Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/11/10 - Agenda Packet0701-02 1 -10-87 PC Agenda!� � k E. CITY OF p kNnio cu( �It7t AC S LANNING COMMISSIGN, AGENIA it TUESDAY NOVEMBER 10, 1987 4.00 p.m. LIONS. 'PARK CO UN]" CENTER $161 BAM Liles RANCRO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORMA L Pledge of Alleebme IL " Roll Can Commissioner l3iakesley _ Commissioner Emeriek Commissioner Chiti sa _ Commissioner McNiel Commissioner Toistoy 77'77- 3 . Ili. Announcements IW Consent CslenOw ` The following Car .,e t Culandar items are expected to be routine and non- controverw A, '+Plat,; will be acted on by the Commission at one time without rl';r,.at Fi. If anyone has concern over any item, it should be remoloC . "ar discussion. A. TIME EXTENSION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -31 - REITER /RINKER - The request for a time extension to an — approved 44 -aae r Master Plan of an of five and business park in the Industrial Park District and Haven Overlay District, located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Haven Avenue APN 2!0 -081- 17 through 21. B. HOME OeCUPATION FiA IT 87 -255 - CISNEROS - A Resolution denying a modification to the original Resolution of Approval to allow instruction of childbirth classes within a single family residence to occur on Saturdays - APN 1477- 151 -25. C. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTAtIVE TRACT 12820 - C.T.K., INC. - A residential sub won of 18 single family lots on 4.1 acres of land in the Low Aesidenfial District (2-4 dwelling units per azre), located at the southeast' corner of Highland Avenue and Jasper Street - LPN 201- 214 -08. D. ?F yOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR TRACT 14946 - EQUESTRIAN TRA.II[f =,- tdOR 04v - A request to delete a port )n of a local 8gvestcian trail casement within a previously approved tract i consisting oa 27 single family lots in the Very Low Residecniol District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the north, side 6f hillside Road, west of Hermosa Aveape. _ r: fi> 5x' I. TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - LABAND .. A request to mortify a condition o approval or the development of Haven View RStates, a custom lot residential subdivision, of 151 lots on 85 acres of I& 1d located an the east sNe of Haven, north of the Hillside Drainage Channel. L hA Y. liC H®etri .•1 t;{j following items are public headings ii: =-,J„ h concerned individuals MOY vo:cc t7a a aptnion of the roIatedl Xh*4 ect. Please Wait to be recosgnt �,eat by the Chairman and address th;e Commission ty Seating your naive and address. Ail such opinions shoal be limited to 5 minutes •,, per individual for each project. E. ENVIR9K=,N1rAL A W$MENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13579 AY£l. - mtz-fa- tatnAlr residen*•iax deveto meet oampcssi o V 9'tits on :69 acres of land in the Medium Residential District, (8- 14 dwelling units per - =acre), located on the east side of Hellman avenue, 12th north of 19th `Street - APN 201^474 -12. (Continued from Uctcer 14, 1987.) P 1,0inTRON'MENTAL ASSESSMENT AkD TENTATIVE TRACT 13727 JAN SENS i A residential stBacTVl e6n. a single amity lots on `acres of land i tte Lcw Residential District (2 -4 d+xetling units units F,er acre), located at the southwest corner of Carnelian Street and Highland Avenue - APN 201- 214w11� (Continued from October 14,1987.) Aft.7 � G. )i�MONMENIOAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATWE TRACT 13359 WALTON - A custom lot subdivision of 3.79 arrea o land into 6 parcels in the Very Low Density Ttesideotlal District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side "of Sapphire Street, south of Hillside Road - APN 1061- 651 -9, 10 'amid 11. ( Continued from Or�tober 28,1987.) Related File.* Variance 87 -15 H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE Sf -15 WALTON - A request to reduce the minimum average lc +t size cad m 22,500 square feet in area to 21, 392 square feet in area in I eonjunction with a six (6) lot subdivision located on tj o east side o! Sapphire Street, south of Hillside Road - APR 2061, 651 -10 and 11. (Continued from Getober 28, 1987.) Related FilEt Tentative Tract 13359. I. TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - LABAND .. A request to mortify a condition o approval or the development of Haven View RStates, a custom lot residential subdivision, of 151 lots on 85 acres of I& 1d located an the east sNe of Haven, north of the Hillside Drainage Channel. L hA B S1EPY#ECNFNiAL MjT DOP A � Rvtew T _ o a Devellopmant Agreement fpr it eorrmaredat des# +1 center and food Park consisting of 1.0 b0ildings totaling 144050 square feet located on the south side of Foothill, between 50ruce Avenue and .. Elm Avenue - A'?X 2011 - 351 -28. i K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSEt SMENT ANL " TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 0 "Eel - BCE DEV DDf'1s5E11T - A subdivision of 16.9$ acres C fir. of land into 10 psresels in the industrial nark Develviaeni -' District, Oubare -a 7, bounded by Foothill Boulevard, Spruce Avenue, White Oak Avenue, Eucalyptus Street and Elm Avenue - APN 208-951-28. Y,. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT iSb4TRICT AMENDMENT 10 - CITY OF iiACHO I . CIICAM0,wQA - A request to amend the Development District map from ''y- Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units liar to . General Ini ial, Subarea 1, for 2.31 acres -,if land, located et i the northwe cornea of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - APN 2C7 541 - 60. M. TIME 13XTENS ON FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AB"SESSMENT AZID CO lTC1NAL IISE PERMiT 85 »19 - PARCO - The request or as time extension for'an approved 35,55? square foot general retail center on 3.22 acres o? land in the General Commerciai District, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevn,?d and Ramona Avenue - APN 208-301-15 th,^ough 17. N- ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13697 - DALY HOMES - A residential su vision and design review of ' 4$ s single 6.r AY homes on, 29.9 stores of land In the Ver) Low" Residential District (less than 2 dwelling -units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Carrari Street - APN 201-091-12, 18, 19. O. MONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDT'i14NAL USE V, PUMiT 8 16 - NII %EST - The devslopmrant of & 8.2 acre 11 integrated shopping center consisting of 4 retell buildings totaling i 87,551 square feet in the Community Commercial District of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, 'Ioaated at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue - APN' 208-261-58. VL New Raeine" P. Rli VEST PQR CONSIDERATiOTJI.PlUATE OPEN SPACE C1ii3DlT FOF' I3li�lEEI,OPME� �Bl'YE_ yy B��BB - �YI�NkI.4YBN ; it Y K t C �p I St VIL ' Diroet;TN is lam: y CZ. lUAMIIMlJM IIN.I'£ S1ZE/MT13IMiiM LOTS= MAUET I WIL ttlari Ti } Baeiness ' LX. Putrli6 Comment$ T#Ys ;° the time and place for the general public ±. address the Cfwnmtscion."- Items to be discussed here are those which do not ,yet - already cppear on this agenda. yY .. )' The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulatiow that set an 11 p.m. adjournment tim . If items go beyond that time, they ) snail be heard only with the co jent at ft commission. r E f1 Y VICINITT MAP �. CiTy rOF RMCHO CUICAME3N . f 'i i 11 DATE: TO.: PROM: BY: SUBaECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT , J F � � L7 November 10, 1987 lrt7 Chairman and Nombers of the fil�!r►ntng Commission Brad Buller, City 'Planner Nancy Fong, Associa4.e Planner 11HE EXTENSION. FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -31 Rii�'R7 - e retlues£'"i'or two ex ns on, o 4n IPPrOVed 44 acre Plaster Plan for Offi.:e and. Business. Park, in the Ir&atrial Park District and Haven Overlay District located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and liven Avenue - APR: 210 - 081 -17 through 21. I. ABSTRACT: The applicant is requesting a titre extension for the above a — described Master Plan. Staff reccmimtnds the Planning Commission approve the time extension for a period of three years. II. ANALYSIS; A. _Background: Ae Planning Commission conditionally approved the sAa per— Tan and Phase I Development in September of 1985. Phase I ii, under construction while Phase II Development has been approvltd recently as shown in Exhibit "A". B. _Compliance With Curre`ft Code: In reviewing this request, staff aFiascompare Wz" AAs er Plan with the current Industrial Specific Plan and Haven Avenue Overlay District. Staff has determined that the Plaster Plan is in conformance with them, except for the policy of undergrounding of utilities. However, the Master ?Ian is only a concept where each individual project and /or phast`s development will be subject to a separate Development f,lettiew process. Therefore the implementation of '.ne undergroilnding of utilities would occur at such time Further, the•e is a general condition on the Master Plan that required ail, projects within the Master Nan to have the utilities untlergrounded. C. Master Plan Ovetlav: Staff has also reviewed the Development o e prov s on`s af"t)ie Paster Plan Overlay District, and :found that there is no distinction between time extensions ,for .Master Plan approvals versus Development Review approvals. The City has required the applicant to develop a Master Plan for a certain area to look at this "Big Picture" in a6',',�ttempt to address and solve circulation, drainage, design and ITEM A .. None �O "rc neighborhood, compatibility problems. The devel6ped !aster Plan will establish, design guide! >ines and standards that address the ' special or, unique weds Or characteristics of that ,area. The estabi ishec : "pste�; P� wsrsrld benef%t the Cit and would t; attract garWu deve1opmant. Letting a liter•^ Plan exore would not provide, f near Aves" for devet open 'tk establish one and would bo contrary to the goals of the City. it it' the opinion► of staff that the Plannfing LoAmission should a be able to r6l6w, the. tin*w- Plan periodicdT y to ensure compiiaoce arith all Tieab;ie ;odes. Since the lister Plan is f not subjact to the A requfcementr o the Hip .Act, the Plannin.1 Coftissfoaa could allow iextmiom ft' a longer period of years,' Staff is in the process of general rlean -up of t1re, Develop nt Code. The addition of s(ach proyllions to the luster Plan dverlcy District could bL- one of the amendments. IIY. RECC*WNDATION: Staff recommends that the Planalag Cow Iission approve a me extension for Development Review 45:31 for a period of three years. The PTAnari�;ig Commission shoul4 direct stiff to prepare a!mendoents to the Mister P,a+ Overlay District by adding aJ languages for tuna: extension. Resp u11X_s atted, Bra' BB:NF:vc Utachments: Exhibit "A" - Mas er Mar, 1f Resolution of Approval i l October 22, 1987 Ms. Nancy "Fong Associate Planner CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUBJECT., EXTENSION OF APPROVAL, ON GATEWAY MASTER PLAN I understand there has been some confusion regarding the time period for approval of the Gateway Master Plan. This confusion seems to load to the fact that the Gateway Master Plan approval may expire after the two year period. It is not advantageous for the Master Plan''to be subject to new conditions or modifications and ch,%nges, i�" the project .is being developed as originally approved, I can think of no other Master Plan which has been subject to the renewal process. However, because of this confusion I will submit this letter as a request for extensi n approval of the Master Plan and ask that necessary action be taken which would eliminate tbs need Eoj, continued reaewal of the Gateway Master Plan. I understand that future development phase approval are subject to the design review process and as such we would be held responsible for completing the necessary applications and approvals with any future development proposals within the Gateway Plan. If there are any concerns, comments. -r questions which would be considered as a result of this re.,luest for extension please let me know as soon as possible so they can be addressed prior to any consideration by the Planning Commission. Sincerely, A.H EITER DEVELOPMENT CO. 'Eil H P . im,thy J. Beedle . P. plan .P. Planning & Design cc: A.H. Reiter Mailing Address- P.O. Box 7250 • Newport Beach, California 92658-7250 - (714) 75'1 -4594 Cr Pullman at Itedhill A-,5 Ali ,{ ?" 4S , i USE (PLAN THE GATEWAY RANCHO CVCAMONCA. CAUPPORK/A s iH,e[lu.:aaT W TRi i1R[! {- tlti!{ 6{T{t!)lMit(j' p'1, 1 t[ {YfT G RY {i1R YM Y.[YC {iTi[ I[Y Z v K YlORT1f.Y{f F {N�Mlltflf{ 7 I2 ' NORTH CffY OF RANUHJ C ONGA T�ju... Fr. , 1.A1vMNr, DIVISILN Eft - err: 5c. ..*- 7 r, Ar 4 t. ,.mss e { RESOLUTION NO. +ni P+ RESOLtlT1 t OF TAE} No CUCAK Pl Au"INN�� ON, APPROVING TEX TIME. , WSTON FM DEifF I1PEIENT R 85 -31 A 44 ACRE MASTER l?LM F€�R OFFICE AND WSIH£SS PARK IN THE njr INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT (SUBAREA f) ADO H OVERLAY DISTRICT, LOCATED AT THE ',ORTHEAST CORNER OF 4TH AND HAME`N MEEK!£ - APN: 210+081 -17 through 21. WH€.4EAS, s request has been filed for a time xtension for the above - described project. pursja:nt to Section 17.Q2.1Gt3« WHEIRF4s, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above - described on Septemter 11, 1985. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the fr, owing°ii -41—nis; A. That prevailing economic conditions have caused a distressed market climate for development of the prR�2i:t. . B. That 'current econamic, marketing, and inventopy condil ions make It unreasonable to develop, the projvbt at this time. C. That strict enforcement of the conditions of apprcvai rega.riVing expirations would not be consistent with the intent of the Development Code. D. That the granting of Said time extension will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially inJurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. i SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commi`sion hereby grants a time extens on or; . i Project Expiration DR 85 -51 Reiter /Rinker September 11, 1990 N T DO f DR 85-31- W, -51 RIF Novembar'10, jW,7."-' Page 2 �Aj A APPROVED AM ADOPTED THIS loTH DAY w Noym ER. 1987. PLANNING COMMISSIONOF TK- CITY OF RW"O 6bCAMMA� BY: ra-7r.Y-1. MCNIEF,--cff-alrom ATTEST: V�Ad Buller, DO secr-FUry I. Bred Buller, DePutY Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do herebty certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, pmed, avid adopted by t1to Planning Cmwission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regul*r meeting of the Planning Comission held on the 10th day of November, 1987, by� the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMISSIONERS: HOES: COMISSIONERSIR: ABSENT: COWISSIONERS: A- 47 -�.,. ,�: � , � .�...�,.,� -T7 - •- " .,�- '" R*�!z�"� ,� -re--a fir -s° grA l On � PF DATE: lapvember iO., 191 TO: Ch. it an i 0 ym*er$ of tft Manning Coamissit FROM: BriA Bu'l l er, city Pi dnner 0 19V BY Greg', Gage, Assistant Planner SUBJECT} lid OGCLYATteg PERMIT D7 -255 - GIS�IEW - A Resolution -ny ng a an a oF Resolution of -J appraval to alltrw instruction of childbirth classes within a single family resid ace to occu=r on Saturdays - ApH; IO17 z�z -75. I. 84KGROUND, At its 3 October 2$ 1987 ti l i're a "'� ppTf $nt's r st to modify the' norigginal esolution�iof, approval, in order allow instructi� of childbirth classes to occur on Saturdays. I' 'fe Commission's dermal If the request :was based on the Potential negative impacts -,f i►�"eased pedestrian and vehicular traffic in a single family area during the vxekend, in denying the request for modification, the Commission also directed staff to prepare a Resolution "of Denial for consideratipn at tonight's meeting. Such Resolution is attached for the Commijjton's consideration. IL RECOMMENDATION: It is recoame4ded that the CoMission deny` the requested O—O ification through adoption of the Resolution attached hereto. City A,l'anner� ' i' SB.GGOz vc Attachments: Original Resolution of Approval Resolution Denying Modification to Conditions of Approval for Horse Occupation Permit 87 -255 it �� RESOLUTION NO. 8� =146 A RESOLUTION Qq- THE RANCHO CucwNGA PLANNING C4',> isslom APPROVING HOME`6ti:,<.UPAT10M PER14IT NO.. 87 -255 1 =OR - CHILDgTRTM CLASSES (WITHIN A SINGLE`'FANILY RESIDENCE) -LOCATED AT 10735 SUNDA111vE DRIVE IN THE. MEDIUM DF.N ;MTV RESIDENTI& DISTRICT = APN 1077- 151 -55 WHEREAS, on the 4th day of Kly, 1967, a complete application was filed by ilrayannas C-Isneros for review of the above - described project; rid WHEREAS, oil the 12th day of August, 19.17, the Rancho Cue �nonga Planning Commission 'held a meeting to c04s14er the above - described project. folxowsz NON, THEREPDRE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following can be atet; 1. That the proposed use Is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purpose`; of the district in which the site is loc6ted and 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detriaental to the public health, safety, or welfare„ or materially injurious to properties or imlpr`ovements in the vicinity; and 3. Twat the proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed project is consistent with the Objectives of the General plan. + SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environman an s categorically exempt in accordance with the California Environmantal Quality Act. SECTION 3• That Home Occupation Permit No. 87 -255 is approved subject to so Mowing conditions: I. MAximum Class size shall not exceed 16 persons at any time, exclusive of instructor and resident family members. 'r 2. The use shall be periodically reviewed by the City. if it is determined that the use is t disruptive to the surrounding residencet, the permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for Nview and possible revocation. f� 1 t_ This appprav'a1 SIAall not w4ivt COMP14rice Witt the provisorls CCaanrt'nitY Plan -including pPlic Code or Term goee U;cusation Criteria. p 4. Instruction at the�residenct shall not` oce prior to 5 :06 p.m' '30 +r"kday! , and shall not coatinat past 1,0100 p.m.,, 411¢ $hail Mt exceed faro (2) nights per week, APPROVED AND A PTEO TKS 2 "DAY OF AlI6t ,, 1987. PLMKN& COWISSION of THE CITY OF RMCHD CUCAMp1 M roan t ATTEST, y + I, Vad Bulltr, Deputy Secretary of th+t planning Cocatission ai the City of a Ran&O CMAMonga, do hereby :#rtify that the foregoing Resolution t�ta5 duly and reg� lvly introduced, passed, and sdop'tod' by the ptr�nning Cos�ission of the `r an theft 26th at a bylthq tloging, the planning On hold AYES: COWISSIOKRS: 'CNITIEA, BLAKESLEY,,MVIIEL HOES COWIS5IONERSt EidE ICK AOSWI. COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTUY RESOLUTIOI -'40. 