur, Title I . Alk . 1 f Ix, �r 4f CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA rVCAMO. STAFF REPORT �vjq��0E-Ur ____a DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Joh1 R. Meyer, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: REVOCATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-08 VERNAGI - A consideration of the revocation of a permit to locate a single trailer for caretaker's-facility far a wholesale nursery in the Edison Right-of-Way on the north side of Base tine Road, east of Rochester - APN 227-09-141. I. ABSTRACT: On August 7, 1985, the City Council denied an appeal and upheld the May 2, 1985 Planning Commission's decision to approve Condite�nil Use Permit 85-08 with Conditions. To date, the - applicant has not complied with the conditions of approval. On November 27, 1985, the Planning Commission reviewed the operation of Conditional Use Permit 85-08 and determined that there was sufficient evidence to warrant a full examination and set a public •hearing.for February 12, 1986:to consider revocation of the permit. II. ANALYSIS: The Conditions of Approval granted a 30-day period for the removal of all existing trailers and sheds and a 6-month period to install landscaping and the irrigation along Base Line Road. To date, the applicant has failed to meet these and other Conditions as indicated on the attached Resolution 85-75. Between September 6, 1985 and October 14, 1985, the City's Code Enforcement Officer made repeated attempts to reach the applicant and inspected the sitz on a weekly basis. As of January 28th, no further effort to meet any of the Conditions was evident. III. FiXTS FOR FINDINGS: The following facts support a finding that the GUh is not being conducted in an appropriate manner and that modifications are not available +o mitigate the impacts: 1. Thai: the approved use has failed to meet the condition to remove all non-conforming structures and trailers within the 30 day period. ,r 2. That the approved use has failed to meet the condition to install landscaping and irrigation along Base Line Road per Victoria Landscape Standards within_ the 6 month period, ITEM B PL.ANNNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ' CUP 85-08 - VERNACI - REVOCATION February 12, 1986 Page 2 3. That the trailer has not been protected from flooding and no design for flood protection measures has been submitted to the City Engineer. 4. That all materials, including the trailer, have not been secured to prevent floatation. IV. OPTIONS: When considering a CUP for revocation, the Commission has the fofol lowi g options: A. Find that the CUP 'is being conducted in an appropriate manner and that no action to modify or revoke is necessary; or, B. Find that the CUP is not being conducted in an appropriate manner and that modifications to conditions are necessary; or, C. Find that the CUP is not being conducted in an appropriate manner and that modifications are not available to mitigate the impacts and therefore revokes the permit which requires the operatiop to cease and •desist in the time alloted by the Commission. Staff recommends the Commission choose the latter option and require the applicant to restore the site to its original condition within 90 days.of the revocation.. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper, the property posted, notices sent to all property owners within 300' of the project site. A letter of notice was sent to the applicant and owner thrudgh certified mail VI. RECOMMENDATION: it is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all material elements of this proposal. If after such consideration, the Commission can support the Facts For Findings and the Conditions of Revocation, adoption of the attached resolution would be appropriate. Res ectfully s mitte S-ad Buller City Planner 3B:JM:ko Attachments: Exhibit "A1l - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Resolution 85-75 Minutes from November '27, 1985 Planning Commission Meeting Resolution of Revocation, HIGHLAND ! l L. L MHS. MH ' Lm . F•fr` i.... Vt`.`r... . MLm t `Itxtn,2n`�t atnoo • •y�•�s:•�Jr h = `• �t r �' 'ARK r:3ViCT6PU Lm Lm :.f: L i- L Lm JT Lm Stiff MH MH 1 .1 M i L �.. MH TSda5EUt3E �s. ®���� _ TMia; IN ` RR #a 1 '• pEEE AR. 1 \ H _ s RR 3s RR '•®: RA s H ` RR F'`°m°us.. _< xauFt±.vEr�uE ._ �..wm;va�af F : C Sct. ° NORTH CITY OF i Ana: RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE:. L-09A:0®f4 MA 9 FLANN NG DIVISION '' EXHIBIT:r SCALE: 13 1 a , 1 1 N 64C[10 D ; LoweT'�etii aas swa rua L jarz; dVYZ'NDl 11-. 1 , - , _ IUn!Baca f 4.lI1TA - r .se .. wr aranw.a:we:.earn f '"�•' aee i amw a w•na� , aaxaaa w.a • . NGRTH CITY OF EIvI: RANUHO CUCAMONGA TTI'I.E: smt RAt,3 PLANNNG DIVIRON EXHIBIT:_ _SCALE: AM5 RESOLUTION NO. 85-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION> APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-08 FOR VINCENTS ' GARDEN CENTER LOCATED AT THE NORTH SID£ OF BASELINE, EAST OF ROCHESTER, IN THE UTILITY CORRIDOR DISTRICT WHEREAS, .on the loth day of March, 1985, a complete application was filed by Sharon Ve-naci for review of the above-described project; and VPEREAS, on the 22,nd day of.May, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga. Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purpases of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditional applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. SECTION 2: That Conditional Use Permit No, 85-08 is approved subject to the following conditions: PLANNING The removai of all non-conforming structures and trailers within 30 days of this approval. 2. If a modular trailer is installed, it shall be upgraded with decking, arbors, trellises and landscaping within six (6) months of installation.. Approval of trailer location shall he obtained from Southern California Edison. Landscape and irrigation along Base. Line per Victoria landscape standards shall be installed within six (6) months from approval date. J Resolution No. Conditional Use Per( 85-08 VERNACI Page 2 ARE 4.> . Retail sales of nursery stock will not be allowed. Further, sales shall- be limited to wholesale of plants grown on-site. Sale of fertilizers, tools, Pots and other non-plant items is not permitted. ENGINEERING 1. That the trailer, ;re raisin the r Protected from flooding by D trailers pad and or constructing a diversion wall or dike up stream. A design for the flood protection measure must be approved by the City Engineer. 2.) All materials, including the trailer, to be stored on the site shall be secured to prevents floatation and possible damage to downstream property. ROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF MAY, 1985. PLANN NG COM ISSION OF THE CI Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • BY. � Danni � . S t, Chairman ATTEST: �r�1 Ri: Game ; Deputy Secretary I, Rid Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho!Cucarnonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regula ly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the f City a Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Cpmmission'hpld on the 22nd day of May, 1985, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES:.. COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, •MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA NOES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9416 - DIVERSIFIED A division 17.34 acres an into parce s in the Neighborhood Comm _ al District, located an the east aide of Haven Avenue, between ghland' Avenue and Lemon P_Venue - APN 2(�:.-271-58. C Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff repo Chairman Stout opened the pubii'c hearing. Gary Madison, 10550 Lemon, Rancho Cucamon^3, ressed concern that this project may turn out like the existing center .Jn Lemon Avenue which has not completed construction. There were no further comments, theref ' the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel stated•'that is project would be a complete shopping r center, unlike the center Mr. adison referred to wht;;h is located at Lemon and Haven. Motion: Moved by Rem , seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Res tion approving Parcel Map 9614, Diversified. Motion carried by the f owing vote: A'ES: COMMISSIONERS:- REMPEL, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, STOUT, BARKER 4 NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NON- qP P SENT: COMLNISSIONERS: NONE -carried 3 G. CONSIDERATION OF REVOCATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-08 - VERNACI - A proposal to cate a stna a tray er or a careta er s .zc1 r (n a wholesale nursery located in the Edison right-of-way on tte north side of Base Line, east of Rochester - APN 227-091-^i; 4- Brad Buller City Planner, advised that it would be necessary for the Plq,,ning Commission to set the public hearing for consideration of the revocati; for f this conditional use permit. lie further advised that the applicant had contacted staff and indicated that they hoped to complete the required `conditions of approval by January 1986. Therefore, staff recommended that February 12, 1986 be set as the public hearing date. Moti.an: Moved by Rempel, seconded by BLrker, to set the public hearing for consideration of revocation for Conditional Use Permit 85-082 Vernaci, on February 12, 1986. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMM' 3IONERS: NONE', -carried Planning Commission-Minutes -5 November 27, 1985 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO'CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION. REVOKING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NG. 85-08 FOR VINCENTS HARDEN CENTER LOCATED ON TV` NOR-li SIZE OF BASE LINE, EAST OF ACLHESTER IN THE UTILITY DISTRICT WHEREAS, or, the loth day of March, 1985, a complete application was filed by Sharon Vernal: for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of May, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing and approved with condition the above- described project; and WHEREAS, on August 7, 1985, the City Council cc- iucted a duly noticed public hearing and denied an appeal of the Planning Commission decision; and WHEREAS, on November 27, 1985, the Planning Commission reviewed CUP 85-08 pursuant to Development Code Section 17.04.03OG2 and determined that a full investigation was necessary; and WHEREAS, on February 12, 1986, the Planning Commission conducted a duly notice public hearing pursuant to Development Code Section 17.04..03OG3 and 17,02,11rl. NOW, THEREF02E, it is found, determined and resolved by the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: 1. Thr• the CUP is not befi:y conducted in an appropriate manner and that modifications are not available to mitigate the impacts and therefore revokes the permit which requires the operation to cease and desist in the time ailoi:ed by the Commission. F 2. That the approved use has failed to meet the condition to,remove all non conforming structures an" ;wailers within the 30 day period, 3. That the approved use has failed to meet the condition to install landscaping and irrigation along Base line Road per Victoria Landscape Standards within the 6 month period„ 4. 'That the trailer has not been protected from flooding and no des. for flood•,protection measures has been submitted to the City tngineer. S. That all materials, including the trailer, hve not been secured to prevent floatation. r. SECTION 2: That Conditional Use Permit No. 85-08 zs revoked subject to the following condition: That. all structures, traiiors, equipment, supplied and plant stock shall be removed and the site restored to its original condition within 90 days of this revocation. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF TH-C C_?TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: _ Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 or Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of February, 1986, zy the following vota-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS': Or : . r r a. ' " F CITY OF RANCHO C UCAMONGA o��ycaAfoA,c STAFF REPORT x l 0 0 F � Z 'a 197 DATE: February 12, 1986 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planter TY: Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-29 - TRANS MEDICAL - To establish an ambulance service facility wit in a multi-tenart commercial building on 2.4 acres of land in the General Commercial Districc located at 827C "M" Foothill Boulevard (Bear Gulch Villa,•z) - APN 207-101-17. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTIO►9: A. Action Requested: Approval of CUP and issuance of Negative ec ara Ion. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: I North - Residential, General Commercial South - Vacant Commercial Building, General Commercial, East - Restaurant, General Commercial West Auto Service, General Commercial C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Commercial North - Commercial South - commercial East - Commercial West - Commercial D. Site Characteristics: The project site, a former motel, consists-o-f--r.FFee buildings beirg utilized as a multi-tenant commercial use aad the China Alley restaurant. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant initiated the ambulance service use wi ou - a bus-Ness license or Conditional Use Permit application. Two major issues were developed by Staff upon review of this application, they are: 1) noise and ITEM C -'r PLANNING COMMISSION ST4T REPORT February 12, 1986 CUP 85-29 - Trans Medical Page 2 2) parking/circulation. Since the proposed use is currently in operation, Staff was able to conduct a purvey of surrounding business operators and residents to dete mine if any problems have been experienced. The survey revealed that noise from sirens was not a problemtors related�to the pa k The ing of ambulances r complaint m Staff has observed the business that:when the ambulance vehiclz, which is si,nificantiy longer than a standak�d car, is parked correctly in the substandard size stall, it sticks prat into the aisle ane creates unsafe vehicular movement around the ambulance. Ii addition, Staff observed the amb+ilanc? leaving the subject site in an irregular pattern, crossing over stripped parking areas, not conforming to the site's vehicular circulation system. Staff has contacted the appl*k,,1!1'; and discussed the above problems. The applicant has stated that they recognize these problems grid gill request, from the Planning Commission, time to look for another area to relo( ": the proposed use due to the narking/circulation problems. B. Environmental Assessmer ; Upon review and completion of Part I an ar respec , of the Initial Study, Staff has found that the proposed use may havti effect,; on existing parking facilities and incrPa f* traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedesc,°.ans.. The parking/circulation issue, discussed above, is the ba-is for the Initial Study findings. The findings way be mitigated by requirira the applicant to park the ambulance at the south sida o, .•%e project site central parking area (see Exhibit W). There appears to be sufficien, room for parking, without. interference, and ease of circulation. The applicant has expressed that the above mitigation would be difficult to implement due to: 1) vehicle sacurity and 2) speedy access. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed use is in accord with the Generz' an, 0 1ec ve's of the Development Code, and purposes of the district in which the site is 'located. However, parkin of ambulance; obstructs circulation and may be detrimental to the public safety, welfare, nr materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised for Environmental ,eview n e�laiiy Report newspaper, VK tt. REC0IENDATION: If the Planning Commission can support the Facts orrin ngs and the mitigation measures proposed, adopt'on of the k E , PLANNING COi1ISSION STAFF REPORT February 12, 1986 CUP 85-29 - Trans Medical Page 3 attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions would be appropriate. If the. Planning Commission cannot support the Facts for Findings then the Planning Commission should direct Staff to prepare a Resolution of Denial to be brought back at the next Planniag Commission meeting. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller • City Planner s BB:DP:das k Attachments: Applicant Letter Exhibit "A" - Site -Ian Environmental assessment Initial Study Part &I Resolution with Cosiditiens of Approval Ask E, 1 {r` " ME '' IC , HC. Kb:a.Mercy/Kniffin) 8190 Mango Ave. P.O.Box P Fontana,CA 92335 77 (714)823.4213 (714)98&1184 - DR-ou-85 October 9, 1985 OC 1 7 _ M City of Rancho Cur:-monga Planning Division 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Conditional Use Permit Application Gentlemen. As requested by lette • from the Community Development Department no September 26, 1985, ens•,ised in our, application for a conditional use permit. The application is for our office located Pt 8270 "M"'Foothill Boulevard, Rancho Cucamonga (Bear Gulch Village). The office is used as an ambulance substativa for the purpose of as- signing emergency-vehicles (ambulances) to respond to emergency y of Rancho Cucamonga Ordinance No. 269, ca,ls, as required by the Cit Section 8.18.020(6). The number of ambulances assigned to the station is one. The ambu- lance is staffed with two field personnel (EMT and °ara%iedgc) for a totai of two employefs assigned to the station for eaci. hilt. We enclose our chock'in the amount of $465.00 for firing fees fur- the permit and initial rz idy. If there are any questions or if you steed additional information, please contact me or my secretary, Terri Parsons, at 89,-2502. Sincerely, E: Don Reed Director DR/tip K; encl. C 36 yLns pIan` - �4 IS p�hl�tE� i. 3oYR s 136 q� ya �. , 319P0< 1�4tP i m2r Ctpti= �t9t9f7 A3 T��rtJ PARKtr�� ' LoC�Tt�t .I r • - -- t � 1 6Y CNIuA Anw,1 «Tut�NT o as yos ►��' pFh,ia `_.FOOT+ltrt aitin �. CITY OF `'ITEM; ; RA NCI C 7JCAM0NT GA. TITLE: firma ` 'LANNING DIV Si( ' EXHIBIT: A• SCA,I. } CITY OF RANCHO CUCA`fONGA PART 1I - INITIAL STUDY i ENVIROMIENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: Zy I�Ifi APPLICANT:_ //Z - FILING DATE: � //l LOG NUMBER: C 0!— PROJECT: AM G S� Q.0 T PROJECT LOCATION: ( I. ENVIRONM, NTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe"sheets). answers are required on attached YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geoloa• Will - e proposal have MIA significant result:; in: • f a• Unstable ground conditions or in changes in t geologic relationships? / b. Disruptions,. displacements, compaction or r I builal of the soil? J C. .Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? a• The destructions covering or modification of any unique geologic or Physical features? •e. Any Potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off / site conditons? ✓ ¢• Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? S• Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as eartNiquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or*similar hazards? / h. An increase in the rate"o'€ extraction and/or »LL use of any mineral resource? x= 2. XIES M- Will the•proposal'have significant "A results in: Pa$e YES KAYEE No AdFAL a. Changes in currants, or'the course of direction Of flowing streams,"rivers, or'ephemeral stream channels? b. Changes inabsorption rates, drainage patterns, `or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow os 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? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available feir public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. Air ualit Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constant or periodic air emissions £roc mobile or indirect sources? J f Stationary sources? — b. Deteriorarion of ambient air duality and/or interfere.,.;e w'th the aetainment 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 results In: a• Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or number / of any species of plants? �y J b. .Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species Of plants? Page 3 YES KNYBE 50 c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of jAM plants into an izea? ✓ z d. Reduction in the potential 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 tre _ dberm of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? C. Introduction of new c# disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a uarrier / to the migration or movement of animals? �J d.. Deterioration or removal existing fish or Y Y 'I. wildlife habitat? 5. Population. Will the proposal Nave significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? ✓ fb. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or I create a demand for additional housing? J (ff 6. Socio-Economic Factors. Will the proposal. have significant results in: a. Change in local or regional socto-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, f tax payers or project users?' ✓ 7. Land Use and_•Plannina 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, J policies, or adopted plans of any governmental t_. entities? c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of s existing consumptive or non-consumptive recreational opportunities? Page 4 4 Y-ES MAYBE NO 8. Transportation, Fill the proaosal have significant results< n. a. Generation of s E ubstant..al additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? l c. Effects on existing arkin P g facilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact 'upon existing transporta- tion systems? • to Alterations F `" present patterrs of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? J a f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water-borne, rail, mass transit of 5 air traffic? . g• Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, i bicyclists or pedestrians? H 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have w i significant results in; i a. A listurbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and/or historical resources? / 10. Health, Safety and Nuisance Factors. Will the 3L ' ;propose— /have s7gnificant results in: f a. Creation of any Ualth hazard or potential health hazard? �f b. E--tposure of people to potential health hazards? c• A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident? j d. ` In increase in the number of individuals or species c£ vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? e. Increase in existing nose levels? f. E.xposlre of people to potentially dangerous noise levels?IMF x ,. g•, The creation of objectionable c.dors? V + h. An Increase in light or glare? / P 5 Page 5 YES :L4YBE NO 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results•in: a. The obstruction or degradation of ar.,y scenic vista or view? ✓ b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors?* - 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new 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 ccatrol structures? f/ g. Solid waste facilities? VV � h. Fire protection? , i. Police protection? J. 'Schools? �/ k. Parks or other recreational facilities? 1. Maintenance of public facilities, includir:g _ roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental arvices? �~ T3. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results ins a. Use of substantial or excessi�e fu�l or energy? �Y b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing f 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, whew.feasible J renewable sources of energy are available? V3 H' Page 6 YES MAYBE NO AIL e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or I -scarce natural resource? 14. Mandatory Findings of Sienificance. 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 below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal cocmunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plan, or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of / California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term 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 considerable? (Cumulatively considerable 1n$' means that the incremental effects of an individual project ire considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects). d. Does the project have environmental effects `+ ' which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? TI, DISCUSSION or EM`IROpVtTAL EVALUATION (i.e.; of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussicn of proposed mitigation measures), Page 7 111. DETEP-MINATION On tt a basis of this initial aivation: I find the proposed project COULD'NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a IvEGATIVI DECLARATION sill 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 because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to she project. A NEG3,TIVE DECLARATION WILL BE 'PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the envirnment,, and an EWIRO:iMT LSPACT REPORT is required'.. � r _�• Date t,LL MA f, . i azure Title G _ E C , €i i RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-29 FOR AN AMBULANCE SERVICE FACILITY LOCATED AT 8270 "M" FOOTHII,L BOULEVARD IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the filth day of October, 1985, a complete application was filed by Trans Medical for revi,.w of the above-described pr:);,cz; and WHEREAS, on the 12th day of February, 1986, the Ranch& Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above-described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commissicn resolved as SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. QP 2. That the proposed use, together with the condi�ions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse iiipacts on the environmen an at a Negative Declaration is issue(i on February 12, 1986. SECTION 3: That Condition& Use PArmit No. 85-29 is approved subject to t`-Fie following conditions: PLANNING DIVISI04: 1. A maximum of one (1) ambulance shall be permitted to operate from the service facility, l 2. Tha ambulance shall be parked at the south side of the project site central parking area. 3. Pd or to any use os the project site or business activity a ng cooaaence .-, ereon, a con IIons o approva s a I be comp I e to the sa is act,onof he City Planmer and Buff-d-Ing utticialN " PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION February 12, 1986 CUP 85-29 - Trans Medical Page 2 4. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance wit;-, all sections of the Development Code and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of occupancy. 5. Any signs proposed for this Conditional Use Permit shall to designed in cnrFotmance with the Comprehensive Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior t- installation of such signs and conform to the approved Uniform Sign Program for the center. 6. No activities shall be permitted which exceed the available parking or cat;se adverse effects upon surrounding businesses. If the operation of this facility causes adverse effects upon adjacent businesses or operations, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for their consideration and possible termination of such use. 7. Any future expansion or intensification of this use shall require a modification of this Conditional Use Permit. 8. This approval shall run with the applicant and shall become void upon a change of business ownership, or the use ceases. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS_12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY. enni s ou airman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy- Secretary '- I, r •ad Bulle 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 12th day of February, 1986. by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: P ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: C Li a F -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Gvcanro ` STAFF REPORT zG�° • cue 1" �r v DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 9 TO: Chairman and Members of the ;Manning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: John R. Meyer, Assistant Planner SUBKE.T: ENVIRONMENTP_ ASSESSMENT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - LABAND - A custom lot residential subdivision of 151 lots on 'approximately 85 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (1-2 du/ac), located on the east side of Haven Avenue, north of Hillside 9•ainage Channel - APN r 201-121-24. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: i A. Action Requested_ The applicant is requesting approval of a F ec°`ative tract map for the above described prole—,t. l B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: t ie North - Utility Corridor; Foothill Community Plan (County) South - Single-Family Residential; Very Low t East - Deer Creet Channel; Flood Control West Single-Family Residential; Very Loft: C. General Plan Des, nations_ Project Site - Very Low Residential, less than 2 du/ac North Flood Control/Utility Corridor within the City's it Sphere of Influence South - Very Low Residential, ';!ss than 2 du/ac East Flood Control West - Very Low Residential, less than 2 du/ac D. Site Characteristicss: The site consists of a vacant parcel which lopein the north/south direction at appr-mimately 10% (' grade. Approximately 90% of this site is covered with chaparral and other indigenous native brush and grasses. Ta addition, there are some Eucalyptus trees clustered generally in the southwest corner of the site. - ;EM D • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF R,?PORT Tentative Tract 12332 = Lelband February 12, 1986 Page 2 11. ANALYSIS: Tract 12332 (204 l.�ts on 141 acres) was originally approved on May 11, 1983. The Applicant ha: ;:curded Phase. I, 53 of the origirui 204 lots; however, he has -failed to submit for a time extension on the remaining phases. Therefore, to6ight's action would grant tentative approval on the remaining 151 lots. The tract plans are identical to those previously approviRd and meet the standards and provisions of the Development Cede. The applicant has agreed to adhere to the orignal Conditions o ..pproval. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: 1he Planning Commission shall make the following finding€ before approving the residential development project: 1. The subdivision provides adequate improvements which, make it compatible with surrounding 'land uses. 2. The project site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed subdivision in relation to the City's Zoning Code and Growth Management Ordinance. 3. The proposed subdivision, in conjunction with the Conditions of Approval, are consistent with the current dev3lopment standards of the City. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This ',em has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper, the property posted, and notices sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the. preject. V. RECUMEWATION It is recommended that the Planning—Commission conduct a public hearing to consider public input and elements of the project. If after sue'- consideration, the Commission concurs with the findlings Pnd {:c ,'.itions of Approval as recomme,!Q, adoption of the attat'_-.' Resolution with Conditient would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner i. BB:JM•cv r d l"1 � lRJ � � � � r � +r e � PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 12332 Laband F February 12, 1986 ' Page 3 E Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" Site 'Plan Exhibit "C" - Equestrian Trails Exhibit "D" - Equestrian Tra I Details ` Exhibit "E" - Landscape. Concept May 11, 1983, Planning Commission_Staff Rnpsrt q Resolution No. 83-66A with Conditions Resolution of Approval with Conditions t 1 f i � � satrNlilM ,_ AOL ® / or NY[Y a uaN* cuclaar ,.��.. \�� Rfl00 fANlrgl„ asigaT TA$ftYYr j IKNaj1 \\` a-1-20 \\. I gg I a B O a4:1(i YN.T � 0 w 61 f 0—200 .Am .! due reer _ • . SITE UTILIZATION MAP TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 I 1 NORTH CITY OF . ITEM! RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' TITLEf y PLANNIN�G DIVI5IUN EXHIBIT: fie SCALE. c�t1 ttoc -Y h Z SG� ! r wr TE--AJTATMK 17ZI r 1Z33Z trt. .w. ..w a. . .+cas r�r..�._ .vim ,• , w.r __ _•_ :' � "�'� TTTF_'_ .I � � u` .t•'." ♦�_`•' � ..T�r ire�.� � Y x� -.. j '♦ Iq sp �,'r r � *ram' � w.. •� �.V �/ .,it � �'�, its .3 _I "a' .;d:� 1..�rL ,ram. ��T`1 w r ;.):.' ` 'pflo `r .1;�\r`�' '«�;, ..•+t �3' ;_ � - �A tw.. <da - =-�yyhf�+-�ew.t tw '�' a+ ♦`r� �•`� I Y -"s �; � .. x �t � is�¢i f ! �•- _ �;-Jt.../ f - a Q• gut de ne < � � e Q➢ •�. � �.. •'` .�y`1+ ••` � - >>� :'t t�i:� ''dy � ed -t. �r 1: -p' -t rU V9-• ®i V� ..1�0 .ICI • � h 4i)` �Mlit � pA. ��I � � � L- m � � ` � -10�-.�'�.�� �Oyl„M io I;r Irk t �\ FA q� y4� 111 1�nf ,_� wl,. ,��it ip�1►0 �`t - SEa1 •�. - `�=ra'ti a mv. - ....: C � 1 ••;yam• wW9 � tr• ci.J t. Ity `I ee E+➢ *� �+4' !� �4.. n n� u •p� a.. t•nr � � - •-.. a� u t E•y� a� i �fir} �9J+- rbi y�' i��.w 0 d _F3' �'w_�e si.m♦,xi.� � Ql 1 R ire"^�`rr°h� ��» '°°. >t_. £� �~� .�5�.� �-'f• • .F'� M b"'`��-�is 1'� Bt.�•�.I r 4 tt MARCH 1063 TENTATIVE T;:.ACT 12332 <- ` I V � NORTH Cl 17Y _ OF �•IrE�I: L�iT�TCI® CUGAMOTA TITLE:S t PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT.—�---SCALE: V{ u fig 10 mo dal W fa C'T'l' ' OF _,; --� -= RANCHOITENI- CLJCAMojNGA TITLE i � c -�__L�t3_'r�► a PLANNING DIVISIOi�I _ EYHI!3IT_C= SCALE- Herren View Estates :11 THE f.1TT OF PAIICHC CUCA11DtIGa - TENTATIVE TRACT SKsI n'Ir�tiQ ZrSwlmfF r304i ii rnl O.ilil[ttcc:.pllrao::10[SLClIG N.TQ a.,.I.r v.. t t rkYlaav rvec. k 1"t_ ��...�•.>�-+ram" r_IC1H1Tr 11aP • al lrp[4• - � Gl 1]f� 1 µlifer j r I.rK m ar..leln -iY-1_•ym�t'm _`I__--1`,1'}}}—///��� . io o.m.a ru u I.sttgr A M •^ IrOlcr[3 OIK Ic i A lts..0 PO Oran[ NOTES �.� 1.C:j s GrCN[.3P w4nl s[1YCtYv[ . __—_A.�wo•�f Re •LR•-A.IK +� IrO1G1[3 pllaMa.[.::,I...... '^IAIG([S t11rrC Ora1vKC rAU15[ <CrtW mmd IK frlF _a_ISnlut..wale..[.....StrYCTV .ill rdi0ullaa Ir" —0OIG1[3 LIM.'a IRpnS[0 U.— r1reR Iaxo aa�a [11311•s COr HN[f.rl Swvur Scr[[rC0 v.ypYya Gy.py� /nrvs[v taiNaS arc Sv.x1 SRIO ®ISYl4f[s mw ICn&Or tat irOIG([s-vV1tOI3c 3[la.Cr.NR' .. [4 1�1 eta ma}r OlrOleart,•Mr 1.n[s [LIZ..1.1-11."boo—M (v Ca3�«i CaANr! O rC rCalrnY1L40. r[9P'J'✓Rpr3r5lts. ZZ DPADItIC tICTEe ~� i' IiC�IN 1 IOM401i OICCIc UISIIR I[asai\.Cd101rt ems"/ � L�—�4 - +sw.lmis slims.. a Ip�wMc �I �•,}[x 1 a.4�ip surt�c{i`wr.Ia` r II1a1[iwsl [It C {iC1CK [ [IOf aswGQ.IIs-rnv Mom[!A gt {iK1�0ivLLML(SIM IE. �,M.tta1m aI MIS _ aK/!a Aw mI - 3:im1Is1f9 :u rdii) s. Maiut[iKliitRKS 01 ail Iv iMJC�I Io�O[niv.6[ H{ D>arISC 9If [r aSC- KV.rEv sT A330G1a{[O C 0Y[[`s erf[J C+1 3 1f0. r. a ac.na rm r st.xvs a.o suno is 1o9^'a .aio:iii. erns- •1•r..ta o strd Slim • G��y:Y..: _ .I LaaKl 4 ltta�[0 OI tK�S•vY S u G{r SRi Sl:+.(3[0�)`i3Nti• • ����'•ffffrr�� smu[ Qlall A�••�'T NURTH CITY OF. . ITEIVIT ANCHO CUCAMOTN A TITLE PLANNING L VISION EXHIBIT. SCALE' o � $ L 'an 1 _ U. o + {� z �< •� lA ;a � � II: I noF � �. �I r �C.) UJ �G3 R � w LU s W gg �eI�C aLU E" O a = , SI 21 lit, god U) E" NURTH CITY OF. �' r ITEM: ..c..,�. RANCHO CUCAIV!v�NG TITLE: PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT-_ _SCALE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCLONGA �1CAA1 STAFF REPORT 01 U DATE. May 11, 1983 1977 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City,Planner BY: Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - ND A custom lot—resi3ential su ivision of Z04 lots on10 98 acres of land in the R-1-20,000 zone, located on the east sidr: of Haven Avenue,_ north of the Hillside Drainage Channel - APN 201-121-12. L. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Requested Action: . The applicant is requesting approval of a tentative tract map for the above-!4-scribed project. Am B. Purpose: To create 204 single family lots. C. Location: East side of uaVen Avenue, north of the Hillside Drainage Channel: 0. Parcel Size: 140.98 acres E. Existing zoning: R-1-20,000 (Single Family Residentiai) F. Existing Land Use: Vacant Parcel G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North Utility Corri or South - Single Family Residential, zoned R-1-20,000 East - Deer Creek Flood Control Channel 4. West Single Family Residential, zoned R-1-20,000 H. General Plan Designations: Project Site Very Low Residential (Less than 2 du's/ac) Proposed Project Density - 1.45 du/ac North Flood Control/Utility Corridor South Very Low Residential (Less than 2 du's/ac) East Deer Creek Flood Control Channel West Very Low Residential (Less than 2 du's/ac) I` `� ITEM H i Tentative Tract 1-'2i.abard Planning Commissi Agenda May 11, 1983 Page 2 I. •SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site consists of a vacant parce? which slopes �n a north/south direction at approximately 10 percent grade. The elevation of the property ranges from 2,008 jfeet at the southeast corner, to an elevation of 2,298 feet at he northern, boundary. Aproximately 90 percent of the site is covered by chaparral and -other indigenous native brush and grasses. In addition, Eucalyptus and Olive trees are clustered generally within the southwest section of the site. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is requesting review and approval for The development of a 204 lot single family residential subdivision of 140 acres of land located east of Haven Avenue, north of the Hillside Drainaae Channel (Exhibit "All). - The project has been submitted as-a custom lot/tract subdivision, thus precise dwelling unit locations or designs are not required„ However, should the applicant decide to develop this tract, precise designs will be required to be approved by the Design Re\tiew Committee and Planning Commission. Presently, the project, as proposed indicates variable lot sizes ranging in size from 20,000 to 44,000 square feet. Presently, the applicant intends to develop the project in eight phases of approximately twenty-five lots each. All lots are designed for equestrian use with appropriate connections to community and local feeder trails. In addition, all interior, community, and feeder equestrian trails will be provided with extruded concrete or split rail fencing per city standards (Exhibits IVI & r"D°). Access to the project will be provided via Haven Avenue in two locations (Exhibit 911). Interior streets consist of loop roads, which, are designed to provide access to individual cul-de-sacs. All interior streets _will be designed and improved in accordance with City 'Engineering Standards. Present iy,`no interior parkways, will be created except along the northern perimeter road; however, an exterior entrance/parkway adjacent to Haven Avenue will be provided to accentuate the development and provide a landscaped entrance statement (Exhibit "Ell). B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee determined that t—he_proposed subdivision adequately conforms -to the basic design standards set forth by the City's Zoning Code .and General Plan in terms, of integration and compatibility with surrounding land uses. . -�o • Tentative Tract 1�' ULaband Planning Commissi.... Agenda May 11, 1983 Page 3 C. Development Review Committee: The Development Review Committee recommended the installation of full street improvemenntE along Haven Avenue and the newly creatad interior streets, per each phase. Improvements include curbs, gu.ters, sidewalks, pavement, street lights, drive approaches, equestrian amenities, and landscaping, where appropriate (see Standard Conditions). In addition, the Development Review Committee recommended providing corner cut-offs and non-slip paving in relation to equestrian trails. Also, the. Committee recommended that the local trails system connect to interior streets for police protection: Lastly, the Committee recommended that a structural Mock wall be constructed along the north boundary line, east to the levee, for flood controlprotection. D. Growth Management Committee: The project has been reviewed by the Growth Management Committee and has been assessed a total of 43.5 points under the Residential Assessment System, thus exceeding the threshold limit, and can be considered by the Planning Commission for approval. E. Citizens Advisory Committee: The Citizens Advisory Committee CAC was concerne wit preserving the existing clusters of Eucalyptus and Olive trees which are located in the southwest section of the site. The Committee suggested that the trees could be preserved through the use of CUR's (Codes, Covenants, and Res,.rictions) which would encourage individual property owners to preserve the tree clusters. F. Trails Committee: The Trails Committee has reviewed the tentative subdivision map and has made various recommeidations to the applicant in relation to equestrian trails, which have been incorporated into the Equestrian Trails Concept, Exhibit licit. G. Grading Committee: Due to the nature of the project, a custom lot/tract subdivision, grading- will be minimal consisting primarily of street grading with minimal cuts and fills. Dwelling units with related building pads will not be provided with this development. The Grading Committee approved the conceptual grading plan subject to approval of a rough grading plan by the Building Official prior to recordation of the final subdivision map. H. Environmental Review: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant. Staff completed the Environmental Checklish and found no significant adverse environmental impacts related to th"e development of the proposed subdivision. If the Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. l Tentative Tract 1j '?/Laband Planning Commissi5. Agenda May 11, 1983 Page 4 III. FACTS FOR FINDING: The, findings listed in the attached Resolution are supported by the foi!owing facts: o The subdivision provides adequate improvements which make it compatible with surrounding land uses. o The project site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed subdivision in relation to the City's Zoning Code and Growth Management Ordinance. o The proposed subdivision, in conjunction with the cond-tions of approval, are consistent with the current development standards of the City. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised for public hearing an environmental review in The Daily Report newspaper. In addition, this project was reviewed by the Deer Creek Homeowner's Association, which has been working closely with the applicant. Presently, no problems are anticipated with the development of the applicant's project in relation to the adjacent Deer Creek development. V.. , RECOMMENDATION• It is recomiended that the Planning Commission conduct a pu'6j c hearing to consider public input and elements of the project. If after such consideration the Commission concurs with the findings and .conditions of approval as recommended, the adoption of the attached Resolution- with Conditions would be appropriate. Re pectfully bmitted; ick Go City Planner RG:FD:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" Equestrian Trails Exhibit "D" - Equestrian Trail ,Details Exhibit "E" - Landscape Concept Resolution of Approvir,with Conditions RESOLUTION NO. 83-66A A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING, COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, MODIFYING RESOLUTION NO. 83-66 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP x NO. 12332 't WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No, 12332 hereinafter "Map" was submitted by Walter Laband, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San. Bernaruino, State of California, described as a custom lot residential subdivision into 204 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on May 11, 1983; and WHEREAS, said Map was conditionally approved by a resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga numbered 83-66; and WHEREAS, applicant has requested a, change in use of the internal streets of said Map from Public to Private Use; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and cotsidered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered tither 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 Resolution. No. 83-66 attached hereto and by reference is made a part hereof, omitting the standard conditions. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12332, a copy of which is attached hereto, dated August 1983, is hereby approved sabject to the attached standard conditions and the following special conditions.. FLANNING DIVISION 1. A signature sign-off shall be contained within the individual homeowner CC&R's designed to alert the buyer as to the requirement for street 'gees, including maintenance. Prig to occupancy, street trees and slope plantings on individual parcels must be inspected and approved by the City, 2. Parkstrip landscaping and street trees, with appropriate irrigation systems, shall be required along streets "A" and "C". The 'required landscaping and street trees may be added with each _phase of street Construction. t s Resolution No. Page 2 4 3. All slope banks in excess of five (5) feet in ' vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated(with subterranean sprinkler systems) in accordance with slo,�,E planting requirements of the City. The slope planting shall include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per 250 square feet of slope area, one 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 square feet of slope area, and appropriate rooted ground cover. Hydroseeding shall not be allowed due to the rocky nature of the soil material. 4. The proposed security gate entrance system shad be approved by the Foothill Fire Disrict and the County f Sheriff's Department,, prior to approval and recordation of the final map. i a ENGINEERING DIVISION 5. Standard condition no. L-1 shall now read: f "Dedication nf ingress and egress and maintenance easements overall interior streets shall be dedicated on the Final Map to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering and Public Works Divisions; the Cucamonga I, County Water. District; the San Bernardino County p Flood. Control District; Southern California Gas Company; Southern:California Edison Company". 6. The northeasterly portion of the project area (rlood Control District Easement) shall be made a pa-1 f the tract map. The C.C'.&R.s for this tract .snail make provisions to incorporate this area into the Homeowner's Association once this area is developed. 7. An access easement by separate instrument shall be provided to the property lying east of the project area (owned by San Bernardino County Flood Control District). The document shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District. This condition shall be waived yf the access is not required by the Flood Control District. 8. The. Homeowners Association established shall provide specifically for adequate funding for the future maintenance of the private roadways and the Haven Avenue landscaping. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF SE`` 3ER, 1983. i • «9 Resolution No, r, Page 3 PLAN 'N COMMISSION OF li;E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: _ Dennis L. out,rairman rATTEST:`� t}} f ti �fr tic I3 Secretary of the PlanetRFE--ommiss7on I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the Cit, of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of September, 1983, by the followings vote-to-wit; AYES: COMMISSIONERS: JUAREZ, McNIEL, BARKER, P.EMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; NONE s ' 11-4 r yam;` N M v�uy •+v_o ter. eAc cm Yr.. fro auq •- as �� y'�.� uJ ry am ovi. eD eq Mace N.' N9. A.•y. •.. Y C L L �` = w D N • P 1•V. �.CJ V . �O « 7d� O ^.N .N �tl� ..•Oy. ��J C Cep `Cq CZ �C =�iVl �L �N!•.^•e a� «l ��h^ LV.q� O^.•' LyV �Y�•V.• w YpwO. ^1DQ + ..0� CM dd0 ft si GV V ^Yq i L 2 •�..0 C d•rVG• 9n. .n ^V BqN L q..C.•'-ef. V 6 6 V a V '.««. N G..4 A 6 A O N C = � �A N J Q O V w V P U L q L. L u tYlwN Vp4 AYV Y7Ya « LC ^r ^UO .•• U c0 YA 5.0 V EA bV V .+ • q@ qj vOM Vow CO,O «0 Y�y ay. y V o DOp L Om.µ dQCL ice . '..S€ macc_ eV =z'« u VC`. ^D•'^Y. s� NVV 9A� ►L O a«aE.Y uGteYY aCNN Ad tnra yu.a„a ao V.V ^. ww 4�sri � L N w9 C Q 4 N JAG p 4 b�4� - r j L pGa Y^NM ttV �O'AO �+ pOp YT 6N ^y Ov �9 «�Y l G r3•«n~ �¢N p9 V-y ti U. O. L: L vD bCC« Ls o< p. •S G vY G o qo O.. U D c •O.•V G A q�. Em q O C G O = _ 9« Y D v@ A O JCY V yam. vE JL O. Ydc� L u Or^ N qN gg P O ^. G N^. Y•G ti L.N 5 qq ^ 9QL O ••.VIAY ^y q•.• ^uY�. • Q«^.OY GO wm 6.Ya 4w1D0. Q�nco w;.N6� .494m Ca 1=6M ^MG 1•L NG1 s tu`o e� uG zz rraY qM Aa yd as o u vv o o o r• c Q L �. vLi ut vu 9.ay a •;nv w « V„4 C•D G V Y V C N. a�d n0 O..q 3 r � « M« � Q Y C�O ,D w .Ni.Jt Y3 CG �nr. q. «�E v ^CIn A�9 Su . �E «.. rp Fu aiyy j. (f11 9,11 'uN u a��o ='g 4 d9. q G « G� c wa- NWo E q« o �D•yx u u n ^ ACE. qa9 G eaM. O G ~�Z �. o L• c� oar p ox"�i �r o =.:= Ao �N^ `- ti � w'•v pAGo rgg'.r p. i.p bu�tt c. «�y� p O nQD4v V�� N� N ad A N�. 'mC M«••G• ryY G V.�YrLd i N G V 0 Czz GZO L •�C AG C NF 'NJd _ � 3 zq uV{� un. vp e4�e cCA_rn eauo �v ,,uGG >ce� NN M O6�w 3$uil YdV F!d Lp �A O 1^O. 1cu5 �"� •. Lf � !�� V �r Jqq '1 N PI V• N. C .+ N1f Be CN Zndi 6�9 VG qvp 06 v S y u L L q Y V U n E O E p6 L.Eo LI O NL C• G OY p G A �^ GC Oy2a y O cE NL a p ;Y C y�GILG� E T rpC EG:5 d=ap L1 �yy, qq E r d yq.0i ^� a L EL O. O.� rO.i C� O C d� G •� C OO u.Y L`L(l.p Y^ D. S GO N^ dEy d'�d du.0� dE�^G�nd CIpJT9 qC •/9 O v C.L TyG .Q:d^.,� � ...Ep` d p. d Nm E G M pd� d 1.dq Y C �F O Lq Gq ✓ C NGq 0. .�. 9 NOZ a E d dt .� o cd die n c � LNE N q L O✓q p Dp D��ccy N�GLK rLE am dG Ld.N� EE N `�OEEn 1Or �nWa � d N N O L M O p�ydu� L L L q �OY q G Y 2 0 L E 7 N 6b' C E p p ?. p,C d'p.p u�✓G G 0.n�0. N d D G�� a GE6L0. �Csro� ^go.`va nY 9E`Y dLp..r uAq^ =LC.0 ✓qV • CA Ha. qt� ML.d�q me YD dE.` oywr. `mot E-Z t: oMUY �u:c s a D TN' n r" ro o� �+• `odp'-�.�rc o=` cTou� >.d«o Q Gp^ >" _~ Ic m u q. $ "'D P°G'�c .p• ✓�. a -o: u o - tq C Y 0.GV 9q ^ 6aG>�. 0.`UC vo OEM ECO d•• ON✓b�d�'�^Y^�.p. M ✓YL ^Eq N ^VH. t ' L • 1'�'5 a E Q E-Z> r 6 0 L 6 0 \�.3 N q. L«+�' 0. U 9 G 9 i•+L.q X. O a•. n^ T. ✓:de �n oo�L d v. ao '•cN -x t q N 0 0 V � 0.. 2 d. E 6 x C_•L.+O u 0�6 OBE C9 W d q0O Do^q Y 2t N Y G S Rq O O fl C E o V.p d MT S C Ly.0 E LC �> L yNjU N c W d Np 9 V L a I � E 9 T O N V a Y ' v L N D QS • np.:V C C L Q�N O N O. 9 y ��` L T f pq O •yW 9 V6 4 � a Lu o D -51 �^Y v C V 9 uy✓ a T C E C • N ^ Y Z y. C E+ dC' N�`Y 'OC 1.d.�=1n of w.GOO Td9r rO ^ G qY GOO ' �9 w9+'✓�9 N •S ytul 9u N� VN o E WiJy.5 q2i dNA TC C�0.CV>GyC GZ.d✓N vOCE G y E.O CQ 7,�7 L G > ` W CL GMv aG'9 j�E q0 9y q Y S. d 6 � y'...- OG�Y Ldy C L N • n M. CG GL'O ^✓O. .N d«L.O O. y d O^q L O pof LSO N.0 �.d �.gd4 •C O. N O drO.p^q %.d U �3. ML9d 4S! p l d H. n Sy rn pe 1L..^..°`' eC0'^oM o yy Tq a'dQ.• 9 M U O C WAL 01 L G C d o ✓ U T v q �.. Y ►, a. O. V ^ UY ^ On ,°. T. •n1I TJ L ^L v�p.E^.a L ^d yy T JJYCC d K2MG N9.N 4Y JY1ppd a�P^G+ FY.y NCa Q4MQL. C DT �CV W.�^ q • A ti H N ti a = N � N • rod« ye Mowr c` Ohy a.�d lcr a�ro a °c1 l`• YNn «c oa.r y y& Ti' Nu 'o cV„ro .a vro L 1wL F9E < u. GAS O C•' $dyG yN A C�«YO N AP pi V Ow1 � ♦ LVT GN <�OA 00 w O N O U 4 E •Z R� 'e v m L o a i pl` F �?. �.0 V Ob 1•.L. dNu OyA .�D' L .j.). C4 d�u q ..� C�•C ro�a G C t .� V C y r'�N C ♦ d� p.,Y Z N q C1 ..•emu «'.P N.o d u«yt .i. u7C N v^'N qu d q Ly..gC D O b O NVr NY N n r s N C d2 A NrdC 4 Ny OL1.d qN q04 'g—E E�r� wL4N .GW L.N u=u+•$ EN. d a9 y wDo ++ dR C VXzza O O�V G 21.M NL LruT N= ez3 Ny U. NNN rL NC C EE . d dv U qC Or..yu L AT N.w W q N cr N a.)Fi . d < >�R EU. Mod>N d c .�.,. Nu .<r Lc �N a�°j Ldc o:♦Pa �'_' `a Ia'.. coT�. uq Mny Nz oN ` rt L.��. 79 N 6YC N"f d..%.w C.N.•J �Tyga C G: gNLL Nw V l] g03w„ � Y y r^v v.c•♦.Y1d a d,LL^rq+ rhA�c C' d,L u To c u=u au<i.dc. n G D A c N. P. q 6 .i.r. LMy �Y. wa ^ as u.P.as. Nq uq «c< o. oe < ^ c F•D q ♦�6 ,,CC. d'O d O OI^'C d 6.0 6.0 y �. V.Rti PD. 4Y rp« � GYM NNR yn JLE�' F.b�R� 46m C.ti lV ♦') w d�CP OI C O Y.-d C. d•..+L c L. •- :^ T♦6n U A L.L aoC'd.♦O. O is , Eq L O C CL YY^ ^ .^..N:d« e N 99 bd 0 yN C Lx PI Wpm f• )NLO'Nd O•.A L MYUML `N�SC M• .d'f a1q�NN{. ¢Jd• = L w�w.l OCM Nu Oy�qDD '5Q. O. 'GriNNO . M.G O 4 Lgs9 01dY 4N�T�.yY d^� PN d YHQ yOAC F C.L 9 OI *�Ew 6 da<d¢L rNC V� C Lrl^•^rti y CR NE Y.1L.O,P Orn pr M N C N rP.N N N C GCGS�N 3.Qi N. �� CCLr a 4^. Lw CNde C.NN 9 wd'ar'SPAC i). 4 T3CA f..dC dd t d eB 6. NL. Uu Z.9. 0 4pN C6p LA O��. Ud� D• UQCdn 11 D �Ru2 N.PI. y iCNOON 1 y C ft pg N L d. .p1.T.q< N<d r = N L Q P D•i C 6�+�q G C e�+x d D.6 V L d G�.p. N 9a aC4N ���' RLp C D'D.QG L FO M D. FCIGN � _ .dD a ONN OCC FO q iivn%a�9.�o Ev- % � YNV['i .^q K YSvl4L.I>^ Lyt d.Mq M a AT T j�� d LT. Ny� L 01daN�N 5 4 V N}6 p u d N U l N L En 2 g C). y.. •Yf a 01 U N N+M u„O,I O 4 .r LL C i OIC.b Ow L.. H q d N G .r L.V q�d N d .0 9`N♦.'�O �...w N C u „ D.wL ^�M•` ac ^O d C•�.r C b y Y N r M O CP.�2.)$1?�q a �Itil la. w d p O..RO ^.•.RL L �� d C `mod C 610<.. >r L. d .e^LN NnA s+ •�>.L G �Y N 41 Y L ♦ w L O N d d>A. q u C j iYH ? L:L t'l y OL i" d a N Z L RN k"'Yi' ^ r O. d .0 LG %X7 OS CL.CM q `O ML CW 1^l01-1 C 1t(.N P.R WLNOCFUt"•NgN Q.N^. 6�ci 4MS:10ed ,4. V IC1 N N FI V N AO •� t� L ISu, C C b L L C C d U U IVp O tl .».» O G C G 11 F.Yi E u C r `�G a =� Y c �n+• d V Eu E�L T 00 C .Y..O O Yy n «Ey C b wq •n 'q N b V � �� '» Q C N ? V•R Y. �q. - �. b..tl..duw ^gEae o as Ma. 01� o«Ttl` v a .i.;aa LW R«.E �atlsY 9 a Mq N� L .»� U •pl Um aLi9 MV^ Cb Nb.O C Y .^ _' •N�. Oa '9 C y qLN •d•a aoo •E .Lil dY �N bS «` N.'aru yrs u.D+pu LY yy L. C� � N. OIM• � {� c O Y d C d L G O Or L ... o�E ad e • �• N.Y. •O.E�E .^ �G m 6� G Oq LL N �db O tlS Om L.a Old q. �o>dN.Y Tq C.C. T LN Dry. L7 E.V�.NN »y tlb - u 6a L`•�� d4p. OY� AG6 bN q� LNN OHO L +.Y. •»^qw.q LVL. WN9 WYY �6. f:J�p.26Y QtlrY Q4.14.0 • • `N 17 • f.l R N f.l N.a m ^•o m c q' 12 y� yal c G'v b q Ewa u o oVGi C �1 a � pcd Y d •^L> .tl Gd S w uyT c G Nam YO d L ,p b O L L V LYLI a9 4 z KS �. I Eat N 4 WC,q Q L G =qV C.••-N $ 5 9 G _ 0 « & y. _`. N� o p. a G dr.. � 1 li• a.4i 6 V «9 1; •C.l d>.y. �V^N. y b wNaa a^ "aa r Aid b A T L ^C q ' � H O Y �.O li- d f• ^. Mm• Ea �.S m L �.O Ob y U >.E}}EO D D. �r i V � D dq•y� L 'PY� L Ly 6 C V4 � Qep Vtl ep Rry L b21p .c LLNeC ` �. YO.. M-E S. o muq q FG 4y L I �! ! SMz;z .q. tl ICYWL N Q • y > _ fir• � N S• t •-o dN T n Ne.c o �' M a u o c BE u. u�.. •a v aU 71 � O •O �. d N� 9 O O �d O Q.L CEi 4,)w C/ O•a 6 .� J r d d i E L Q L d n m E v c 0a TN a I 1 d N. A 084 p d L C N O d V d 0 Y U�a Q/ N d Ll~i' L 6 O•. dd0� 00 a. ^q � ^ ^7 T 4L � Z Z., YY 30. C ( Ol V OA W L Q t LC �r V d O �' '•r�nN Ym cT Y • Qu 6M GL6 ¢YW •iq 6PL W> L LiNq NaC 4L Yr� Z 1p rnov m..2u Qluou `• yd•Gco q o O►wo rn € G 0 O•d 0 .5 +b nN Sv v � y V i and C xgTxC y i 9G p0 d = j N pC � �O YdL dp E duo • �q vim. -q _ ONd Lw A y ,M V L �.M • 6 T r d V L Yq- N= 0~ G C • ` d CC ' LT ly.. •p•O R _ •Sd p 4 T Ol. O 60 d' upo ` aq of ^ 289144L. L Zo L G T E N u C L wQ.d O OLq a pu o_ dNE p C •� ��EC.1 N = p�EY O ++0 O.d 6Y 06 Cl€ Y Ot E06 q dy V 09V Y 4 N N L _ 1 T 6 O1 C.2- N• C t N y d • E 6 E R i0 N y p ` L A pp Cu OIN p T C N O C •- d� "d'•8 � u ¢ O L Q aY py • 9-C O N Oti 9 A w N my E s .� sad. Oa L O L i p' d POI d d we TI Yd T L O O al� al0„C L U Gp OI rE w ' v LExs pppdv CCao TA L'' c ` N m C"lec id 'c c uc. p O q O...u.uo ap. OlA � u^ p cs a yy .. 6. A a Y • O d � C 00 L�00. N w9 f,' rt v . •S Z T n d A q •' Lvroi C b {.1 •b F c r A •O C d q Y E • N b r C` .� n -C d O S.• ti O d L W. uq U ru b CG OT d E n O SN W E G G M .1Y y9 V nd D.Ny Q y 1J° `« •� E On � Y. d io cy � = E. Oy d6 C N0.9L • T �{� O� do c. �.Z L E S w G a u o. - N C r� O C •-b q LY � 2 Nd Ny .0 O 6 V NL ln.L C^N N d0 tY €•• 9� NW L 6 q G C a < o!=C 0 9 c�W 9 S N a GO! p O qu dd OL e! K T i� T ... .Lv.C 6 H A L` A •• W J Tf..) 9 � r� � �vrti 46N. Qa�a 1Y Q u3� €aL+ Qy A � Q.r � aip' O!� vi Allk a tj Nu O2 Goou �_5 •Se .d0, O-0U_.• d p Tv !~i! O.A 9 Gd p G�Z NG N III a c mor Lp cu. c-1 ro d wun3.4! N!•y �pE -2uu IDYJu O�q ^C O O Olb S. � G •N N N N� T GZ � T dy p N d urC..T dW. NQ GuT N: C N L du C V q d Tcu NL t 4.Oi NT u _ G Ll S i d0 A � O Eu u~ b.0 NO C.drq� G G U *QLN �d ouu C YL F.OLM _ � V E L Eri roAN AaT+apiO • E�m u AO L pL _ ;p •.•� _ Ay u p U Off^ LCA CiLi L c � C d C V N.Z ipr 6 tV a11p yd va O.V LV ad L�TNu y u L qV. 6d c'E.r pElr �LCf O.„. dq0 Q•.•EV LN:EM,GY^ O. Nq N E Y TN. w •y Ey o D Ypp qO 'C�Lad. N,O..o 6 � Gd d p O.d. O TL y!Or T V C^ �c E O Y V �b �W G U q O D T N C q 4Y L OOW LOc N�� LULO W Cb?• drn '.2 OlU YbV� T NN -l..i • A,. ^.r• 4 ^� �aN Tali4 g LNf� N� E `�. 'qd dC v o D U d A L W d A d QY Ht H 6NtJ NBWF� ,(✓� NO�O NNLI 61r+i•. 4ta O.r iYNNptiJ 3d fJ4 'A .. IA b Izn�i ^ N. N H H • •1 r tJ - cn M N 0 z U N O C mom. N A _ y i L �A Y O 2•• �W M LLOy Y a= O Y� d4T � pNO c �� ae N c H u as na du a L o w o IT ma n 4 > va m NF •O • dam... • EL 2� LA�� d V L yy Y. �M d .. i•Y dT 6 C nL V mod. O•^ O O d ` �N L 10r� ' � d•� O A C L vYi � ppdd .CO. nd LLC OT Ca ». O� OWN RAN � LL6 6n Imo'^. dJ Ua RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTIONt OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT 12332. WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12332, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Walter Laband, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of 6 California, described as a custom lot development into 151 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing an4 action on February 12, 1986; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended pprovat of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering, and Planning. Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commissior, 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: Aft SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 12332 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 s consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The d,�agn'of the subdivision is not likely to cause F substantial environmental damage and avoidable Injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract, will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, no-5 of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. Page 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12332, 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. A signature sign-off shall be contained within the individual homeowner CC & R's designed to alert the buyer as to the requirement for street trees, including maintenance. Prior to occupancy, street trees and slope plantings on individual parcels must be inspected and approved by the City. 2. Parks-trip landscaping and street trees, with appropriate irrigation systems shall be required along streets "A'° and "C". The required landscaping and street trees may be added rlith each phase of street construction. 3. Rooted ground cover is required for slope hank erosion control where required by standard Am •conditions. Hydroseeding shall not be allowed because r rocky soil. c ENGINEERING 1. Deification of ingress and egress aad maintenance easements overall interior streets shall be dedicated on the Final Map to the. City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering and Public Works Divisions; the Cucamonga County Water District; the San Bernardino County Flood Control District; Southern California Gas Company; Southern California Edison Company. 2. The northeasterly portion of the project area (Flood Control District Easemen;) shall be made a part of the tract map. The CC & R's for this tract shall make provisions to incorporate thisarea into the Homeowner's Association once this area is developed. 3. An access easement by separate instrument shall be provided to the property lying east of the project area (owned by San B—nardino County Flood Control District). The docvr!e.lt shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the bisti<ict. This condition shall be waived if the access is not required by the Flood Control•District. Page 3 4. The Homeowners Association established shall provide specifically for adequate funding for the future maintenance of the private roadways and the Haven Avenue landscaping. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA � BY:.Dennis L. out, Chairman ATTEST Brad Boller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 12th day of February, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: . ocLa a,..•rL u �cw �' oo, .c Ne�. u�.ud ;t c G o a n u6' . u' ue nn co ag a`` Nd� ppicn Lv L�.q•� N d Y. VN' 6>uG qL gt4!d «A GU nA d q c ^3 fO U C C N `.,S ` w.0 qc+d o:�3 •n O wa�u naq d. u.M cu u - .9- 9 nYo '^dc Z MELa N6 UG�. •^p p9 ACC E6Ea {.1. 09 EG L 29A � dcg6 u�.co SCEtn Ocd9 �^ OST= cV.O uEMNc Gy 9 S d CW y«dw. �rgN oL L=O. C'C G wu dr'«p+a^p cpu q. •^6n gym' ^ar�i co o. 2 ua nau _ N Ec NF,.O Y� ^>d.0 L O p O q F �.EEc 4. '.b TC �qqL O.LVgg Np 6 d y d QO y. p� d Nr c Cam. AC da •n On O -...pc �.:` qc.. nn^pL `a.�• acra�n.4 'O N LL o Y..O. Vd p 9 y a..qa sF N Zz G L q ` �Oo •Cc a C dUyE No,� 6tO.0yC Dy yd V\a EQ o C [S 4 ONd d q C L q�Syucac dNc O r C EdHHHU Ny pdV G.C�gyl. d t •6 d m OU y O«2V NOYJV L E ,,GG > q >I�d N N.Y d� n 6 ty� �c0+• C m _ . d y Ada` rn o0 V. Nu J > n+N qEY AG W Z �`y d E LNNN UU�N O u do ao d�cNc i a o c d9 •~ n'q � m 547;pEnL _ a � q m .G 2 N•+ J e: o=m, o w > • +ad+ u I 'a. � 2 �^ O A 2 9 EE A c 15 Q N VW • pa J.i d�yo d ' �• Y 4 C A Z +•d c`�a,•N q d p o�G q p M. N Y •+ Y d • 1\�,�� q G a 4 A p � �O�9 d ~d `N Gar cd •J V O T ¢or .E- •�. q6 Q iO pJp..O d •� I I �� - �M ZC dCNY 014 iy4.� .4. Uy . n Aga CTmO^r Oair ALV,Od ,pO� A Oiu6 r_C I. C.O i O 6^ E d d L d E y C T t L rl O L Lq A Oa+q T^�p V O O O p A.0 4 V t G T L E N V v .q � d Z•j r V 4. ',p�EV 'L vViCNV4 «O.Oi y^E pb �V N`�N. C 6 A 6 4 g p�a A.A 9 C 9 N M O.N. •L V d 1'C V O S N 4-• Y O qy^ 2.2 4J A LO N O YN p4L4.-=6q.pa Y MTV d L'.-. dA Y.� Tp" S MF. qq G �d V VOC Up h^uNO4~N.A� U�4 L 6C A0= O� "'� NQ g 3 O R. W GV L t Z 01 N L. b r ^ O r..,.0 u y' a E q Gm v -F _ C V= t C Pr L Ni 2p. OI=u 1 'NCO LCY ^4 Y=O IS.pAu01 A 00 OIpQ 'c Cr�jVUC QO ^ .p �v • yC V A 1naNQ E VC0�4 YP^�. YLN'SE «q y O N Th =C qp N I' NLVa OC > d01 VTr OI a y �� yam` Yt. TY. OY Y.O.L a4 ^ ygMa Ouyi L� Zn Gp. L �' aw 6u« 4u aE pvs ds am. O. y66 Y Y G ^ V A L U Y :O E.4 q u.r0. L Y N c ypp pp CC SS e L Q E M O. O . . N • q c o Sm -S E v�.o.AedrAu « p« ,o y Cy z Y^ 2 q n U f E 3 i O R ^ _L VYY^ y yE? L.G 1UU ryN 9" y aAEU ULA3C _'� 6 C� M.n�' €4i .,�' 'daLt fxi�.L.�yLo O"L A u N E V .� rq cc Ly TA y dplq. q�c Q O E a O L�O+ 6L t'_U S6 AW "2 u rq�. TYa d^. ysu a0. OC ~ «A L M pV OC. LA Ly V "' pp C d •r4 N. -53 LY � L � qyS L3 � LA.�> '6 �.� as _ cM a L=E , a Atl a=� $.yN.. L>.p dEo v.L,q O.p OZVIN� V sNo c•->G. d aa.4p _ n Nu OICLN <A U lA.O LOST L AU9�906Q At d y E N L C J N L. � «_L O y ... A U n t 4 m y d L E y d N EE YI.t.Lt V V^Di9 yntY Ay0 CN uL L. 6= C ^cp p46.^ram ` d.2 OR =L: Q L ,t 9 N d as0 +•q �Y L V� �j V V y a 6 L L y 0 n p o �0,. L ABC OIC.E Ln0 �y r HOC A E V E A � gHN+. CV> O 401NNO .�.YLL L.yI VCL ^iAl ULa+a•'p OY9uL YYnCUO Y.O O�EO m-5 �•� 1'�'+IY NtA F'^AQAp mw.a+L L eu �uc.c w e�aii v aobo co ,o oY .emu o�ood=ln a��O« a N. ^ %Z. y a5 P Ng ✓1 O.•. O e �� L�N U V l+C m N N O @ L L G.� q q Ol.✓O$o $qno mN Np« o.O. 'p6L O b d�a�urlo a .d•« q v o✓Qq $ « `u At q oqo �'a o01 ��1ugi d q. N « a L A c c qYN U `q•`O Uq�•'j Np6 CUTZ.N C L✓U 4,1 . NdEoEu A.u01 �jOL 9II''..'.•� > aU YMY ra NT q✓Ca 5 re d ^O p 0 L R ^� A r OI q p Y N k Q O R CO. V L C .0 II. «c« qc mo. .a N�. i^LN o-o any. 'na cN4c«as q-2 mr w� og.•. L«i« uq T.. O C O ✓u L 0 4 •T.Y:9 C a d m N C L.O n2 CIC Yo qU O^ CH LO py 4 •L CO N 6FT1�•1 Nd'O ✓T 6N v0 dNx.L.rr ONt�Gq✓ CND L DN Lf•!✓ v0 X y- b>r9.�d�. Wa p� }p. 1 q U.d`L L O UQRN p C NxE G L^r Q.Y« J�H K N L� O.d d Tp^G R O V N�d.Y ✓N 0 d O q✓L P A�.OY m U ^vy A N a•G,gi^^q '^«^ & N^Y '° u V7 1 a q a M d^V I q u S'+ L,rn q.G t�$ N dq b Y Y L^`.O` �u1 C d i S 4 01 L �Y YCC ✓q>I Q „^t, CE. ✓ N a NQO L Y.Ct�CN 90C .0✓.. TIlI nOy iN @°I Q o ZH✓ m ✓^ U N um oabp aa. • NrN9L Q'N•^• QN SNO :I+NL <N Y•-9 Ola a.,";X. 6bC06 KY Ili.0g6N I ri M is u avo dOl <q 1• .1` rnQO O1 �c aoR a-a Gqu « u Ap1n q ��� ag¢. 24 m« 9n.R au NN .+ tj . a a caste eu ro•„. ya Y`yi � Nge C ,C.js Lm +•tea ^ Nq aN Crp,z MNd«T CY pp �M� vAur C .r0•� LO LGGA an b�AM�LbL. GE V YY ib Y N ^Z 4ee O L U�M ✓ atr•. .D'._m qy u OO MC✓ uL.9 s aE x NNcd ".,o u ew�� E d. ua N« �.O ✓j. tv „„ad CV aNi.Od q �C L.✓ d qn LU OIN LO V�.0 �' .S..dL 9 ^u �� r.V LNU` a✓ppi'_ q�^ b RYq +R Ocjl^ du�� Wqa N. Y =�N V G40 N� Ly,O✓ q,z� O RL a..` �. ^ Lu%✓Y .Cq r Rp ✓ GN ~w E9 C N H N O ,,,•4. C b O Q�� C L.✓G Y N • R d b b^ T]g L u O .UO V Y Q.�.r �yH V✓ C aL A ✓U. NT Jw CI ,Y L q E N a N m N LI A u p U M V 'G C}✓w p '�a N L W b • c4S OILL Z N90n^ C «Ol q > u.. CO R L i L., ^ 5.E 78 O .U C OI A G L w O S LN " ✓.r• R S v u R N O U`U L • N N✓ L O k 6 R U V ab u AMMO �6 NUL.m > Gb w 'IY GN 6U Kb f••oN�w �oq K N On WGgMN«� �A N � �Ap ouu g^!• C�.6 y W O Y .Y d.C /- W S Y� y q..=.p d y C G ag Fl ll�c•.,•YacC Y .lJ.a ,L� e g � ;y�i..� yg oe Pd o•. •pvoc g �o;Ey.a 2S y9d ^u L� �0. '�40 Yr EY +L q. J M�Y.4 yw�6tJ GCSE: O Y� iz p QQ y L 111 V NS 4t Cir 9~LO YVi tµSit pVC C�N�p A„� V •u' V I j.l tt w N. VAy- Y�L V� S. �l.q= L�.L^ Gr.• [O �.L g'p v O=O ^yl'1'' T` �u U .7 •A+�'w w a u q N A g V 1� y ^.4 •� llf�` ��G 9.�5 g =LG W V�6� L99 LTw¢¢, �:M dC �S d Z OY YOB m I V�VY � .> q� MON� gdgtpg •r=.'~'y•.rt O "'Y. w'=A r. R.OY LSD XY�'Y CI..yYU �9GVV Tpp .'�A wdN d A=bpO Y u �= O Ild. R od< L U q Y Cg xATdw, qoF CC �^ V �Uc CLr-y 6. g �V u^yo fwY aV Ydp ua'o Wt V=AA a qc •na�. uM=.¢y �i.,,..� C�n•dr ov m hAL^ xT w.. 4 �O •o NEB O N C L ^p �y^�6 V i?C E S^o g N C y lo ^ Cn- Z i• C L C? N ^ ' =wV Oyc !L Y �yM SL M <y TtL i• Ri^7 ¢an- AN O. 6M.d.�C YY HCC L COd4 L r49N f60.•=.a 3LILNrG Yi-Aq •�+ 6 Yb dt LCAY di(5 LC6V � nN~ rVi �VYtL {LJ gd�N L1.+•q•tiG N LUy � V N I�t �/Ily 1 mT w 1 1 O^��. _ =r •drru N�Y6 w� �ii Y L qd wA qA Eq 9L� ^Hat �qw.w w c osL >C YR • q \.{. C Yp u� a u N n� S O V N.q � •-+A d L rr U. y g N L H N L b"G! C Y Q Y q2 ^C Y ^ � g 7 00 AO td.^ �`q' Y TN C� wbY ys. pY t� � ••.._ - Yy� NaLi w C t? g vc+ Y E N2 A� M,q p`in. Y pµC Ly Cac 'p dw ^ q p V^ Gepp A aC C� oGu O y v >ap. CL' g06 C VV �Y.. ' 2 L�6 =� [T ^T� VL� Y Nn Y YM.d gY b� • 4�y N • '.) i�•G � A y�N p N Y Y. 7< C.rx.L p.. Oro a L� Y vq E L N w d O N 1 m gu `.c Ay Y Y •" nx moq N v�•n€ �w aY w YdC L� { q � C C wE�Oy vY a.• ^E gy�a .iE.,�«r �Y O^.6 O j V Lg = G.p �� V p. q V 0��. Q 1••4 L L wbw. MyL d a r L d N« `Np n y 6^.L C9 La l V•p.a Y • Y N •'V L G Y 6 C Y O N L L ...y 0 � �o �6 xN^ E•Du � �O V OC 1ti� MC Y O q E~a' '. ^a A L c u a u" h o g•^„ Fd t 'o 0 p^ C 1y.V ys: l��E do�'b O••.d. Oq Ld KSG OsiaL ' a•p d'C.b eE v ��o wun � gN2e.:) ?n p.^ O.. dd �R N.� i Nrp C Y V VOTa. _ �CTCYbQ QQLr� 6 yvlL ^dF •. HVVC Yv 9 C 2V G ^ €G+ r6 5q0 N4 RN HN O npci pt'ta'wA.' oc=' ',q� WiOMW- YA = Map VlOICM ` ^pp A C�� Y*2L� tT� `�._ �90n•y t L`UOL 6^ C ML C dgG9C ^� t�Na Vw NN 20.E JL6^ T a''OYN Y yE W ¢O.tp DV W� W Ei hYw N 1l � P. { 1 (- 1 1 a . Y�L O.o o:PON . boo �a�y«r Ililnd N " a u w.occ ^.o. SC rO N4�dH PYi� G N N m� LT tl A. g.Ma �a u N i O & qj w b C 9 «+- s�a ryo Y�o _. v a L %O �tl a p a s �. O{. POn N^ Q 6�~ T 4Nr L P 0.qgL ~Y . r pd i rG ,^.` O.� A B.'q YN G G. Ly tl q �U�O. G^ O. •-c@amc o ` a v Sa o....v 01yH ado •"'NA O.9` 11d. W 1 �. ON S N C„:2 t H-.2 Y.� gd Vp0^pA G pq C q`+ p1NQ V�9 °AOS QO M « « v6 L L cG'd.«.N MYO YoOh q N N Y qd f.i T N °I d W dy O q C CPr: C^ YC q-OL( PY dpG Y A w�L NL Od Ir d. . PSG •'A EI`,q C pl a N,p V~CC N d�A G O.. L Y V.N L. Z I2= Z.5 NY. «.-B� L. O GT OC afi dN L� Cow _' 4`d6 CCPq «�9 Ya w- t P L Pb.0 yS0 N O =V d •u^ W N C O^ SS}}Ld • S d > GO�W Ov .-.N {ib 6.0 CY6Lp c.VY 0 0 '•° N 1.1 A' YI 4p A W J Lo • c> O C G d P O a ` h.+gN+ cZz:: gg a O d pNp 9 L v.C.�. ..• 9 L +LY, it G m G •^O O YaU M Sq S A PYy�p =dS 6 W 6NC v.Y. oY ca.o 4 �A r Lu dS Nd^c =L dp u0 �' y. Ay:. V «:uq... O Id Ly^` �'w •^•,_Oc .o-� qa iOs aw da P �d N.cC $poe LAY . M= NE y6 NN AG A`3 O Yp yd = LL«O 9.Ww O1 CdY«_..}.. > r R {$? 'dOro T4 « �GGC d N C G YS O Sp L9N W uq yl' N A9 W Yco>� N No GGj$ �L y� u.1 �P DPP u6 � Aa ^O q u0 C �O LV aO,Le d@ o So NsdN ''a n Lq is VG" A u `«- oa ^� o MT A q i� o� �I�q oV ^� ^O b. O rCO B��O ✓ �6 HOC Oro . . a a a fQ� PG GO P�. P6 d� ►y y^ O "`a'S.9 PP Gpg «�-u L o.lC`O.uu NN wO O .at 1.q vrv4Vlf RggG am-a-,64 P O,,GuG YG N. WN� WYti 6 f'J Gt p2 �.� A:O 6m iIf u0 Y. UCL W p�U O O O N O N VAO NULEE Uy OAd q ..C. ..yV < ,0 x • 5-6 d an no r 9 Y G T U pp v.0 ny N O Uy' 49CyT ^ N9Mot N •n n... d•- 6 O.i c n 8+9 a m 1W Onx all M1p'« O « E Lq UT w0 U C C Y LC Lu • qCl y. Uy Eb ON' AC L O.Ad V A CVkLL+ w SE q�.N� L.L nY C d 0 W Lp� low- nM p�. y C E L r M O CO 69 �. B. ygLC dgad qN CO.'�j. y0 LL Sxu.O Q ^y nN E.N yO.L. caa d YE CLw c.% iai. C ad . 2. LL y..�. pp Lr E'N O W mV `� C Qv d gU T«TL n Vuq Ou�C Nq d x F Y d L O y TA. V a 0 E •+L« p c C Y Y d q i.L L N upp C d y` N x^r d Y W C W C L p I d « l N d O N pW w^ Q6NY NOuu N9 6Y�u QV 6tC• Wyu.{.Lt1j•2L 39 AAIM r u tmus O U N d V Y 1 G M Cy E a m W y S. l I C f p O �LL L .61 ap. O .fin c« ^ " 9 1[F j u 1 O�O yC t Y U x q Y 6 u i y u E'O N N.J U r 9 C 00 i > wqv tM rNi LO. :�yd LZ'. Ou��j 9U N E 04 6 T V. W mY Su D. OIm O� ^ N3 � L .O dNY q9 WO N uV�L.m NN by � O LCp at r C w:M �e ^�aPi a ovo N. E cE L: w u o br = c Oi •I N 1•! k.... q T � aau M C C Of r cu L Y n a0i d Cry Lv Ny V a ^ CS V A 1. t c A pn c Y a SY� o Y Q. OP Md ON 91C M �i.l ?a E N Gy 9 M 6Q T yLw f L Cy V. • GS d6 NA t d VCYM F E�? _ A FO'•A • d E� O T a R M A A c d Y O .C d72 Ug. �v L LL L ¢.6 rr y plja f a d uM y� o u o c;a o'' o r N « L ? _ oP �0 uoAi L N 4 U O op Y I y W .9 O O RCN NN AL ^M h = Oa n qG V C O d y n0 d A c aM vv a.r v d m ao.L. a. o c O a LL L N S L E µ 9 Ny L4 .CY 'v0 La ry O N CLN Ny LL yZ'c b? Ny Y U UW.0 9 ALp. O,= ^N ..c.• O.«V YY Od C q uF � Mi.fw q q m o a ti ASk 9 C N w,o-6 A ^OU HO w I�Y�Y CAN 3 Y.CO L �!� fM i'G ny Y g �3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG A STAFF REPORT O O U a DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning. Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dino Putrino, Assistant. Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1314 SCHULTZ A 2 _custom lot subdivision an 5. acres of land in tide-Low Residential District located at the southeast corner �f Vineyard Avenue and Calle Del Prado APN 208- 921-03 ana 04. I. BACKGROUND: The proposed project is a custom lot subdivision situated on a hillside in which -s1opE- ana gra-lsing are critical issues and become an important factor with regards to.the design of this project. During the course or staff's review, many concerns were raised on how best to design and grade the site. After reviewing the latest subdivision layout, staff continues to have concern -and has been in the process of developing alternative solutions with the applicant. Therefore, the applicant has agreed to a request for continuance. III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue Tentative Tract 13114 to the March 26, 1986 Planning Commission meeting so that the applicant and staff can continue worki,g together in addressing the above concerns. gdeectfullysbmt d Buller City Planner BB:DP:ko i lii 147 ` t } ITEM E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA STAFF REPORT a E Z —> DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9431 - HARRISON A division of 2.94 acres into 4 parcels in the very low du/ac) Development District located an the east side of Beryl Avenue, south of Hillside Road (APN 1061-611-04) I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Reg-nested: Approval of Parcel Map B. Pur ose To divide 2.94 acres into 4 parcels for future development of single family homes ' C. Location:- East side of Beryl Avenue, south of Hillside Road D. Parcel Size: Parcel - 0.46 acres r Parcel 2 - 0.46 acres Parcel 3 0.52 acres Parcel 4 - 1.50 acres Average 32,016'square feet E. Existing Zoning: Vacant s F. Existing Land Use: Vacant r G. Surrounding Land Use: ° North - Site of Tentative Tract 11997 (Exhibit "C") r South— Existing Church East - Flood Control Channel and Vacant Land West Hertige Park H. Surroundinq General Plan and Development Code Designations: North Very Low 2-4 du/ac Development District South - Very Low (2-4 du/ac) Development District East Open Space H eritage Park West - Very Low (2-4 du/ac) Development District ITEM F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map y4::_ February 12. 1986 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: The site slop,3s in a southeasterly direction and conta,�-,-s an avocado grove. II. ANALYSIS: Tne Parcel Map proposed by the developer is shown on Exhibit B. For your reference, the approved Tentative Tract Map to the north is shown on Exhibit C. The issues related to the Parcel Map design are as follows: 1. The lack of a trail connection to the property to the north as recommended by the Equestrian Advisory Committee, . 2. The Equestrian Advisory Committee has also recommended that the flag portion of Parcel 4 be moved to the south side of parcel 3. Their reasoning is contained in Exhibit D, second Item a). 3. The number of driveways (4) on 'Beryl Street, and 4. Parcel 4 being a flag lot, I Issue No. 1 can be solved merely by requiring the trail connection. The III developer prefers ,lot to provide it because of difficulties in crossing it with the driveway to Parcel 4. Also, he believes it is unnecessary, because the tract to the north provides sufficient trail access to the east. Again, Issue No. 2 cart be solved by requiring the change. It is, however, dependent_ upon the decision concerning Issue No. 1. If the trail connection to the north is not required, then the flag portion of Parcel 4 should probably be located where proposed by the developer to eliminate the concern of crossing the trail. Ij Issues No. 3 and 4 can only be,resolved by a alternate parcel layout. ExM bit E contains a design prepared by staff. All parcels can take access from "A" street and there are no flag lot: The disadvantages of the staff design (Exhibit f) are as follows: 1. Added street area and improvements resulting in reduced lot area and increased cost to the developer, 2. The Developer's Engineer feels that the parcel layout is not workable because of the Development Code restriction requiring; than areas for the keeping of horses be a minimum of 70' feet away from dwelling on adjacent property, S,: 3. All street improvements would be required to be constructed immediately upon recordation of the Final Map; because Parcels 2 `Y and 3 would otherwise be landlocked, and �r PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 9431 February 12, 1986 Page 3 4. The construction of "A" street would require the removal of existing Avocado trees on the -;Ite. Regarding disadvantage No. 2, it appears that adequate buildable areas could be provided, considering the required setbacks, including the 70 feet horse keeping area setback, refer to Exhibit F. With either alternate, staff is recommendending that all street improvements bi constructed upon recordation of the Final Map in order to prevent short portions of improvements from `being constructed in a piece meal manner and to facilitate the undergrounding of existir(l overhead utilities along Beryl Street. Underground Utilities Overhead utilities exist ilong the frontage of t!