87 -146A I ,> A RESDLUTIOH OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONV, PL{kNNINO C lISSION DENYING A ,AEQUVSIEO MODIFICATION ''i0 HOME OCCUPATION 9ERMIT 87 -2F5 ?O ALLOW CHILDBIRTH Ct.A5SES (WITHIN A % SINGLE FANCILY RESIDENCE) LOCATED AT 107 6 SUNDANCE DRIVE ON SATORD YS SMUN 10:00 A.M. AND 1:00 P.M. - APH: 1077- 151 -75 A. Recitals (I) There has been submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga an application by Wrayanne Cismeros ( "Applicant" hereinafter) for a home occupation permit to 'allow child birth classes within a single family residence l;aated at 10735 Sundance Drive ( "said application" hereinafter). (ii) On August 26, 1987, the Planting Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a hearing to consider thy, application. Said hearing was concluded ar,d i!said Commission then adoptO�1, its Resolution of Approval No. 87 -146 approviiig,,the application subject to c%rtafn conditions. (iii) The Applicant` = subsequently r�quest2d a modification to the:' conditions of approval so firth within the original Resolution. (iv) On November 10, 19P ". said Commission conducted a hearing to consider the requested awdificAtion regarding permitted 'hours of operation/instruction. Said hearing was concluded and said mission -then directed that a Resolution of denial he prepared and sub*?itted for adoption. 1 (v)j All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution i have oicur. S. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, the Plannf:ng Commission of the ;pity of Rancho J Cucamonga does hereby find, detersmine and resolve as follows: 1. This Commission ;hereby specifically finds that all of the facts setforth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upor evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced hearing on November 10, 1987 including a writte:s staff report and oral testimony presented during salt Nuvember 10, 1987 hearing, this Commission specifically finds as follows: (a) The requested modification would be inconsistent with the intent of the original approv +l relative to land use intensity and/or hour,& of operation; (bi The pr(^posed modification wo041 create increased vehicle traffic within the single family neighborhood during a time of peak demand for parking and Mess. kq�� PLANNING CNIISSION RESOLUTION NO. it HOP 87-255 - Cisneros November 10, 1987' Page 2 (c) The original approval was grarted with direction to monitor the use operation to ensure that conflict did not exist. The use Was not been in operation long eraugh to determine that it iv,?being operated in a manner compatible with the surrounding neigil�rftood. 3. Based. upon the facts found hereinabove, this Commissioq hereby denies the requested modification to Resolution 87-146. 4. The Deputy Secretary Co-oission shai�l certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVkV -AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF VM—mHBER, 1987. PLANNING COWISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUC.40NA BY: ATTEST: --MiCTUMer, poop Se 1 I. E;rad Buller, Deputy Sicretary of do-Planning Commission of the City of ho Cucamonga, do hereby certify thav,,the foregoing Resolution was duly and 'early introdu,;ed, passed, and 41dopte6,,,by the Planning Commission of the ". Ranch-, Cucamonga, at a regular meet"*ng of the Planning Commission held 04 - �ith day rf Moye%ber, 1987, by the foIlowing vote-to--,Niit- AYES: !"ONMISSIONERS: NOES: C"ISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIOWERS: kq�� A Qi CiT' ,�,QF R ,-:�,'HQ CUCAJ,¢O CI t ,,�MO�►,, o 1: z U > j November 10, 1987 ' TO: Chatmun and Members of ttie planning Commission fi^ FROM: Brad Buller. City Planner BY: Scott Hurphy, lusociate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12820 - CTK, INC. A res c"ii:n . a s-uF vTsTdn ow"' 7,�T'nq a family uti' on 4.1 a:rOt of land in the Lout Resfd,ential District ( ? -4 (Aelli'ng units per acre), located at the swiheast corner of. Hilebland Avenue and Jasper Street - APN 201- 214 -08. 1. BACKGR0ii110): The project was originally approved on November lat, ai' i*iitial period of twn years. Subsequently, the applicant applied for, and was granted, a one year time extension f which is due to expire on November 14, .1987. The applicant is now requesVill ai additional one year extension of t trp_ for th(t tentati<<r tra.ft. 13 II. ANALYSIS: In reviewing the proposal With the current Developmant Code, s a f fiords that the tentative tract is in general compliance with the Low 'Residential development standards and the General Plan. There is one area, however, when: the tract map does not meet curre ►,t 0�de requirements. The Developwnt Cod requires that lots have a minimsss lot depth of 10.0 feet as measured frog the midpoint of the front property line to the midpoint of tiv; rear - preperty lone. Lot 1, while measuring M feet along the north property line, is only SS feet In depth from the midpoint along Jasper to the midpoint Pf the rear property line. Staff doez not feel this deficiency is significant and will not impede the logical develt.pm€nt of the site. On April 29, 1987, CTK, Inc. submitt_?d an application for a new tentative trac,- map at the same ?ocatxon. While the new application has nut been reviewed by the Planning Commission, the Design Review Comeittee has reviewed, twee properal and is in general agreement wikh the design. Final details of the proposal are being prepared for future Planning COMission review. It appears to staff that the applicant is requesting the present extension of time to prov,,de an option in the event that the new application is not acceptable 4o the City. ITEM C E - t T,�' r !t;NYE �a9e R ' III. REEGR4; tlMATION St tf reetsa�"Ads- that the Plannita Omission' 'tea approver °� Year extenslon of jig for %statixo Tract 12820 through ;adoption of the attached ge"Tuti:o&. RWIi Bt; BR: 9,( :to Attachm,�Pts° LAter from Applicant: Exhibit W Vicinity Pap Exhibit "B" - Tract ;ap. Resolution of Approval �e r, t ' w. , 667 Brea CAnyon Rd Ste 2ti Walmut, Ca, 91789 1 � gar i October 23, 1997 I � City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division Attn: Scott Murphy Pa Box $07 9328 "C" Baseline Rd Rancho,Cocamonga„ Ca. 91701 I Ref: Tentative Tract 12820 Gentlemen I Please extend my Tentative Tract Map Ho. 12820 for and additional year, Also, please rote ny nPw address. Very truly yours, CTK Incorporated Carl T Kohbins ar " President CTK /cls P t, 3 CI'T"% OF app R.-vNCHo PLANNING D,11,' ITE.M., TITLE - EXHIWT: - EM z A MR L a w CI'T"% OF app R.-vNCHo PLANNING D,11,' ITE.M., TITLE - EXHIWT: - EM r- `3 nt a Jul • � _` S•' (�� —may.` rr -_ {• � p CITY ; . rn , RESOLUTION WO, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCA�"m,A .T RI4G COMMISSION APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION FPk—tENTATj * TRACT NO. 12820 APR 201 - 214,08 A. Recitals. (i) C.T.K., Inc. has filed an application for the extension of Tentative Tract No. 12020 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Re 014t -on, the subject Time Extension request is, referred to as the application . (ii) On Novembe 14, 1984 this Commission adopted its Resolution No. 84 -129, therdby approving, subject,:to specific conditions and time limits, Tentative Tract No. 12820. (III) All 1,3gal prerequisites to 0n adoption of this Resolution have occurred. - B. Resolution, NON, THEREFORE, it is hereby found. determined and resolved by the Planning ComMission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows; 1 This Commissiol hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set ,F;v' h in the Recitals, part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Comission, Including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows- (a) 'the previously approved Tentative Map is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan., .Specific plans, Ordinances, Plans, Codes and Policies; and (b) The extel sion of the Tentative Map will not cause signifir, nt inconsistencies with the current General Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinances, Plans, Codes and Policie6; and (c) The extension of the Tentative Map is not likely to cause public health and safety problems; and (d) The extension is within the time limits prescribed by state law and vocal ordinance. q S. Based Upan O Midiogs a4d;.concl s�t� yet forth in �ara�r phi i A 2 above, ': "U"wvf7� WHO A ` #o{�'L A:.�yy1 ] /b3•i ssfen for: cEXt,e 4 12820 CTnM;.� ?n. Dover 14, Igo • The Deputy Sxrett�-Y to this , COMiSsi on salt certify to the adOPii OO Of ' "Is RI -sGl ` ^ ution. AP tl xi AND !k[Mi kilS lOTfr; EERY OF 310AMM j tst j PLAN-NING,COMSSIOM OF THE ICI tY 0F➢ # CttCAMONM i BY: Laery ATTEST: ary i, Brad Buller,, Deputy Secretary of the Planning COmiss ion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing solution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by tfit Plarning Commission of the City of Ra�icho Cuca a»tga� at a regular meting of the Planning Somission held on the M day +of lebensber, 1587, by the following cute-to-wit: AYES: Cf1tISS ?DMIRS: t NOES: COW!SSIONERS, ABSEkT-. COMMISSIikiW: _ 1r, i K-1-1 171 —• ..ix x tirr �,x-tuyuneV Cr4`Lt11,YiiJ1�Ui1 it STAFF REPORT t DATE: November 10, 198 o 0 a T0:" Chairman a-id leers of the Planning Oowfssion U FROM: Bead Pallor, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: RESOLUTICO OF a i & , FOR TRACT 10046 EQUESTRIAN .TRAILS - eW delete a por an a a ocat", an trail easement within a Va eviously approved tract consisting aaf; 27 single family lots in the .Very Low Resikntial D1st°i;t (less than 2 &&fling units per avre' ocated on the north side of Hillside Road, west of fiermosa, ��verrue: 'J On October 14; 198tfi Planning Commission ,,:onducted a public hearing to consider input Z� te*timony on a regmth to delete a portion of a local equestrian ttall easement withims a previously approved single fmily tract. Based tipon the information presented and the oppcsitf to the request, the Planning CoMission determined that the request wad nett appropriate and directed staff to prepare a Resolution of Denial. Attached for your review and adoption is the Resolution of Denial to delete a portion of the local equestrian trail easement. Res uliy s l ri )tY a er JZ C P anner BB:SM :vc Attachments: Resolution ofcd�( p _l �I i .I ITEM 0 R 1` RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CONXISSION OF THE CIMY 0,r RANCHO CUCAMONGA DENYING A REQUEST TO DELETE A PORTION OF A LOCAL EQUESTRIAN TRXXL EASMNZVT ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH BIM OF LOTS 2 AND 3 AND THE WEST SIDE OF LOTS 3 A !,*k 4 OF TRACT 10046 LOCATE.)-", GENERALLY Chit TH]kc RTH SIDE OF HILLSIDE ROM ) WEST OF HE "itlA10SA r RAWMIO CUCANQNGAP CALIFORNIA„ AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. M SHARON M�RROW, owner of Loot 3 of Tract No. 10446, oii crtf of herself and the property owners of Lots 2 and 4 of Tract 10046, has filed an application requfssting the deletion of a portion of a local equestrian trail easement a "- i'.escribed above "+ in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject request sftaa,l be referred to as ' �he Application." A map depicting that approximate area of the lgfal equestrian trail easement pertaining to the application is att;:ached hereto, marked as Exhibit `rA" and is incorporated herein by this reference. (ii) On December 5, 1984, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho CucsdmonSa approved, by resolution, Tentat�"—e Tract No. 10046. As part of said approval, equestrian trails, as recommended by the City, wera required with.4i the subdivision consisting of a community equestrian trail along Hillside Road and local equestrian trails, including that which is the subject of the apr,,'ication, throughout the tract to connect to the community equestrian trail. (iii) On October 14, 1987, the Planning Commisz,ton of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and said public hearing was concluded prior to the adoption of this Resoluion. (iv) X11 legal prerequisites prior ' to -:he adoption of this Resolutio=n have occurred. H. Resolution. NOit, THYREFORF, it is found, determiners and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City Qf Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1 1. In all respotts as set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution. ;I 2.;,' Bawd upon the substantial avidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on October 14, 1987, including written %ind oral staff reports, together with public testimony, tinis Cotpmission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies tc the local equestrian trail easement located on the south side of Lots 2 and 3 of Tract 10046 and the west side of pots 3 and 4 of Tract 10046; b. Said Lots 2, 3 and 4 are currently developed with single family residences and the subject local equestrian:. =;, trail easement is included within the rear yard portions of q .#ad lots; c. The properties to the north and east of }k,e subject site are designated for residential uses and are., developed with those single family residences which conk?: bmise Tract 10046. The property to the south of the subject site is Alk designated for residential uses and is currently* &welgped with a single family residence. The property to the whist of the subject site is designated for flood cont;nl purposes and is currently developed with the Alta Loma flood control chanrel; d. The application has been submitted to allow the deletion of the local equestrian trail easement from the rear yard areas of Lots 2, 3 and 4 of Tract 10046 to allow more usable rear yard space and to provide greater privacy to the owners of said lots; e. The equestrian standards of the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga provide that residential tracts within the Equestrian overlay District shall be developed witA local equestrian trails to hallow lot owners safe and convenient access from their lots to the community trail system. The application as contemplated would not conforn to the General Plan absent express City approval of the placement of such local equestrian trail easements; f. The application as con�:emplated would contradict the goals and cbjectivGs of both the General Plan and Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and would promote a detrimental condition to the persons and properties in 2 , D ..3 ,1 Resolution No. Page 3 the immediate vicinity of the subject si e, for the reasons as follows: (i); The deletion of that portion of the equestrian trail would force riders to traverse from the equestrian trail to Evening Canyon Way in order to connect with the community trail adjacent to Hillside Road. This route of travel would subject those residents adjacent to )vening Canyon. Way to &d1itional those, odors and litte° from horses traveling adjacent to the front of su'h residences; (ii) It is the,,goal'of the General Plan that local equestrian trails shall provide safe access from residential lots to the community trail Lystem of the City. By forcing riders onto Evening Canyon TIay, such riders would be forced to compete with automobiles e- ,«eying and existing Tract 10046 from Hillside Roaii? Such a si' Nation *.could not only be dangerous to horses and riders but w6-L ?-_:create a potential hazardous traffic circulation pattern in and around the intersection of Evening Canyon Way and Hillside'Road; (iii) It is _ze,.,of the goals of the Equestrian Overlays Zone to protect tha`abil.ity to maintain horses on residential lets within the zone. The deletion of the equestrian trail would make difficult the provision-of supplies -and equipment necessary, fpr the keeping of horses by for S`ng such deliveries through thii front anti side yard areas of those lots referenced in the application. g. Local equestrian trail easements are held in common by all owners of residential lots within, a given tract. Accordingly, in addition tv City approval, the deletion of the local equestrian trail easement would require the approval and consent of every lot owner within Tract 10046. At the above- referenced public :hearing of orstober 14, 1987, several lot owners within Tract 10045 spoke in opposition to the proposed . application amd presented petitions from other lot owners in opposition to the proposed application. 3. Based on the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during tk�e above - referenced October 14, 1987 herring _ - -- ar..d upon the specific findings of fact set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2, above, this Commission "hereby finds and concludes as follows: The application as proposed is -nrj, in conformance with the, goals and policies of the Generdl, Plan and Deve'�)pment Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; b. The .application as proposed will be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare; and will be materially injuricus to properties and improvements in the immediate vicinity, and, c. The evidenoe presented to this Commission . has identified substantial potential adverse, effects associate::. with the request specified i'n the: application. 4. BaL.sed upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, -2 and 3, above, this Commission hereby denies the application. 5. The Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall certify to the adortion of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS MY OF NOVE,4BvR, 1487. , PLANNING ;,!ONCIISSION 01F THE CI'T`Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA By: Larry T. Mctxel' , .hairaian Attest: Brad Bu111r, Deputy Secretary Brad Buller, Commission ofthe City%af Rancho, o Cucamonga, do hereby ncertity tll�t she foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucunonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission head on the day of November, 1987, by the followinq vote - to -wit: i"YES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COi�ITSS1ONERS S \133 \:2ES0 4 r� N ](�D N 89:39'20`7 }14.42 J -, 1 N 89'39 zd'i 325,:0 �' a 9• N 9639", 1 A74.00 I 7 ti x ZPM LEWOOWMI.00 DRIVE Q '� N $9•39'20'f 274,00, 1 " 'i IrM 1 138,Su N 2903912M }9b.79 Ms'i r'1 j 27 I $ 20 j Ica' ;,o" Coe �, �r :�,I <' "N $9" d9'20wf - 215.05 =i`— S� �• N $9439'20 t j 1 NCO FT7, ru g) I ^e� "' Nom: ti tS ?POE 44 F �!�.. 4"' I �.f r " ON N tf Aid ., - 128 -, t E r� +3'ra )53.50 �R�,Vpy M8r OQ�JBhlr ��T�53 c' � g N $99`20`_' 142.06 � 4.G0 r- ol.V IS st N E5�a2 6 "1 2 }5.00 r 2' , c 30' i -Ap4 P o ir� ,ADMIT HAL OtOtC.ATIOP ,E CITY G 6.AMCHOt CUCA. k% i r 04 • e " �30'a�30'. „ s'�.nw —ems rc"eacnss.� it r��+�i:, „y rr � ++ra� M�r� °rwa'1., •\ EXHIBIT 'A"'` i; -_ CITY OF RANCHO " iJC.A- too r A STAFF REPORT Ai.. A 13 DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: November 10, 1987 Chairman end "emberr of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Debra Meier, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND TENTATIiFE TRACT 13579 Amen compr s.ng 1 uhTis on 4.59 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-•4 dweilfne units per acre) 10 -aced on the east side of �Iallman Avenue, 325 feet north of 19th Street - APN 201- 474 -12. BACKGROUND: This project was reviewed at the October 14, 19F ammng ommission meetii±g= At that meeting, the Commissi �l determined that the site ds-sign did not meet the &sign goals of the Development Code or the :General Plan and continued the hearing to November lo, 1987 to allow the applicant time for site design revisions, The applicant returned to the Design Review Committee on October 22, 1987 to discuss some of the design concerns. Primarily, the concern is that the site is 'lot suitable for max,mum density in the Medium Residential zone and that the building mass and amount of hardscape on the site dots not interface wail with the surrounding single family character neighborhood', Based upon that additional irput, and suggested site revisions discussed on October 22, 1987 ' the applicant will reschedule for Design Review once revised plans are completed. The project will be forwarded for Planning Commission consideration r Upon resign Review Committee recommendation. At this time, the applicant hopes to have all probiems resolved and return to the Planning Commission at the meeting of November 25, 1987. Otyl u Ed, ' n ner BB:DM: to Attachments: Letter from Applicant Deign Review Committee Action Planning Commission Staff Report of October 14, 1987 ITEM E r i x- �.r'a<.Pt�Q✓�'7 i}L t✓�!