(-- proposed project. The property to the, noi-ch of the project is the site of approved Tentative Tract Map 11997 and when constructed will underground existing overhead utilities from Hillside Road south to this project. It is Ak recommended that the existing overhead utilities fronting the project be undergrounded at the time of construction of Beryl Street. Based upon the above analysis, the Planning_Commission appears to ha'!e the following options ,. 1. Approve the Parcel Map as proposed by the developer subject to modifications imposed by issues l and 2. ' 2. Continue the parcel map, with the developer's consent, until a f revised design is submitted. 3. Deny the parcel map. IIl. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration is Part I of the Initial Stu dy as y completed by.the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist, and has conducted a field investigation. Upon completion and review of the (� Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no ad erse impacts on the environmentyas 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. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT f Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 9431 February 12, 1985 Page 4 V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all input <.nd elements of Tentative Pavicel Map 9431. If after such consideration, the Commission can recommAnd approval, then the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, BRH•BK:d e Attachments: Vicinity Map Exhibit "A" Tentative Map Exhibit "B" Exhibit "C,', Exhibit "D --#1 Exhibit "D #2" Exhibit, "Ell Exhibit 'IF" Resolution f ilecommended Conditiins of Approval initial Study f IVCK.Y�EOW 4'Mi'L2/ L/A"I / ��avr_�uritiP�yPRicroT to I /nacre CID. D i7 9F9 1 i 6J�D r13; ydrj� "Y ~ { wrrN AV69d- Hdr e e ti �W 2 �� try fidae� .o �„� � t ;�� l wv ep•✓: urnar ccvpixT �s, M 'AD stthiH ®a!lry lh�h�g MI�liA,F3 I IZ -dP...�.��� db• � lug O �J .e • a • � I aar1E CITY of � �.��. PROJECT PARCEL MAP 9431 v'! RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE .. VICINITY MAP ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT; A - S TENTATIVE PARCEL fAAP NO. 9431 IN TIN Cis!OF RMCII(•CIICAS.f.. CoNTY or Sul CERRfJ11111.s.STATE G CA[mq[alA.: A COO..f e.—1..f In w.t. 11.f In——Wit of t.1.flat.le.t 6 of1... 14 c wr /i.t I..[areN .too.f .+M.f.p 4.f.a.e.of..lA a.V. mism:n&ftQY e.lsff �£ I Ni//aide w I 4 leCA— If. x�iq � ' VL 28 i \ P - 2 V L PARCEL 1MAP N 2756 i V L �W P.M.�. 25-42: atm(auflam: lmnm fr:. Rlt..t f[taeefl)Wrtl.a t.ae■4Itn wt t TO fu Ipl . Tim p1.N.a f17K eef pigfsf•[as plcl>al- fl]6F sff[ .n.111 a ttgi.f.111 ■.et!.f.w.ct nW..tf-el. .11 E [.t ar wlatc/.ee.fv n..f C.enl ¢ ....,. < watt e1 unlecc ercartf-c""* ll.lt of"wm 1.. u am sf.t. A.. Alffik ax EXHIBIT 'IB" . aIYE`Ia���iIAM e� �r t 91,�i, p�,F •:,,��;c33at�j t�)�'{s �c4 .,r to��;i� =�� °�SY � • ,: 2�l,•iµ•It 1, r :aS� H I }�1 , a t� .,.t4t MEPITAOL PARK j s• I 0 o _ _ a--___y4__ 1 fG^• Ofa - ��y��_ •;� � . '^�.•,, is it t A :Q e •t•L�_�'� ._,.�_... :...��,--.—e.i•��; ,, v I , S` za a ul7x'roD . AVENUE`—• ••_• I €i y •� t� ' TENTATEVE 'o..ae auasmou �iaL MAP a,� ` ' a �a4soeu�"o"•Q101HEER� T Fi ra4 i N 0� 1,1997 I,6iwoas 1 "as taaa +� MINT " C • EQUESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENT SHEET 110111T DESCRIPTION:: PARCEL MAP 9431 - A FOUR LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF'BERYL, SOUTN OF HILLSIDE` ACTION. 15' easement for local feeder trails per City Standard Drawing 01001 to be provided as follows: ' a) In a north-south direction, along the entire width o'f the property from the northerly property line to the s,:utherly propertY:line, with the center line of the trail coincident with the rear property '.ines of Lots 2, 3 and 4. b) In'a east-west direction, along the southern property line for the entire depth of the property. Along with the trail alignments aa; indicated above, the Trails Advisory Committee is also making the following recommendations in regards io the design of the'-pr6ject: a), The flag-portion of the rear lot (Lot 4) should be realigned to the .southern trail: perimeter. The east-west equestrian easement would then be located within a driveway as opposed to a side yard adjacent to a single family home. If this is done, the flag portion would need to be widened to a minimum of 35' ta:accommodate a 15' trail easement and 20' driveway. Correspondingly, Lots 2, 3 and 4 would have to be deepened so as'to conform to minimum lot size requirements. b) The trail easement terminus at the northerly property line should note be fenced or gated., but should be open to permit a continuous trail . system between this subdivision and Tract 11997 to the north. EXHIBIT D-1 l •• TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 9431 b is G7•a L.cw cwc o tw.rr a S�•Ittu•eln,S7•rt.w:4uto•n.. t• 1 •1•aAdtYwt. Llr It W.wwV a vq '✓t i t�uat le.t.y�•. w t t•1 t w •.••N�•,w•t,{•M N,:R•w••I ww C••.w, s 15 it. EQUESTRIAN EASEMENT ���Ni//ride_ hlyd a ; 9 .Eat,��•.�• h r ✓—" �, WL 40 r i C PAFrZL 3 1 1 _ PA c'! 2 YL PAfl6c_�MAP N 2786 YL E512 j • .IMIf.kRtl•10/4 NIM.O lrt � , wtWl'!alwlt YwJte� 1pe t•It•at•t•• - • tpll• tYlw.CA r11Y t97 MYt•t•Slew{ • I711H•FRA ~- (�7:-..ri0t + •/•w•tr•1•M•t••111 w t1Y1�INII R•IMtI.1. .' .�/Te w,•" • f•Itttq'IW wt ., t •Z ��� '. Mw.•7 tMlwt wt••M7 tiw••N , � � 3 � /I t t N Lmt•n••rt• /IM C>tnl � fr .,trmt..wens•[rt. r IYf1••n4tat lJtMet) +ti�•fi• F Sa,.i.tt'�. P f— �9 fXH ^r- rP-10, h v 'A.., /41 v ERe6�rlay✓� 1 M 359 /'-/00'' CITY Of PRO PARCEL MAP 9431 . RANCHOPROJECT.CUOAMONGp TITLE: STAFF DESIGN ENGINEERIN33 DIVISION EXHIBIT E „ F- !a •,— r dFuldable_, � /area(rt� Area Cffz1 , 79c'o . L' 0j 3 zo e!,J'90 3 Z4 975 i � 7 4!0 AT 7I Ste, A g oeo A i MA' 503 2/0� •295'� _no (u ( v' aA Sre }- jD 4' • v M W ' 70 70� / rray—�' �✓� ` 359 "-700� • � llwellrt� bui(�ab�� area CITY�O[ PROJEGT; PARCEL KAP 9431 ' RANCHO`O CUCAMONGA TITLE; BUILDABLE AREAS - ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT;_ F It RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 9431 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 9431), LOCATED EAST SIDE OF BERYL, SUUTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 9431, submitted by Michael Harrisor and consisting of 4 parcels, located on the east aide of Beryl Street, south of Hillside Road, being a divitiorr of a portion of the west one- half of the north one-half of Lot 2, Block 10, as recorded in Book 6 of Maps, page 46, Records of said County, and WHEREAS, on August 15, 1985, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above-described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on February 1?, 1986, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above-described map. NOW, THEREFORE, THE kANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the C,�, iral Plan. 2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3. That the site is physically c 4table for the proposed - ,ment. ' 4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage, public health problems or hive adverse affec`s on abutting f property. SECT hat is lo T h project create significant adverse environmental d a Negative Declaration issued on 1,,I986. SECTION 3; That Tentative Parcel Map No. 9431 is approved subject to the recommendnd Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUC16GA BY: ,. Dennis L. Stoyt, Chairman ATT€ST• Brad Buller, Deputy ecretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Cormiisslon of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the PI anning Commission of the � City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held f on the 12th day of Fr.bruary, 19$6, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES; COMMISSIONE'ftS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i 1 II f Ii, I • i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOCATION East side of Berl Street TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 9431 south of Hillside Road DATE FILED: August 15, 1985 LEG,^' DESCRIPTION A division of a portion NUMBER OF 0TS: 4 of the west one-half of the north one-half GROSS ACREAGE: 2494 of Lnt 2, Block 10 ASSESSOR PARCEL NO:1061-611-01 DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Michael Harrison Same Terrance A. Lane 697 Elm Way _ 902 W. 9th�Street Upland, CA 91786 — Upland, CA 91786 Improvement and dedication requirements in accordanne with Title 16 of the Municipal Code of th. City of Rancho Cucamonga include„ but may not be limited to, the following: A. Dedications and Vehicular Access 1. Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights-of-way and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the following streets: additional feet on additional feet on additional feet on 3. Corner property line radius will be required per City f Standards. _ 4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated 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 C.C.&R.s and shall be recorded concurrent with the map, 6. All existing easements lying within future right-of-way are to be quitclaimed or delineated on the map per City Engineer's Alk rFquirements. 7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the %.ity where sidewalks meander through private property. B. 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 post security with the City guaranteeing the required construction prior to recordation of the map and/or building permit issuance, 1. Construct full street improvements including, but not limited` to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, r parkway trees and street lights on all interior streets. 2. A minimum of 26-foot wide pavement within a 40-foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half- section streets. X _ 3. Construct the following missing improvements: Prior to recordation for Beryl Avenue. Curb a a.C. Side- Drive Street Street A. Me ian Street Name_ Gutter Pvmt. Walk Appr. Trees Lights Overlay Island* Other Beryl Avenue• -X X X X X X *Includes landscaping and irrigation on meter X 4. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment'permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. f X 5. Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil °Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of an encroachment permit, 6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of any power yles or other existing utilities as necessary. F.. public 7. Existing lines of 12KV or less fronting the property shall be undergrounded. X 8. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs, striping and markings with locations and types approved by the City Engineer, tiff -2- : X 9. Street light locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern Cal?€ornia. Edison Company and -the City of Rancho Cucamonga, ' Lights shall" be on decorative poles with underground service. 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permit." X 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. t Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. rC. Surety i X „ 1. Surety shall be 'posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing completion. of the public improvementsprior to recording for Beryl Avenue, 2. A lien agreement must be executed for the following: prior to recording of the map X 3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of all on-site drainage facilites necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Divison prior to recording. D. Drainage and Flood Control F X 1. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on i.he final map. X 2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. If 3. The followingstorm drain rain shall be installed to the l� 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 P for review. 5. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain increased runoff T .1^, • -3- E. GradingAth X Y. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform _Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading plan. 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 bui'ldiag 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 prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first. X 5. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building permit. F. General Requirements and Approvals X 1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:" CalTrans for X San Bernardino County Flood Control District X Cucamonga.County Water District for sewer and water San Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required prior to issuance o` a grading permit) Other 2. A cupy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC.&R.$) approved by the City Attorney is required prior to recordation of the map. X 3. Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, water, electric power, gas and telephone prior to street constructor. X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall 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!San Bernardino County Flood Control District. $ X 6. Approvals have not be&& secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. _4_ i 7. The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available. at 'the time building permits'are requested. When building are requested, the Cucamonga County. Water District w llmits be asked to certify the availability of capacity.` Permits will not be issued unless said certification is received in writing. X S. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provided in accordance L with the Trail Plan. A detailed trail plan indicating tvidths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing and weed control, in accordance with City trail standards, shall be Submitted to and approved by the City *Planner prior to building permit s issuance for each parcel contiguous to that parcel. a 9. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assess*ients under Assessment District 82-1 among the newly created parcels. 10. At the time of final map submittal, the following shall ba submitted: Title Report, traverse calculations, (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference a,id/or showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks referenced. 11. Notice of intent to join the proposed Median Island Landsca3e District shall be filed with the City` Council prior i:o recordation of the Final Map., G. Special Conditions X 1. On-site drainage plans shall be submitted and approved by the Building and Safety Division prior to recordation of the finai parcel map. Drainage glans shall also be submitted to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District for approval. X 2. Existing overhead utilities on Beryl Averue from the first pole narth of the project to first pole snuth of the project shall be-alaced underground at time of construction of Beryl Street improvements. k 3.. Parcel 1,'2, and 3 are required to have hammerhead or circular type driveways. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LLLOYD B. HUBBS, CITY ENGINEER ^4' by: e '� ' Al. o�Ic:A.mo, ENVIROtIr-tENTAL RENEW APPLICATION o) o 1977 INITIAL STUDY - PART I. GENERAL 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 Planning Division staff will ,prepare Part II of the Initial Study and make recommendations to Planning Cimmission. The Planning Commission will make one of three datgrminations: (1) The project will have no significant environmental impact and a NF,gative Declaration will be filed, (2) The project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or (s") An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. Date Filed• Project Title: Parcel Man No Q441 Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone:_ MirhaPl A Kimb r1y Harrison _ A97• lm Wx (71 946 246 - Name, Address, Telephone of Person To Be Contacted Concerning this Project: Lane & Associates 902 W. 9th Street, Upland, CA 91786 (714)981-•5602 Location of Project: Approximately 700 feet-South-of Hillride Road, on the East side of Beryl Street Assessor's Parcel No.: 1061-611-04 List other permits necessary from local, regional, state and federal agencies and the agency issuing such permits: None - F-aO i PROJECT DESCRIPTJON Proposed use or proposed-project: 'For custom lot purposes Acreage of project area and square footage of existing and proposed buildings, if any: 2.94 acres. Describe the environmental settin4 of the project site including information On topography, soil stability, plants (trees), land animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, land use of surrounding properties, and the description of any existing structures and their use (attach necessary sheets):_ Subject oroperty is currently an avacado rova), sloping typically _ North to South at a slope of an�roximai'e1y 6%, land z.:Jmals include rabbits around squirrels and other tvoical rodents. Land use of surroundin4 _properties as fOilow� �'nevard to the Borth, flood control to the East a church to the oath and open space to the Wes+. f Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative r< actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact Nn ti WILL THIS PROJECT: YES No 1• Create,a substantial change•in•ground contoars? _ X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce vibration or glare? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing Zoning,or Gene, ai Plan designations? - - X - 5. Remove any Existing trees? How many? X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammabl'es or explosives? X Explanation of any YES answers above (attach additional sheets if necessary): 7. Estimate the amount of sewage and solid waste materials this project .will generate.daily: None 8. Estimate the number of auto and truck trips generated daily by this project: None 9. Estimate the amount of grading (cutting and filling) required for t,»5 project, in cubic yards: None r 10. If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION; I hereby certify that the statements furnished above the attached exhibits ove an rts present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that 'the facts, statenents, 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 Planning Division. • Date: ��/� =� � • Sgrature��=--f�- +. Title • F_as - .. I-3 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be pravidt3 to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in -order to aid the school district in assessing their r ability to accommodate the proposed residential development. Developers are required to se--ure letters from the school district for accommodating the f increased number of students prior to issuance of building permits. t Name 0'* Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: 4 f r PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Number of single family units: 2. Nurter of multiple family units: 3. Date ,proposed to begin construction: 4. *Earliest date.of t occupancy: Modell and # of Tentative 5. Bedrooms _Price'P, ange I I-4 CITY 0k RANCHO CUCAMONGA c��ro STAFF REPORT ���� O O F 8 7 U > DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO; Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner SUBJECT! AN AMENDMENT TO THE ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND THE CARYN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, KAUFMAN AND BROAD LAND COMPANY, XID MARLBOROUGH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - Relative to properties located between the extension of Banyan Avenue. and Highland. Avenue on the north and south, and between the extension of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on the east and west - anr11 225-141-08, 12-19; 225-151-01 through 03, 07, 08, 10-13.. I. ABSTRACT: The developer is requesting an amendment to the qP Annexation and Development Agreements for the Caryn Pla,.:,ed Community, modifying certain key provisions dealing with park and --school issues. The Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed modifications and forward its recommendation to the City Council for final action. II. BACKGROUND: On March 20;, 1985, the City and the developers entered into a Development :agreement relative to the Caryn Planned Community outlining the coi;ditions under which the project would develop. In brief summary, the agreement called for the development of the 248-acre site bounded by Highland and the f-%ure extensions of Milliken, 5anyan and Rochester; The agr lent outlined the developr-ant of 933 single family homes under Tentative Tracts 12642 and 12643. The development included a 7 acre park site donated by the owner. In addition, the agreement specified provisions dealing with improvements, timing and phasing, fees, and numerous other items. The Etiwanda School District has since decided it needs -a 5.4 acre � elementary school site in the center of the Caryn Planned Community where the park site would be. In order to satisfy the objectives of both ti;e City ar;' the School District, the owners are proposing 1 modifications to the existing agreement. Key points of the proposed amendment,. are outlined below: 1. In place of irk donation ''the developers will provile and fully develop a 5.4 acre elemertary school ITEM G 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF RUORT CARYN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY February 12, 1986 Page 2 facili-y. As an equivalent to the original park site, the developers will donate to the City the sum of $750,000.00; 2. The amount will be designated as having been provided in the name of Caryn Di'Iorio; 3. The amount will be paid as buiiding permits are issued except, with the respect to those permits issued before the Development Agreement is amended, the prorata amount will be paid at the time of amendment; and 4. In addition to the 933 lots presently approved under the tentative tract maps, the City will approve additional lots on those remaining portions of land. The revised Tentative Tract Maps 12642 and 12643 that are alsa )laced on tonight's agenda for your consideration, indicate seven (7) additional dots would be developed if this agreement is amended as proposed. III. ANALYSIS: There are two basic sets of issues related to the proposed changes. The first 'deals with *;i vverail concept of the proposed change, the second with the specifics of street layout, design, and —conditions of approval. The general issues are addressed below, the specifics in the following report deal with the revised Tentative Tract Maps 12642 and 12643. The proposed change represents a departure from the original concept, in that the park feature location around which all the residential areas are clustered would be replaced by an elementary schs?1 site. The system of pedestrian greenways connecting the central site with all areas of the community would remain intact. That portion of the community below the major east/west spine road (Vintage Drive) would remain unchanged. Minor changes in the areas above the spine would extend two CLi-de-sacs to provide two (2) additional lots in Phase. I (TT 12642) and five (5) additional lots in phase II (TT 12643) of the project (please see new and old lot layouts). ' -The proposed revisions .solve the school problem by providing a school facility in accardance with the Etiwanda School District's requirements. Substitution ?f funds for the original site will add substantially to the Ciy's comprehensive lark program. The Community Services staff has been involved in detailed discussions and indicate their support for the revised concept. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The attached Initial Study indicates that no significant environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed change. The iss4!ante of a Negative Declaration is therefore 1 ' recommended should the amendment be approved. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CARYN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Februnry 12, 1986 Page 3 V. COMMISSION ACTION REQUESTED: Development Agreements require approval by ordinance y the City Council. Tonight, the Commission :s asked to review the proposed amendmentto the Development Agreenient and forward its recommendations to the City Council for first readin on February 19, 1986. VI. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended• -that the Commission approve the attached Resolution recommending approval of the amendment to the Annexation and Development Agreements to the City Council. Resp tfully ukitted, Community Development Director JL:OK:ko Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Approved Protect Exhibit "B" -Proposed Revisions Exhibt- "C" - jmendment to Annexatio,? and Development Agreements Exhibit, "D" Initial St•: `•y, Part is Exhibit "E" - Resolution Milk C-� INZA _ a �U/ a rQ If - KMM 1 • -a� �j; �i�sir`-� �'''�`�' .�� �. ' �s F ��� r•�ti- �l� ,-tee na MIR � � 'C3 f r _ sib- �. ��" ,, f , t a�\�r>a � i� rya ti.r.Fa � '" h � .f;•1� �, �� � a I` a t. •�... 'ems 1 v,; f!` lr:1 � �1 l 1 t p ! L - Imo:V •, f _,' •�. S X ��i �I. ).�:. �A '�!3.Y �� ' .,'s%.,,�rt'at'}�. _ �� 11.. •y_"!�i �� ��•IS Y . 1, �'� � � �• �. F ►r! ' w gy. y—• � ip9 I Li ' PTL PON Av�mlr jr EXHIBIT } III � � � ��� �, t� It —i` F: •,i � U�1:ntsk t�f' j�,l�.. I-1� 1 �.. ,>✓r..� ^ir. i .t"J.�Tii 1. Y'I �. .� "W •+ !��1 �'8 �I� to � •• ..'� _; r � a�c:„. y 1.� '� 1 r�g?i)1 " ��11 dt9 � rl' c� 2�+. :� 1•" ilea �'� � :�• );I 777722 t 1 f` iW ��„ RE '• 't r5 mg .� F6J r;ar�,_ (�r f 1 Jt.tiy. . 'tP.rOPosed Revesio' m, n Sw RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MIEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk City of Rancho Zucp monga 9320 "C" Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730-0807 AMENDMENT TO ANNEXATION AGREEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREFMENT This Amendmer,t to Annexation Agreement and Development Agreement (tlh', "Amendtrant")' is made and entered into as of this - day of February, 1986, by anc among the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("City') , a municipal corporation, The Caryn Develop- ment Company (nCaryn") , a California czorporation, Kaufman & Broad Land Company ("K&b"), a California corporation, :and Marlboro,2gh Development Corporation ("MDC") , a California corporation, Caryn, K&B and MOC are sexatimes herein referred to collectively as "moaner". R E L I T 1% L S WHEREAS, the 'City and Owner are parties to .hat certain Annexation Agreement, dated December 19, 1984, and _- :,orded in the. Official Records of Sari Bernardino County on March 4, 1985 as Instrument No. 85-049652 (the "Annexation Agreement") ,- WHEREAS, City and Owner are parties to that certain Development Agreement, dated March 20, 1985, and recorded in the Official Records of San Bernardino County on March 29, 1985 as Instrument no. 85-07436�i (the "Development Agreement") ; 4 3�26:d 1 k 4/28/86 x_ I WHEREAS, as part•..of the City Development Approvals, the City has heretofore_approved Tentative Tract Map Number 12642 (the property therein depicted being herein referred to as "Phase '") , and the City has heretofore approved Tentative Tract Map _umber 12643 (the property therein depicted being herein referred to as "Phase II"). Phases I and II are sometimes hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Property". WHEREAS, Owner and City desire to amend the Annexation Agreement and Development Agreement as hereinafter set forth. Unless otherwise defined herein, defined terms shall have the same meaning a. set forth in the Annexation: Agreement or Develop- ment Agreement, as the case may be. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, and for other good, valuable and sufficient cons idP °3tion, the receipt of which is hereby acknow- ledged, .the parties neretu agree as follows: 1.0 Park Site and Park Fees. 1.1 Paragraphs 1.3(d) and 3.7 of the Annexation Agreement and Paragraphs 2.7 and 2.9(d) of the Development Agreement are hereby deleted in their entirety; and clause (b) of Paragraph 2.4 of the Development Agreement and Cl"use (b) of Paragraph 3.5 of the,Annexation Agreement are .hereby moc,ified in order to delete therefrom the references to the "Park; Site". 1.2 Owner agrees to contribute to the 'City the sum of $750,000 (the "Park Contribuyion") on the terms and subject to it the conditions hereinafter set forth,. The Owner's agreement to contribute the Park Contribution is in full satisfaction of (a) the obligation an6 requirement of theµ'Owner, as set forth in the City Development Approvals (including former Paragraph numbered 3.7 of the Annexation Agreement and Paragraph numbered 2.7 of Development Agreement, and as may otherwise be described in Exhibits ;B, C, D, and E to the Development Agreement) , to deb gn, - C=-_7 3:26:d 2 1/28/86 improve, and dedicate or donate the Park Site to the City, and (b) any fee, exaction or 'imposition which may now or hereafter be imposed upoa Owner by the City for park, recreation or open space purposes in connection with the development of the Property (including without limitation the City's Ordinance Number 105) . 1.3 The Park Contribution skull be payable on a pro rata basis (calculated by dizriding the Park Contribution by the number of single family residential lots approved for development in the Property, including those lots described in Paragraph 2.1 hereof) at the time each building permit for a residential dwelling to be constructed upon the Property by owner is issued by the City to the Owner. By way of illustration only and assuming that the number of single family residential lots approved for development is 940, the Park Contribution shall be payable at the rate of $797.87 for each building permi- in fact issued to Owner for the Property. In the event that the City has or will issue building permits to Owner for dwellin, anits within Phase I prior to the time that the referendum period (as provided in Section. 65867.5 of the CalLfornia Governmerc Code) shall have expired, the pro rata portion of the Park' :ontribution which would otherwise have been paid at the time of the issuance of such building permits shall be payable in lump sum upon the expiration of said referendum period. ' 1.4 The Park Contribution-is and shall be paid by the Owner in the name and memory of Caryn DiIorio, and to the extent ' permitted by law, the City agrees to acknowledge such ident*Lficx,- tion in connection with any project or purpose to which the City expends the Park Contribution. 2.0 Revised Tentative Maps. 2.1 The City has heretofore or concurrently herewith (a) approved the revisions or amendments to Tentative Tract Maps Aftc numbered 12642 Ead 12643 reflecting the use of a portion of the former Park Site as additional single family residential lots 3:26:d 3 1128/86 ("Additional Lots") , end (b) taken such other actions as may be necessary or appropriate to authorize the lawful subdivision and development of the Additional Lots as single family residential lots. City hereby deletes Condition numbered 1D7 of Exhibit B to the Development Agreement and designated as Ordinance No. 246-A, and hereby amends the Manned Coiiounity Text/Development Plan attached as Exhibit B to the Development Agreement in order to reflect and authorize the Additional Lots in lieu of a portion of the Park Site; z_ the extent that any provision of the Planned Community Text/Dev,�tlopment Plan is inconsistent with the forego- ing or any other provision of this Amendment, the same shall be deemed superseded by the terms of this Amendment. City agrees that Owner shall have the right to construct single family residences upon the Additional Lots in the same manner and subject to the same provisions of the Development Agreement as if such Lots were part of the Property at the time the Development. Agreement was executed, and that such Lots shall for all intents and purposes be deemed part of the Property and be subject and entitled to the benefits of. the Development Agreement. 2.2 Owner agrees that, with respect to the Additional r Lots, Owner shall not improve such lots with single family resi- dential dwellings which have less than 900 square feel.. 3.0 School Requirements. 3.1 Conditions numbered 96, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, and 115 of Exhibit B to the Development Agreement and designated as Ordinance No. 246-A, Conditions of Approval numbered 1.1 and 34 set'forth in Resolution 85-06 and attached as Exhibi,c C to the Development Agreement and the counterparts thereof with respect to-Phase II (including without limitation Condition numbered 3 in Section 2 of Resolution 85-77) , are hereby deleted in their entirety, The City acknowledges and agrees that Owner's obliga tions pursuant to Paragraph 2_J`ta) of the Development Agreement and Paragraph 1.3(a) of the Annexation Agreement with respect to the Property have been fully satisfied. 3:26:d 4 ` 1/28/86 t 3.2 City hereby agrees that Owner shall not be requir- ed to pay any fees, compensation or other consideration for or in respect of, schools o.. schooling, whether by way of impact measure f or otherwise, and whet:hsr designated as SB201 fees or other exactions, and whether for temporary or permanent facilities, in connection with the development or improvement of the Property or any portion thereof'. Furthermore, City agrees it will not take any step to impose (or cause to be imposed) any fee respecting schools or ,schooling in connection with the recordationt of any tract map for the Property, the issuance of building permits, the issuance of certificates 02 occupancy, or any ether approval required for the development or occupancy of the Property, and will not oppose (or, if requested by Owner, fail to support) Owner's development of the Property or any application for t;ae r approval of any governmental authority of Owner's development of E- the Property. i 3.3 The City hereby acknowledges, represents and qu cnienants that the use of a portion of the furmer Park Site as ana for a school facility is a permitted and acceptable use for such property. 4.0 Status of Caryn. i� 4.1 Pending the recordation of the deed conveying Phase II to K&B wic MDC, (a) any approval or consent that is required or is permitter: to be given pursuant to the Development Agreement or the Annexation Agreement by Owner, shall be deemed to have been given on behalf of the Owner if given solely by K&B and-MDC, and (b) any amendment or modification to the Development Agreement or the Anncxation Agreement executed by R&B and MDC shall be binding upon each of the entities which comprise Owner, 4ncluding Caryn. Upon and following the recordation of a deed conveying Phase II to X&B and 14DC Caryn shall cease to be a party ;o the Develop!-nt Agreement and the Annexation Agreement, AML and shall not be Aaemed an Owner for any purpose under said Agreements., 3:26:a 1/28/86 AAk 4,2 .In furtherance of Paragraph-4.1 above,, Caryn NW hereby designates and appoints R&S and MDC its agent, and attorney-in-fact, to act for and in its stead in connection with any matter concerning the giving of any consent or approval which may be required or may be given pursuant to this Agreement, and otherwise to act for and in the name of, and Zu11' power to bind Caryn, in connection with any matter concerning or affecting this Development Agreement. 5.0 Miscellaneous:' 5.1 Except as hereinabove expressly provided, the Development Agreement and Annexation A9 reemc!nt shall be deemed in full force and effect, and .i,all not be deemed amended or modified in any respect whatsoever. 5.2 This Amendment has been exec,ited in one or more counterparts each of which when so executed shall be deemed an original and all of which shall r_onstitute one and the same instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment to Annexation Agreement and Development Agreement is made and entered into as of the day and year first above written. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a Municipal corporation By:_ Mayor ATTEST: The City Clerk of Tle Cityy, of Rancho Cucamonga y 3:26:d 6 1/28/86 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: James Markman, City Attorney - THE CARYN r.EVELOPMENT COMPANY, a California corporation By: By: Its: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ss. ) On this day of , 1986, before me, the under- signed, a Notary Public in and for said state, personally appeared personally known (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory-evidence) to be the person who executed the within instrument as the _ and personally known to me (or° proved to me on =he basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed the within instrument as the of the Corpora- tion that executed the withininstrument and acknowledged to me that such Corporation executed the within instrument pursuant tr. its By-Laws or P Resolution of its Board of Directors. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary's Signature Type or Print Notary's Name 3::26^d 7. s 1f28/86 MUFMAN-AND.BROAD LAND COMPANY, a California corporation F By: G Its: E By: Its: STATE OF CALIFORNIR ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) On this -day of , 1986, before me, the under- signed, a Notary Public in and for said state, personally appeared personally known (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed the within instrument as t,ie , and personally known to me for proved to me on the basis of 'satisfactory evidence) to be the persoi` who executed the within instrument as the of the Coxpora- tion that executed the within instrument and acknowledged to me that such Corporation executed the within instrument pursuant to its By-haws or a Resolution of its Board of Directors. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary's Signature 'hype or Print Notary's. Name `2- 3-26:a B 1/28/86 MARLBOROUGH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a California corparatior By: Its: By: Its: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF }ss,3 On this day of , 1986, before me, the under- signed, a Notary Public in and for said state, personally appeared personall,- known (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed the within instrument es the , and personally known to me (or proved to m , on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the perso,,� who executed the within instrument as the of the Corpora- tion that executed the within nstrunent'and ackncwledged to me that such Corporation executed the within instrument pursuant to its By-Laws or a Resolution of its Board of Directors. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary's Signature Type or Print Notary's Name y 3:266d �r. 1/28(86 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II - 1NITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DATE APPLICANT: 4::�Qoyllf FILING DATE: / LOG NUMBER: PROSECT:__�Er'fr✓�t,r�(? � QVY/.(�,r ��'?�-l�_� � x�S' PROSECT LOCATION: `O i I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES MAYBE NO I. Soils and Geology. Will the proposal have I significant results in i a. Unstable mound conditions or in changes in geologic re�'ationships? b. Disruptions_ displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? I' c. _Change in topography or ground surface L contour intervals? / d. The destruction, covering or modification / Of any unique geologic or physical features? L '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. Exposur, 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 attraction and/or use of any mineral resourcf:? / E 2. HydrolortY, Will the proposal"have significant -=C q results in: page l YES MAYBE RO a. Changes in currents, or'the course of direction Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream chanrels? �F b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and, amt.int 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? J e• l scharge into surface waters, or any 4 �- alteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions 07 with- drawals. or through_interference with aquifer? Quality? Quantity? h. The reducticn in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? �• Exposure of people or property to water L related hazards such as flooding or seichesT 3. Air Quali Will the proposal have signficant results in: a. Dinstant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? / Stationary sources? b, Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or Interference with the atta:ament of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic coxldisiuns, affecting air movement, xaoisture or temp^_rature? 4. Biota ' Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in; a. Change in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or number A.. .of any species df plants? / b. Reduction of the.;umbers of any unigr,, rare or endangered species of plants? j is Page 3 YES ".AYBE N0 Ask C. I^troduction of new or disruptive species of Plants into an area?, d. Reduction in the potential .:or 'agricultural jreduction? Fauna, Will the proposal'have significant results in: a. Change ltr the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution,,.or numbers / of any spe ies 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 into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of Lnimals? e. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or f Wildlife !'abitat? �w P 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 human poptilation of an area; f b. Will the proposal affect eristing housing, or -� Urea, . demand for additional housing? 1 6. Socio-Economic Factors. Will the proposal ha4}e significant results in, a. Change in local or regional socio-economic characteristics, including economic or commercil. `iversity, tax rate, and property valurt.'; b. Will project cos:L be eq;: _ably distributed ~! among C-.•-oject benefir±aries, i.e., buyers, to• a,;..rs or proizat users? 7. Land Use and-Planninx Considerations. Will: the Proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A 'r)nflicz with any designations, c!,aectll-ves, Policies, or adopted plans of any governMental entities? An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of • existing consumptive or hcn-consumptive ,_ =recreational opportunities?���`.7 »` .�� ���� � ,,;... a, �w._...���. .,. .9.. .., .. M„ Page 4 "ES MAYBE NO 8, Transoortation. W511 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 tion or movement of People and/or fgoods? la- f• Alterations to or effects on presei:z and potential water-borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedes'trians? 9. Cultural Resources. Will the significant results in: proposal have a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological., paleontological, and/or historical resources? In. 'Health, Safetv and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Creation oc any hea.ith 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 orgaaisms`? e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise g• The creation of objectionable odors? e h. An increase In light or glare? Page g YES MAYBE 110 Aft11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant ` results in: a, The obstruction .)r degradation of any scenic vista or view? b. The creation of an aesthetictily offensive site? / c• x conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? ' / 12. 'Utilities and public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following; a. Electrfc power? b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Communications sysitems? d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f. E100d control structures? g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? f J. .Schools.? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? ' 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? M. Othergovernmental services? / 13. Enerel 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 • sources of energy? c. An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? f d.' An La.ease or perpetuation of the consumption of non--renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? i. Page 6 YES MAYBE NO e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or iA scarce natural resource? / 14. Mandatory Findin.s of Si nificance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade ' the quality of the environment, 'subs tantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildl .z 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 restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term t_term imp act o he, 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 considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that t- he incrementa l effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects). / d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverso effects on human beings, either directly or. indirectly? II. DISCUSSION OF EMTIRO*E4TAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). Page 7 IZL DETEIL"i` IN_ NATIOl On t e basis of this initial evaluat$,o�, I I find the proposed project COU9,D NOT have a significant effect on the environment, 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 because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project M.4Y have•a signi cant fe on the envirnment, and an ENVIRO:fiiEN;T IMPACT REPO is re 'r , Date` gnacut 'U ti i 4 °u. e RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CO"I'MISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO -CUCAMONGA,, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND THE CARYN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY:, KAUFMAN AND: BROAD LAND COMPANY, AND MARLBOROUGH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION', IN RELATION TO THE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN THE EXTENSION OF BANYAN AVENUE AND HIGHLAND AVENUE ON THE NORTH ANC• SOUTH, AND BETWEEN THE EXTENSION OF-ROCHESTER AVENUE AND MILLIKEN AVENUE ON THE EAST AND WEST WHEREAS, the City and owners are parties to an Annexation Agreement, dated December 19, 1984 and recorded in the official records of San Bernardino County on March 4, ,1985; and WHEREAS, the City and owners are parti?s to a Development Agreement, dated Marcn 20, 1985 and recorded in the off .;iai records of San Bernardino County on March 29, 1985; and WHEREAS, as part,of the City's development approval, the City has approved Tentative Tract Maps 12642 and 12643; and WHEREAS, the City and owners desire to amend the Annexation and Development Agreement as outlined in the attached amendment._NOW, THEREFORE, tha Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby recommend approval of the ,amendment to the City Council. The issuance of a Negative Declaration is also recommended. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary -a�- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CARYN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY February 12, '1986 Page 2 I, Brad Bulier, 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 12th day of February, 1986, by the following vote-to-wits AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ALOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: r c -aa L I �.�, r ;� �'� _.w._�' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA wCnra STAFF REPORT C� O DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT 12642 (REVISION) - KAUFMAN AND BROAD, INCORPORATED AND MARLBOROUGH DEVELOPMENT - A revision to an approved tentative tract to delete a 7 acre park site, and for 2 additional single-family lots for a residential subdivision of 99.8 acres into 472 single-family lots in the Caryn Planned Community (Phase I), located on the north side of Highland Avenue, west side of Rochester Avenue, south side of Banyan Street, east side of Milliken Avenue - APN: 225-141-29-37. AAk TENTATIVE TRACT 12643 (REVISION) - CARYN' DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - A revision to an approved tentative tract to add acre school site and 5 additional single-family lots for a residential subdivision of 110.7 acres into 468 single-family lots in the Caryn Planned Community (Phase II), located on the north side of Highland Avenue, south side of Banyan.Street, east side of Milliken Avenue, and west' side of Rochester Avenue - APN: 225-141-08, 27, 41, 42' and 225-151-1, 3, -7, 11, 13-15 I. ABSTRACT: Approval of revised tentative tract maps for Phase I Tentative Tract 12642), and Phase II (Tentative Tract 12643) of the Caryn Planned Community. II. BACKGROUND: In discussions with the City and the affected school district, the developers of the Caryn Planned Community, Kaufman and Broad, Marlborough, and the Caryn Development Company, have .:-concluded that it would be more desirous to provide a school site for the developmen` �f the Planned Community rather than the currently planned park site. The Planning Commission is considering at tonight's meeting amendments to the Annexation Agreement and Development Agreement between the City and developers of the Caryn Planned Community to implement this change. additionally, the Planning C,-mmission will also need to consider revisions proposed for the approved tentative tracts that will be necessary to fully implement'''the amendment to provide a school facility in place of the park site, ITEMS H & I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 12642 and 12643 February 12, 1986 Page #2 IIi. ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed revisions would delete a seven acre park site in favor of a 5 acre school site and would add seven additional single-family lots, increasing the total number of lots from 933 to 940. The approved design of the current tentative tracts show a 7 acre park site north of the central "Spine Road", between the two phases. The majority of the park site is concentrated south of "J" Street (Tentative Tract 12642) and "A" Street (Tentative Tract 12643), with a spine to serve as a trail connection continuing north to Banyan. With the proposed revisions, the 7 acre park site (Lot B), is deleted from Phase I (Tentative Tract 12642), and a 5.4 acre school site (Lot 469) is added to Phase II (Tentative Tract 12643). A swine connection from the school site north to Banyan is. provided (Lot F) "d" Street has been extended easterly in Phase I (Tentative Tract 12642) to create two additional Aft single-family lots, and in the westerly extension of "F" Street in Phase II (Tentative Tract 12643) creates 5 additional single-family lots. These revisions, as proposed in total, do not significantl al`cer the current design, of ei`cher phase of the Caryn Planned Community from that orignally approved by the Planning Commission. B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee, in reviewing the revisions, has found no significant changes from the original approval and has recommended approval of the proposed revisions with inclusion of the following condition: "The Spine connection from the school site t- Banyan Street (Lot F), shall be realigned to create , more linear configuration to promote a more funct, gal, usable, and secure trail connection subject to Hie approval of the City Planner." This item has been included into the Conditions of Approval. C. Grading Committee: The Grading Committee in reviewing the revisions has found no significant changes from the original approval and has recommended approval of the proposed revisions to the tentative tracts. However, the Grading Committee has recommended realignment of Lot F to a more linear configuration consistent with the recommendation of the Design Review Committee. K/ ya . a :u PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF RE PORT Tentative Tract: 12642 and 12643 February 12, 1986 Page 03 D. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee in ^eviewing the revisions has found no significant changes in the original approval and has recommended approval of the proposed revisions. IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent wizn the. Caryn Planned Community and the General Plan. The project will not be detrimental •,.o adjacent properties or cause significant 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 Caryn Planned Cor-.unity, the Development Code, and City Standards. V. CJRRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily—Report newspaper, the nroperty posted, and notices i were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the projec', site. VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider all material and input regarding this project. If the Commission concurs with the Facts for Finding and Conditions of Approval, adoption of the attached Resolutions would be in order. l Respectfully submitted,, Brad Buller City Planner BB:BC:cv Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Mep Exhibit "B" - TT 12642 - Revised Exhibit "C" TT 12642 - Existing Exhitit "D TT 12643 - Revised Exhibit "E" - TT 12643 Existing Resolution No. 85-06 Resolution No. 85-77 New Resolution of Approval w/Conditions - TT 12642 New Resolution of Apprdval w/Conditions - TT 12643 �- .' DEER CANYON DAY CANYON. 1 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO / CITYOF RANCHO—\l•` CUCAMONGA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE I pp CITY OFRA• •� •� t CHAFFEY rr CUCAMONGA r,OLLEGE I BANYAN AVE. PROPOSED FOOTHILL FREEWAY J SITEx ®®®®! HIGNLANO AVE VICTORIA —_ f „jPLANNED BASELINE AVE. F---.* G� COMMUNITY '' 1y FOOTHILL BLVD. La La Q C ui j rq- LuQ m Q L 0• to it SqN BERNARDINO FR EE f AY 1-10 EXHIBIT2 VICINITY MAP PROPERTIES..^..MILLIKEN AND HIGHLAND SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY,CALIFORNIA NORTH. CITY OF �c.: ITE\[: L!9Z�RANCHO C 1 TITLE PLANNING DIVISIUNT EXHIBIT SCALE a II n�93- �'jr, !Li ! } a3 = p 1 al y3 Siiss$aLISa 'mil NJ l"1_� �� -I 3� I }.a �: m �� o �•.•I 1 w_ � S��C t�. all i ffa s z I y W i a IL MEN Sii� -E ae➢ i Sa➢` _ o� tl YF� rVTti � 5. ➢�2�e. sc5 � �� cW. a 'i '.�• Gy it QL t t et� •M. ,j7 t I s� g o I eg� a fi;ttes. Ygj�5i4 # — u = - ��i dss'i s� tl'.s"S-' �i�f�t��•�.1: u.. �r,E WA OM r �. RT-MOTT pro ur i ,, Vol-, � , � _ G AS9 �1 •'� `a t i •, a �i 5 VA Q A27 f\. '. I W y W R \ W } 1 =t J C W a y V 74_ • Y��a. i i Z. 1? - y 4. 3 e �e rg Al `w � � f � 3� I + I��� it � � I W S F 'it i kil C c\ a fill H Q q 4* SQR y __OD�Fc�ff�J//��� �0 3 � ti T Y. IA sIRA, rt � im � Syr �s�e i�i r . fi a��� •L�-` ' `y�S i= A Min -A New RISER Ewa M- :b i•. W {� W L_ �_J r• 'rif' e I � a' }g3:j %i 1 `? � a ,�,., � "- o �� )( \ z W ! U 5Y4 r�•�;c.'-� NNIJ PNNA MUMeex i im Fg —�—�{—•\ t � ttt a y • w ��• S I� Ha Hill 3 $ Cool h FS CC tS _ ti p ll Id� de. �� ° .kt + f pyy€ +�M. I lit a s 'MO lI ill 4 IAf-L-C-1 �i tR �• ) U � 1� �•_T�-_-.lam � ��r�F ��� ;c .M.g.&ACUL 6 _ �i16 fA7tANIO MIN NM Z. ► C�: jai ' ' .,� �- VvMkMM r _ 1 IN 1 i f W iN i W � V � t al •� 4 � � x � � s J�Y �\ Ma.w n Si W1 lig L � OCR I !sic r =cam �aeH � ■f p: i• r 1 CA) %, .00 FA i s .' .y}Ai.�. `A-.L:+���iAl 1. •�,,: iErYik"i��'MJE i��� �`=j►=�� '� '�3�-1 �4i L�q1�;l� �ti_�'�►� � �1 AUNT l:l� M�� ��-` :► fi1]lC]; � , Ali �f��"• �x.r� .BLS-�,� '' il AM' MAMA# FAUX i aRnal: ,l. ' y`�i� t r •� r•-.�r ['�=� L`'Fdl_ ,r.� j L1r?:L F''�r�r �; , a hlu,�i� •�`� - � ` �tiri�� !sr '�. ) y�'..•j�� � fir: ` rar—r•� •'_, � y. , -s' wgg 6 � f1C�� T;►..C.�`'�F;I�:i`�i���:.��~>���� �::`� ,.� ��L.. 1�y rid ,a`-°��rJ� �� � .;:• i �i7LaY �i��'�-' �iM►l� W� iPrw, �y7 �� � `�"��7 tt: b.�Y �r�,�r►r FIR t �r �I iNm ui 4 r�;� �r��'�i'� ���1 �1r.�1.J► �3 .L.�t� �'i f� �3 ��� ,��T I !a ��1 r��r��a n 'SL IL 1> Wk, Eli t r ta1_yr 7Y �I..n � r J `, yr is s � RESO,LUTIOil NO. 35-06 d I _ , A RESOLUT-11h OF THE PLANNiMG COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOF.NIA, CONDITIONALLY" APPROVING r TENTATIVE TRACT MAP No. 12642 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12642 hereinafter "Map" submitted by the Caryn Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential subdivision of 115 acres of land, located between the 'extension at 9anyan Avenue and Highland Avenue on the north and south, and between the extension of Rochester Avenue and Milliken Avenue at the east and west into 470 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on January 9, 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 f presented at the public hearing. I NOW, TH'ZREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECT;ON 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 12642 and the Map +hereof: 4 (a; The tentative tract is consistent withY the General Plan', Development Code,and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (c) TNe site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d)• The-design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental ,damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife'"or their habitat; (e) _Thy ` �ntative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; k i. Tentative Tract 120. January 9, 1985 Page t2 (f) The de-ign,of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at lar9e, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. (9) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a -Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract hap No. 12642, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of th-i attached conditions; APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1985. PLANNING-EOMMISSION OF THE rITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r' f BY: 17 Denni_-LL St ut;;'hairman f ATTEST: / '"=� + ,3,,, ,, Ji.ck Gom z, geputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho C camonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution Was duly and regularl� introduced, passed,` and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of January, 1985, by the following vote-to-wit AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL CHITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT:' COMMI';' IT i,NERS: NONE r N j ty Conditions of Approve' Tentative Tract 126gk, Page 3 • BUILDING AND SAFETY 1, A soils report shall be prepared b the State of California to Y a quaT•ified engineer licensed by " Building Official, perform such work and submitted to the City t • 2. Grading plans to be submitted to and approved by Building and Safety Division. As 'required by Lownes geologic reports of May 20, 1983 and March 21, 1984, Earth Research report of January 2a, 1984 and Douglas E. }` Moran review comments,dated April 11, 1984, additional geotechnical work required prior to approval of grading plans. 3. Grading of the subject property shall -e in accordance with the Uniform Building i lode, City Grading Standards, or es modified on the conceptual gradng plan approval and accepted grading practices_ The final grading E plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual } AOL grading plan. 4. Obtain a (ition permit for building to be demolished. Underground structures nust be broken in, back filled and inspected before covering. 5. Submit plans and obtain building permits for all walls over 6' in height. 6. The applicant shall comply with the. lot est orm Code,, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform P umbing e Code,fNationalain Electric Code, and all other applicable codes, ordinances and regulations in e'rfect at the time of issuance of relative permits. 7. Prior to issuance of building r)errait for a new residential dwelling �«i, unit(s) or major addition to an existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay the necessary development feeti as per the Annexation Agreement, 8. Street addresses shall be provided by the City Building Official. 9. A geology report, prepared by a licensed engineering geologist, shall be filed with and-approved by the Building Official. The report will be reviewed by a licensed geologist and the costs of such review will be billed to the developer and shall be paid in full prior to recordation of the final map., As required by Lownes geologic reports of May 20, 1983 and March 21, 1984, Earth Research report of January 23, 1984 and Douglas E. Moran review, coffhents dated April 11, 1984, additional `< geotechnical work required prior to approval of grading plans. ;rr Conditions of Approva'- Tentative Tract 12642'} L Page 4 PUBLIC SERVICES 1. Temporary secondary .access, as shown on the tentative m eliminated if Miil' tr shall be Milliken Ave,Av e G Street, Banyan Street to G Street, Spine Street and both Loop streets are paved to all-weather standards., 2. Sewage disposal shall be by connection to Cucamonga County Wat,!'r District sewers. S• The water purveyor shall be Cucamonga.County Water District. 4. The following are the steps that must be completed to meet the requirements for installation and/or finance of the on-sits water system and/or sewer system: on-site/off-site A. 'Where the system is to be installed prior to recordation: The water system, fire hydrants, and/or sewer system shall be installed in accordance with requirements of the State Health and Safety Code, and in accordance with plans approved by the water and/or sewering utility and the over authority. The plans shall be reviewed bng fire protection a Civil Engineer, registered in the State of California, and contain required gm certificates and approval signatures. It is the developer's responsiblity to submit to the City Engineer, a 'copy of the approved plan and a signed statement from the utility of jurisdiction confirming that the improvement has been installed and accepted. B. Where a bond is 'to be posted in lieu improvement•, of installation of the 1. The domestic water plan and/or sewer plan which meets the requirements of the State Health and Safety Code shall be reviewed by a Civil Engineer, registered in the State of California, and approved by the water or sewering utility and the governing fire protection authority. The plans shall` contain the required certificates and approval signatures. A COPY of the approved plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer. 2. Said engineer shall determine the amount' of bond necessary to install the improvements. a. .This amount plus ten percent shall be posted with the City. A statement sighed by the engineer stating that the amount of bond recommended is adequate to cover the ' Cost of installation of the improvement shall-be included wi+b the estimate and submitted to the City Engineer. Conditions of Approv;.' • Tentative Tract; 1264',, Page 5 b. Or, in cases t•1here the water agency or sewering agency is a governmental subdivision, the bond in the amount of 110 percent of the cost of installation of the improvement may be placed with the, agency. A signed statement from that agency stating that financial arrangements have been completed shall be submitted to the City Engineer. 3. Prior to release of the bond'for the improvement, the utility of jurisdiction shall submit a signed statement confirming that the improvement has been installed and meets the requirements- of all appropriate— State and County laws pertaining to s;tch improvement. It is the developer's responsibility, that such signed statement is filed with the City Engineer, 5. An acoustical study shall be performed to assess noise levels at the development and shall be r M egged and approved by the Planning Division prior to map recordation. Detailed noise analysis and precise mitigation measures shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to recordation. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a report stating that the recommended mitigation measures have been implemented, shall be submitted to the Planning Division and the building plans shall be so certified by the acoustical engineer-. Acoustical studies shall be based on available profile and design data of proposed Route 30 at the time of tentative map approval. 6. All existing easements lying within future city street right-of-way are to be quitclaimed or to be delineated on' the map per City Engineer's requirements. 7. Street Improvement plans including street, lights prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer shall be required for all public streets prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. final plans and profiles shall show the location of all .• existing utility facilities within the right-or-way. 8. Pavement striping, marking, traffic --; street name signing shall be installed per the requirements of the City Engineer. 9. --gency access if required shall be provided, maintenance free and a minimum of 26•-feet wide at all times during construction in dr nee with Foothill Fire District requirements. 10.' Prior to issuance of Building Permits ,for combustible construction, } evidence shall be submitted to the Foothill Fire District that temporary t water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection systems. ll. The applicant small contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Condiitions of Approva ' l Tentative Tract 12642 , Page 6 12. Permits from the: San Bernardino County Dust Abatement District may be regLired prior to issuance of a grading permit. PLANNING 1. Oevelopmentloesign Review shall be accomplished prior to Annexation to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 2. The s4te shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Planned Community Texv and where applicable, Development Code regulations. Prior to any use of the project site or bc.,iness activity being commenced thereon all condil:ons of approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 3. Final site plans and bui-:ding elevations incorporating all conditions of approval shall be suomitted or review and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. 4. All final site plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading permit, tree removal, encroachment, building permits, etc.) prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. S. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with sections of the Developsiont Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, at.-, applicable •tommunity plans or specific plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance which have not been addressed either 'y the Planned Community Text or conditions of tentative approval. 6. All lots on the north side of the parkway shall have a minimum area of 5,500 square feet, with a minimum lot width of 50 feet. All dots on the r south side of the parkway shall have a minimum area of 4,000 square feet, with a minimum lot width of 45 feet. Minimum width shall be measured from mid. point of lot. 7. The following are minimum building setbacks. A. Minimum rear yard setback of 5 feet, or 12 feet between structures; (Note condition 1108 of the Planned Community Text). B. Minimumm side yard setback of 5 feet, or 10 feet between structures: C. Variable front yard building setback with a mirl,,mum of 18 feet from property fine. �.. • i o Conditions of Appro Tentative Tract 126,,, i Page 7 D• Minimum street side yard setback of ten (10) feet. 8. A final grading plan shall be required. Said grading plan shall be submitted to the Grading Committee for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots. 9. Street trees shall be provided per phase'as illustrated in the Planned Community text and per approved landscape plans. 10. Greenbelt improveraerits wholly within the tract shall be provided per phase as illustrated in the Planned Community text. The first phase built adjacent to a greenbelt area shall be responsible for landscaping the entire width of the greenbelt area adjacent to the subject phase (i.e., phase 3 shall be reponsible for construction the entire width of the greenbelt planned for Lot "G" to 500, south of "Spine Road"). 11. The applicant shall be responsible for constructing 3 1/2 acres of the 7 acre park prior to recordation of Phase 6 of Tentative Tract 12642. A landscape plan shall be approved prior to development of the park. Landscaping shown on plan shall either be improved or 'bonds posted fnr their completion. 12. Equestrian trail adjacent to Banyan Avenue shall be provided per phase and included on landscape plan. 13. Three (3) copies of a Landscaping Plan shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval. Said 'Landscape Plan shc'•.1 include the following: A. The required slope for the surface of all slope banks in excess of five (5) vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope landscaped for erosion control as follows one 15-gallon or larger tree per each 150 sq- ft. of elopLprea, one gallon larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft.'of slopL—apnropriate ground cover. In addition, slope in excess of eight (a) feet in vertical height and on greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slot , area. Trees shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften slope plane. Maintenance by a Landscape Maintenance t District may be required by the Planning Commission on a case-may 3 case basis for perimeter slopes. t B. All decorative walls shall be designed and constructed to incorporate design features such,as tree planter wells, variable setback, split block face, columns, or Other such features to provide visual and physical relief along the wall face. C. Any-existing eucalyptus trees to be retained shall be topped to thirty (30,) feet, trimmed along the lower fifteen 15 ' cleared of all dead leaves and branches. ( ) feet, and , PF, i Conditions of Approv ,' Paneagive Tract 126401 9 Al 14. Ail slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that it is in satisfactory condition.. 15. Water and energy conservation techniques are encouraged to be utilized, such as special irrigation techniques (e.g., drip irrigation), draught tolerant plant species, alluvial rockscape, etc. 16. Three (3) copies of an irrigation plan shall be submitted for Planning + Division review and approval when slope planting is required. Slopes required to be planted shall be provided with an approved system of irrigation, designed to cover all portions of the slope. A permanent irrigation system installed by developer is required on all slo es with the exception of those less than 10, �•;,en within 50' distance of a hose bib. A functional test of the system may be required. The mainteneance of traded slopes and landscaped areas shO l be the responsibility of the developer until the transfer to individual ownership or until the maintenance is officially assumed by a Landscape Maintenance District-,_ All irrigation systems, where required, shall be designed on a individual lot basis unless commonly maintained in an approved manner. 17.• The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be .-sidewalks to approval by the Planning Division and coordinated for consistency with any.parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 1' Landscaping and irrigation systems required to 'ie installed on public right-of-way on the perimeter of this tract area shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City and annexed into the landscape maintenance district. 19. All landscaping and irrigation shown on the approved landscape and irrigation plans and all required galls shall be completed or suitable bonds posted for their completion. 20. Lighting and Landscape District for the project shall be established for the maintenance and management of the common open space, recreational facilities, and public landscaped areas, and trails. 21. All equestrian trails shall reflect the design standards as shown on tentative map. 22. Parking and outside storage areas should be screened from view, to the maximum extent fea:;;ole. Scftening should be accor,lished by utilizing existing topography, by the placement of buildings .,nd structures, or by landscaping and plantings. Conditions of Approv ' Tentative Tract 1264. Page g 23• Approval will be granted by the City Planner for wit: creation of two, tthe hree or four lots as shown on the approved tentative subdivision for Prior purpose eof issuance obtaining Permits for model homes or units. bond or cash deposit hall be permits for said model homes, a surety Department for the street improvepoated Countywith the m n ts abutting said sr as requiredfor the approved tentative subdivisi'on.s'i , The surety bond or cash deposit temp be in an amount equal to a contra ctor's construction estimate plus ten percent. Applicant is permii-ted four model homes per phase. 24• Provide all utility services to each lot including sanitary ^sewerage System, water, electric power, gas and telephone in accc'e-dance with utility standard=s. 25. Installation of any Cable TV service shall be coordinated by the developer with the cable service prov4der to coincide with trenching for utilities. 26. All :utilities within the project shall be installed underground including utilities along major arterials 12 KV and less. 27. Utility easements shall be provided to the satisfaction of the serving utility companies and the City Engineer. 28. ,. Oeveloper shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public utilities, as required. 29. Developer shall be responsible for the installation of street lighting in accordance with Southern California Edison Company and City Standards. 30. Approvals have not been secured from all =UtMLies agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subje;;,,;, ct to any ' requirements that may be received from them.` 31. Final parcel and tract maps shall conform to City Standards and procedures. 32. The conditions of the planned community as contained in . Ordinance— shall apply where applicable. 33. The recommendations of the approved Geyogic Report shall become conditions of"this project. 34. Detailed park improvement plans, including irrigation, shall be submitted for approva ey thegCo landscaping i es Director. 35• Detailed landscaping and irrigation plans approval by the City Planner prior to is , ofabuilddin submitted for ,. . 9 permits. Conditions of Approve,'' Tentative Tract 12644•, Page Iry NI 36. A separate landscizpe and irriaatio�n plan per City Standard for the ` parkway and/or median landscaping to be maintained by the City shall be required fu;; review and approval by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. 37. ,Maximum slope height is twenty (20) feet. 38. Final grading plans shall be prepared in accordance with Ordinance 118 and shall include details of the retention basin, subject to the cunditions of approval• of the Planned Community Development Plan. I C p ti RESOLUTION N0. 