_[3F #"SEP lT' kil Avenue% Mitt? jc-ma, cc 1 f r n_8 Naxember 04: 1987 - l Dftra Meier City of Ramat, Cucamonga P.O.aox �p7 1 Rancho Cucamonga. Cz. 917317 MO ?fig -1C ,91 Ms. IiElert f As per ,,our - equestf this letter is to request t c -�tinu';wx +_on on ;:ate Planning G,mmilsidt cn�:tinq to Novemhar 25q 1987. r►ould ,ruu Please con- firm a time with nit-, C, Respectfully. ,r 7Y Or r Art MO c RGi.f1C,t V 21 Pr 3 ,1 T1 L1Y.S.� t �' = G. �•.fi� }_ {�I �../ r aid �,. ,^i ,*. 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS j Debra ;i 6:00 October 22, 1987 is .� I ENVIRONMENT& ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13579 AYOUB - A :multi- '"" res� em,id eve opm- en 'compr�sIng uni s on _ ,acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) Y• Y• located on the east side of Hellman Avenue, 325 feet north of 1gtt; Street - APN: 201- 414 -12. Des-fan Review Coaxittee Action: Members Present: Bruce EmErick, Dan Coleman, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Debra Meier This project was reviewed at the October 14 1,987 Planning 'Commission meeting, at that hearing the Commission determined that the present site design did not meet the design goals of the Development Code or the General Plan and continued the hearing to November 10, 1387 to allow time for site design revisions. The Design Review Committee expressed the specific concerns as, >follows- 1. Although this, project is ix the Medium Resi-;lential District (8-14 dwelling units pe r acre) tte omi.tee felt that this particular site was not suitable, due to size and neighborhocd character, for maximum density of this zone. ?, The 2� story building at the streetscape is not compatible to the surrounding single family character along Heilman Avenue. 3. Because of the density of the site there is a large percentage of hardscape and not adequate areas for -planting of significant sized landscape materials. The Committee provided .direction to the applicant for the foliowirq recommended revisions: 1. Delete one unit from the building facing Hellman Avenue. This would lower the density from 13 dwelling units per acre to 11.6 dwelling units per acre. 2. Scale down the height of the building facing Hellman Avenue to a maximum 131 story height. The building design should eefiect a large single family home. s. To soften the appearance of the entry patios the. Committee suggested using a hedge rather than the block wall to define the patio area. Aft 4. The site design of the Hellman Avenue frontage should include additional landscaping along the driveway and at the north and south buiiding elevations, along with a bermed, landscaped streetscape. E Z DATE: TO: FROM: By z SUBJECT: CITY OF RA' sn CUCAAiC NGA STAFYItEPORT October 14 1987 Chair. i; and - :Menders of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City planner Debra Meier, Associate Plknaer ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13579 - AYOU = "A "nu"Tti= am , res en ; a development opmen comprising - units on 0,69 acres of land in the Medium Residential District {8-14 dwelling units per, acre) located on the east side of Hellman Avenue, 325 .feet north of 19th Street APN: 201-474 -124 I. PRWECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of the subdiyWcan map, conceptual Plot anT`; conceptual granting parr, conceptual landscape plan, and buile,ig elevations for the development of 9 towrhouse units, and issuance of a Negative Declaration B. Project Density: 13.0 dwelling emits per acre. C. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: or - -- ExIstIn§ ,own omen; edium Residential (8-14 dwelling fruits per acre) Siiuth - Existing Single Family Residences; Medi(jm Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) last - Existing Townhomes; Medium Residential (8-14 dirpliing units per acre} West - Existing Single Family Residences; Law Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) D. Generail Plats Designations: Project e - e sum es dential (8-14 dwelling unit4 per acre) North' - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) South Medium Residential (8-114 dwelling units per acre) East - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) Nest Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) E. Site Characteristics: The site slopes from north to south at approx ma e y a percent grado. The parcel contains an existing single family residence and accessory structures which will be removed. Also, two trees will be removed, a 24 inch diameter cedar and a 24 inch diameter pine. E-4 ITEM I � k PLANNING COMMISSIt iTAF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT 13bt9 AYOUB October 14, 1987 Page 2 Alk 0 F. Parking Galcutatioi)s. Number, f - -uWe *, of Type spa " s Spaces, of Use Red Eire, PravieetL 9 three - bedroom units (2 O x 9) 28 18 enclosed Total (0.25 x g) 2.2 3 open II_. ANALYSIS: A. General: The townhouses are designed in three levels, two s or es of living space over a two -car garage. The units are provided within two bu lding3, private op�_ space for each unit consists of tran" patio and two rear balconies. on- site amenities r,, clustered to the rear portion of the site, including pot'l, spa, sun deck, tot lot and open play area. d. Design Revi`w Comittels: Thr project was presented to the Design ck, Buller, Coleman) on August b, 1987. The Committed de� ermined that various architectural and site plan revisions were necessary. The specific conceris were: 1. Ccmittee'a Concern: The Site design is very tight and does not allow sufficient perimeter landscaped area or adequate lacidsca+ping: along the ends of the buildings. Some alternatives may be to gain emergency access to the north throu9t.1 the Alta Wes-d!; project or elimi�iate a unit. Apolicant°t,Response: The applicant did try to gain emergency access to the north onto the Alta Woods townhm,t project. The Homeowner's Association for the project denied his request. Rather than delete a unit, the applicant 's concentrating on all the specific problems related to the denseness of tti site as described in items 2 avd 3. The applicant` added two Maple trees to each end of the:` building adjacent to Hpllman. However, the planter aepth is too small for trees and a tall growing shrub, such as podocarpus is suggested. 2. Comi'ttee's Concerns provide in appropriate landscape screen along the east property line to achieve private screening for the pool avea from the Alta Wood project adjacent. E-5- PLANNING r,"TSSI( 7AFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT 13b/9 - AYOUS' W-tober 14, 1967 Page 3 Applicant's ftsponst: Tf, landscape area along the north and east edge of !,,he pool and deck area now contains a cn4inuous screen of trees on i 15 foot centers. Th trees proposed are Maple. Staff suggests using a species more adaptable to our climate, Liquidambar or Sycamore would provide a similar appearance and are bettor suited for drought tolerance. 3. Comittee's Concerns The ends Hof each building need additional architectural treatment. Some suggestions discussed a;.. *_he meeting included: a. Use of siding materiaii on these elevations. b. Gradient change in color from upper and lower levels of building. c. Bringing the balconies around the corners of the building, d. Some fu;rm,,of stucco trimming details. Applicant's Response: The applicant has provided vertical wood siding with a horizontal 2 x 10 trim piece at each floor level. 'Me siding is painted, carrying uut the blue -grey color range of the desired Cape -Cod theme of the project.. 4. Condt:tee's Concern: It mould also be desirable to add interest to the roof line with change- in ridge location, or some vertical relief such as bringing the roof lower at the ends of the buildings. Applicant's ;Response: The roof line of the e d units has been dropped 12 inches below the riddle portion of the building. S. Coaerittee's Concern: The Planning Commission policy has been to upgrade all roof material to concrete tile. For this particular project the suggestion w,as slate colored flat tile. Applicant's Response: Roof material proposed is now concrete tile. C. Technical Review Committee: The Committee reviewed the project ana ffe-TZH-Tfied that- VtFi'ti'ie recommended standard conditions of approval and specadl conditions as provided in the attached Resolution, the ;project is consistent with ail :applicable standards and Ordinances. C -iio T `$ Ll PL�iNNP �' :RpRT `> TENTAUVIE IR G i3 er x4, I Page 4�� D. Environmental l�sse4sment• Pa?t i of the initial SttS4N has been comp le y e app Staff hies. completed Path` T of the Environmental Checklist and found no significant im pacts an the i` environment as a: result of this project.. ICI,, FACTS FO R FINDINGS; The project is consistent with the Developmeit Code and the eneral Plan, and will not be detrimental to adjacent properties, or cause significant impacts. The proposed use, . building design and subdivision, together with all recommended conditions of approval, are in compliance with applicabl_ regulations of the Development Code. IV. CORRESPONDENCE* This item has been Olvertised as a public hearing in thi Daily _ 'Report newspaper, the property posted and notices LI were senT o IT prop; rty owners within 300 feet of the project site. V. RECttWENDATION; Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve e n•a ive Tract 23579, subject to the conditions of approval, through adoption of the attached R ecolutan and issuance of a Negative Declaration. RespetOul ly s -Ritted,, B l city annex 88: DM: to Attachments Exhibit "A" - Location Flap Exhibit "0" - Site Plan /Tree Umoval Plan Exhibit "C" - Trt-e Removal Permit Exhibit "D" - Conceptual Landscaping Plan Exhibit "E" - Preliminary Grading Plan Exhibit "F" - Fire Department Circulation Exhibit "G" -. Duilding Elevations Exhibit "ti" - Floor Plan Resolution of Approval with Ceaditions t-7 �� �JtGWLAM AM?. ' -1-85 Ci G' T PlR ECT �cCM1�?iritk'stu�ts3 R""3_T� R -1 8500 1 _E:.._ -4FR7 LU I j_ t 1 t1inETSetl H s� w R9 I MATH CITY Or, iTENi R NCHO C CA7vIt NGA TITLE: �-- PLANNI,\G DIN ISiO.N EXHIBIT. -A- SCALE= - ,a 8t... �r sr a�w ar w• a m.w• >wav E � .r— ,i..�.A... _..:.. � tom• L,._.:�_ ..®rr, S j _` E *ILir ■Itb:DNifl PAD 4t tULDINO IkAD «• srf ••••, 4. Toy LOT i lea! ry� x +JP i+•� aE4 aVa3C wca }� p. YeR4iMi . i �- + KiN it tC3 tw.eC SITE PLAN :.T'J -AAt' _�. �!�. s3ii! �'3" ... iJ!!5 ':: 4. �2 v •lR�2 l6Ci+W .,u•5 xl }C� wOV� x3L!{2 itlq l.rf'I - •O, �.0 0 _�.�i SW i4aa �� ]x3C .i E.a �+.�x ix+,` is e�ac w�.' '+ .a�:i ��' ✓.'a.•q � a �� I S� I PLAlV'NIM DrvrNM EXHUD SCALE= I amity of Cucamonga GENERAL INFORMATION a Removal Permi, DEVELOPMENT', OR MORE TH -AN 5 TREES OR 50' LR f EAR FEE Ordinance No. '276, pertaining to the preservation of trees on private property, requires that no pera:`n remove or relocate any woody plants in excess of fifteen (15) feet in height and having a single (. unk i circumference of fifteen 415) inches or more'and multi- Trunks having a circumference of thirty (30) inches or more (measured twenty-four fi4) inches from ground level!, without first obtt :ining a Tree Removal Permit from the City. f I TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLIGAgt: . s LOCATION OF SUBJECT SITE 6649 Hellman Ave. NAME. ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF APPLICANT: Rich.-!- Ayoub, ,5649 He 11man Ave i - ti Alt Lora .CA 91701 (114) 980 -1210 t NA *A E`. AGDHESS. TELEPHONk OF PROPERTY OWNER (if other than applicant) I sAr»" — REASONSFORREMOVAL(atticr, necessary shoe -_tl' Trews arz :n the proposed i location of building. pads. (SEE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP) °ROPOSEcD METHOD OF REMOVAL, _T: im from i ht c con cozier % APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE.- ADUITIt. AL FILING REQUIREMENTS This aop;mation shah mejuce a plot plan indicating iccation of alt trees to be removed and retained . The species, :cumber, aid site of the trees to be removed shall b., so dgsignated. ita't-ee is disease-i . than a written statement from a licensed arborist stating the nature 0 the ^isease shat; he required_ ACTION -- Evatuatioit of this application is based er the y7- er±a con the revere ride. -1+ APPROVED —_� ❑ DENIED B __' _ Reasons: _ Date: __. _ Nctifi,,ation of application shall be given to p prior to approval. If no appeals are received, It /.3V17 date of action. This approved tree removal perr ^ .--� or buiidirig permit iss�< :nce. whichever comas r� ' �,� e day pencd. a new permit Shah be required, Lin � exc ai�cr a ihA wN ri +. _ _ �_ EXd-HiI x SCALE: W- RANCHO CLICAN TrnE: #r` A � 8.••. •r a w •s. a an r m..r =sx.r f i rAw ^w LAW _ a • dr r arK j Tw it11LPING aAp� mr 14 00 a" sr wit TV, ..:Y . , .�.. <..,.. .r.,...,...•.. ter.... ,.•.. -- so •0 NORTH W- RANCHO CLICAN TrnE: UL k. Oww sr sr WOW GRADING PLAN -00 MN a M ar M'4 WVAW FIRE TRUCK ACCESS PLAN LEGEND c� NVM�-,� CITY Cy n7m! MU" PLAMNG UVEM EXHffllT--Zo--SCAU-. �j e a GARAGE ENTRY ELEVATION BUILDIMQ SigcTIaN a FRONT ENTRY ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATIONS I north elevations sWisr I TYPICAL ELEVATION," PROPERTY LINE BLOC;; WALL }} :H CITY OF mm. l PLANINIllj EX IIB11`' St',AZ.E I" SN . WY.0111M1 M.M s�•r�r SITE / FENCE SECTION 2 setback -r !lint - drive turnaround SITE ! FENCE SECTION - 1 t r V CITY OF : ltaigV . few t. _...__ -_... —.« �.+Na w.f oecc .aea +a�a.....r •a•.. • E GARACE LEVEL C IMK aEr ROC L!? N:uRR�.nO tt}TM, ^ ~ ENTRY LIEL I FH ;, f II - * �t4 ��. Nan,.: -�• �MNL Yl. Ott?•a�a Nfry.R .atp iJ24 FIRST FLOOR LEVEL jAWWA rota, OTa} 2UM 2200 ngra' r V CITY OF : ltaigV . few �Y r CITY OF RANCHO UC91tIONGA STAFF REPORT ',ta o F z �1 DATE: November 1o, 1987 � 077„ � To: Chai man ,and Members of the Manning Commission MOM: Brad Buller, City Planner r BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Q­" #D TENTATIVE TRACT 13727 1< � residential RUD IV s O or single axis y n sIon 53 ocres of land in the Low Residential District U -A dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of rarnelian Street and Highland Avenue - APB!: 01- 21� -I1 Staff is in receipt of a letter from the applicant requesting that this itan be continued for an additicoal four weeks. Therefore, staff recommends that the public hearing be continued to December 9, 1987. Res p tfu7ly bm;Fte"' B ulier City Planner BB:SM•vc Attachments; Exhibit 'A" - Letter from ,Applicant ITEM F 1` U Eric Sanssens ��� < <� r• 109. Ivy Ste C o� -.... GUCAG,CFIG.' Monrovia, Ca. 91016 CRti1VCH0 NIt4 Lil'S'Or� i November 3# 1987 f' :..: City of Rancho Cucamonqa It i! Planning DiviS�on ��� Attn: Ccott Mu3,hy PO Box 807 9320 "C" Baseline Rd Rancho Cucamonqa, Ca. 91701 �: Ref„ Tract 13727 Gentlemen: In order to complete the design of the Tentative Tract in conformance with the establlau --d Caltrans right-of- way, I recuest that Teitative Tract 13727 be continued ' to December In adt"itio,i, 1 agree to waives the time- limits established by the Subdivision Map Alt. /very tx ly tcu: =.s, lVEric Janssf ns i • 0 DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF F_A ?dCHOECUCAMOT MA STAFF RPOR .cam i C: Cd O .^ November 10, 1987 1977 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission' Brad Bullpr, City planner Scott.Muroy, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13359 - Custom .vis on at acres a an in at i parcels in the Very Low Residential District iless than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Sapphire Street, south of Hillside Road - APN: 1061 - 691 -51, 10 anu' 11. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSME_RT AND VARIANCE 87 -15 - WALTON - A request to reauce the minimum average o s "ze,500 square feet in area to 21,392 square feet in area in conjunction with a six (6) lot suhdivisi u located on the east side of Sapphire Street, south of Ni'lside road - APN: 1061 - 691 -10 and 11. I. BACKGROUND: On October 23, 1987, the Planning Commission conducted a pu is Baring to receive input and testimony on a proposed tract map and related variance (see staff reports for analyses). During the hearing, concern was expressed about two issues relating to the project: 1) the drainage from the site down 'lurk Street, and 2) the current General Plan designation as a park site and the potential of providing another park site in the northwest portion of the City. As a result, the Planning fommission continued the tentative tract and variance requests to allow staff to investigate and address these two items. II. ANALYSIS: A. Drainage! As part of the tentative tract application, the ap'— pi3caf submitted a drainage report to address the drainage of the cul -de -sac street from its terminus, through the schol site, to Turk Street. The report addressed the size of the pipe necessary to handle the run, -off from the street. the report, however, did not address the downstream flows on Turk Street. Staff has been working with the applicant to assess the flows but, as of yet, has been unatile to compile all the necessary information to adequately address the drainage issue. Therefore, additional time is necessary to. complete the drainage study. Staff suggests that a four week continuance be considered. ITEMS r t H I .. " PLAwNG commrssrm STA'f REPORT 'fi' 13359• - Walton VA 87 -15 - Walton havember'10, 1987 Pam 2 , Adk B. ,Park Designation: One of the objectives of Oe City's Genera an is to prinv, a adequate park and recreatiunal fac.1ities to 6t%,et the demand of the growing populction. To accomplish this it,jective, the General Plan states that 5 acre, of parr Tani fo,` every 1,000 peoplo would be necessary. A thie >-tier system of park development was established to implesrept the General Plan directioq, This system includes co pity parks,, neighborhood parks, anti mini- parks. Cowunity par;,s range in size from 20»100 acres avid serve a 3 mils radius area. Neighborhood parks are generally 5: -20 acres in area and serve c ,. 1 mile radius. Mini parks are designed to serve the imp- diate' neighborhood. "sire General Plan designation fCr the subject site is shorn as a neighborhood park. The City has considtTed the site for d park facility and determined one following; 1. In reviewing the access, surrounding and directly acUocent uses, and mitigation of any adverse impacts created by the introduction of a park thb City felt that the use of this s site as a park was not desirable. This decisson w &s formally reviewed and greed upon by the City Council's Perk Acquisition L Committee with yity Council concurrence (see Exhibit "B"). 