85-77 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIOi4ALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12643 AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR SAID MAP WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12643, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Hall & Foreman, Inc., applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of }rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as the development of 463 single family lots on 104 acres of land in the Caryn Planned Community (Phase I1), located on the north side of highland Avenue, south side of Banyan Avenue, west side of Rochester Avenue„ east side of Milliken Avenue - APN 225-141-08, 12-16, 18, 22, 24, 26, 27 and 225-151-3, 7, 11, 13 into 467 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on May 22, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all condition: 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. ROW,"THERE'ORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 12643 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 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 envir:,nmental damage and avoidable lajury,to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious f public health problems; (f.) The design of the tentative tract will not corflict with any easeMent acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property *,within the proposed subdivision. . Resolution No. j TI 126a3 Caryn 1� Page 2 W That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and• a 'Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Design Review and Tentative Tract Map No. 12643, a copy of which in; attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions: DESIGN REVIEW 1. Approval of this request SKS1 1—not waive compliance with applicable sections of the Development Code and City Ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance which have not been addressed either by the Planned Community Text or t conditions of tentative approval. 2. The site shall be ?e,elo plans on file in t5e Plannin�nDivision, theccordance �condth ir-approved site herein, Planned Community Text and where a lice' contained pp Development Code regulations. Prior to any use of the p .ject site or business activity-being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed to the W-isfaction of the City Planner. 3. Detailed park improvement and phasing plans, including grading, Aft landscaping, and irrigation, shall be submitted for approval b,, the Community Services -Director prior to issuance of building permits. Construction of thq required park shall be completed prior to final inspections and/or occupancy of any unit. 4. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping and sidewalks ^hall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to approval by the Planning Division and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. ' 5. A trail connection shall_be provided along Vintage Drive to ' provide an 'east/west link between the of. set passeo' trails. Passeo trail design elements :such as landscaping and the pathway t - configuration shall be continued to identify said connection as a part of the trail system. G- 2:1 slopes across north/south passeo trails and at the end of cul-de-sacs adjacent to the park or a trail shalT be reconfigured to provide for pedestrian and bi�.ycle paths. ` 7. The design of passeo trail walkways shall meander. Aft t-E j T__ay Resolution No., 1, TT 12643 - Caryn Page 3 $. Walkways shall bQ pruvided at end of cul-de-sacs into the park and north/south passed trails. 9. All decorative walls shall be designed and constructed to incorporate design features such as tree Planter wells, variable setback, split block face, columns, or other such features 'to provide visual and physical relief along the wall face. 10. Street trees shall be provided per phase as illustrated in the Planned Cormnuni.ty Text and per approved landscape plans. TENTATIVE TRACT 1. The City Conditions of Approval for the Caryn Planned Community as contained in Ordinance 246-A, attached hereto, shall apply where applicable. 2. Design/Techn,;cal Review for architecture and site planning shall be accomplished prior to recordation of the Cial Tract Map. 3. An acoustical study shall be performed to assess noise 'levels at the development and shall be reviewed and approved by the plarning Division prior to map recordation, Detailed noise analysis and precise mitigation measures shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval ' Prior to recordation. Prior to the issuance of building permits a r ort stating that the recommended mitigation measures have been 40, implemented, shall be submitted to the Planning fiivision and the building plans shall be so certified by the acoustical engineer. Acoustical studies shall be based on available profile and design data of proposed Route 30-at the time oftentative map approval. 4. The recommendations of the approved Geologic Report shall t become conditions of this project. S. Final plans incorporating all conditions of approval shall Le submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division.prior to issuance of building permits. 6. The final tract map, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issucance of any parmits (such as grading permit, tree removal, encroachment, building permits, etc.) prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or N• approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. Resolution lia. TT 12643 - Caryn Page 4 7. A final grading plan shall be required. Said grading plan shall be submitted to the Grading Committee for review and approval. All in-site cut and fill slopes shall be a part of the dowO '�i 'lot when within or between individual lots. 8. Three (3) copies of a Landscaping Plan shall be submitted for Planning Commission review and approval. All slope banks in excess of five (5) vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped for erosion control as follows: one 15-gallcn or larger tree per each 150 sq. ft.. of slope area, one gallon larger size shrub per each - 100 sq. ft. of slope appropriate ground cover. In addiiton, slope in excess of eight (8) feet in vertical height and on greater slope shall also include one 5- gallon or larger tree per each 250 sq. fts of slope area. Trees shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften slope plane. Maintenance by a Landscape Maintenance District may bfe required by the Planning Commission on a case-by-case basis for perimeter slopes. AM 9. Any existing eucalyptus trees to be retained shall be _ -topped to thirt (30) feet, trimmed along the lower fifteen (15) feet, and cleared of all dead leaves and branches. 10. Three (3) copies of an irrigation plan shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval when slope planting is required. Slopes required to be planted shall be provided with an approved system of irrigation, designed to cover all protions of the slope. A permanent . irrigation system installed by developer is required on all slopes with the exception of those less than 10' when within 501 distance of a hose bib. A functional test of the system may be required. The maintenance cr' graded slopes and landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer unitl the transfer to individual ownership or until the maintenance is officially assumed by a. Landscape Maintenance District. All -irrigation systems, where required, shlll be designed on an indiividual lot basis unless commonly maintained in an approved manner. 11. A separate landscape and irrigation plan per City Standard for the parkway and/or median landscaping, to be maintained by the City shall be required for review and approval by ' the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. Al Resolution No. TT 12643 - Caryn Page 12. Landscaping and irrigation systems requires to be installed ors public right-of-way on the perimc�zer of this tract area shall be continuously maintained by the developer untilaccepted by the City ai,d ?;,nexed into the Landscape Maintenance District. 13. All slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously maintained, in a -healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and..occupied by the buyer. An inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that it is in satisfactory condition. 14. Water and energy conservation techniques are encouraged to: be utilized, such as special irrigation techniques (e.g., drip irrigation), drought tolerant plant-species, alluvial rockscape, etc. 15. Equestrian trail adjacent to Banyan Avenue shall be provided per phase and included on landscape plan. 16. Final grading plans shall be prepared in accordance with Ordinance 118 and shall inclu,e details of the retention basin, subject to the conditions of approval of the Planned.Community Deelopment Plan. t 17. Lighting and Landscape District for the project shall be established for -the maintenance and management of the common open space, recreational facilities, and public landscaped areas, and trails. 18. Provide all utility services to each 'lot including sanitary sewerage system, water, electric power, gas and telephone in accordance with utility standards. 19. Installation of any Cable TV service shall be coordinated ` by the deeloper with the cable service provider to F coincide with trenching for utilities. 20. All utilities within the project shall be installed underground including utilities along major arterials 12' KV and less. 21. Utility easements shall be provided to the satisfaction of the serving utility companies and the City Engineer. 22. Developer—shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public utilitfe"i, as required. nb, Resolution Na. TT 12643 Caryn Page 6 Aft 23. Developer shall be responsible for the installation of street lighting in accordance with Southern California` Edison Company and City Standards. 24. Approvals h;,ve not been secured from all utilities nad other affected agencies involved. Approval of the final ' map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. 25. Final parcel and tract maps shall conform to City Standards and procedures., APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS ,22nd DAY OF MAY, 1985. PLANNIN MMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA i BY: DennW airman 1 c # ATTEST' { Ri kkGo z, Deputy Secretary I,_ Ri Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho]Cucamonga, do hereby certify, hat 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 an the 22nd day of May, 1985, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, REMPEL, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE _ I • • .^sad?k w s o RESOLUTION NO. 85-77A AM E A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING x REVISED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO, 12643, TO ADD A 5.4 ACRE SCI•'u". SITE AND 5 ADDITIONAL SINGLE-FPAILY LOTS FOR A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION 0,- 110.7 ACRES INTO 468 SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS IN THE CARYN VILANNED COMMUNITY (PHASE II).. d WH" -AS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12643., hereinafter "Map" submitted i by The Caryn Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing' the real` property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a-residential subdivision of 104 acres, € located on the north side of Highland Avenue, west side of Rochester Avenue, s, south side of Banyan Street, east side of Milliken Avenue - APN: 225-141-8, 27, 42 and 225-151-1, 3, 7, 11, 13-15, into 463 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on May 22, 1985; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved and adopted said Tentative Tract Map No. 12643, per Resolution No. 86-77 on May 22, 1985; and k WHEREAS, revisions to Tentative- Tract Map No. 12643, hereinafter, "Revised Map", submitted by The Caryn Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,-County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a re A dential suLdivision of 110.7 acres, located on the north side of Highland Avenue, west side of Rochester Avenue, south side of Banyan Avenue, east side of Milliken Avenue APN: 225-141-8, 27, 41, 42, and 225-151-1, 3, 7, 11, 13-15, into 468 lots, - regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on February .12, 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 Plarning Division`s reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. i NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning.Commission makes the following findings in regard to revised Tentative Tract No. 12643 and the revised Map thereof (a} The revised tentative tract is consistent with the j General Plan, Development-Code, and specific plans; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Page #2 (b) The design or improvements of the revised tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (c) The site is phys;icaily suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the revised subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The revised tentative tract :'s not likely to cause serious-public health problems; (f) The design of the revised tentative tract will .not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12643, as revised, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions: 1. All Conditions of Resolution 85-77 approving Tentative. Tract Map 12643, shall remain applicable with this 'approval of the revised Tentative Tract Map, except for Condition Number 3 of "Design Review", in reference to the park site, which no longer apply. 2. The revised Tentative Tract Map shall substantially conform to the design submitted by the applicant and as shown in Exhibit I.'" of the attached staff report. 3. The approval of this revised tentative tract shall only be valid subject to approval and adoption of the Associated Annexation Agreement and development for the Agreement Amendments for the Caryn Planned Community by the City. 4. The spine connection from the school site to Banyan Street (Lot F) shall be realigned to create a more linear configuration to promote a more functional, useable, and secure trail connection subject to the approval of the City Planner. a PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Rage #3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 rommission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of February, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 0: Srdt„ ` y K/ z 31 RESOLUTION NO. 85-06A A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING REVISIONS TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12642, TO DELETE A 7 ACRE PARK SITE AND ADD TWO ADDITIONAL SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS FOR A 'RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 99.8 ACRES INTO 472 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS IN THE CARYN PLANNED COMMUNITY (PHASE I). WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Man No. 12642, hereinafter "Map", submitted by The Caryn Company, applicant, tcor the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Raixho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential subdivision of 106.5 acres, located on the north side of Highland Avenue, west side of Rochester Avenue, south side of Banyan Street, east side of Milliken Avenue APN 225-141-29-37, 41, into 470 Lots, regularly came before the Planing Commission for public hearing and action on January 9, 1985; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved and adopted said Tentative Tract Map No. 12642, per Resolution No. 85-06 on January 9, 1985; and WHEREAS, revisions to Tentative Tract Map No. 12642, heretiafter "Revised Map", submitted by Kaufman and Broad.. applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential subdivision of 99.8 acres, located ,on the north side of Highland Avenue, west side of Rochester Avenue, south side of Banyan Street, east side of Milliken Avenue - APN: 225-141-29-27, into 472 lots, 'regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on February 12, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the revised Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering an, 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 Punning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to revised Tentative Tract No. 12642 and the revised Map thereof: I C. (a) The revised tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Page #2 (b) The design or improvements of the revised tentative a_q tract is consistent with the General Pl , Development Code, and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the revised sutdivision is not likely to cause substantia' environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The revised tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the revised tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. SECTION ?_ Tentative Tract Map No. 12542, as revised, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subioct to all of the following conditions: 1. All Conditions of Resolution 85-06 approving Tentative Traci. Map 12642, shall remain applicable with this approval of the revised Tentative Tract Map, except for .Conditions Number 11 and 34 of "Planning", in reference to the park site, which no longer apply. 2. The revised Tentative Tract Map shall substantially conform to the design submitted by the applicant and as shown in Exhibit "B" of the attached staff report. 3.. The approval of this revised tentative tract shall only be valid subject to approval and adoption of the Associated Annexation Agreement and Development Agreement Amendment for the Caryn Planned Community by the City. 4. The spine connection from the school site to Banyan Street (Lot F), shall be realigned to create a'more linear configuration to promote a more functional, usable, and secure trail connection subject to the approval of the City Planner. a• , Li k! PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 9 Page #3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. ` PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 Mh day of February, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: A. x �i CITY 0r RANrHO CUCAMONGA. CUCAM,ON STAFF REPORT � c9 Z f n — ,�46P v. s1 0 z U > DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning r1immission FROM Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner- SUBJECT:. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-52 - A3A - Tha development of a 55,00 square--foot warehouse manufacturing industrial building on 3.48 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12) located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Pittsburgh Avenue - APN 229-251-60. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of site plan, elevation and issuance of a_Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Meldisco, warehouse manufacturing industrial use, vacant; General Industrial/Rail Serve District f (Subarea 11). South - Vacant; Industrial Park District (Subarea 12). East - Vacant; Industrial Park District (Subarea 12), General Industrial District C�ubarea 13). West - Vacant; Industrial Park District (Subarea 12). C. General Plan Desi nations: roject Site - Industrial park. North - General Industrial/Rail Served. South Industrial park. East - Industrial park, General Industrial. 'West - Industrial park. D. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and is surrounded by grape vineyards on the south and east side. To she north is an existing industrial building (Meldisco) and an approved project. for a 92,000 square foot warehouse/distribution building. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed development is a warehouse/ anufacturing industrial building. An office entry plaza area and an outdoor AOL eating area are provided at the west and east side of the north ITEM J PLANNING COMMIS-!ON STAFF REPORT DR 85-52 -. AJA February 12, 1986 Page 2 elevation, respectively. The plaza areas are provided with benches, bollards, texturized pavements such as concrete and tide pavers, and attractive landscaping. The proposed elevation consists of painted tilt-up concrete panels with reveals and a variation of building planes and surfaces, and include such architectural elements as painted metal entry frame, black glass with painted mullions. B. Design Review Committee: The developer has worked with the Committee in revising the project to address the concerns of the Committee regarding deleting the driveway access off 6th Street, providing an outdoor eating area and• special landscaping treatmtlnt to compliment the _archit-cture. The Committee reviewed the revised site plan and lar< -,taping plan as shown in Exhib,-its "C" & "E and has recor—nded approval with the following conditions which the developer has agreed to: 1. Special landscaping treatments such as intensified landscaping, mounding, specimen size trees and other hardscape be provided to the corner of 6th Street and Pittsburgh Avenue and "long 611h Street. Special landscaping treatments sk: , as intensified landscaping, specimen size trees, accent trues,, and other treatmen�-s be provided to the project entrance on Pittsburgh Avenue. 3. Dense iu„sscaping such as increased number rf trees, specimen size trees, dense hedgerow be provided aloe the south p boundary,y the east and west building elevatons. and 4. Texturized pavements, such as brick pavers, to be provided in the plaza area and the outdoor eating area in front of the building entrance and the east side of the north elevation respectively. _ .:-C. Technical Review Committee: Staff has completed the Environmental Checklist and has found no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of this project. If the Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the General Plan and the n ustrial pecific Plan. The project will not cause a significant adverse environmental impact and in addition the proposed use, building design, site plan, together witff-a recommended Conditions of Approval are ' J_a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 85-52 ... AJA February 12, 1986 Page 3' in compliance with the Industrial.Specific Plan ani all other applicable provisions of the City Standards. V. RECOMMENDATUON:: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission issue a Negative Declaration and approve Development Review 85-52 through the adcation of toe attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval. - Res tfully submitte�/, c� Brt.j Buller City Planner BB:NF:ko Attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C" - Detail Site Plan Exhibit I'D" - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Landscaping Plan Exhibit "F" - Elevations (2) Initial Study, Part II l Resolution of Approval with Conditions I 3-3 i ` ' t ♦+ 4z +'�u".�'(zw�'nV(" IS i x , s 71hStreet a l C m I Hooveri�y—�TT7— j LQ' Universal = etoc la 140,751 sq.ft i Fumn Meldi;co O - "IEYA1111s fjl NORTH 1 CITY OF ANTCHO CLTCAMC��TGA MU: PLANNING DTV7,1Ott EXHIBIT: SCALE.�.= ----------------------- . :SIXTH STREET ASK 1 1 i G' x ��ajl � --•. i i 3 ` =I TAELLATION 6011SRE4Ed -ISIX3:0.F.aN Ac!•ays]af • - -_.. lessee as:(ata Aq M:T.SIIE APEA IsvN sM.Ac: eunPlo Alga•. eUtt)w. ]S.\ VEL02M AMA MIT&F. ILA WESCAPS tmt ]axes. mm MlA6GPEAgEA 2mo w. us (ele.'1 'MI 'A IW PAMM PR , 'sem IIF. 32(1RY] IWIFACIifip 1QemeF. ]](MSOW "Blom 3SmO4F: ]](v¢on TGTAL - 5=w. at a 0mal �.'. j NORTH MY OF .u, rrF.L�I- RANCHO CUCAA/10NN A �. T PLANNING DIVISION TITLE. EXHIBIT'= SCALE; �' 7i\ i kill. _ f V a 8I A=lalt C-c NORTH Cl OF ITEiv;: /I ' - RANCUO C 1vIOjNGA MILE: PLANNING DIVIRON EXHIBIT r SCALE. • Y - F is 00000�DJ0 }} k n NOTITH CITY or, � ITEM: ii,A7CHC) CLTCE,Ii GA TITLE: �✓ � PLANNII'\'G DIVISION EXHIBIT:---,SCALE: /� N a. . E aouv000As<.rrcw w - ro ' �•• it NORTH CITY 7� D7F' s R' ITEONGA M- ' ! PLANNtING DIVIRON EXHIBIT- SCALE-, ` � ��: j1°�y�11 a w1 y �. y ,y.j��i��r.�t :i 0 � 1_1 tl- y � -- �j` ��, « i,S I `� € _. _ _: _ .. 'F rr jKdf'r k - i }�� w. • i j���i • y • �. • • . � s • �' � •� • r . i � . y: ` r .� • CITY.OF•RA`ICHO CUCAMONGA' PART II - INI"'.AL STUDY ENVIRONITENTAL CHE ?:LIST DATE: APPLICA`'T: 7�Jf} �79)n tfSflYli{T E5 ' Accamp C DATE: LOG ZU E2:, PROJECT: SID Fl i 1�lAhIclFticrJ,PiA)y �, PROJECT LOCATION: S Dj)W O}yj r0 Or 6 71 qr- &OLCA'kc&Air. I- ENVIRO`MNTAL IMPACTS 1M (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES MAYBE NO Aft 1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions,. displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? XZ c. •Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique 920logic or physical features? V/ ` '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 tp„geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or•similar hazards? • h. An increase in `he rate of extraction and/or / =tom AML use of any mi:- .al resource? V 2. Hydrology, Will the proposal'have significant results in: Page 2 YES MAYBE 2:n a. Changes in currents, or the course ar direction Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral --tream channels? • f b. Changes in absorption rates. drainage ;patterns, or the rate and amount o1 surface water runoff? c. !-Iterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d• Change in the amount of surface water in anv body of water? e. Discharge into `surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? f. .Alteration of groundwater characte ,;stics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, / either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? ✓ h. Th. reduction In the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water relater` hazards such as flooding or seiches? e� 9. air_Ru ality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Const. , or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? Statanary sources? b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or _fir interferet,Le with the attainment Of applicable air quality standards? l/ r. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture Or tempevature? ✓- 4. Biota _ Flora. Will the proposal have significant _esults • ir.� 1A. Change in the characteristics of species,, includin3 diversity, distribution, or number of any Wr.ies of plants? b.- Reducticu %-f the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? rf Page 3 YES `fAYBE No c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? • d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural f production? Fauna. ""Will the propos.l'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 Lnto 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. Population. *gill the proposal have significant results in: AOL 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 for additional housing? ` 6. Socio-Economic Factors. Will the proposal have r significant results in: a. Change in local or regional socio-economi,v. 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? 7. Lard Use and P1anAinz Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. 4 substantial alteration of the present or planned land se of an area? b. A conflict c .th any designations, objectives, Policies, or adopted plans of any governmental V entities? An impact upon the qulaity or quantityt if existing consumptive or non-consumptive recreational opportunities?) t _ F E Page 4 YES MAYBE NO 8. Transportation, Till the proposal 'have significant Tesults in: f ' 1 a. Gen ration 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? f e- Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? ✓ f. Alterations to oa effects on present and Potential water-borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? 8• Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 4. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have 4 Significant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, pale, *wological,_ 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 exp-3sion or release of hazardous ` substances in the event of an accident? d• An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or ptthenogenic organisms or the e:9osure of people to such organisms? ✓ e. Increase in existing noise levels? f•. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous ~ noise levels? E. The creation of objectionable odors? h. 'An increase 3n light or glare?' 4 f - Page S YES KkYBE NO 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in: J a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site? ✓ C. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors?' ' 12. Utilities and Publ?,,{ Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the .following: a. Electric power? /' b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Communisations systems? r U. Water supply? e. Wdstewater facilities? f.. Flood control struc:�ures? r ✓ g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? I. Police protection? V, J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? ' I. Maintenance of public facilities, including road- and flood control facilities? m.' Other governmental services? f 13. Ere'a1 and ''•arce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial or e::cessive fuel or energy? lGe i b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources o, energy? f ! c. An increase in the der..and for development of r i^ 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 availaLle' Page 6 . - i;ES MAYBE NO e. Substantial depletion o f any nonrenewable or scarce n2rUral resource? 14. Mandatory Findings S�11_ ficance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of thi enviror,,,t:, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife, population to drop bei.ow self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plSrtt or animal comsuriity, reduce the nimber or restrictmange of a rare or endangered plant or anim or eliminate Important examples of the major periods of California history or nrehistory? b. Does the pr. Iect have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term. impact ca the environment is one which,occurs in a relatively brief, �eflnitive t:eriod of time while long- term, ';.mpacts will endure well itcso the future), f c. Does the project have impacts which are Individually ilmized, but curulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that: the incremental rfects, of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past p-ojects, and probable future projects), .e d. Does the project have environmental effects which wz l cause substa�>tial adverse Effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? DISCUSSION OF 'IRON`SENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative ans±,,rs to the above questions plus a dis— cu�n of proposed mitigation me�snres), i Page 7 ; I11. rETEMMINaTIOV On the basis cif this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project 027:%D KOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that althouEh the proposed project could 'nave a significant effect•on,the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures deseribed on ar, attached sheet have been added project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project W, have a s g ific nt effect on the envirnment, and an ENVIRO.. ,`IT XPACT RE 0 T is quired. Date Signature Title RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVLNG DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 85-52 FOR 55,000 SQUARE FOOT WAREHOUSE/MANUFACTURING BUILDING LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 617N STREET AND PITTSBURGH AVENUE iN' THE INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 30th day of December, 198S, a complete application was filed by Aja & Associates for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 12th day of February, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission he'd a meeting to consider the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resnlved as follows: =rION 1: Tia' :he folllowing car be met: 1. That thz proposed pnuject •k1s consistent with the i objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is In accord with the objective of the Industrial Specific Plan and the Aft purposes of the district in which the site is located; ad 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Industrial Specific Plan; and fit. That the proposed use, t,igether with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimeni.al t) the public 'health, safety, or welfare, or mate Tally injurious to properties or improvements 4n the vicinity. SECTION 2 That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on February 12, 1986. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 85-52 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: Planninq Division 1, Special landscaping treatments .,such as intensified landscaping, mounding, specimen size trees and other hardscape shFki1 be provided to the corner of 6th Street and Pittsburgh Avenue and along 6th Street. lift 2. Spy.":ial landscaping treatments such as intensified landscaping, specimen size trees, accent trees and PLANNING COMW3 IN RESOLUTION DR 85-52 - AJA February 12, 1986 Page 2 other treatments shall *be .provided to the too project entrances on Pittsburgh Avenue. 3. Dense landscaping such as increased number of trees, specimen size trees, dense hedgerow shall be provided along the south property 'boundary, the east and west building elevation. 4. Texturized pavement, such as brick pavers, shall be provided in the plaza area in front of the building entrance and in the outdoor eating area in front of the east side of the north. elevation. Details shall be included in the landscape and irritation plan. 5. dolor samples for the roll-up doors shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Engineering Division: 1. Notice of intent to .join the proposed Median Island Landscaping District shall be filed with the City Council prior to recoration of the final map. ?. All or-site drainage to exit through USD 507 or other approved USD. 3. Provide a minimum 5 foot rlanter along east and south property boundary free of any slope and graded l 5 to 1. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. � PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RAt:SHO CUCAMONGA BY: L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST• Brad Buller, Deput;• 'Rretary l I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify'th.c the foregoing Reso`ution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular eeeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of February, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COM,MISSIOivERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERSc '., ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: A r- e o t o n e d o w n p d o q L> C .O¢ E E {,l• G YM c 6 E L L c� — O gp L'eu c O E d .+p Y A K x T! O.y`J'ro L a s O CE a b 0 7 d Y 0 U M a 4 W C w d 60 a Z dELa°1 Y y y,o qd� EA d�N� Y N NE w w 2.r lCCa o �q9 a 0�. Ln V LLC9N OLaY dOq O cLto }dn, dE NC G1 O Ym E quo u u9 rAu •r7 ]C,r� M C. y x Y=0 O c0..W e V V xy NL pU9 C6 �d O .a.c > COln q U d OOt yg U.Oy C qq N d E • LO Lb v 7' d 60i, Gp UN J L NygO .N d T 9 d O !Y R C O C c A G E M LG Eai �w Tq '..�LC BEM - 9 E11Yat �N q_ 9 C 9 ` r_n .. L. Up Od.U.q �6 dyy 66 C� NE CcOip GGC Yqy O.bM� �dU>re. C w OgCp q0 lH Ny TC .O Vo LYg1 qu YO 610 C.Y Odi16 <E6r-•y N E�z m Od^CLl •.E d Y dr E. u ad..N aD` o Y w� Yd q L 20Y N� N b. NWNOUt y y r O dt E LLAY. .. L N V d.^ 1q' •� N brUR vxN.Ln2.r 1�Op=N ¢ KNY dM3 ¢ 6— � pn gO.Yn L nw m C c y c> E.ab• LOOT Y . Or q 9 N C t U� L Z. _ _E x uaTs�r qa db o, .5 i N O qL a LL o e u �. pN., R zo oY nN oaoi ��de; f d EO L •.N a.l R r Vow=+ i Y OY O o 0 p lr t'J N u a E SE O o TY: L q� Y. i C .;0 1 H 6 C C O '9 Y RC~ E CN Md d cr•y a d•3 p O 4 L tq d Lp C t TO. E O>. 1. FN a .\ a u�. iq 34 EnW08,4 2a OL L 'O d Vd C 2 O np�Av9 aC a .. I N L�ntO V6d 2 � i yo N N t y iEL+n t N ait b^9 N A.L O as p E o , `•d n o_.. L m E d L a G3 C V 4d G 6= Nb O�_�'C Np O V U mL pdd MY .i X."� 06 E� ' � '• W L G � E Gu N a=6ti � •A G GO 0 6 qy0 E i i L.N '�^O, A. N d y O Y t M Yj i" Any L� co, S y ' 6N NT d c'x i. 7Z mof da=n c s�. n L C ^ '.G N.m yTG d0. i d^i b Ol O.dy L L. F.Nn YG O L. O EE a d. 't 7 Ot d O N d Y Y N �+ C N„'.. LO>>C EJ LOI 3 3A� Y> 9Na aOOtY Lny GC =a O 9CG Y d ^£ 2 gg ^ A�. 1601 O.A�N Yhu.O H aEN c.006 WU�3 i.C- 6LLY:0 NbG Q EM66. CNU1'� en a+N Lj3 Ntf O G. �I ,I �I ^ �I 4i ' NCC •n Fb Ya>.r L dTN. w.y } ! .�V�LO^ dC N Ttm AMk ^TW O+• ads 6V gip= w -6 M1 O�uud b 1 M = d o N 3 O d iO A AL � nO.Nai.�Uw- EN Y =tp �YYpN LpCO �N 2, a.p C >f N C A 6. Y O 9 • ,L U G^ C d A O u V a' ^A c� C'T A d O na N. C O CA p T A u y Y A Y Y A v-p4. N ¢. uN2: u iE Na. aq p m c C OtdG qG A ^L N d^ n G. D C =d u E.a U da+y 4�ON O .+ NOY ..0. ��~ZD• pia i. NW-d GO p 9 •0.G^C u a0u 9x�F G. Wa tq LNd C -'t p CO O) m O A n C O. 9 2p H L m EAOyO L W. �9 N O• S� f N.�E BAN VlL O d d�R'L9.. Yn O CN A Ny,= C Od ^.n Vv, Y O Y u t O L 2 G N G l C N u -,do t d��O. • LyO,Y �T ;v 4 'O ENE SY Cy G,O.+T~.�.W y. N NON C.0—P-"z d e O Y A U U 4 u ..V.A'. 9 Y q.0 6 ECE p N Y O Y p L Y Y>u v n».4. Ud� E G `1 G A LAC OIFN n0�..� i^4 p.9 Q L u q i N.O d 6 b L L .O L U d T L V 60 V 4 w GA6LG �. C H,o�oaq ^pnG VIN A 6U JMV 4L AM 01�.E- 1-u.it.NCA 1-r•N610 p n L�-tea • _ d O N 0 C O �• � �U O O l O d C N h A.N C Z qi� 6 l L v u d q9 s d no. N u d v my d G m y« p ayr ayuo • C O P O '- ELL9T n+ E.-.ON Ol! y CN u¢. O •ryT d � wC pV.ar • LaQ? 9 I }- �L Nq O d �b d L ^ T d;q E qTN dq OU Na N L i N sM. _ oyr aTy ,�v N •O NOp6 dK Gy nNC n� .br d •G rn�T Gp�1 A AOYC A q ' 9PF n• b r q~. I N% aNC O� _ LO'Pd Ld '�. CL L^ W Y G O G OI C O`d Of y Lu0 L C dY 6%O•�N L O `Yf h' .. OL S i CL. �E' O dtt E9 .r = .D..N cy d T V O o N= E.h N Oa Q� K tT.n �W GO L6NV da0 dmt O p n L FULd 1 �01 >ti d » y � V d T d fM �A A N p I,- N YO MO �L y advddi. d^ n >w V - V a I 'O.V l c E dN y d�. ^ ] ^E u c U^ O O d N�•NAN Qu'i 6 SNO lhM QN Y�^0�>O�q QA^UG QU 4.OA p.�i�. f i a d d V C 12 L T ' C`t c D-c6 u � n d"GO + E is L_A N ✓ . O G V G ire K�.C L y G L na �^' r N.; N n dnA Gp•� N Y.dO yp O A 0AO Ly T� qq dN d. u>i L d O..G.y >.r a ::-E-- G il -W u V a L p U.qD i d q Ld c o T nY E O N L L yJ G qH UV N O A+ NC M AOAC n6G Ap C N NOy Gw Wit. ' q n t d� C S N b tLj C u q n Y�N N t d C G O L =T D: t EN ^.EO n CC N A L F~ LO E Y:O dN UI O nbi O yp ^� Aydii. y nr O] Gyq• d � C t]'a A U yCw•Y EILCO 9 •-EG(� nN l q C A.d O.CI E.4 C w L LU U. a > dO NtA] sOI. y u L 6h D be ^ 0 n d^ p 1pa. Ya~ W L yT d00 O y�^ N^L•^ ^-�N y O q per• n U wddN Nx ^CO •.t.. U1E]a Vd L E n E Q�+NO QgYL-G] ? )YOH 1•'6N QU 69 A.. c.Op gvLipA W66�VfYY. 4 b C �' �I Qi N) b�. Ni e J-a3 W a d GM ELT• ��^ N 9O t.�Cq Nt� . E T6 Oyl Y 1•• m2 a =Crpd U� u r� E t c d L O ppp E q C r,'T.Y. FEF E q E w d d � K-E Y3 w•^ EdV U 4yO� u6�LLC y�ty q LO . � O y �..• g �u �q Y Y• N y G d • d O V O L E fJ U 4 J u G d... L M u 6 y A W p ♦c -px LW j o W V?a =NAIL^ EE OO. Z Y� p�0 04 • L _N 1-• dd 'yp add OI d EEEE u m c L V O.cO S •O ��n CY S7z.6 LGO W Own .•E d dp i �qE '�E O d �U,o d q 0 •.• L Z.0 aiJ GYL 90. oJ. tdie 6d um C d Q �d day O «Tai ^qcd. ^ �q q q Eom q L U S W O •c 1i E a G L G-.w EECLN Ua TO.r-• t1"I a aW �d Y CI i.. N �'•� A LL EU pu C Ld. a d j 0 2 �uW•d-O L W CY.q q «Aoo Gc.Q t o1 Ic pp Go'Q EE NN NT p«L UO. CL NYL o c0«Eo Nd.-.mod N qC '.. NE! •^9 Ncd dU Ali• n . L d O N p o N q w L N• G {. E C L^ H n T Gw• .6 2 E dy w•^,T p. A d� U SLaA6 HAis w O CO,1W L. p�6,p y:y y yd,pi y� 6.Va wN AML p aoi d dQL :2 y. "i aLo Y� .o08 ay � A. d sy. d do 'ZYn O i Y= A...•Y O O�O A d L n Y N N Y O N d A oitd. d G} « u u c p d o U G 3 dL � • _ A O d U d N o G ^ y^..•.N r`>n.q m d w y ', a nYP3 a. 1G.a `s o « A G va yN crn av�� L <Ta 2 o QO « A�d0. Ep ya0it 6q qCdK n O A L uu 9 n q Ca ou C EL • qp y! E ® •'•�O 9.d. N1U '�E L W«iY n N. d T L= M O. 69TS GSR.0 N L LA p• N .Y.• ;T d O L. y d> �t NGO YC GSM E. .• C on N. L � V � « dG 6 01 dq C cc_, cd qp y u U L L..± H "nT '^••r TOG LOYi Ly0 o ni nu.01 AE 'O dL� TI. .u4 ':O 2 IVTdq V � STdC C qaC •a}NL 60^nd dd Oq«M . d G m o opTOM S o G •^ ' V 6 ^� � 01 ' LOIN Gdd ^ O �.d m FF a u. 9L; GIB 016L CV pT �dq aNpi^oo ma L•.•o g CFO Au da v a L� L fi ot•q N t >e q0 M��YLA C S L C N C� O Y NL T pLL ^ G L aY Cd � d T �W v .^-a N •O.d > d '^ O e d r N s Prn n..qi :� % v. OVL cY cu •L nLLo +a ogLq fi'�y a o o LY a cgaa,D ^LL EU- � N.Ny OZ fi9 L� w�n E. d d d N ^ CCyfid 6T^ Ndidc fl. �y L OLL d >.dCp .L.q • �O.� u O n^.p O Y N q q 7 � E O M C �j a L u 6 q ' Oda CiN� O Y.O. qdq C OOP N LLp > q N ' gOa a ON 5.5 OfCwd+ C .-•dL V~ NY Od N G yy:ACy�u COT L.d.u't 0�p0yAC+Oq• CC q� L �2 AC -g79 d9: -92O • LL m.G U 6 O Y Y O 9 P y T q TI Y u I L C L O L^C 9_.E Ln r Y r T y Y O L yy L d o---W Ow ^N tpaO C N C.r LL 6 6 YM O 9 s NI W J 1 Lr i • La a T Ud Lod Y a� L«u 9 ^ C � Ca L d N L d q Y y.C•.u I� mEE y SdV Y ~ qp � WN�.O 9� Cplp C'0• �L O d M y aVmS j 9 q n YYcl C N 91 a aG Y^ Ly j q N cd- G � O L C �dY q A q.^.r• dd Ap YZ 'y'L aUp C C9T• d yy� A� y per= O -dA LDO�U TO Y AY 11A ~ 6. 6 A; LLYY.. AdYC pU9Z ^d ^U O y A a Y a q O a E d k 0 d Y y Oq �Ik�.. C •an qy^6 � � LO EERnd o NN V d ++� z: YA PN at fio j N dOi'� qai ad ,ems dci oz ^c n su 'o. gia01i ^L _ . L nU q p n� a u •�y N G O d o,9 • Y ^.^ U..OI a ^L� d L N 6 L.L.. Y.r «q ' NY pa aON O V4 Y n 9.. AGnCf �u.00 C ' p3 ��. Y� W LC1 OE D.9 a CT o�YY yy CU ef�E. N.'O. V�69 idi LN ANA O9^ y DAd2 A 4 V q a0 Cp,y YU M1.L ^ V O q OI>O Cd1 n 9 p� O U o 1 L9 NO �a OEa ' L.d Yi �'��� Y T duq pOLN d p. N CY LNCC 01 a 2�2 'O N LE.SkN ppN.V:> �N.T: Q. �+ 6� O.A �U� ON. GA �O C W d A N UV VIA 4.�•.AG OOT.C.�..Sd. •. WUt,I 0 M. FAO 9 I Nuo< t o G� oc u:Fdo a oos ar :: U d !� «. �• d �L i « « ^ L u N p v ,• NooN uW .�^' � H e=N e b N 'GyArn a qg y No c c ut� A yd s n6^r � Yy_Oj 6M. N^6 N L�Q qN Z T9 62 O. !+ N O��2' �C i.�b � `C N< � Y ,O. p• 2L ply W NTEwN+ yG' -25 6 a � G.0 0. G.O p A e'� ^A• q U y L C r C Y L y G NYC d L OIo = CN L.P•^ Lybj � gtiy+^. U�„ bNe � 9ad p V •- i GU�4'� rgdY®G dNC �`L �� �' C.• NU. 4.. C« ^ AC C V.ATy NO ` 2 O G u. M d V^ G L Czr L ubC G ErG +� 1-2 �A.,,,G C.L.r r• C�LY �C xG. ea. 6t ` eB A. a u 9 L m va •- a C"ON C dALb a YL �•e ^W W.p Nd L«Oep A = 7 L NOe .28w to 4W�Ga� 46NM. NOSY N9. R1rd.aii 61..1 d.+ L O N a L V oT b C o. T = EN u L E d L Y• � `.L..U V V a y Y 4 b b G Y 1 p V $ B a¢C 2 H a d .G Oi +u f •N O O U 1OJ L V w a'N' 06 rG C GUaMd MAY � �H o Q N CQ a „Oj EdE wa O. o 9Y• ^O Cb.YN sL Y =d Y 6 N L 5.2 O ^ J N M V G o.. n� a� EEvdA 9L1 .^� o N H •. E • a'.961 Y O � ^ G d p yG> 2 OJ G O•d V!, N U Pa C7 N N � ti Ol « O .Y O 9 Nfic 9 II ML 2c 4 O tl.0 � CC W C � Tpu 98 C O L C ^ d pp O C c.�.G. H=L f RA Ko'L WE L UA.A Np� 6 9i�. • AY. 6 J: ' 3 •{V l7 oL.NU u Z o � Lpdc u V C=. d O w` E fl .H. � u� ✓O Y C Co41 c� az Ud U„N '.4 Y N d dt..1 aL Cry E• u•G Z:0 U.. C L NL Lt N C• Nf �'� YC dC ' d o L or u rfc ^ Y >Yq M cq. UO.ed.¢ u� c F+Nd- �N� � ZA � a �qf•« QO Jf..la C� o a l Yr 09 O a.0 i C� C Y ,pY a� �Y V• l�YYd 'a E V Y L.L CC LE U L L �p O L? a • UE Ln U « �C AT CN CM L: S�p+• � ^ 9L L01�r3 N y O O d qN ^R O N¢ tl. 73 .� 11 O1 ♦ 6 C C� Li r � �. " w O q O 6 O L 00 o La V S aL Yp - «F yl a Lc s„ LL O d.A d0d .O- oo `1 qT rCi F•4Y Q Lp.N 4 N J Sa Q • 1`r•2� FM eiY Q 2 , Y ,I �I �! al��I el !4 n1 ®l �( �I �� J — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMT ONGA k=` GvC'10,�, STAFF REPORT cc %3 0 0 Z U > 1977 DATE: February 12, 1986 TO: Chairman and Members ofthe Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-50 - ARE - The development of a 33,88q square foot two-s ry o ice building on ?.I acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subalia 6) located at the southeast corner of 7th Street and Haven Avenue - APN 209 411-01. ARA I. PROJECT-AND SITE DESCRIPTIrH: A. Acticn Requested: Approval of site plan, elevations and Tssuanc<i lo-f Aegative Declaration. B. Su",)unding Land Use and Zoning: North One and two-story offices under construction, Industrial Park (Subarea 6) South - Vacant, Industrial Park(Subarea o) East - Vacant, Industrial Park (Suba-a 6) West A Multi-Tenant Commercial, Industrial Park , (Subarea 6) C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Industrial Park North Industrial Park South - industrial Park East - 'Industrial Park Wes:. - Industrial Park I. Site Characteristics: The project site is a vacant corner lot gradually s opzng tO—the south. 4 f t ITEM K PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT February 12, 1986 DR 85-50 Executive Capital Page 2 Aft- II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed project. has been designed consistent with th Haven Avenue Overlay District. The site plan demonstrates a building configuration which %Raps around the project site in a "V shaped pattern, screening the park:;its area from the Haven Avenue public view. Circulation is logically designed for both vehicular and pedestrian movement. ' The architecture of the proposed project reveal"s a high quality progressive, sophisticated, and urban style of development per the Hatien Avenue Overlay DistrRZ evelopment Standards and Guideline_. B. Design Review Committee• At the January 16, 1986 Design Review Committee meeting, theapplicant presented revised elevations of the proposed.project. The Committee recommended approval of these revised elevations and the site plan subject to the following: 1. 'frees and landscaping adjacent to east and south elevations. 2. Canopy shade trees in parking area adjacent fa the south end of the east building elevation. C. Technical aeview Committee: The Technical'Review Committee has reviewed the pr6iec en etermined that with the recommended Conditions of Approval the project is consistent with the j applicable Standards and Ordinances. i D. ntua onVit1..e. The Grading Committee has approved the conceptual-g—rding plan subjtct to kn approved final grading plan prior to the issuance of building permits. E. Environmental Assessment: Upon review and completion of Part I afil Pay 61 a Initial ;"udy, 'Staff has found no significant- adverse environmental impacts r.lated to the development of the proposed two-story office ouilding. .Hay III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the Industrial Area peci it aii and the General Pan. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant - i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Februar- 12, 1986 DR 85-av - Executive apital Page 3 environmental impact;. in addition, the proposed site and building designs, together with the recoamened conditions, are in compliance with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and City Standards. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the PlanninS Cc;,mission approve-`6evelopment Review A5-50 per the adoption of the attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval an.! issue a Negative Declaration for the project. � Res ectfully submitted,. P I - Brad Buller i Gity Planner BB:DP;das Attachments:._ Exhibit "A" Site Util'iz ate on Map Exhibit "p" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Elevatirn plans Exhibit "D" Landscape Plans Environmental Assessment *•itial. Study Part II Resolution and Conditions 3f Ap�roval y Y db I r .1 Q J-0 m fl' i n _ � , i♦--ter-. I ��—� '7 CZ ° N- 4. k 4 .4 " a Z a p U c U, N 'SU u 9'.�uZ N4 - ® I I ( ICI® ®a 1 r _ 3 I :-- . ........ s 7 �. i� �i 0-4 7 fl ✓� z { • 3ON3AV N3ANH - �� ..A.• i .n.sty a f r�aW Sxcr awl i. ICI � tl ICI �I, � I ���►if+a�=�, � �. ,y� son. CUM q I I��`��l��'✓, �L tFiI��S`'y��r' anw..i�aMi �r;. I� 1� al ■Milan � ,Ya�1re��■ 1 i Il�llm '.. . f� Il:� -.9 F 11 1 �.� i�lik tF' �tY�lLa t OUR i��Ns3�ile>kAespr..F.Y�. ' IEll iml I. I■l� 4,11lc t � :.� h:w:?: i � y vin�ti � � - i�iiG +Si4.ldlC�. �� tR�'? _{w, +,sr..aeswY- ,4,�u,A^c1a'r�e^i 7aarsr�w(� R' y fI'r!� � �2r'F•`t Q� �.h,p' .�j1.�+�a�.:: � f•1 i{y�a p 3t1�� 7" ,.�� yam. �[�Z_ 4V..,�� w �Lo- 4 ��LU�-� ��+�., � .rY,,::.. f��"+�.�' ■tom �t^.s�l�'r�t { �`�. � .. �zr �:: � �r e _... ■ ■ �`e., e t,�S. �. <- '- ��� � - �' �yy � 4� � �a uP.SL:2 ` ua���mY-�i.__��.' i,',`.ewe®�a°mar �*�+r� i ,:t�,:.: r. r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II — INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: '�I�P APPLICn.VT:_ (1P/TqL PILING DATE: p� g —LOG NUMBER:��%Z PROJECT:_ 3 �jQ �jj is Tin %n2Y OFFi['� Rtl.Gt�l�lC� PROJECT LOCATION: T O/�t%Er2 Q� 7-r4 I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES MAYBE NO AOL1. Soils arf Ge 10 y. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in / geologic relationships? b. Disruptions,: displacements, compaction or 71 burial of the soil? / c. .Change in topography or ground surface �L Y contour intervals? / d. The destruction, covering or modification .1L of any unique geologic or,physical features? ` .e• Any Potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site cocditons? - f• Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? r . .• g• Exposure of people or property tR.geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- l slides, ground failure, or'similar hazards? h: An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? 2. Hydrology. Will the proposal have significant I' results in: Page 2, YES MAYBE \0 a. Changes.in currents, or the course of directionAqk Of flowing. streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream charm@ls. w b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? o / c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood ][/ waters? ood d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water? e. Discharge nto 'surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? S. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? j/ h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water relateZ hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. Air Quality. Will results in: ' the proposal have significant a. 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 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 results 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, tare or endangered species of plantsle 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? Y/ Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results in: i 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? ]L/ c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into 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. Population. Will the proposal have significant results in 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 for additional housing? �• 6. Socio-Economic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change iu 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. uscirs? 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, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of / existing consumptive or non-consumptive J recreational opportunities? Page 4 YES ;"YBE NO a. Transportation. Ask Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? x/ b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or / demand for new parking? JL/ d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? ✓ e. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? -1L/ 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 ( a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and/or historical resources? 10. HealthL, Safetv. �and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: hf a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health f hazard? f : 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 Qr 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? .9G/ S. The creation of objectionable odors? . h. 'An increase in light or ,glare? Page 5 • _YES `RYBE NO 11. Aesthetics. Will, the proposal ave significant results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? / b. Ti,e creation of an aesthetically offensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated / or potential scenic corridors? �v 12. Utilities and Fd;;lic Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? / b. i4atural or packaged gas? c. Communications systems? d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? r g. Solid waste facilities? J/ h. Fire protection.-- - / i. Police protection? J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? 1. Maintenance of publi:. facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? za. OLbsr governmental services? �✓ l3. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant re�iits in: a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in 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? k -t3 , Page 6 YES MAYBE No e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource; 14. Mandatory Findin s of Si nificance. 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 below self sustaining lev,,�ls, 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 ` Cah fornia history or prehistory? J b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive reriod of time while Tong- te- impacts will endure well into the future). c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an MW Individual project are considerable when viewed /in connection with the effects of past projects, 1 and probable future projects). d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects / on human being:;, either directly or indirectly? f II. DISCUSSION Or EN�*IRONMENTAL EVALUATION answers to the above questions plus a discussion of`proposed mitig tionemeasures). 1 � fi Page 7 III. DETERMINATION Ask On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD.NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although. the proposed effect-on the environment, there will�not beect uad significant have a neffect t in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. r ❑ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the envirnment, and an ENVIRONMENT L+JPA T REPORT is re `red. `t Date S gn cure .r itle Mt I' �y w s - _ r t RESOLUTION,NO. . A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING ;cVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 85-50 LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 7TH STREET AND HAVEN AVENUE IN THE INDUSTRIAL HARK DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 27th day of November, 1985, a complete application was filed by Executive Capital for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 12th day of February, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as °ollows: SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. Thar the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in E.,ord 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 on :he environment a—fin that a Negative Declaration is issued on February 12, 1986. -SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 85-50 is approved subject to the following�itions and attached Standard Conditions: fPLANNING DIVISION: 1. Trees shall be planted at the southwest corner of the parking area between the building and parking area f !inimum tree wells) at a rate of one 15 gallon size tree for every 3 parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50 percent of the:parking area. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION February 12, 1986 DR 85-50 -Executive Capital Page 2 2. Trees shall be planted adjacent to east end south elevations at a minimum rate of one tree for each 30 linear feet. ENGINEERING DIVISION: 1. The cost of construction of one-half the median island on Haven Avenue for the length of the property frontage shall be reimbursed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga prior to issixince of building permits per City Council Ordinance No. 170. 2. Notice of Intent to join the proposed Median Island Landscaped District shall be filed with the City Council prior to building permit issuance. 3. The applicant shall pay prior to issuance of building permits a fee in-lieu of uadergrounding overhead utilities along Haven Avenue. Said fee shall be one-half the front foot cost of undergrounding for Haven Avenue frontage of 330 feet. Said fee shall be held for contributions to future undergrounding of the facilities on Haven Avenue. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1906. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stom C airman ATTEST.: ra u er, Deputy Sacretary I, Brad Buller, 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 12th day of February, 1986, by th^ following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: u,. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: '.,, ♦��. wT'O�Wy> a0A �G 2�.� � .Cq� UC.dd EE o ' 4�L E Ue d.Gyq CO �pE G�'G.d e• GVV Y^ L L 6L6E Li YM e4. N Ni ty� 6Ypq p ..fie Lqy N M O Ym CV E V L O C� wy E�dY Y VyQ N L.0 G�.Y YV� p�GY'a0lYaN �'z YEYaoN9d Le t�'qu poi ar.auq qd.^ ae N� u 'cam LTw SC� CV« O day+d Y p1d '^A.Y C VNa 4 u ua 9NU SyYL d l .006 Y. Ydr U .> 06 CY..aNE•�f N Nq E O^U a YL O E.Ed ti..eG ' L'3'G.� tQ yL t'q Y=VP LagU��Nd :K Ott O p GN a d Ny0 wL o V�Y V Ni• N4 Y'de'^V a �UCN a"a^ u N ¢o 0 G a6 L YYk OC>C.^e CY Vp Oq V�d�df` Oy^d adq � a o o.�,..i ^'iwd.� e N p ro. Yd p�—o nT'- Yu L N.Wq N- OTC 1. T. E LLV~> a JVY Lpp ,G py 6�4G6vS 1�OOC,n 6YN S..N.�.W�'= CO^.m F-L�L6ti d b O N 14 O tb I � .L u •1 L .- E L O rrt T. tp� EE d p G . y M V o N o � Ot q � t 6 t OdT A to ig G 5.c d ^gTcca x �u a � c�oE q L Y N.N U U du O L - C 'ZZ m d ad h Q �.y L Cam' d�� d _.� A .en V q • 1 Zd Y H M Y UrgO 6 Y. � •v. M 6 ,G� � i�r '9pi4 L.N4e' ' � � ..� � vat. i. e. c. N� op.�.Eca d e - t• • rJ J C ppG U � . yoar� cvr>'ea a aqw„ YEE G �. van.3w a y �n aNa rrA e L io aaa U abiO 9 r OV "T US � YL« E.Wq `rn L•SU^ VO r Y U C N U C d« O E a ^ ? E b O SF u re 4e a q� rs u� `q a 3 -$ 5 CwN i • U Y N S U ^ N ^y G 0 c Y� a V mT i LO L cgy ^ L q.,•, •'^^� �ov atiq n E^a.Tui as � st m.4 «mw 4-3 C O�G ,CMaq ,yam q N g.YaNiG ro q aUCr y�.N %Jt M b.O En •' C �� Y =OT c L iaoo YdM Y.CL 9 C L«E rULY V r '0«O O z rcF N 0 g q u {.H O . Z!= u a NC« NC A. bm c a .c .'•t r- cN '� c'�^. nc u� ...a. �' q3 '•• m jO Vr M%^ LU OL 1 cC. VUc.Ly LG ?.M^ O ^a aV« E NSOT Gm cZ Y� 4 w *m ^a0 aJY^ NO ..c yVd q a jW t A.0 � N LPO ��• C C>UY O L ^ C YO y„� « N ac �W�• 'O •bo uYUw� L CuCN O9Yq.CC .UVYaqE 'L LawY Sac MOC.y UL.«A _y ;Vc pC C«6?C«gg bu`6� L NL S�N �EEE.A Uo gt_,R. E OQ cLn.. Arc•M G p q q E K EMG6 6YniY d� L V).•NN32YLi.WVO. l•pm.NN.m2 zc .1 S �C 6LTNd N4.G. O N A•I � yj G o��y c6F «o�aY aa'rn $ie a o¢ .�aY.a. um L^q M�.7L O3 d� O O. aprTCL« a V r.. r �G O O 6 Y L n m 60.N;T 9 b^.a C�Sy O O O d J r-•t iq p c a E b L uO 3. C 2a 4 t. OC>r y~ q O Ga 4 a E M'. T F• >4: W Nan qu UUgq VO d6 m� gE�dq. rY HJ NdK .+'.FL a �e ani=qu a'+L+u a'c'i doc p y« Y n 6 C Y «U N c W cou ^pN0 U4 hL«V W•CO OCE «L ^y.a�aU^ MN •dy,� cNn O a c A ` q p.L L V �.U E y O • Y u� U.S. S'ZV'TJ%EG Y 09�Y L4 C^ rcY'CrJn Id Wh w Lea WY fa arm 3�6Y^L LS .Cub �� cHL 9 W �r0 � ,"aCVI AY Wes' c UC + a RO F•. CJ Sr~ir.O U«. 9bQ yCiW La �N^ = y�0 L;C NT � US>pLq "_q cstuN eadC 6iC a T aLL L c 'Y O9 NOQ C Ja N L+. yN r.V c maL G qV bah. cd �6 r'•'J > V,—o yy rG EE Nta rU.r C ^.L.Y9 YJ q O �� ��N'E L L3 . c N �O J O U ,U •O MY q O W Y' Ci O.UC da �yc~dr YO . q O 9 Fdy L O V« dqa�,.,6Y.0 ca oO c0 c OO�c L« N �VCT 9ct ca9 c O A i d c a qp $i L a Ypi a �J� YLgg 6 C� arq au V. �c JUO+^. q O q. 9 ,i n(L O era >J q E L !1 Y J TU.Q.drb Op V S U V V O pq' lb.cNG 9. 6�Na NaA KY JuO pU sw 01�T •�„u« � d EQ • ¢�f d. UNa ,c YC rwrgKOp - y` R Y Y] A ® a . Y4•YL C LO r ^�. CU 000 YG.°NLNO � ;..fit E LL N aogo n6 Y � N c d^ •qE6 ' daY r ECNL E. Bo N 1 A. O q a r. °1 ...n.N N-� E y G.L T b• 4 o n o w, o as Y d U V O L q rq.N N IC L y Y O ..O dY 9L N q dC Z. � a u +• quw > N � uya he y a _. _, Y d N �. Y.c r Y 4u m .o 09. .o v=n oo Np gay •; N at 'y n ny vdi d. rrn4'� a q RE co2- S. 'o c d I NK yic f u, Y La u.on � oo N�L�. ao., pvoo +y+r cq m cam. c.. a.0 "c Y u vz o A L u oYanN E L•y-d rn 1t 4 d C N a t d 0 rn O H 3 G d L Y�4 �a oiR^ +- a o'i y„ N L`O 1t Y Oq Y« H`Y ?L'TN^ °' qc e.6�q Oq I or Orn .9 u<d LLq T 6T^ O E r N 01 q 41 L^ Yuv� E.L EE C �pLi L'OUOL6aCic V.Cc m >frn�'y qdq Y E.dv Ed .r•Y�+ w oL•u ` __ _ qy w Q V YL.O N it LOaY Yrn Lb G rn�60rn Crn . CN Oq. 'LffCY� =MO Cx� La Cq NLn� yil •-p r. rnL M �3 L L G d �uY S' Op^L drn E dq N L4 �.O .d C.O iLr LA^ • •, pN.L EY q�. y' yYL� aY q.L: Q fir. -_. c' ve N. q O y. d o o.�- o o c .o q c Y �.d. ''cainq 'o•w,,, s'n a v a d Y d^ ^ OUp VV E CyC y0 C > L EOOy OY qua t} t1•Y- N V n c N O D q III YY C Lw yL C9 2 d y O L S 6 q.^yTtU W- E Y69i Y 4. NOON - mztz 0. CiO 9 A GUU O rs_y Yj� Y �� 9Nd Y•^00LJJ .O Y N N q y U NO p D C 6rL - tT Q FY oNO p 6 yC N rnq Y U V C w 9 V YV A Vb q' 1 i O 7 • }YO C nu . .. G + S Y n aw. Y Yd.1 N wgg Y q Tc@Y QLn .. ^ E� _ >CC� Q�wO.. Gq T Q'O.H 1Y-nM QLI ° -b 918.1Yq Qpn Qt E Wd 6MNuYO, Ty 1 • � R - a.- IM oLc cc • yT 'wya. w�o CC �'� wuE C. EZ A� 4E • N 'O.�q - In li • • C y 109 0 0 C d O d A N «.L ECT.O .14.�L Ld C Q EZ FF L O. U p c Ld O L u C A.LL O L n O LL . O O « V O y= + ••S.wu Y V E.O o 9 E 'E ltVa ^ A � +'uo c.G LL UY9Y Y d�'y •O E Y G.. y 3 Oi A MtLL y +E W w W u d V 4 � L^ O1 d.Yc ON V V. LL EV4. 2 O q u Ox. F. O NgaO+ C N+p. i O W WT U+ EE O1L �. Z a � N�O � • L N I=-• d.Y Y.Y=. I � N �. �aq LO rcuY ci U H S 09 o1a m 2 N -I- 'Z. W .O N 9 C Z n y f..l dY. y E G o s y-5 q p a d^ �..."•E a •$ O. O L.Lq mcON A..at U 'cyyd ^qc V + q 2L�.D a+ C N Ea e O cC x O N J A t LtJ. � 6 d gt1W G aLL W U qq C ap,•E Iti cti t rd 6. NG+L' dYa+40 U N V YC� O.O V� YE A�q 2L N c` L 9 N «iS F tip dqy,«? 06w.� u9 F5 NS iJ .c d�L ^� O E p L L d� E E, L'.a ��d. o • q Y.� N n C N+ o T x O N d N p L 'dp 10 y 0 L V 1^E c qV w7 H 6� =L7a6 ! 10 N E 15.OW11 63I 1.IL-5 d gY-wI, Z' 6 d Lc a 6 U^f9 N yd y d 4.0 ..y BoY q d rn u C+ C OLD w N U g L y V E G 2 L yq C r c e q6 q A Q d A O C V N ' L L C u U U d Y V L .Y qVN Oq E W>Y6 _ O •CC0.9 NL� p GV. L U Ox CQ� LY. Or p. M LN H Y q� YO N • .Y•e E 'a m o.- �V d t i,' ate. qp .•. w� .1^'a y A L - 2 c L q+ •O L E x '.nC � N L + 2 L BE O L� , Y O A c E+ q+c v u io =Y EE c C aJ G n G N N gal Yn u. QOYA c d«t 'O. +c • YO-tL N.y tL E O L N rn a a 3 O C y u Y n E L qAF a— q = nN Ov LOT ay V _ Yd�c u u v of U d N.Y• d L. t y y. c n O. ay A cq O N N O ny x It ^Y G w 9.p 2 G d E ,�', �•'L. � O L � N d9•C c my�� I O+L A> w m q q w a E x a O O C A w N 2 0 O N n • O q0 .d Y OAi ....t=d ^ N=eq •'G..F'• Ly at dY.N� + m U E79w t 0 C c y Y 2 Y T C A O N u+ O L N C L F c v oaf 'dn o+« O N A L 012 C d L U O L• N U O y q Y q. O C O mm ECE d Y Y C y U q + �d L 9LC•OJ L ,,ccOy y 9 Ub q; cyWC�r -LEi OVm Ey6{^$� .a� ' •Y. HNd YM NNE S�� �l L E� Fq•c^1v..c. tnm OYN-g U W40. WG26dMU ' cz A v rl HczAl d ..1 •• N Ai 14 o. .. � 4 • k-aa • r:a o v e c ay L. .L u EE e �. N o r •_.r {`®� Y C O C O C E 0 y N. A U tl °• N dE Ltl0. O. W i 9: id. COI. d N 3Fi .tlC n O Gm !f. rn e d s I >• � tl o. c o a- a �•p' >C prA6 tl� Lq^ 9 U N tlN tlN N «ra ry CA C� LM 2 L o E �^ a d A tl C .2 C L V N q H N, M C 0 o {,/ A OnE 0.9 yp OC OI d Ina D qo L). 1... Llt„ '� � p•i 4. p L = y dIY L tlL •f 5 Y•..0 EN-r. _ p • C��O O^H t C N O avAi L:i- EpEp d d ., d L. 01 �- L . EO y.O a Si 4OC u0 E6q dam. u L A A uT ... G + N>Iq NN u C E y A q qu L d` L c o A c d Top T vvo `o' a^_ OYi SEW t ACA C �� LN Lo M.m a Y 4 0 o Y 0 OI A S L A^ C S L^ A O E 0. d V yp. I- L tl pO�W O.Yp. tiV C.A 60 awl 4.Vw O O C Iz CO Ct dY Lypiy � A� p^. u O. C t; C^ Ar a ° N L.. A E Hy CM M q0 ^N P i q tl g G = N q A �o L L L� d 6 Y Y C N.^L S9 6 Z. dq qCm O. •tly� q 11 r 9�^ di N d'0c CC VYbr� u Oa f>EEy E E. j�IrR A o a 9p E0.Y0. ^uyq Z E� pC da C O p 09 d O� ^.O Q L Y.0 NgA6 Y y. LO$� 'EdEd 3 N Nil O>q Y> ^ E U O A C d N C V C y r C A V • r H i d tl d( N9 a O Gy y N Y. u. N A C L L -EY ^� qd 6fO.rn .dC Cd ggG u c ^M G.. ♦tl A V O E d 9 N L - O N L L V 9 .K q H y O L C p9 d ALo t. O L d O d. C t G G y � y .�u N A 4€ N d 6 d T p y o«Y E>C O� '@ •. at oo a.9Au `.. 'co y ua v- d vam �o e d o N c a s U C O1 0 `' E •a N A y M ^N d.0 HV Ou n-.L Lq O t r0 y L p C �,O r q Y C 1 L m u r 9 0 y p p N O� O • d = r y y h� LN Tt g:a o €di C LN _c0 N LE34.N dLi NO C 6 CO y y' q • 0. q N V�Nw. A:NgO 06+.Nr6 s�.�td 3f�#Ou #uP bN LCL=. WNO WV1.f .'Cl ly "Iw; 6M QO Qqu �O Q: A O �j i Nu O.� U O OO4 L • EL � • Adh C N O r V R i Y L � u N y L T y N Sd � O 0 O 6 M =L M Y am _ • S V •� 6 qa c n O L O � C�O ~o C e V L V L�U n r 0 ^n TCq E En b AY Y my Y O ^ 1• y. qqe m>'ay a> c c�.Lsa `i. oc ' pc - a z.� CYTJ O 9pY0. O ny. dqU OE uM U 2� L dy E. •qaw^ 6L Nip EEL EW. yFEUC C Um L S CCU. d u � RCLN R1... L a Cc CL �Y OY pd� a O . E UNLU N�.UL 6N p^W. E VgOa0i 00 p' I L O EN NO AT aN. >d Otw L UU V T•^L•.. L C Y L RUJ> NU W L9 N .vr Q.6N..•Oi UY N.9 6wY. 6i.16 WMNL�u rO T n LU ZO. ti4 6 4. G rl o Y EdC.0 S.N 6Q 9 CL. • OL Y d q OJ F tp L 6 N E cw. ro Yew ct � Liw .Lip n s Nr - 2A o 06 u O 6. Lq9 N d p Sq rnOm Da VIS Y C U Mt qL N EO Lj Ep LW L � A L C09C�N fi O� Y J C 6 Y 4f�f. �� •, A qn � > a mod: d p d @ate c m. �w 4-3 d N O A Y �'• q a T JY N n•.r••� ` A w N d� - U O y 9 A.N '^ E•�L C Y � •n L g w tl N� •La d.w L y U •.L-tl Y nn H� a dm Nd d S:C Ytl. LV dC.E N G M O A W w 69. d U N . L H y G•O„e 0,�. d d C u�Y . un n.•. T cL ¢ ud N u- dN 20 _ Bf y V C u Y:q yr da E•E FIT, • Q•s 1. c .c u n rn q 1='Y s u.L a tl • E� p� a� d^ L C O. dW u O.N� OY•. 4.c-' » O� d••C-N 6cN IiG QG �+c- CJ tO.Ta o ¢ Aft � . rY Y q 9Y• E tl�r�C T Y O d0 O CA} O Y . ?d 4 t t O¢ •• o n a N u u n w E O t� C d a Y L =MOT N N • _ `F� SY dY L L C. Y rtl DD d E �L pad 4 d 6 qa o r• K— tl L d9 CEO N d O T_ q0 G� V 09 q 6 G III L T L¢ 9 N d 9 N Lt L c.V • �T a 2oc ci � d "� w9 L d atl^L N o dZt � N d d d q 2- WU `od o E 9 dtl Y`. L 9L • L L: } 6 L g d Y 9 N d N C T C..fJ 4 O.. tlr v1Y C 6d W 0-> i uv OIW 9 .n 9 Y O>• C ,p.• d dod 900 m q L+E'.q� dd cd. ¢.a, s•F :, .. q.. .9 �c9 .o. �:.« -It; 'aN .di ia' o` q Lr m•L. a�Ir .�.• c. ---� C TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA wC-Anroti STAFF DEPORT 1 0 0 F $ Z U DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Comnission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner . BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY REVIEW 86-01 - JAUNZEMIS The consistency etermination between the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies and the proposal to occupy an exieting abandoned service station tewporarily for the operation of a retail/wholesale glass busirss in the General Industrial District located at 9670 Foothill Boulevard - APN 208-153- 05. I.. ABSTRACT: The applicant has submitted for Planning Commission consideration a request for determination of consistency of the proposed 1 . month temporary use within the Foothill Corridor Study Area. II. BACKGROUND: The site is 73 feet by 136 feet and consists of two buildings totaling 3,000 square feet and a fuel island as shown in Exhibit "C". Although.staff has not been able to verify these dates, it is believed that the rear building at the northern Property line was constructed in 1908 but later moved 20 feet to the north in 1926 when the smaller building and fuel island was constructed. In i979, the Historic Preservation Commission had reviewed and considered this old gas station but had recommended against Historic designation. Recently, site and building improvements have occurred on the property by Vie ,applicant in preparation ofopening a glass wholesale/retail shop. Mr. Jaunzemis, without the code required permits and repiews„ proceeded with these improvements to the site -.and buildings after his initial contact with the City in mid October. Though the staff member who first met with Mr. Jaunzemis failed to inform him of all applicable codes, these codes woule have been brought to his attention had he applied for building permits prior to begihning.the improvements. Mr. Jaunzemis is now aware of the applicable codes and has had lengthy discussions with staff on the process of establishing a use on the subject property. Ws result of these discussions, the applicant is only requesting temporary use of the property at this ITEM L PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Preliminary Review 86=01 - Jaunzemis February 12, 1986 Page 2 time. He realizes a request for permanent use of the property may require substantial on-site and off-site improvements for which he feels he could not comply with. Therefore, the only request before the Commission at this time is the consistency determination of the proposed 13 month temporary use of the propert.;. II. ANALYSIS: A. Surroundinq Land Use and Site Related Issues: To fully understand the complexity of the issues, a closer look at the surrounding land use and site related problems, as .shown -in Exhibit "B", Study Area, are required. The area bounded by Archibald Avenue, Kiusman Avenue, Foothill Boulevard and €stacia Court has problems of non-conforming use, lots and structures, small strip commercial, unimproved access, and flooding/drainage problems. The subject parcel is one portion of a larger area (see Exhibit "A") which the Vanning Commission has previously stated should be the prime target for study in developing the Foothill Corridor Plan. B. Project Related Issues, 1. Conversion of the gas station. According tg Interim Policies and Development Code, the conversion of a gas station to a new use is permittedon non-conforming Lots, subject to Planning Commission review. However, the proposed conversion may require such things as substantial reconstruction, renovation or exterior remodelling; removal ` r of all gasoline appurtenances, pump islands, overhead doors; installation of full off-site landscaping and irrigation; and construction of missing_ street improvements. Further, the proposed conversion request I must be submitted with a Master Plan with integral development consistent with the Interim Policies. In reviewing the plans, as shown in Exhibits "B" end "C", they shows numerous site constraints such as su'standard lot size, dimension, setback, and street frontage, which would create difficulty in Complying with the above mentioned requirements. ( 2. Proposed land use and its compatibility to the 5uteZ_.n,41 n area. According to the applicant, is usiiess is a who of household glassware such as windows, frames, e;c. The nature of his operation includes truck delivery every 3 to 4 weeks of uncut sheet glass (24 foot 3-axle truck pulling aforklift), daily truck delivery of products to customers, and infrequent' on-site customers. The City's current Code classified this type of business PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Preliminary Review 86-01 Jaunzemis February 12, 1986 Page 3 operation as furniture store, repair and upholstery, which_ is a permitted use both under the Development Code and the Interim Policies. This area is characterized by non-conformity, strip commercial, and billboards. .It is such land use problems that led to the establishment of the FooEhill Corridor Interim Policies. The content of such policies are to attempt to synthesize a complex set of issues dealing with land use, urban design, traffic and circulation in achielving the following goal.: " a high quality, attractive,and unifying design image reflective of community heritage, and provide a viable setting for a balanced mixture of residential and commercial activities with safe and efficient traffic circulation and access." 3. Master Plan. The purpose of Master Planning is to provide for integrated development at the earliest _ possible time in the review process. Master Planning of defined areas will avoid development of single parcels of land in a manner which prevents or orc-cludes future development of adjacent parcels in the best way possible. Therefore, :the proposed land use at this site may preclude an opportunity to coordinate the land use and site planning for quality development consistent with the standards for Ia Foothill Boulevard, which is to de-emphasize strip commercial by creating organized groups of structures and uses, and provide for efficient utilization of land. C. Temporary Use Ve-:, Permanent. Use. 1. Temporary use. As mentioned before, the applicant is peoposing to occupy the building temporarily for twelve (13) months. Three months prior to the end of the period, the applicant would inform staff as to his decisions on either staying at this site and complying with the requirements of Interim Policies, or in the process of relocating to another site. Since the proposed use is permitted within the ` General Commercial District, allowing the applicant ' AOLto occupy this site temporarily would allow time for him to, decide on whether he would pursue permanent PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Preliminary Review 86-01 Jaunzemis February 12, 1986 Page 4 occupancy of the property. A Temporary Use Permit is required and reasonable conditions to mitigate any potential adverse impact of the surrounding use, such as parking, traffic and access can he conditioned at the tima of approval by the City Planner. 2. Permanent Use. Although the land use is permitted at this site, the permannent conversion of the service station would require Development Review. The applicant i4muld be required to develop a Master Plan, detailed site plan and elevations consistent with the standards of the Interim Policies, and submitted for Planning Commission Review. III. OPTIONS: The following options may be considered by the Planning Commission: The tem orgy use of the property for 13 months is consistent witF the oothi'l Corridor Interin Policies; or, the tem orar use o the property is incons� i—`scent with the Foothil orC ri dor Policies. If the Planning Commission makes determination that the -temporary use of the site for such land use is consistent with the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies, then the. following directions should be provided to staff and applicant: 1. Direct the applicant to apply for a Temporary Use Permit to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner. Reasonable conditions to mitigate any potential averse impact on the surrounding uses may be imposed. 2. Provide staff with criteria as to the extent of the on-site and/or off-site improvements required for. the proposed temporary business. Such criteria as: thG amount of landscaping required, off-site improvements such as curb and gutters, repainting the building, and renovation of the building, etc. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Preliminary Review 86-01. - Jaunzemis February 12, 1986 Page 5 IV. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Panning Commission consider all input and public testimony regarding this project; review and provide direction to staff end applicant regarding the " above mentioned two options. Respectfully submitted Brad Buyer City Planner BB:NF:ns Attachments: Letter from Applicant Chronology of Events Exhibit "A" Location Map Exhibit "B" - Study Area Exhibit "C" - Site Plan s Exhibit "D" - Photo cif Existing Buildings G h, F y� �.i 1. ,JAIUAXt 27, 1S,36 PLANNING CO LMISSIO:q PLANNING DFFPAITMENT "WICHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 91730 Re: 9670 Foothill Blvd. Dear Planning Commissioners; I wonld like to occupy, for husiness, the property on Eoothill Elvd for 13 months after the approval of the Planning, Commission. I intend to comply with minir.al improve- ments to the property during this period. If I should decide to stay longer than the 13 month period, Z will notify the Planning Commission at 10 months from the date of approval. At that time I will conply with all requirements deemed necessary by the Planning; Commission with the exception of the removal of any buildings.. At this point I wouls like to point out that I am only leasine the toperty from year to year untill the owner can lease or sed the property i>_ future development'. Very truly yours., ED JAUNZE`IIS r � w '. C Chronology Coversion of Abandoned Gas Station at 9670 Foothill Boulevard (Northwest Corner of Foothill a::d Archibald) October 14, 1985 Applicant, Mr. Ed Jaunzemis of 7447 Archibald, approached the City's Building Department requesting information on his plans for opening a shop on the subject site. Mr. Gary Richards, City of Rancho Cucamonga Code Enforcement Officer, on October 14, 1985,• signed off on the "Building and Occupancy Inspection" form. October 17, 1985 - Mr. Jim Schroeder, Building Inspector Supervisor, aftce a field inspection, also signed off on the "Building arrd Occupancy Inspection" form. November 25, 1955 - Joe Torrez, Code Enforcement Officer, responds to a complaint by Ed Jarnzuwis regarding illegal parking on his property. During Joets meeting with Mr. Jaunzemis in the field, Joe also inquired whether Mr. Jaunzemis had obtained ::11 necessary approvals to be occupying this building. Mr. Jaunzemis indicated that he had. November 26, 1985 - Joe Torrez reviewed files, talked to Jim .chroeder and copied the "Application for Occupancy Inspection" form. November 27, 1985 Joe Torrez then contacted Ed Jaunzemis and advised him to contact the Planning Department because from his review of the files, Mr. Jaunzemis had not received all approvals needed ,for what he was doing. December 12, 1985 - A phone message to Dan .Coleman from Ed Jaunzemis requesting a meeting. Dan returned the phone call and set up a meeting for Mr. Jaunzemis with Brad Buller, City Planner, for December 17, 1985, December 17, 1985 - Brad Buller met with Mr. Jaunzemis and reviewed the history leading up to the current situation. At the end of the meeting, Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, joined the meeting to go over the Design Review process and Planning Commission schedule. Mr. Jaunzemis set up a meeting with Nancy for December 18, 1985 at 9:00 a.m. to prepare a submittal package for preliminary Planning Commission review. Mr. Jaunzemis was given all necessary forms at this meeting and was advised of the Planning review process and. schedule. His item was then tentatively set for the January 8, 1986 Planning Commission meeting for preliminary review. December 18, 1985 - Mr. Jaunzemis did not meet with Nancy Fong. Brad Buller scheduled and met with City Attei-ney, Andy Arcyznski. The City Attorney informed Brad that Mr. Jaunzemis must follow the process outlined in the Development Code and that'Gary RirXiardsl signature does not allow the use of the site without following the o6ner procedures outlined in the Code. Chronology 9670 Foothill.Boulevard Aft Page 2 December 19._1985 - Mr. Jaunzemis requested a meeting with Jack Lam, Community Deve'npment Director. Jack met with Mr. Jaunzemis and Brad Buller. Jack reaffirmed the process outlined by staff at the December 17th meeting. December 20. 1985 - Chris Westman, Assistant Plannae , received a copy of a Business License application. The application showed `_'iat Mr. Jaunzemis proceeded to obtain a Business License after being told thathe would not be permitted to occupy the building until, he had gone through the Planning review process. The date of the Business License was December 19, 1985. Mr. Jaunzemis signed and dated it December 20, 1985. Again, this was after staff advised him on December 17th that he eeede-1 Planning Commission approval prior to proceeding with the project. December 27, 1985 - Brad Buller returned the call to Mr. Jauaz=in. M Jaunzemis felt that he had no choice but to go "o court. He agreed to submit evidence of his financial investment into the property and would return Brad's call within the hour. January 2, 1986 Staff received a letter from Mr. Jaunzemis's attorney, James E. Hummel and Deborah Mohr Walker, of Andrews and Hummel Lawyers, 9330 Base Line Road, Suite 100, Rancho Cucamonga 91701. A copy of the attorney s letter was given to Jim Markman. t t -� =iii un 4 �iii� i= �� IIIIfN MlIID Aa�mass MrNre 1 nu!!r!< a s s I�rrmlxurrif►- ,- ` t F •s �. .►- r -r Fx i T ' SS 74' � f! �� •. ss��t ,q Q 30 33 1.27 AC,M/L sss' gs' sr.ees 73 i ,2O n n O h 20 !9 .60 AC.srt/L o © r (a ye 18 • o ,H 22, ♦.- 93 / �38�„1i 40• rr - �„ w •_57 — ..3 24n. .27 1 i •., i 18 ;cli'� 9t5 c 1 ass', rc•r �. •.or 1 J62�1 SO• .M 21 s:4 ¢S'11ILYFA 1 I 15 A U Q � • un,ax�e►�� � G�MMtKGAG L t3` tz n 10 r Q (?�&llcArnYj `� t »x. ff ------ --- -- ---� ' BOULEVARD o--�-{- • NORTH CITY OF rrEL t RLNTCHO C'UCAMONGA ��: PLANNM DIVISj( 'NJ EXHIBIT: al { SCALE .�_. 1 0' f 73� i REAR gtD(, ' Zb28 Two R`LL-UP DOORS F�.oRty1 Alhk M ul(tMPRoJE9 AShiE gisLE /777777 FRONT ^a .�—plwjp4RD 385 En Fy CARPOV 4 NOME � i �nlmPRavED ' vNIMFlw�ij CITY ali f �j ,/:Pr�Rokcal -., /rPPtWAu{ Jhlrl➢Fo�ED t uNlM�co� b F � Gu0.0 u�C 1TEIVI. ( RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: I PLAN?MNIG I TV LSION EXHiBrr.. scALE Sj r •:t� 1 ^q: fs. n •i +ter' _ '� 'x � � x �,ss.,..._..� ��!r�«• ��� � � � x .. F �f ' I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GLICAntCy� MEMORANDUM 1Vt ?,; ! F A. CONFIDENTIAL � � > 1977 DATE: January 6, 198E TO: Mayor, Members of the City Council, and City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner 1604 SUBJECT: CONVERSION OF ABANDONED GAS STATION AT 9670 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD (NORTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL & ARCHIBALD) I would like to take this opportunity to bring to your attention a situation that staff has been working on during the last month. We are currently withholding issuance of any building permits for tenant improvements of the gas station, buildings at 9670 Foothill Bculevard pending Planning Commission review. Section 17.1C.03O(H)(2) of the Development Code require, Planning Commission rev..ew of gas station conversions. To date, -eye applicant has not subaitted the required plans for Planning Commission review, but has made on-site improvements without building permits. Auk Ed Jaunzemis of 7447 Archi"ald began work on the gas station site at 9670 Foothill Boulevard some time in late October or early November in preparation of opening a glass wholesale/retail shop. In mid-October, Mr. Jaunzemis approached the City's Building Department request{._¢ information on his plans for opening a shop on the subject site. The Building Department referred him to the Planning Department. Mr. Gary Richards, the City's Code Enforcement Officer, was available and handled Mr. Jaunzemis's question regard'_ng the proposed use. Mr. Richards, on October 14, 1985, signed off on a "Building and Safe},y Division Application for Occupany Inspection" form. Mr. Richards should not have signed off this form without further clarification of other related codes. His signature-was mistaken by the applicant as approval of the proposed use at the -vabject site within .the existing building pending any Building Division conditions of approval. Mr. Richards failed to alert Mr. Jaunzemis to the Code Section which requires- development review by the Planning Commission prior to conversion of any gas station and the Interim Foothill Boulevard policies. Mr. Jaunzemis claimed he proceeded and made improvements to the property and buildings based on Mr. Richards' signs,;ure on the Application For Occupancy Inspection form. However, during this same period of time, Planning staff was notified through a Code Enforcement field inspection that work was being done at the gas station. Records were checked and staff found and informed Mr. Jaunzemi3 on December 12, 1985 that Ask conversion of a gas station required development review by the Planning Commission and that no building permits were issued for the work in qW progress. � -13 Memo to City Counci� _ty Manager Sub3; 9670 Foothill Boulevard January 6, 1986 Page 2 _ Mr. Jaunzemis at this point (December 12th) apparently stopped work on- site and attempted to pull building permits for the improvements being done. Permits were withheld pending submission of plans by the applicant for Planning Commission review. Staff scheduled this item for the January 8, 1986 Planning Commission hearing, but Mr. Jaunzemis chose not to submit plans for review and felt that he had the right to pull building permits and open his business based on the approval of the Application For Occupancy Inspection form. Again, while Mr. Richards should not have signed this form, the .form does not authorize the use of the site without following through with other procedures requires; by the Code. Nevertheless, Mr. Jaunzemis has retained an attorney and_staff is in the process of responding to his attorney's letter of December 31, 1985 kattached). Staff will continue to keep the Council informed as to the status of this project. If you should have any questions or receive any caills, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Staff has been in consultation with the City Attorney's office during this period andj will continuo to do so. r is CC: Jack Lam Jerry Grant Lloyd Hubbs Jim Markman Attachment BB;jr r �o.y ` CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r-Vcnnro STAFF REPORT ti�9� O o v a DATE: February 12, 1986 19n 1. TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brai Buller, City Planner F BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner E SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-43 CHRISTESON COMPANY - The development of-a two-story office/retail building totaling 21,000 square feet within an approved integrated business center (Virginia Dare) in the General Commercial District located at the northwest quadrant of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN 1077-661-6. (Continued from January 8, 1986 meeting). 1. BACKGROUND: At its regular meeting of January 8, 1986, the Planning Commission reviewed this item and continued it to this meeting. The Planning Commission was concerned that the outcome of > the pending appeal of Condition No. 3 or Rc�oiution 85-112 regarding parking requirementsfor Edwards. Cinema -uld affect this . .project. The appeal was scheduled for public hearing by the City Council on February 5, 1986. The appeal has been withdrawn as of January 23, 1986 (see letter from the applicant). II. RECOMMENDATION: Staff 'recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review 85-43. A new Resolution of Approval GI with Conditions have been prepared for your review. 6 Respectfully submitted, r� Brad Buller City Planner BB:NF:ko Attachments: Letter of Withdrawal from Applicant of DR 85-22 January 8, 1986 Planning Commission Staff Report Resolution of Approval with Conditions • i' • r ;?r ITEM M '`i ALLIS?tt MATIE1,4s,.LSCR, GAMBLE S:MALLOEY w.ATTOR"rTS AT LAW ... •M.. •...mo•n cD•.o•.noR. ,R `J CIVIC PLAZA. LOS AwOC� L� Cyr l"Ict KSUITE 230 O Ci 4,. •cl te.q h OV}NNEW?ORT BEACH,CALIFORNI uow7w m coRcA 92660.5999 LOS ANOCICD.C.tL.IOR.Iit o0o71•]m� TELEPNOI,C 171a1 Ow0.DD00 `Pwow[12131 Six.o]]] Po C 10 00.OZ25.A^ILO4 u• TELEGOPiER NO.(71.t1 6.0.2a Sg TCL[.N0. i:i.t..Ot.,.•. we C NO.17IA TC LCCOPICR mo,(21]1....... ZAP MAILO 'wK;�..:"•"O ,y. 1 6A0•DAJ2 ZAP MAIL.0.(ZIy1.022.7.12 Pt\ January 23, .w2srwDeoorrlGE •••c•O.ay.•.,�.. q .0.00 w.L gTRC SOU, ary - 148h vwA0.9UIT[.2: " `•" at wir• LOS.AwOtLC].C tl.OR 9oO2A•]000 w0•KA OI.Ow� n[M tip,O.ww.tP iCLCPwONc li1]1�)7•]]O[ OUO nL-.MlreC�1 _Ms. Beverly Authelet C1779-002 City Clerk Office of the City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline,Road, Suite 'IFCII Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: C/A Limited, a California limited oartnershio Dear Ms.* Authelet: On be_.alf of*C/A Limited, a California limited part-,,rsh this letter constitutes notice of the withdrawal of C/A Limited with respect to Resolution No. ppeaT 5° 12he a PI Very tzuly yours, Allen, Matkins,' Leck, Gamble & Malloiy Sy• i R. Michael Joyce " Attorneys for`C/A Li ed RMJ/p is — CITY OF RANCHO CUC AMONGA wCAnro STAFF REPORT t z 1 c,- O O F !� Z U > DATE: January 8, 1986 ID77 TO: Chairman and Members of the Plannin. Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-43 - CHRISTESON COMPANY - The development of a two-story retail/office building totaling 21,000 square feet within an approved integrated business center (Virginia Dare) in the General Commercial District located at the northwest qu ;ant of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN 1077-661-6. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of detailed site plan and elevation. B. Siurroundinq Land Use and ZoningL North - Vacant a shopping center has been approved recently); General Commercial District South - Phase I of the Virginia Dare. Business Center, Vacant; Ger-eral Commercial District East - Vacant; Community Commercial histrict of the Terra Vista Planned Corinunity West - - Deer Creek Channel, Existing Industrial Use; General Commercial District C. General Plan Designations: Project ci7T- General Commercial North S neral Commercial . .South - General Commercial East - Community Commercial West - General Commercial and Industrial Park D. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and rough graded. Phase I of the Virginia Dare Business Center is almost completed and Del Taco Restaurant is under construction. II. ANALYSIS• ~ A. .General: The site is a former Garrett Winery and has an approved Master Plan which aMablished building areas, parking areas, and architectural program that reflects the winery theme PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF RFPORT' OR 85-43 - Christeson Company January 8, 1986 Pa9e 2 and _ mission style architecture. Recently the Planning Commission has approved Spire. Restaurant and a six-plex Edward's Cinema within this Master Plan (see Exhitit "B"). The detailed site plan and elevation for this proposed two-story retail/office building is consistent with the approved Master Plan and architectural program. B. Desir, Review Committee: The Design Review Committee has reviewed the project and recommended approval with the following conditions which the developer has agreed to: 1. A- recessed quadrifoil on the second story of the northern elevation be provided. 2. A texturized pedestrian connection be provid_J to the Del Taco Restaurant across circulation aisle. 3. A texturized pedestrian walkway be provided to connect with the northerly project (Brunswick) The developer of both projects . should coordinate the location of this rsdestrian walkway. 4. The arbors shall be planted with vines- and creeping varieties of vines or ivy against walled surfaces throughout the project, reminiscent of the original winery. 5. The planter area in front of the arbor adjacent to the east and the north elFvations be expanded to provide adequate space for triee planting. The developer has revised the site plan and elevation to incorporate Condition Nos. 1, 4 and 5 as shown in Exhibit "C", E , and F". C. - Related Parking Issue- The Plannina Commission on July 24, 1985 regular meeting conditionally :pproved the six-plex Edward's Cinema which is immediately adjacent to this proposed office/retail building. To assure that there is adequate parking within this business center, the Planning Commission imposed a condition of approval for Edward's Cinema (see attached Resolution 85-112 and Condition No. 3), This condition of approval has been appealed and is pending City Council review on February 5, 1986. In consideration of the ending appeal the Commission may wish to continue this item unt11 Council action. The intent of Condition No. 3 of ut Resolion 0 12 was to require a parking analysis if a proposed office structure requires more than 85 parking �a "t; PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 85-43 - Christeson Company January 8, 1986 Page 3 spaces. Since this project only requires 84 parking spaces, it would not be affected by said condition. However, the Committee recommended full Planning Commission discussion on the parking issue. D. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed the Environmental Checklist and has `4ound no significant adveme environmental impact as a result Hof this project. Further, a Negative Declaration has been issued with the approval of the Virginia Dare Business Center Master Plan. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order to approve a commercial development project, the Planning Commission shall make the following findings: 1. The project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan. 2. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 3. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. 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. �+ 5. This project will not create adverse impact on the environment. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission consider all material and input regarding this project. Should the Planning Commission determine that there are adequate parking spaces for the entire business center and concurs with the findings, approval of Development Review 85-43 would be in order. A resolution of approval with conditions has been prepared for your review. :However, the Planning Commission may, in consideration of the pending appeal, continue this item until Council has taken action on the appeal. GGRes ectfu ly submitted 7 Brad Buller City Planner BB:NF:ns PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 85-43 - Christeson Company January 8, 1986 Page 4 Attachments: Resolution No. 85-112 for Development Review 85-22 Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B - Virginia Dare Business Center Master Plan Exhibit "C" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Grading Plan Exhibit "E" Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit 'IF" Elevations Initial Study, Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions i llllll RESOLUTION NO. 85-112 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO.. 85-22 LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HAVEN AND FOOTHILL IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 12th day of June, 1985, a complete application was filed by Edciards Cinema for design review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 24th day of July, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning r, mission held a meeting to conside., the above-described project. follows: NOW, 7hEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the folluwing can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the ob',ctives of the 1eneral Plan; and 2. That the propused use is in accord 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 What.this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and,that a Negative Declaration was issued on June 8, 1983. SECTION 8, That Development Review No. 85-22 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: Design Review 1.. All pertinent conditions of CUP 83-07, as contained in Resolution 83-79, shall apply. 2. Construction shall include a parking lot with minimum of 455 parking spaces within 300 feet..,, 3.FUndehe currentL-Vmred parking ongept, the c^.:,struction of structures adjacentto the'Wester, insofar as the same. more than 85 parking Rspaces, shall be deferred until specifically approved by a modification to vhe Conditional Use Permit for the site. At the time any such office structure is proposed to be developed, the applicant shall submit a detailed parking analysis to determiiW if there is adequate parking for all then operating and proposed uses. This study shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. f a conflict exists between the theater and other uses, then the Planning Commission shall consider a modification to the applicable Conditianai Use Permit to reduce the square footar;a of the unbuiit remaining office buildings in an amount c_= tensurate with the parking overlay, limit the yours of operation of the cinema, or other appropriate means of_ assuring adequate parking. This condition shall be incorporated in a document approved by the City Attorney to bR recorded to provide Notice of fondition to prospective purch<:,'ars of the subject property prier to the issuance of a build na permit for the cinema. 4. A t?axtured treatment shall be used in the pedestrian,walkway underneath the arbor that runs through the site, including across the parking lot. 5. The arbors shall be planted with brines, and creepinn varieties of vines or ivy shall be utilized against wall surfaces throughout the pro;,act rtxl niscent of the origital winery. 6. Adequate lighting shall tie provided on all sides of building for the safety and security of theater patrons. 7. °-noper crowd contrc •Facilities and management shall be provided for waiting lines to ensure that theater patrons do € not block access to adjacent buildings .or conflict with q vehicular circulation. ` 8. Grand ,penings and oVer special events, such as movie t premieres, shall require review and approval of a Temporary Use Permit by the Planning Division. 9. Trash enclosure/transformer location shall be modified to provide access to the satisfaction V the Foothill Fire District. Ere ing eerin Division: t- 1. All pertinent conditions of PM 8303 s6ll be adhered to. 2. A lot line adjustment shall be recorded to eliminate the lot line between the two parcels'containing the theater prior to the issuance of building permits. BASE L4NE It3 L4. I �•1.raA3�lrl 1 `� a� CR r1 It)nv •rr. KBnzf I �'%[Arlfrtit9ii• - � �'1 I�4 � s ..n�_CL/•7i-r;B � � !fa• - r.. �• I \ l� ..e.\ 1 1'J�z-�.si 1/L II.��I _y 1 •e• , �il aTll �' 1��^+J�®i'�?��I �.�. : •q .�„ 0 M1Y �\`h�L.. '�•�'�•�fo- 1+0i L. N yI� �'� ,Ilt�.. F!- e Li LltI.L tl. •L^.�I.1�.� V I �• a„ T \. w h •� ' ,L.� 0• E FALL L ` PET La tat fir—: I 9 � ✓-•�; I� 11 / �. r'V.� .9I/3P-.33 P � 1-i Nn L7Z5 v + 01'�P t. L._2 .n7 • ^ 'b 11gp ' �,•� 1� i Nevs 1 F25� P e° bon y�.� "�1 d� ���- �i+ iI! i �.L�� f•;tt.0. ... �'��J..4'�1b,16h \ �">�v_ � T ./ li NORTH CITE' OF ��,. ITE-VI: RANCHO CUCA TMONGA TITLE: PLANNING. DIVEON EXHIBIT.-� SCALE'!` i .I IliII1L li,t�illl!1 i i I1�1 +• H OO ly NURM CITY OF RANCHO aTi Ql 9GA TITI E: ,. PLNNhNG DIVISION fl EXHIB[T- SCALE=_ / 5 f G 1, NMI NORM. CITY OF RANCHO CLTCNMONGA VLAMING DIVISQN EXHIBPr: _SCALE. t- ss :; 12105 % �titi5 1I znrc ),�Qf• I����. 5 `:� TZ/.22f.S. a S /ZZi%Zf.S.�$�4�?• � �` .5•- vo ''tG �r���' t�• �S i l�/Z�j� ' :l :zz�i 33 FS 1��.5 1''l� . �- It- \ 1'�\�1�7�/B_:sL/:G. As 1\f f _`'vim,z. ti�. '1 - fOR P�PEC/5'E G,PAO%N6,rs'9,PGSCAPE }n� Gt•:� CONSTP!/C7/G}t!STEPS!�'OLLS,Ems' !, Olr q�c�-• � WllfJ/N TN/S� PEA�A.PDUNI!T.NE � � ?r,1v'o ��i c �� J!{p/NG SE TiYE L QNOSC.9PE ,ti0 A�Cf/%:ECTS PLArt'S by A e ti 0 l R P bra►�� �o� ^� �� � I \ r t, jj . P �P _ y INDRTH CITE' OF iTENi: RATNTCHO CUCA MONGA TtTI.E: PLANNING Dr'VISION e e R�� '�iy' �� � pp ti:-__ Lip .-ye � , �� _� 0; � tl _o' I i a � a� '�/ oopee.� a ose•des-0�` a o d f � �s a � ,u • a o � $ a �Y � ` � d a o � _ O ¢ O � as a�,,,•.:__� � - -� a s .. a ,a � o q m o {___� O.y o �T" a a�C� q;m® .� d, oatNO.O QOR P � ��-.rota'-'-'.e 0 g p � �D � Q� 0 p 9 J ���'� - a ' .o ar Sa o �� _ o �a°'� O� �� o- � ��iJt'Q l� -...fi, E �p�y � � __ �OcP.pa-.�E'.a.-,,,..,,•�� Y„�' S►D ��• ap -. oo � v. � r �DOO � YI '� iGr .a• �' ,� ;,�. a ice' i � .j t � t p] IMF oif .I 1 7 L• �AaTM G!-0KITbV - • •�n�a'T CfsY lq� - - _ Oak 14P Il 1 ORTH CITY RANCHO CC"OT GA. TITLE:-- ,_ PLANNING DIVISION �� EXHIBIT= SCA-LE: CITY' OF 'RANCHO CUCAMONGa PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRON;IENTAL CHECKLIST DATE._ APPLICAN•i z_�'. fSMOA/ C'`9 FILISG DATE: (-• 85 LOG MIBER: �5► � PROJECT: �Tc,�o r p12!/ G l� 7diL iq n,•T ?'��ii-UAJ6 2I flilaS�,F PROJECT LOCATION: �Ia�flFw„/T I. ENVIROM ENTAL I11PACTS (Explanation of all"yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and GeoloR . Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Uc,stable ground conditions or in 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 V of any unique geologic or physical features? 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? 9. 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 ot'extraction and/or {� use of any mineral resource? 2. tIydroloeY. Wi 1 the proposal have significant results in• �9 Page 2 YES MAYBE No a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? / b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage Pattern.. ✓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 anv body of water? e. Discharge into 'surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? — f. Alteration of groundwater characters ?sties. g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, r either through direct atditions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? 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. Air Quality, Will the proposal have significant results sae a. Constant or periodic air emissions frog mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sources? 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, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? k. Biota Elora. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change ip 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? ?age 3 YES )L4YBE N0 c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of Plants into an-area? i. Reduction is the potential for agricultural / production': t/ Fauna. Will the proposal•have significant results in: a. Change in the charat:teristies of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers / of any species rf animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? ✓ c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or / y wildlife habitat? 5. Population. WIU the proposal have significant results in: 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 affoct existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Socio-Economic. Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in lccal or regional Socio-economic i characteristics, including economic or I comr.ercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, k 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? A conflict with any designations, objectives, policiea, or adopted plans of any governmental t entities? V E a .. _. c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing cans mptive or non-consumptive recreational opportunities? Page 4 YES ;GYBE NO 8, Trsinstorintion. Will the propcsal have significant results in: • a. Generation of si.bstsn •ial additional vehicular movement?' b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for net? street construction?C. ✓ Effects on existing parking fac l:tizs, or demand for lnew parking? - / d, Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion ;systems? f e. Alterations to present patterns ofla- -- `—// circu tion or mvement of people and/or goods? s V f. Alterations t,, or effects on present and f potential water-borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? V/ g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? / 9. Cultural Resources- Will the proposal have if signicant results in a• A disturbanz.e to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, an&/or historical resources? 10. Health. Safety and Nuisance Factors. Will the R 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 substances explosion eventrofeas an accident?of does 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 i>. existing noise levels?'y �p f., Exposure of people to potentially d,.ngerous noise levels? / $. The creation of objectionable odors? V h. An increase in light or glares / 5 Page 5 YES HAYBE NO Aft 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results i - a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b. the creation of an aethetically offensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors?' ' 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? V b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Communications systems? d. Water supply? / e. Wastewater facilities? /J f. F sL lood control structures?ructures. g. Solid waste facilities? f h. Fire protection? f - i. Police protection? V J. Schools? f k. Parks or other retrew.Lonal facilitie _ v� I. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? !` m. Other governmental services? 13. Enemy and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: P. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? _ b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? f c. An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non-renewable fords of energy, when feasible renewable sources of ene:;gy are available? Page 6 YES 1�YBE NO e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable_or scarce natural resource? 14. Mandatory Findinrts of Signifi ,e 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 below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a gslant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare orendangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impa. t on the environment is one which occurs in a re Atively brief, definitive period of time while tong- term impacts will endure well into the future), _ f c. Dc_s the project have impacts which are individually lim=zed, but cumulatively cons ider,='.'a e (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable When viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects), d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effect-; / on human beings, either d�,,ectly or indirectly? II. DISCI?SSION OF ENFIRONMEN-'- EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures), ' ah r;. `GR p� Page 7 4 III. DETER.MINATIm On the basis of Chic initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT hAve a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECT,ARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could havit a significant. effect on the environment, there wil' not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation ±asures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, A NEGATIVE DECLARATIo;1 WILL BE PREPARED. ElI find the proposed project ave a si nifica eff t on the envirnnent. and an E,TVIRO:i`MNT HPACT REP T i requi ed, J, Date Signature Title AML .xl Mu aLim^,uou u�.� L•- u� a$�r�. cqc _u�.+ma G C O q {M{..�O FF„O.O YUL p..ul q 6aEf��Y d a •Y�+M ifU O EG YY j t L O n C 9vw yt qW N NL'YO oa of � A_ uve aar. d 0 1.d nu�. cep p '^ i�u aci q La 4 aYw.O.y OI cVd pb �. �nYV4v LcO L dYt,i r aov'.qnq u+ ti yuc eat n a 2 ty C G E d�a .L Z=d�d L.E gyOj CwY Z.O. GC.N xC ZO40 yG L.a` L Y.N CLU L N.�G, u n a d q 0 0 O p q .• C C C p gq p N a + E G r 9C NNV,. Oa >+ilaN Nq +LCp • dOp O. 8 = r n ES t!E + � Y uON LO4y G q O V d.. a v 4 Y L ♦ �y O L R.D r+,VI qd+ 6d'r� 4 > G>•-�Y.� a E .• L >O O 'O9 p o:'•-��,p Fqa eYLi � to q.5}. +om. nao.o cy�u du .c t,s'.:S a a+ o�u EL a.�.o ay8 d. N G �dsOi Opo.rn c m I 6�L ZY I '-.-I a L + E a t y n+ tO N G.1y- 4 \ \\\\1 6 L.qU b p ( S NI �1•lI. v'I b�. f N m TV L L. - �J +Y ( Y � '•�y a�y 0 0 J E O n I11 'Y xx EEE C d F d 0 d d �+2 O O A « g L d CN EN 0`.v S Y d N ty-1'N Ol da•O w `. Y an4c �' I YN9a YNu C ql. y t„O O O O • V. 4L�' OG 2N`V•r • Lf q C G M Y. ia'G+ Ow OR-O.O-q SAN G 7 C w p^OQh d�A:M U ~ C � K Y q • :a ti. O cH4.4 Y p.r.M a 4 q t �1 E V=du t0 �� d «r✓C C b EE?a 0 O V C N a T W L d. a« • a L E✓IL L rn L 1.�O.do q 3 i d r E E � ✓N L O� IGr p ba n ,yq ub � O N VO Sn yiL E q .0 y� p0 . r. ^q <.oy. ✓ Nb � a of u N't o_rn 2 � b Tu E q L C V C ✓O 6 C L d�.l O W • as a •^ N N ai^ q •904.0^ qw Hcua � « qL Q.^ _ 24 ° o Z 6LNL OZ��L Oid- nNCCOId Nb L O1 3C ��] u �: so�c coubiq 6 N'"o dq*1-L d y,ur '• aL:.6 g•a •n �� G � r L O j d r L. _ t n`� w q L. dO Uq by aS.Cu UC� b 02i Lv QR. pp q L 6tJ � NE> E qq ate, aN'N L .MAY G. U pCdlO� ^O N T w L ✓ `�' � N L G OnG bl^E �E':i Vq.•. cu w� dU y^ 1 p. �� NdC am pb REi.0 NN,p y_O go00a q q OI OCJ M prU ' pNca aai � R^ En Eyb O. V.Yep' O qh NC'•L. 9N C O WN y C q qE 7W _ y✓ O v�H tib>rC >�b Na d q y T�to p C� w•'•�H N L V>� «RY sb>.� ✓ uiq a aL qx r.Nw. vcE p.o," L r�u no q C 19 Q d 09 0 L 9 c y' C Z>C 4 1T yV CEE L Eb L 014 A" V~ u q.D LOTinuy Ya eEw C N G d d F q G a q U^w d C L 66»n6 4w SC V01 bNLk S»d0 4Vu�i Ndw+-6 W••C��= dC .LLLm✓d u•166 u wn'ad dss �w R 'dC.'.ub ob ay'y_w da,r b o q o- �o n A a Qsq aLi� � J a. .NL.• c = w ca s.-. > rbd. R,.,o L L.o aqw ur � rb '«Moa %a. +' NT Ord ` c qo .+Fsdb`.]'>•_... c=E ✓N. oo�w Lw ao« o. am��' pp qx S. sr Qyn�a w..CdC—`e w.a s>'. o, n. +'�� o_ �qc`��• djCT Cn Q �6 Y� CEu dYf O l�Eo ANwuq .�N q u. da RY. « ✓ a E ?✓ O �•J T q✓R .y b 'p N L N T y O. s b V L 1S1 a b� a. .. G C L>^"• .n q T.u� nob i l�Yu _ BUY.. y'O r, >bl p.i Olga N� uG C.L Ckt »l CO C i •ice - C N •VW b o.a A A b a.i 6 ¢$.n ,•n J;U o A u d O Y M d u r " a oba " s. Ls ur Jad: d C�v 9 !,�N N ...: �V~x CI O•^b L N y N d.O C 'Ea. O.q 6 O b=c F 0 y. 1 L b u p .� L r �U L-!V 0.L. r q; `Ua� LbLL CL. C✓yb ab Ob C ezT C Jyq ..0 CWI yy � d0: .0 a � wqf >b O E.arY•• S d.q aN V O ba d« Eq: L U .Ci �S.0� y ,,.»ems^+•. p � N•U N.V b N au y 1`"» � p.«s,L a E •`_ «� � a\o � �•A+::h o.tgil N c a,.o..ac Up> b V Cb q R OldH O. O� Cb:. L y> u O u E b _ yd.0 L R•L-y as pi dOb b p OWb.-O.,V uY C>yU uLC Cq� _; N d avp• �i0 4 iQRR3 L d. n 410Ib?u a V.ROE a .. � 6Sp N6 ':^_CNC Q�.�p NqA. 61t J«4 G.V Nr OI.C+� !^uYwGC h.•CiNKR O.. N N H N ti y C aoA� ao a it aF o,o cL.od— Ni•-.o cr aL .L U dL So of a o n ?a 'O d nw. a o a(a o o BE Y A L +6 a u. ,EaaL av »sA ou 4J --HUH-1 0 N d< •.V F W �Y L u.�^ u Eui dnN Nq Ur 4 OQ.C. mU .O Ol p� k A LNc O'd v d c C L.J AC Ap.O.0 i Po dAa n. .aeAl r pdC c 1i do Nd — c 61y 'a L.F,.� La ^enC y ••y n�o�" r. a C2e Yr NCL Nd Onq O u . Y vel 900 ae vLo C �� YLI i do d Y A- ` d� Z jO f•l i0 4 Le OO n61 C+��a E TLV Y0- ^ CUNOO OL .ad�C u 110 �NU� aY.F.o d a L o Oc n d o f y u L y N u O a E cN r n`c oq'e_c i.c _ F d M 6.€. S N L N E N E » ^.-..L L q o \\]V I N 2 N w^ 6 1e N`9 I� G�N Y g i a N 6.0 6 o e C 0 C 13 p o 6 A 6 ^J c L y�N .O I•d'A L O U CIS ca N EFTl S. q 0 SAX 6 A.F. _6 i*a • vi �q NLi[G SC O•� LC SaJ p g y C . dM =�6 y ...0. O a E U a y d a� A Q F •_ O zL COd 1 o 'C: y,t Y aL rn.YaL a uc • G.GC y.E Ld,� c H u a u0 c Aa c. NOCy O — C�v 7 ea d d L «u SnnN dpdoa: •.�6 •+ CC LC, n �Ndu yU pnCG ;. ApYq m ^.FF.- q r a =N N U h- wa ^ d ^ a Od yL iL.Y d p.FUY Ya. u car A p.L dt d L a >..aL. a L Lam c C'L.�' i1L Y� UCN LC V 4 d O N N U o1J Fc— T 1.0 Y 4 L y 33 E« O r c N C?.> a qw0.Lp Oa •., Qa}?O QAb@ �� �aN .d�clrQi ia2 60 i�ON.`-.Le q06 sLM6U W�.'LfNNt 4 _ � W C C t L �z� ON TN A ^ •�O L .ly . dtT c � � Et�.•. Cd aCC n�qA to 14. ^h - E C O S D O�W Y � 2 u C • �.. !•K L �6 ILLQ.L Y O /- m2dE. ••.pLL NE NE Ld u E e G..dcz E tOd ..uv.•.p AY.Ed RE a • G; G 4E iJ OA L"r V JLa.O tLL C O y ' •u pN V OEi Cu" �` E V Y L t=Ud O O)d.Gd N O+O•C t O Ea 2 NNLL� Au tJ r. N. >u 6Ep N YO d NWN p: Z wan Aid LL_ � 6 du CY dC \.dd ad A Y ut drpt V OL O U A a=N q L d u U D O •^ .r.y Y O ^• D .In N u n y TZ 6 W =n N ` d C !• m a L E Coro dy€,,.q CL N dUC C u C Y A E O q fxO.t Y U G u dud ^a E a O F 6 �Y pp a �dL uL A�UY. Od emu. C >O y D Y u U•.�O i L W N T g D G C y tT •"•a O'^ pt 4 o Y N �L O Na•"• 61 E N Y� A EE Q d j CO dda u� _ L a dt U uti_•AW COurO h>•_-•�< C IN"I .- e` uu. ..�. m emu.. NEE �9 cai d gg qL Ag u.-.ddTd �O) n L N n Wa( �•��tuL Lva a o L EC. •^ n� 1-mmA f4`u ]L LLLN G. t-AA _ f-tj 6u6Ot�1IYi. R.+2- N AVM qL Ca E. aG Y.^� NadO s0 uYr Ad uOI W E �euu O _ U. otr EdD c c Du a u•' O A • a Nam, �' L 6 C u L^C p d • 6Y d aLe m° d..vo _: 4L 0 Auu ai Ga c u•�U u .^L .'CZt q d'^ L auOt. NW �N d.t� a N a'. C d=O �„•G V O Y d L D Eb N, A� �� E N >'O a E • N1 MdL 01 G A O. O O2^ T�O':q -u Cuy a d ND Ott GN L�� VL` u pp O y a a E CE Mgg d i 6.y V U �u�. AV Nwl n N•)q �L C'd d. � A L • N N A S p) W c o JO d O •�u�`. d L d t`Or s 6N D O. L u 9.0 L ma TtTi. D OTa da G Y LnaE On NL O �U Oq NSG O nL. p�. w c L d a H Ebu^ •AOO d C yY E )dn .2 d q0>•Q tT Y"dA0 Nu GpL,r-�, On IL �•�y'L a y) Ty CN q.�ean Qn N>� E'.q� N� qN NLjO d q. �' FF !� !•O u me dia NW A L T YDf u L +^ CG DbT O)Y &9, LW.ory •ci NN d W V aL CO d �j dCM ��EE L 6 u r G 'i N ^ f•O X. N F•O •.!d O t-N�a uM N.N 2a� .iLE 6 rm�A.�• 60..m uYci N+• V ni b too "u-02 w riu L o .Nona ^Y rdq JINI^Oo qEu � A YM.-.9-. oft E r u U d •a 0 v j Z h a J d LC N L N � dp0 .c- tq dc7. LC T O vE�w 'pa yqa b=c NCUa. C.04. ay ay � a4ar 4yW A LE � wLi L O C l d.A N O c d.4 � yAL V L yO+ n 9Y ypr � � L V caL+•t r•+d 0 2.0 C •.• A O L o O ..LO.d a p �qG . ♦a..,^ir � dHM ON�y •c cWC S:` O.N '• .Or9 E9 •Ot C cA O 2 c E^•�pQb N d.Qi^ �.Oii d 1 ME pz0 nZA p N a T C 6- w q A W E� CL �n 6.N ,• V n L a `oa ywN. ZLd d c a9 r d L• r V OY.p..y. cc T Oa. �'E o• N.. uF C LYi q 2 LLmP 6.0 V. O01N .0. �Iru .•a - Cq. L 6 ci �Jp N w ^ OWd u i d L yee O o w pYp. _N IJ9 6 N 6'+p+pi 6 6 4M Q O + Sr it LL7 a d L a Lad CT O J q a L 9 m r u i p r 44 o^ o a` N �n e r pA«pp F cr c '^ O LTO Q• 01 d ICY CNM_ EEz P.iE b N bOE a '$.94. O d^ ) 6U C CC O y � ^y. w c ^p ME p c q d Y EE 7w. 6 d D.e b yma �A p� ONdvCL- Au ve c 39 y6 FF �F. .22 •+ V C L aw M dy.LL �La�i_G Rwp a h0 py a^wiw d•1 U �L. Y .LLiA N. O. Oq ^w. aL Ja aom q Jv n. " n O c y^. d cob w d d9.0 A V=. rb.,A Ea G Y O O U G V 4 q .a r O O C O V E O. b C 0 O C a O.. !�C c 6' O m M V d. •_L �.c q u As U a..V L O.`,`O d Y u y C u ,c C a •'o dt rq r V N 4 6 U u O V 4 aw N c m c�4r � Po cM' Jv o'. n.ic+ c.�.Ni+ �Au'.y . 4 -,a—, Q, On E.