2. Heritage Community Park, located to thc. east, has a service area extending north Into the sphere of Influence, south to ''Foothill Boulevard, east to Milliken ftenne, and west into ule city of Upland (see Exhibit "A "), 3. Red ,Hill Ccs unity Park, located on Base Line Road, has a I service area extending north to the City limits, south i :'to the City of Ontario, east to Milliken Avenue, and west into the City of Upland {see Exhibit "A "i. j 4. The park designation of the Ceneral Plan is a floating designation. It applies to a general area and:is not site specific. '.. There are other vaca ^it parc0 s in the northwest portion (if the City that coind be uquired and developed for perk uses. Exhibit "A" shows toe locations of 'existing and proposed residential subdivisions. Considering the petulous points, ztaff feels that the tentative tract can be approved for the site. Staff recommends, however, that approval of the tract b.Z contingent upon approval 0 a General Plan Amendment revoving the park designation. t �c�y T +may, �+ µ. y ' �'l..At$11ING" 4i'WiSSIlWiI f `REPORT 7� TT 13359 - WaIt n >�' 2 87 5 lial t06veaibee 10, 1587 (?a9- r - o C 4 III. RCCOMFiENDATION Staff rec ends fiat � t C + n ativ Tract a 133551 and a F amt e_ --Irbe continued to the Meeting of December 9, 1587... The contiixaanre,.however, can only be accomplished if the applicant ,agrees to the continuance and the appflcant agrees to Waive the G tip limits specified in the Subdivision trap Act. If the applicant E is fidt agreeable .,to the continuance and will not waive the time limits, staff' reco nd$ that the Manning Cometssion direct staff to prepare a Resclut?on of Denial. I � Bra idler City Planner i BB: S!: vc t Attachments: CxhiXt "A' - Residential Applications Map Fxhibit "B" - Memo frte Bill volley, Communit;(Services Director Exhibit "C" - better Dai;ed ,tune 17, 1981 Tentative Tract 13359 Staff Report Variance 87 -15 Staff Report RT�I .L j+ YH 124at f"_i -. �': i - If9 >s!a nscc jLac Highland 19f'r W'� ^?te= JnZ (j 4. GeVCt� . >•a Terri WE LF CITY OF ITF-% V �" _ , f axx %56 i t 4 i• " RA., CU0LjD:% A TITLE PL. ti`�ItiG Dt�IS EXHIPAT. SC ALL 90- 4c,12:0 AVIC,164WELT ;�4e� 1-1-17 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA MEMORANDUM date: November s; 1987 1ti To: Brad Buller, City Planner From: Bill Holley, CO=-unity ;qe vic4s Director Subject: General Flan Park Site A?esignation Brad, you ha'inquired regarding ' certain park site designations called out in the Recreation Element of the General Plan. Four park sites called out in the General Plan, specifically sites located at: • Sapphire south of Hillside; • Banyon at '�uca� Dnga Creek; • Hermosa north E,� Hillside; and • 'L3 Mancha► sit! west of Maven south of Arrow, were not acquired far inclusion into the city parkland inventory between 1980 and 1982 when the opportu.,ty to do so presented itself. In each instance it was the action of the City C (-unc1l c);: the City Council's Park Acquisition Co:amittea with Council concurrence) that made the determination not to acquire the individual •_te. These actions will not be found.in any City Minutes. The Council Is 'reasoning' for their action at the time is irrelevant toaay...the fact is that it was their direction at the time and that direction was followed. No alternative sites have been designated which, :Ulustrates the need to update the Recr,,atj]n Element Plan. of the general As the Planning Division is the 'custodian' of the General Plan, the Community Serv'.ces Department would be available and desirous of working with you oil that update. BH:�s cc: Lauren Wasserman, City Manager Dave Leonard, Park Project Coozdinator K r i t } CIS OF RANCHe Cp,1A:N ONGA. . � > atrrpPt�Rk'�►D.r�eieloaer" - JArtio+cr loot D.MuLtu June 1., 1981 r,e { Arian Walton 4, 5675 Sapphire 4 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Dear Mr. Walton: This letter is sent confirming discussions bttwe u yourself and this writer regarding pote ttiai lucatiout of a park ,upon your property `at and adjacent to 5675 S�Aaphire in 'lancho Cucamonga. While the General plan shows an Uidication of a park c+pon your pi^.aperty, this is merely symbOic of locating it in t.';*rt '.general" j= �A aria. ". specific site anal'ysit. of yorr property when considering f,,4ors .,f: acce3s, surrounding a6d directly adjacrnt land uses; wnd, mitigatian to any adverse impacts possibly created by the intreduction of a park, it is felt that' the use q� your land for a ipidhborhuod park is untenable. We appreciate your generous cooperation and offer to help the City in this undertaking of providing more park land for its residents, how- Ever, we are not consi dering the purchase.af you: property toward that end. Again, thank you for your considerate *n. Cor ialyx William .. Nei ey, qi-r-Rto Community 5e_TM ices ar nt WLNznm p� at.c�0�'� �8 +3.1 +Q iw ikA.' iCIit7CUt�, .V3Q2+TGA,.�Ii,YF'Qt'i?�IA9173Q � {93�3�Jd�5r.i8�Y .� k 1, CITY OF RANT tt O CU ,AMONGA ,'TA B`-REPORT, � 7 t' DAiE: OctOber 28, 1987 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commiasion FROM: Brad Bulb t City Planner BY: Scott Murphy,, Associate Planner f SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT I. 9D TENTATIVE T:J1CT L3353 am jof. suoGIVISloq of acres or an ini°o 6 parce+s in the Very Low Residential District (isss then 2 dwelling univs per acre;, located on the east side of Sapphire Street, south of Hillside Road - APR 10&1 -691- 9, 10_xpd 11. RELATED FILE: VARIANCE 87 -15 I. BACKGROUND: On September 9, 1987, the Planning Commission con uc a 'a public hearing to receive input and testimonv on the proposed developme t of 6 single family custom lots. At that time, with the recommended condition of approval fw x a mity Trail on the south tract boundary, the lots within the subdivision would not average 22,500 square feet as r'dauired by the Development Code. The Plannin5 Commission stated that the requirement of a 15 -foot community trhil as necessory to 'Implement the Master Plasm of Trans within the Equestrian Overlay District. The Planning COnission, IhOWver i felt that there ` my, �t sufficifint Justification to �.onsider a varfanc -�.: lot size 9,—,44e due to i.he amount of iVroveme -nts required Wth the subdivision. As a result, th, Planning Cowission continued this item to allow the appi1 °ant to file a V,irianca request. II_ ANALYSIS: Following the Planning Commissinn meeting, tie applicant TIT-OT4- iariance request to allI)w Me reduction in the averc)e lot size. An analysis of the variance is euntained in the s :,r'f report for Yarsxnce 87 -15. W ;th the recommelded conditions of approval, the lots within the subdivision, ranging ftiom 20,700 square feet to 22,,500 �nuare feet in area, ,Onfare to tra Dovelopo -nt Code minim lo,t si a of 20,0 The average lot size of 21 K1 square f t. ,392 s4tl�re feet does nit confers .b the Code requirement oi:__22,590 square fe,, t. Therefore,, the tract can only be approved if the related variante4 is approved;. l A detailed description of the various Committee recc wndations is contained in the attached September 9th Plan report. ning Coamission staff P;' MNIN6 C"! SS10N STAFF RtdORT TT 13359 - WALTON October 28, 1987 Pace 2 III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order for the Planning Comission to aProve lentative Tract 13359, facts to support thi: following finings must be made: 1. The tentative trest is consistent: with the General Plan, Development Code and Specific Plans, 2. The design or the improvements Of —be tentative wact is uansiUG t with the General Plant Specific P14ns; ; Development Code and 3. The site is physically suitable for the t»pe of developMeh: proposed; a. The design of the subdivision is not likely f, cause substantial environmental damage ,+std avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or :heir habitat; E. The tentattive tract 4_ 4-var -fil ely to cause serious pub4 -ic health pnsblemsp 6. The design of the tentative tract mill not conflici; any easeeent acquired by the public at large now of record for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivisions. IY. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advr Wised in The Daily Report newspaper an notites were sent to &11 property otrners y hi-n— 3W feet of the pwect site. Y. RECOMENDATION• Staff recom"nds that the Planning Commission con c amp �' hearing to receive alt input and testimony on the Grapost!a p►- ject, If, after recalving input, the Planning Commission determines that there is sufficient justification f(sr the variance, then approval of Tentative Tract 13359 through adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of d Negative Declaration would b* =apr;apriate. Resp ui iy s nted, ra = City Planner 68: Sk:ko „ 4txachments.: September 9, 1987 Planilinq ma Co Won St3fi'Report Resolutitn of Approval wi Convitions n - E 11 rrrV AV 'tAN.,I"1U 5 REPORT y DATE: Septe*l er 9, 1983 M: Chaired;; acid Me er. of the Planning Commission :FROM.: Brad Bu11"�Ar, Ci*y Pls finer BY Scott- lurpt%y, Associate, planner SUl�1Et;T: ` EifVi MORWAL ASSES -XW AN TENTATIVE . TRACT 13,359 - >\ - cus aO, o sea v s o W3.7,; acres o ' land %`ira six 46I pare 1s in the Very Low, Re fdential District tl, ±ss than ; Zl` `ng units pt;, acre), 1�cated on the toast side of Sapphire Street, !,.u+h of hillside Road - APN 1U6 - 691 -% 10 and 11. I. PROJECT AND Sl*,� ` ESCRIFTION: ^1 A, Actiot-Ae ltid: Approval- of sub4ivision design, conceptual of a ko •4 ive Declaration. B. �r ect Densitjj „ 1,58 dwelling units pmr acre C. Surrounding Lang Use and toni�, � Noon( 8 an'n”; ery oyr; esiZential {`Pass than 2 ,dwelling units ptr acre X South - Single PkImil.y 'Its dantia).; `try Low Residential (less than 2 &VI ling units per acre) East - Floyd Stork \klearEr:.; ry School; Vary Low Density 1'tt-ldential Mass than 2 dw,01ing units per acre? . Nest - Single Paeti';y Residential; Very 1,ow Residential (less than 2 doelTing units`per acre) 1. General Pita pesi natiars: roz ec 'par^ North -.. Very F:ow ResidetitiaT (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) South - Very Lax Residential (less than 2 dwelling unfits per acre) k1st - Elementary School Wkst - Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acne) E. Si ,Ch.aracterisi:,.;sr The .file_ is currently Vacant with an aver Qe s ape o .pia percent °none northwest to - outheast. 