•L 41Np W4V �.G. fJ�'6T. 6� 40 6O�u 1�0 6 A ,p y r N+T+OL L O -p L a L. ddd . Ld .. ... ^ t Al- L a L v~ v a^ o N o o v c G4 j � O C� G �L LCZ�yJOi CC T W O•= T _ oA a�i1T w NQvu N �• SL�,y^. P.. N OITUYE Cp dny y w� y9 Tr a NQ '„� G aq Y COn ECL F O O.p� FV dL _~ S uV y E:O�?6 OT d :d0L N cr -Ell m na u y u �.q.' =..N qu L.^.. u °J ace ao .pL.p c+9aou a .e..y r. d w L u n'95•5v. c du d`o U pppT EA V PP W nY O TG C 'EL G TNL EL �d 9L � EaNgO O LC uT O. E ^W. w Ug00 N = L k `��L C mad N fl Qgg Oq T u V�9 O LN Y 16 6.6-5�0+. p.0u� p LW� 6W 6 Wu.N Lti So t]O 6 v e 1� m 4 T ,.�i ti � �I to �p.y,o VY Er.. �d N3L 6C6.� NJ �j b66+�Op . . ,O-o C� Gq EL C� y# • � y € LEA YO.L T NL sC0 'C •. C CcT d • pL �e � �s p GN Co d o Tq L NE Eb NO � !�ddds p 7[ N tlW Tf L yp.C. �O. r.�p qp GVOEN Epp USE.. UOI m .J O O�� 6.N Q04 W S L YNAMG Q.L 1i^ W U 2 ti q = c qa u RE 'c^ c u rpiuN V C+• N N A H • u aupi S .si N C � d w• � a L � A V. 09 a� M • C L 2.. GAU Uy wpp y b C y rr »6!P 6L ON C y 2 C) pr r + p O N.C Vd UN. L a.N t CrM mC pp 21 . A u yU L �� • d C r a ?�s• N G n N U L y UM p7C E yN E` A" y�y Y� OW OD q E 0.9Yu D � 1 4 O 6 y VM •O+,d y0• 4. 11..CT w Q C O L O L G..q..�L O. ~ L hito c M y ` p q Q N Lu W O M� a` n Y . � ..,ON GN p 4 R NL raw . O i p p p )C p .CU s s"' c L i s d ti pu op Ma o'v u P uw a Nav q� Lu N c pL a 1 i ; y.y .L+ qqo i yL uuv n p Y A}., ,� O Lcvon �V q _ Tr. yU W .5wti pc e. Is .L cp YN a $ e n s^ V LLpp �� an Gr N. U A= q U a U 2 A p N O wo c cu c moY c w.� c LA` co) urn �� I�i "') V.M Ol a)M.q C Ap6. PjCW QiW O nT. Y_ Lc0 CNLL UN OLL D't L L A •'� Y'^ G S QOC gfui{Gt M YQ Or yY C ' LL •.q U aOO SLi U O VV. � W dnnNC ♦..ice. CU �+- ,,CC Ur� L MTA� b.L yU. nF a :YV u• 1•�Y.V 4�6N Lv�i q A y • a .A. e1 N f•1 f N {D h fJ 'P� •�-1 M RESOLUTION NO. AM A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING CCOMMISSION APPROVING DEVELu MENT REVIEW NO. 85-43 FOR AN OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HAVEN AVENUE IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 21st day of November, 1985, a complete application was filed by Christeson Company for review of-the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 8th day of January, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above-described project and continued the meeting to February 12,1986; and WHEREAS, on the 12th day of February, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the 1p objectives of the Genera? Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord 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 eacn of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; n and 4. That the proposed use, together with th= conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or salfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. ' SECTION 2: That this project will not create adversa impacts on the a environment and that a Negative Declaration was issuel on June 8, 1983 for the Master Plan, CUP 83-07. SECTION 3: Taat Development Review No. 85-43 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard-Conditions: P ANNING D VISLON Alk '. All pertinent conditions of CUP 83-07, as cont«ir, d in Resolution 83-79 shall apply. Resolution No. - DR 85-43 - Christeson Company February 12, 1986 Page 2 2. A texturized pedestrian connection shall be provided to the Del Taco Restaurant to the satisfaction of the City Planner.. 3. A texturized pedestrian walkway shall be provided to connect to the northerly project -- the Deer Creek Shopping Center. The developers of both projects shall coordinate the location of this pedestrian walkway. Details shall be included in the Landscape Plans to be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 4. if a fence is to be built along the northern property boundary it shall be coordinated with the northerly developer and shall be of wrought iron or similar material. Details shall be included in the Landscape Plan to be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior to issuance of building peg mits. S. The arbors shall be planted with vines. Further, creeping varieties of vines or ivy shall be planted against walled surfaces throughout the project, reminiscent of the original winery. 6. Minimum 5-gallon size trees shall be provided ih planters along east and north elevations to the satisfaction of the City Planner. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON3A F BY• Dennis L. S out, Chairman ATTEST. t . Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 Coiinission held on the 12th day of February, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GVCAM0 STAFF REPORT �je "��� v v a DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO:: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brune Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: GRADING OF CUSTOM LOT SUBDIVISIONS I. ABSTRACT: The purpose of this report is to receive palicy direction regarding grading of custom lot tracts. Staff is recommending that the Development Code policies on gc•ading be revised to allow greater flexibility to deal with varying site conditions., II. BACKGROUND: The Develipm nt Code distinguishes between two types of u divisions. "Tract Subdivisions" are the more traditional AMbk form whereby the developer subdivides the 13nd into individual lots and then builds a mouse on each of the lots frort a previously approved set of house plans. Once constructed, these tract homes -are then offered for sale to individuals for residence. A "Custom Lot Subdivision" is a case where subdivided lots are sold in their undeveloped state to individuals who then buiid Mouses on these lots an a one-by-one basis. Per the Development Review process of the City, before home sites can be constructed, grading plans must be approved. With tract subdivisions, mass grading occurs over the entire site, including both streets and lot si..e�. However, grading vA th custom lot subdivisions is limited to sreet-_ only and also to trails, when applicable. The Development Code does not permit mass grading of lot sites with custom lot subdivisions. Mass grading should be distinguished from "padding" out of the E lots. Padding of lots is characterized by cut and fill slopes to create terraced, flat, building pads. Mass grading involves grading techniques that are sensitive to natural terrain, such as contour grading and variable slope bank gradients. (King Ranch :'Estates is an example of mass grading). III. ANALYSIS: The operative word in the definition of custom lot E subdivisions is individual; custom lot subdivisions, as opposed to tract home developments, are where the person owns a raw, piece of ':-!std and has the opportunity to design a custom home specifically suited to the site constraints. To encourage a variety of housing styles and site planning techniques, thn Deve.'.,3pment Code limits gradint. for custom lot subdiv g'dons to streets'only, and requires build'iogs to be designed to fit the natural topography. ITEM N PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Gradinq of Custom Lot Subdivisions February 12, 1986 Page 2 Limiting grading to streets onl;, requires that each lot be graded independently in a self-contained manner. There are some situations where an individual, lot-by-lot grading scheme becomes impractical. The physical constraints of &he site may require certain techniques such as rear yard cross-lot drainage, shared use and maintenance of slope banns, etc. In these situations, for these techniques to work, grading of lots becomes interdependent upo►i adjoining lots. This type of scheme can only be reasonably expected to function if the site is graded on a comprehensive, mass grading program. In situations such as this, the Development Code requirement limiting the grading to streets only for custom lot subdivisions can present obstacles that severely inhibit the ability: to develop a particular project site with a feasible, workable_solution. The primary source of the problem is that, as it currently exists, this Development Code requirement applies as a universal standari to all projects regardless of special or unique circumstances. It is staff's opinion that a reasonable solution to this di Umma would be to still require this limitation or, grading for custom lot subdivisions as the primary direction but to provide the flexibility to allow comprehensive grading of the site when special . .circumstances warrant such a solution Another aspect for consideration is the issue of minimal grading versus usable yard space. Grading policy of the City has always been to minimize grading and to design built structures to fit the natural topography as much as possible, This Pulicy is reflected in Development Code criteria for grading stipulating the creation of minimal building pad areas. Rnwever, another City policy is the creation of flat, usable ;,ard areas for single family developmtmts. This policy is reflected in the Development Code criteria for a minimal 15, usable rear yard per single family homes. Bath arp useful and necessary policies to promote design standards to eshieve a high quality li,ring environr^ent. However, staff has recently experienced situations in which the implementat•'in of both policies concurrently for the same project ,,.has proven to be problematic. � i The problem is that these two policies can he mutually exclusive of each other; to implement one is done ct the expense of the other. If grading of the site is kept to a minimum, this obviously inhibits the ability to provide flat, usable yard space. On the- other hand, to provide flat, usable yard space obviously implies more extensive grading of the site. Because of these situations in which two City policies are h�Fdirect conflict with each other i.e., the implementation of ore limitinq the impiementat{on of this. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Grading of Custom Lot Subdivisions February 12, I9PS Page 3 4 C other, staff has had difficulties in resolving design a inconsistencies of project submittals in making then; conform to A City Standards. Staff is requesting the CommissitW s disnussion of this issue to provide staff feedback and direction in establishing priorities so that when these two policies of minimal site grading versus flat, usable yard area are in conflict with each other, there is a consensus policy as to which direction to proceed. Ili. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission direct the'Staff to prepare for the Commission's review a Development Code Amendment that would amend the section that now limits grading of custom lot subdivisions to streets only, to where this limitction on grading for streets only is still the primary direction for custom lot subdivisions, but where also a degree of flexibility is permitted to allow mass grading for the project area when site conditions warrant it r, deemed appropriate by the responsible agency of the City. Respectfully submitted Brad Buller City Planner BB:BC:ns Attachments: Development Code Definition of Custom Lot Subdivision Development Code Section Limiting Grading of Custom Lot Subdivisions to Streets Only t i �w t( jj[ u� 5eetiwn 17.02,i-0 SUBDIVIDER: A person;h rm,corporation,partnership,or associatc who proposes Aft to divide, divides, or causes to be divided real property Into a sobdivislan for himself or for,others; except that employees and consultants of such persons or entities,acting in such capacity,are not"Subdividers". SUBDIVISION: —he division of a lot, tract or Marcel of land into two or more lots, tracts,parcels:or other divisions of land for safe,development w ltase. 'SUBDIVISION,CUSTOM LOT: A subdivision wi.ch creates parcels to be sold in an • ' undeveloved state to individual owners for development of not mare than four units per owner. SUBDIVISION, TRACT: A subdivision which creates five or more parcels to be developed as a whole by an owner or builder, T TOT LOT: An improved and equipped play area for small children usually up to elementry school age. TOWNHOUSE: A building subdivided-into individual units such that each owner owns the unit structure inn the land upon which the unit is Located,plus a common Luterest in the land upon which the building is located. TRAIL, COMMUMPY: A trail,generally 20 feet in width,which is a segment of a planned trail system,'intended to lln•c local feeder trails with the regional trail system,and designed and improved for riding and hiking purposes. TRAIL. EQUESTRIAN: A tra. which ;s a segment of a pl&ined trail system designed,improved,and intended to be used for horseback riding purpo �s. TRAIL, LOCAL FLEDER: A trail, generally 15 feet in width, which is a segment of a planned trail system,intended to provide access to the rear of residential lots from the community*or regional trail system,ead designed and improved for riding and hiking purposes. TRAIL, REGIONAL MULTI-PURPOSE: A trail, generally 30 feet in width and located along flood control and utility corridors ?ntended to connect residential areas with regional parks, scenic canyons, the national forest, and ether major open spaces,and desigted and improved for riding,hiking,and bleyelinsr purposes. TRAVEL TRE,1,ER: A vehicle other than a motor vehicle, which is designed or used for human habitation and For tra iel or recreational purposes which does not at any time exceed eight(8)feet in width and for`y(40) feet in length and which may be moved upon r, public highway without a special permit or clisufreur's license or both without violating any provisions of the California Vehicle Code, !t TRANSITIONAL AREA: An area which acts as a'`uffer between two land uses of Cifferent intensity. TRUCK TERMINAL: A lot, lot area or parcel of land used, desigm�d or maintained for the purpose of storing, parking, refueling,repairing, dispatel:inc, servicing or keeping motor trucks and associate equipment together with thy:, facilities necessary to service, dispatzh,- store or maintain aforementioned vehicles, their cargos and crews. `s -38— sy„y Section 17.06.010 4. Development Review Committee. The Development Review Committee, is comprised of members of the Community Development Department, Planning, Engineering,, and Building and Safety Division; the Cucamonga County Water District;the Foothill Fire.Protection District and the Sheriff's Department. Review by.his Committee will consider items,such as,bull not limited to circulati`rq street improvements; right-of-way dedication; utility easements; grading; drainage facilities; storm drain improvements; uniform building code requirements;security; fare flow; emergency access;location of fire hydrants; Water and sewer line connections and sizing; water pressure; permit fees; streetscape and landscape standards; setbacks; paridng; and requirements for environmental processing. The Committee will require changes in any development for complia ace with adopted codes and standards. They may also make reconimenootions to the City Planner and Planning Commissson on any policy issues or areas not covered by existing codes and standards. 5. Grading Committee. The Grading Committee,comprising of representatives of each Division of the Community Development Department will consider items such as, taut no'. limited to, cut and fill areas; drainage and Blood control facilities:.erosion control;retaining walls;and the effect of proposed grading on adjacent properties.. Ti::s Committee will determine if the Grading Plan meets City grading guidelines and policies. T`ie dscision of the Grading Committee will be forwarded to the City Plannee or Planning Commission and will be based on the following criteria as well as *he City's ad^pted Grading Ordinance: (a) To provide a variety of housing styles and site planning techniques, grading within custom lot subdivisiois shall occur for streets oniv. s Built structure:: must be designed to .fit the natural topography as much as possible. (b) To reduce the.impact of grading on adjacent pre^erties,har,,i edges left by cut and fill operations shall be given a rounded appearance pp that closely resembles the natural contours of the land. i.. t �� D GgVlaGut�C�. 8w<1c ' 6•yVK� M�'+�fY IN SL.Cr' . cwc=5aMcn4zAL �atlra s A =lvolw 27 SAN,• AAATVAZAL RESEMG[1JV3 (c) The character of the natut-id terrain st'41 be preserved wherever possible. In hillside_areas,the creation of levrrl arras,such as building pads, shall be minimized. However,where 1:�vel %yeas are necessary, grading conc(';;ts ravU provide variety in the steepness of slopes and configuration. "n nom o G?a a u CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LvCA STAFF REPORT O O Z a DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM; Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Alan Warren, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: "PERSONAL SERVICE" USE PROVISIONS, INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN, HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT I. BACKGROUND: At the January 8, 1986 meeting the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP 85-41) authorizing the establishment of a travel agency in an Office/Industrial Park within the Haven Overlay District of the Industrial Specific Plan (I.S.P.). During the review of this act-rs, Commissioner Pempel questioned the need for the use permit procasa for a travel agency office. Staff has prepared this report in response to that inquiry. II.• ANALYSIS: The I.S.P. set the basic use provislons for the entire Industrial Area when enacted in August, 1931. This document permitted the development of industrial, rasearch and development, and office uses in the Specific Plan area a,zd provided for conditionally permitted commercial support activities in selected areas. A general category of support activity which is conditionally rermitted in the I.S.P. is "Personal Services", which is defined in the Plan as follows: Personal Services: Activities typically include, but are not limited to: information, instruction, and s'.milar services of a personal nature. Uses typically include, but not limited to, driving school's, day care facilities, travel bureaus,, and photography studios. Subarea 6 of the I.S.P., in which the travel agency is to be located, allowed for the establishment of "Personal Services", subject to Conditional Use Permit approval (Exhibit "A")„ In March of 1985, the City enacted .the Maven Avenue Overlay Ri:'rict in an effort to enhance a major boulevard entry into the City. While it was recognized that select ancillary commercial and b;:0ness support services were seeded to strengthen the desired prot.ssional development on Haven, a 20% floor area restriction for commercial support services was placed upon any development ITEM 0 -77 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT . • "Personal Service" Use Provisions abruary 12, 1986 Page 2 Aft Section B.2 Exhibit 911 . i f ) he Conditional Use Permit mechanism � was included to monitor and enforce the commer6ai floor area limitations of the "Persrna' Services" provisions of the Overlay Distract. The use permit process was establi ,hed to, nriiate flexibility e 1bility necessary to achieve. the objectives of:the Development Code and General Plan. Selected uses in each district are allowed only, subject to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit, because of their unique site develupment requirements and operating characteristics which require special consideration in order to operate in a manner compatible with surrounding-uries. Section B.3 of the Haven Overlay District requires a Conditional Use Permit for "Personal Services" (Exhibit "B"). Staff believes the use permit provisions of the Overlay District are appropriate measures to monitor and regulate the extent of personal service uses in the area. III. RECOMMENDATIm: It is recr::mnended that the Planning 'Coniiission conside-r all material input regarding this issue. If after such Consideration the Commission determines that a CUP is not appropriate for personal services within the Haven Overlay District, then the Commission should direct staff, by minute action, to prepare an amendment to the district use regulations to be considered during the Commission's discussion of the Industrial Specific Plan Amendments currently in process. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:AW:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A:' dse Regulations, Subarea 6, I.S.P. Exhibit ''B" Use Regulations, Haven Overlay District r. al! -a / SUBAREA $ i General Plan Designation Industrial Park Adh Primary-Function _Subarea 6, is 'located on both east and west sides of Haven Avenue extending South from Arrow to 4th r Street. While some'existing manufacturing uses exist around the ATESF track, the area is substaA- tially undeveloped. In the future, Haven Avenue will serve as a major access and gateway to the City. Develop _nt'is this subarea will provide for the high quality character associated with "Office Park" type development. Permitted Uses Custom Manufacturing Light Manufacturing Light Wholesale, Storage and Distribution Administrative and Office Building Maintenance Services Business. Supply Retail Sales and Services Business Support Services Communication Services Eating and Drinking Establishments Financial, Insurance and Real Estate Services l Hotel/Motel' Medical/Health Care'Services Professional Servic— Administrative Civi Brvices AMIL Conditional Uses Automotive Rental Automotive/Light Truck Repair-Minor Automotive Sales Automotive Service Station Building Supplies and Sales Convenience Sales and Services Entertainment Fast Food �l Food and Beverage Sales 4 Funeral and Crematory Services --tea Personal Services Recreational Facilities Cultural Public Assembly j; Public Safety and Utility Services Religious Assembly I NORTH Y O RANCHO C�LTCAMOI'GA 'TITLE:use WL2LAr1QUS S65kAEA G,r.;,P PLANNING DIVISIaN - E}CHII3iT. •, _. A SCALE. Om .no.No.249 Ord. Hs, u Page 2 Page 39 nanee A,Goal Statement l Conditional.Uses Conveniende Sale.A Servlcei Eatertalemant Gauls are statements that define the Food and m.Beverage Sale comontty'. Aspiration and intentioha. The _ Fast F.ad Sale. ' Val forth.Havea Avenue ec:•ridar has evolved Hotel/Mote1 from..331 vltn the ladnatrlal.aM!bAsinAsO Par.onal Service., ecesunitLos and with the Clty's elected and _ Mcreaticn Facilities Appointed officials. This go 1 repra...ts the. Public Assembly current eoneaptlem of and future ampiretians ^ublic safety.A.Utility Services for the best Interest of the Cary for the Rellgtoua Aa...bly Haven Avenue corridor. - eflolllary Uses Linked. to 20% of the a development loos-the I mtvtet- 'plemod floor area par B.2. which amemt Along the H 1 s corridor dby BA Fast food x.rvicea arm apaatfically which eaNnoAs Nneba Gaga Pro.ding as Let_1". hlWa que'llty excluded as a primary we. This would gateway into tba City ace,:by promoting a ProAlude the development of bypical free dtetIeCtieey Att aCtive, And pleasant standing.fast food restaurants,:last of oftI" perk ataoapberm Ina a campus lib drive-through which require facilltiea. g settinwith high ix-estiga Identity. in.the Overlay District..Norevor• fast fwd-old be permitted as An,ancillary B.Land Use Types or secondary use, subject to a Conditional use Permit,As a part of a The intent of the. Call., eS policies Ice to larger pr.Ject, provided,however,such entmurage land uses and develop..t aa..latent use not be located directly adj.-.t to e with the. design Cal far the Haven A, Uave.avenue. ee"tr As en ietenslre,high quality gateway Sato the community. C.Master Planned Development B.t. Toe.Pricary land Asa function along The.intent of this section Is to prr for Haven Avenue. Sa Z-__wdsd to be of An integrated d...lepee.t at the .t adalnistrative/professional and Attica Pa.LDle ties in the review pro"". ugh .mature. ewever, en the parcels the Halter Plan.prce.a there 1s opportunity directly adjacent to the rallraad, the 'Co ceordtnxee thv atferta of single Al. Punning Commission may conxidar mUltlpjo property owners and dl.daurage addit Local.uses Permitted in Subarea.6, - Piecemeal developae..t. Finally, .taster subject to the issuance or a CODditlo..I planning of defined areas .111 avoid Use Pormit, add a finding that such a development of sL.gle parcals or land In a. use will be Consistent with.the stated manmar vhicb would prevent or preclude future design goal for Haven Avenue and all. development of adjacent parcels to the best other proH.Iona of the Overlay i tray Sam blA. It.to not the Intention of the OSatrlet. .master plannlcg process to rant future development Interns 1.sto.e. gather. It is D.2. Select mdillary Cemaere"I and toxin... an attempt to dlsdover Problenx. ef bore they support service wee .hall not exceed develop,to deal with issues vblle they era be 20% of the floor Arms In any MAster solved,tend to take advantage of opportunities Pleased development. Concentration of while tbey .slat. Th- tanderds and • such As0s in Asy building or along the guldellne.which follow.are lat ceded to apply At"t frontage is not pemitted. to all proJects cad.should at be.'conatmined by parcel linen or apcific site boondarles. 9.3. The. follsving..land wu type. .era C.t_. A cancm tual Master Plan .hall be permitted. r codditlenally permitted auhni,ttad for Planan within the Haven AvanuA. Overlay 6 Ceemlaaion District. All other w4 shall be approval, together with any development prchlbit.d. - proPasal, including subdivision er parcel map applications. Such Maat- Permitted Uses Administrative and Office Plan sha11 addre.s. rataticashipato Financials Snaur+nee A Real Fatale otber parcels ulthta tW Heater Place Services Area. Comucluatto.Service. Medical/Healtb Care Services. �\ Prof...local Servke. Adntal.trative Civic SarvIcAs Cultural Balm...Supply Retsl*.fzAJ.A Services Bu.inAss Support Service. Eating and Drinking Establlahcenth ,. ( CITE' OF f'-CHO CLTCAMO'NGA TITLE'05E RC4ULA77aU5 Nhmm WMAY I'LANNINU DIVISION EXHIBIT.t•If. - SCALE:� . 0 _"A pTRAVEL l, 8140'Haven Avenue Suite 109 Rancho(Jucamonga CA 917;;0 _ (714)989-5884 JANUARY 20, 1986 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT — PLANNING DIVISION 9320 BASE LINE ROAD RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA, 91730 ATTENTION: COMMISSIONER BAKER, CHITIEA, McNIEL, REMPEL, AND STOUT. I WISH TO EXPRESS MY OPINION CONCERNING THE QUESTIONS RAISED LAST JANUARY 8th ABOUT TF'_ REQUIRING OF CONDITIONAL ` USE PERMITS FOR ANY TRAVEL AGENCY PLANNING TO LOCATE ON HAVEN AVENUE BETWEEN 4th STREET AND FOOTHILL BLVD. IN RANCHO CUCAMONGA. AS YOU MY RECALL, I WAS ISSUED SUCH A PER"11T AT THAT MEETING AND VOICED MY CONCURRENCE WITH THE CITY REQUIREMENT FOR MY TYPE OF BUSINESS TO OBTAIN SUCH A PERMIT. I HAVE SINCE REVIEWED 'MY COMMENTS AND THE AREAS CLUSTER RATE FOR TRAVEL AGENCYS AND I AM CONVINCED THAT THE PRESENT CITY REQUIREMENT IS GGID BUT MAY 3E ---TO LITTLE, TO� LATE--- FOR SOME AND SHOULD BE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT THE CITY NOT JUST ON HAVEN AVE, LET ME EXPAND ON THIS A LITTLE FURTHER: ONTARIO HAD (6) TRAVEL AGENCYS WITH (1) FAILURE OR SELLOUT IN THE LAST 3 YEARS = 17Y. TURN—OVER RATE. * CHINO HAD (6) TRAVEL AGENCYS WITH (1) FAILURE OR SELLOUT IN THE LAST 3 YEARS = 17% TURN—OVER RATE. * MONTCLAIR HAD C5) TRAVEL AGENCYS WITH (0) FAILURES OR SELLOUTS IN THE LAST 3 YEARS = 0% TURN—OVER RATE. �. * UPLAND HAD (13) TRAVEL AGENCYS WITH (2) FAILURES OR SELLOUTS IN THE LAST 3 YEARS = 15%TURN—OVER RATE. * RANCHO CUCAMONGA HAD (10) TRAVEL AGENCYS WITH (4) FAILURES OR SELLOUTS IN THE LAST 3 YEARS = 40'c, TURN—OVER RATE. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE DETAILS AND MY VIEWS AS TO WHY THIS MAY HAVE OCCURED IN RANCHO CUCAMONGA; * ALTALOMA TRAVEL SOLD OUT IN 1982 TO ALWAYS TRAVEL * ALWAYS TRAVEL SOLD OUT IN 1983 TO ALTA TRAVEL * ALTA TRAVEL IS STILL IN BUSINESS BUT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE TRAVEL EXCIiANGE. * ONTARIO TRAVEL CLOSED ITS DOORS ON FOOTHILL BLVD. IN 1985, IT HAD 17> OTHER AGENCYS WITHIN A (1) MILE RADIUS OF ITS DOORS. PLAZA TRAVEL 9140 Haven Avenue Suite 1.09 Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 (714)989-5884 HORIZONS UNLIMITED CLaSED ITS DOORS IN 1985, IT TO HAD (4) OTHER AGENCYS WITHIN A (1) MILE RADIUS OF ITS DOORS AND ONE OF THEM WAS JUST ACROSS THE STREET. THE LACK OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT OVER THE YEARZ AND THE LACK OF ATTENTION PAID TO WHO IS MOVING-IN- WHERE, I FEEL, WAS A MAJOR CONTRIFUTER TO THIS NIGH RATE OF TURN-OVER. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIONGA IS GETTING THE REPUTATION OF BEING A TRAVEL AGF_NCYS TESTING GROUND AS WELL AS ITS GRAVE YARD. THE SELLING OUT OR THE CLOSING OF ONE'S DOORS IS A VERY PERSONAL THING, 13UT FACTS ARE FACTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA HAS TOO HIGH A TURN-OVER PERCENTAGE RATE FOR SUCH A NEW AND GROWING CITY, THE ELIMINATION OF THIS NEW REQUIREMENT WILL ONLY INCREASE FUTURE ACENCYS CKPONCES FOR FAILURE. ANY ACTI014 TO REMOVE•THIS ONE GIANT STEP FORWARD TO HELP THE TP.AVEL INDUSTRY WOULD BE WRONG. PLEASE KEEP THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TRAVEL AGENCYS ON HAVON AVE. AND PLEASE. REVIEW ITS IMPLEMENTATION IN OTHER ARES OF THE CITY. "OUT OF BUSINE9,S` SIGNS IN STORE WINDOWS aO NOT ATTRACT NEW BUSINESS, OF AW KIND, TO ANY LOCATION. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITT BY L OYi7 f: WEDBLAD ' ak NEF; cc a > :. n CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �Uc�nTa MEMORANDUM ar 1 r o a Z > 1977 DATE: February 12, 1986 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM; Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT: FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK In January, six firms were interviewed for the contract to prepare the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and Environmental Assessment. Two firms were then selected to prepare a revised scope of work for the project after input from City Staff concerning the major issues, study methodology, and the desirable end product. One of the firms, the Planning Center or Forma-Planning Netwoi,k, will be offered the contract. On Monday, February 11, 1986, you will receive a copy of the proposed work program by each firm. Both proposals are very near the budget for this project, so Staff has emphasized the need to eliminate non- essential tasks and focus on ways to achieve meaningfull public participation and ,provide a realistic economic development strategy and urban design plan. This item is included on the agenda to keep the Commission apprised of i - progress toward hiring a consultant and to solicit any comments concerning a final scope of work. A decision will be made shortly and the final contract negotiated for City Council approval.: t BB•CJ;cv ^ ITEM P CITY OF RA14CHO CUCAMONGA uCA STAFF REPORT a 1 O O E Z U > DATE: February 12, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Otto Krrutil„ Senior Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT 12642 K & B • Proposed modifications ifff:-Et-ggloor plan mix in K & B's portion of Tentative Tract 12642/Caryn Planned Community I. ABSTRACT: The builder of this project is requesting minor modifications to floor plan mix to their previously approved single family homes. The Commission will determine whether these modifications are consistent with previous approvals. If so, no formal action is necessary. II. BACKGROUND: Kaufman & Broad recently submitted for staff review, revisions to plans affecting K & B's portion of Tentative Tract I 12642 (first phase of Caryn Planned Community). Proposed modifications involve a slightly different mix of floor plans." The Commission reviewed the product mix on August 28, 1985,. and expressed specific concerns relative to house sizes and mix. As a result, the project was. approved subject to a very specific formula. identifying an exact mix of floor plans and sizes. The modifications now proposed by K & B result in increased house sizes in both the 1135 Series" (south of Vintage Drive), and the 1150 Series" models (north of Vintage Drive),. The average house size is being increased from 1160 to 1206 square feet, and from 1285 to 1324 square feet, respectively. The 830 square foot model approved by the Planning G.ommission is August is being eliminated entirely; the dwellings will now range from 900 to 1690 square feet. However, it should be noted that by eliminating the smallest model, the total nramber of floor plans is being reduced from 7 to 6. Specific comparison between the approved and modified product mix is made nn Exhibit "C", attached. All floor plans and front elevations are also included for your information. III. RECOMMENDATION: No formal action is required should the Commission ermine that the proposed revisions are in substantial compliance with the approves project. ITEM Q PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12642 - K & B Februarf 12, 1986 Page $ Respectfully submitted, (Brad Buller City Planner BB:OK:ko Attachments: Exhibit "All'- Tentative Tract 2642/Caryn, Phase I Exhibit "B" - K & B Portions of TT 12642 Exhibit "C" - Proposed Revisions, Floor Plans, & Elevations Ij i I j c . 1 e / 1 OC✓)'V0�1JJ9 .r9J1M10: 9 Nf/1iS.dNl .3NIl 13 3 � � \ „ w t y� ( � � l C� •,�yl a� �?,� - �o k�- fit• � _ `•'? 's is `g ;: �{ta` p lilt Na'� 1 , • .' 7��g9 " .T.L.."_. . PSG .+ `'�� � ' • ���- ,�i \ . X. �. FA EM Go . E'8 a ,�.ES '�`; cc5 ®- �L�� ✓$gp a�3' �_•• �I•' � 7FFa h .titvnriar JJrJ+f.�wrfwaf. 7?N.a1,lY N3.iY77/!N 3 • �a srno TI U m 11 it �h ro.•� �J '\ I �j r li II ,gC l r` ,� JL . it. ` CAI fm jL i k +i+i 1 fA a y W li �' cwa cEi �F � 6 H III 1 ` 14 , x � In o t •1. I I.,�• 1 \ ti\ w •. 1 ..�� II �' 1 � II fI II I,1 co 1 III o �r•,.'II �I I C' +tee M 0 Ln N O In w �a C; N a a o ccu n a qqT, u .«. .w C= E \ C C 'to CN N CM W G r— Ot•r y Ir O1 t- ? to to \ lL W W A oI al N M. •E t-O- N W~ \h M O cl 1— r— c0 'A O O 01 co - .�— L. NO O V' ttl G c3' N M. •3 +I +1 M cn rn z c 3 3 r .-1 w to iOc to C c a o c s N I. to n o ct r�I$ er cl c L Z N ~ cli O FN Z M. 1�� 'OII 'y N cn O /T I. ��I cn Q O L � rN-1 r�-1 rN•1 al .c a .M•1 .-t 1.0 •�-1 EMI J d. G N C. O_ .w O F •--1 ri N N CV N 1 N C w C N M d- 1 tM M C I ��• Z O W N 1 7 C to cmtY W m r0 r C }a }t E J 'Lin, C= .I M M 1 ¢ ;.J 1-1 M +1 1 cf +I 'tl. 1 M Ol N Z a. - r-1 N O ¢ N W W cz O C F¢-• O O. O. .nl OII •O O O� MII N�I CO coT ;. C^" _ rW-1 '"� Ol 1 C1 to lI op O¢ tN L. .-1 .-1 .-a eMti M I t0 st N 1•1 CQ CL - at3 A .M L of c I al 3 0 3 R 0 C O. ^. O t cc4- 4- o CD i O i C C at J OJ O i i L i • -Pi L •� i-1 -P -P -P -P v e� gn to v v. CA cn- to M 'n OS •3: v .... v v to •N ca S /•-1 ¢ LL w lu p W. C9 k i S- al 10 lO t!'1. t0 N > 19 O O. O O y. �O +M M. M M M cL y: tt7 tn. to In .¢ c= 1 CX- it O p KT MASTER BEDROOM SLOPING GEIL;40 BATH 0 A� s C? L L WALK LIVING N/ ' r -MEDRAL CEILING CLOUT Allk y i BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 3 I W II D 1� GAME u Plan 2 / it � �; � ._ -•+ 1 "� I''w � w t _ MASTER BEDROOM CATHEDRAL CEILING APASTE BATH %�. i�• O BEDROOM'l BEADOM 4/ MASTER'IETREIT 4 BEDROOM 3 BFiYH I 4 LIVING a DINING GARAGE --r � 0 LREFJ � 1 - KITCHEN I Plan 35 i Elc' 14 Y. a .�„ 7t ,•ate .. s f• r• :GI=C CCCC CCCCCCC FWDR _ KITCHEt1 OIHIC3 L ,� 1 Cosa LIVING ENTRY i FIRST FLOOR II _ BEDROOM 2 2 BEOROOM 3 it OEM k 0 t _ �I I over to eeww i MASTER B€4RODWI Y �) t �.. 36 yyrr 4 SICOMO FLOOR - Pl%n 35F C�L` it •- _ � ,, T—'ram- > Wo • n —/-�`tiya s `aAti � Elevation '� �'�L"- �� _-`:vim-t �-r::a. } �1,�•� _ _ — 2 z N • r ErCC _ -��_ � ��;��`.�" • 'fie e...�r. Elevation B �!: T?" [� ��•�yak AWL Elevation C Q - \ awsrgn nn�TM C� MAMa BEDWM sm,wom s. BBATk �N• BEDROOM 3 OPTIMAL ®ECt200WI 4' I LnnWG I FAMRS CIO KRCPEM j - DINING -0 - - aa0vwm cacao .ai' GARAGE r��2 Plan SOE Q�t3 sro Elevacion A .-4kYA `fit; - `^ j �r h• - Elevzfion a •ay'�'1��-aaC�.�. f, �rk��• �sf '3APr_�'�.y... Wit. - l = �'"'F��_;�=���� ��';•. 015Z Oevation c C�L- ► F f +t L+ATHI O II mem.4OM 2 l �I NUMVER BEDROOM t LIMN' Q DATN ! 2 DL`•DRDOM 3ak l 4 ( �—\ I( i__J II ;1 SECOND FLOOR s 1 °li w 3 too" woo I PwD 0 DINING KITCHEN 4.l GARAGEAIIII 1111UP LLLI Y FAMILY LIVING FEW otowNu ulLeso ` FIRST FLOOR Ic PIG vowj ' III 7 's'S' 1 CODE 0 �r i Elevation A! Elevation B i� " (`' it:•—�+•--.-'^•^'r z!s:.. Elevation C CN— ko ado�as v Ndwdnv^� �Ig �I�I{I! ON L D� - - LO a cl ' In z ----71 Ij i 7 1 � Z d 1 to ✓�I ` ®.ea• 1 ®wee' � 'main �oQoe■ c .. ei i BE a t Z � 1 0 • LL 1' I 1 i PW r --' °� © , a % " , t fi4MILY DINING I LIM cam GARAGE �` iiCISEN J us y ENTRY CiVItiO SLOP"CIK NQ FIRST FLOOR l ,ldsrR `O fs�- lr ii TLE BA 2IT EIEDROOI<e2 h lKir MAZZA BIB am TO BELOW � a BEDROOM 4 BEDROOM 3 .7 ®r6 SECOND FLOOR Au 74 ` y.l�:y��a4 4 :.+ter^_ 7 — _' . �• Y. Elevation A � �i •:e .�''' ' -_�� `-'--.--`, yyam�,,+ nl - Elevation B 'r ter' �. — ,�„�.��• �.,�'"��"�,,� rya�;Ys' ._----` - 4 Elevation CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CL3CAP4 jp VIQ-1�0 MEMORANDUM �,Qft, ci U c: z'a wn - DATE: February 12, 1986 TO: Chairman and Members of the Plannin_g Commission FROM: Brad Buller, Ci'cy Planner x,t Curt Johnston, Associate 'Planner SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN REVISIONS - Planning Commission review of general revisions and update to the Industrial Area Specific Plan, Part IV (Subarea Development Standards). This item has been continued from the Planning Commission workshop originally scheduled for Monday, February 3, 1986. Please bring your workshop packet, which includes the Staff Report and revised Part IV (Subarea Development Standards), to the meeting for discussion. t S 4 4 t BB:CJ:cv ITEM R