1,� YI- PLANNIM CoMk,ISSIC TAF,F itEPORT TENTATIVE TRACT 13369 - WALTON Septeaber g, 19$7 Page 2 -, _.,, Affilh Ip f- Q. j ANAL i y SLS: _ r A. Genii °al: the appVcant is' prsr,hsing to dev'lop six lots ra 91*9 in size fcA� 20,700 square feet to 26,900 square feet in arOa, The Tats, are intended to be sold !nor custnw home developsent. B. Jesirnn Reviw Comri "tee: The Design Review Comait.pe (Ba -ker, x 5" .Ar rev ewe the proposal ar Hovembe:, �, 1986. At, that, time the Cpaa�itt recommended approval o- the ro ec Fp p subject to th_ following condit�ios:s- 1. The drive4ays (curb cuts) An Uts 3 and a should be limited to 12 feet fn width, 2. The driveway on Lot 3 sf auld be located on the east side of the property frontage. 1 3. The Irivrway on "'Lot d should be locet�4 on the i west side of the property frontzge. C. Tect >lieal Review Committee: The TNchniral Review C ittee rev.*** propose on vt*er 4, 1 86, Tht Corm ttew determined that,tho drainage of. the public strut would have to be handled within a tUri,Ireir, pipe, as opposed to an at -grads structure as proposed by he applicant, in order to protect ttit ries:dcaces to the h of the site, As a resu.t, an easement for the proposed storm dvaid pipe j1dC any p ?adirg necessary for construction of t6i2 storm drain pipe was ,- equired across from the elementary school sit &. Th& applicant liar- subsequentl ;^ obtained the necessary +aa%Meft� 'rom the schr; ",4 district. The final desfSn`of the storm di,esn pipe will be reviewed and approved by Ue City Engineer prior to recordatiP:. :If the final map., 3. Trails Advisor _Eroamwiitee: The Trails Advisory Co�ittea FR�'eetea r � proposa osa'�y 20, 1967 and recomndaJ j approval subs -tst to the following requirements. 1. Provide a 16 -fRot wide c0ownity trail wig I-efergd daricatior along the southern ,tract boundary; The comuni ty tfliY fenein should provided along #:� rmrrhtrr edge of the train. The 'trails CON6-4M. stated that the Wicatioh was necer,"ry in order to =provide another portion Of the Be`+echwood f.,omrity 'Frail as itqufrQ by the lister Plan of Trails "8■), ii (sat Exhibit The exist4.4 trail ;309th df the tract is (fie ;�+enty f*e:t in wi --3h�but is, `owever, an equestrian ! n—t' And `'s not dedicated to the City, � x. YI- PL41MIfiC CI' R41SSIC ,TAF'F REPORT M ''ATI erg TRACT 13359 ,. GALMe Sex;x,aber 9, !eV Page 3 •:. The 15 -foot wide local trail easement ?.long tht west tract boundary should extend up to Street "A". 3. The local fdeder trail sh(wt aloft& touthw= steriy lot line of Lot 2 shoo; deleted. 4. All offers )f dedication and equestrian easements are to be shown on the final reap ant are to be submitted for the review and approval of the Trails Co+smittee prior to recordation of the final map. With the Incorporation of the eecr maendations of the Trails CommittEe, the tract design, as proposed by the applicant, w1ll rqt be in confoiTAinca +with the Develapment Cide. The Dev0 op&-nt Code requires that the lots within the subdivisi ,)n overage 22,500 square feet in area. with the 15 feet of dedicatil.n for the community trail, the l=.ft* will or.iy average 21,592 square `Veet in area. in ordar� tc co ply with the recd aaatiotis of the ?'rails CO"Gittee, the tract map will have to be redesigned. rde applicant, hoviver, fee's that the dedication is Massive and wishes t%7' Panning CommixSion to review a,rd consider -the recow 40flS of the Trails Committee. D. ervironrzntal Assesu*at. The rvw- i cant has completed Part I Staff has completed Part Ix and determined that the proposed development will dot have any concurs, a iss afiee ofi�a c Negative the ation would si.be appropriate, T1I, E'ACTS FOR FINDINGS; : ',th the recommended conditions of approval, e rat - �a�+ ;emitted, will not ve in conformance with the sta"eJ, as and objectives of the Development Code, The `ots will average 21,392 squirt feet in area. The V :+lopment Code requires tracts within tkle '10y Low Residential District; to provide an average lot size of 22,500 square feet in area. fORREEMiXF3%CC° thi; item has been adver:clsed in the ort hUrin flail Re n spiper a pubii�; " *h ro 50 fret of the project ce. were sent to 5� p op -'may IAFF ET wX - Rage 4 Mt V. itEC liT 4# : Staff recogcgds, that the P1 �e�aing C� issimn ° 'r g cans La public - t ti ,� .the �prpposad d6ielop� f after receiving al a llnyut, the �`lrina ng Co.amis,. "pn �anc�a► witi� i r os endaticns of the '101s ry caw#ttii3 _and' the ap�icar� is unx+tlling to revise the subdivision map, i - °rdcaa�en ' that the plYnning Cdssir+rt dengr Tenxiwe ;Tract . 33389- Clue .. to irsnnsi ncies with the 9revela n iod� through adopti4a of the atta'chrd Resolution. R",pectfully suWt'.ed, ra u}i /City iranner, ; �ttachroents: Exhibit "A" »`ilts Util'2ttin PAP Exhibit "g" Subdivision Nip . E Oibit pl. aq "ryC" Ca Optuat grading - EtYtbit er R1an of Tails Re,ai� '14 ai D'' Trial I t 0 E ORTE TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CrLT OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STTAFF LFPORT Oct(ber 28, 1987 1977 Chairman and ftibers of the Planniog Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Scott Murphy, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL.ASSESSSMENT AND VARIANCE 87 -75 - WALTON - A request—to r uce e m n mum average o $ ze rote 50C square feet in area to 211,74 square fast in area in conjunction with a six �6) lot subdivision located a the east side of Sapphire Street, south of Hillside Road - APN: 2061491 -10 and 11. RELATED FILE: Tentative Tract 13359. I. BACKaROUlD On September 9, 1987, Planning Commission conducted a pu51"ic— "%wring to receive input and testimony on a proposed of six required that custoE lots. a Community Trail be p ovf4ed a',ong the south tract boundary. kith this additional dedication, the subdivision could no longer meet the minima dverage lot size required by tht) 1,evelopw at Code, The Planning Commission stated that the regv;;rerPent of a i5° Ce®uunity Trail was nenessary to implement thr Ate,* Plat of Trails within the Equestr;ai Overlay District. The planning Commission, however, felt that there way be sufficient justificatfo:! to consider a variance request due to the amount of iwirovecaenta requit.,d with the subdivision, II. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a .e uc an in tyre minimum average lot size from 22,SOO square feet in area to 21,392 square feet in area. in considering this variance request, the F1at+n'09.Ccmmission may wish to consider tka foilowing items: 1. The unusual configration of the site greatly restricts the design of the subdivision. The Site is a flag lot design with a 401 wide strip of land fronting onto Sapphire Street, As a rasult, access to site is li0ited to a single street entc:.ritg the project and cul- de- sating within the larger portion of the site to the southwest. 2, ne proposed lot sizes are consistent wii, the surrounding area. The tract to the south and to the %,LCst across Sapphire Street were developed .ht the R -1 20,000 zoning designation of the County. As a result, the lot sizes within loose tracts are approximately 20,000 Square feet The current- :,proposal meets rr exceeds the lot sizes o1 the s �rrotarding developments. FLAWNINE COMISSION 'STAFF REPORT VAR ;A NCE 87 -16 - WALTON October 28, 1987 Pag6 2 i y^ 'All. FN-'TS FOR FINDINGS: In order for j�he Planning Commission to approve a var ance, the QevelopWint Code requires that the following findings must bo= iatt I. That the strict and literal inte�j proetstion and enforcement of the Specified regulation would r {sult in Practiciil difficulty or unnecessary physical hard, ip inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Cede. 2. That there arc, exceptional' or ex'$raordiriary circumstances or conditiens applicable to the Q,Soperty involved or to the irtended Use,of the property that do not ge ►ocraliy apply to C or properties in t o Lame. district. 3. That strict or literal interpretation of enforceaeeett of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by tfie owners of other properties in the same district. 4. That grante+' zk variance Vouid not canstitaAte s grant of Special priviiege inconsistent wit.F the lijitations of other properties classified In this same district. S. That the grenting of a variance will not 5e detrimental to the hmalth, safet , or o0fare, or oeateriall;- injurious to properties or Improvements in the vicinity, IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Ibis item has been advertised as a public hearing 1n ,e a -`�Ort newspaper and notices were sent to all property owners w r W-r* *t of the project site. V. RECOMEW)MON: Staff recamends 'chat the Planning Commission son uc. a Public hearing to consider input and elme;.ts of this project. If, after such consideration, the Planning Commission can support the i'""ired findings, Men adoption of the attached nesolution Of A,aproval woell!, be appropriatt. Resp uliy su ted, !a rad\-ft 91 � City P1 nee E18: 94: vc Attachments: Exhibit 'A" - Site Utilization Exhibit V - Tract ftp Resoiu lOn of approval y y -r LA 3A CITY OF T' AI+i0H0 CUO`AXONOA STAWRERDIrr 0 d t}- z > {{ 1973 _ 1' € ATE: November 10, 1987 . T0: Ch` gran anal Members of thi Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Daly Oolewn, Senior planner f SUBJECT: TEa1TATEW TWi T 12332 �_ "`. °ND _ A request to modify a con on of Epproval for a developwpnt of Maven ,Viers Estates a custom lot residential subdivision of 151 lots on 85 acres of land looted on the east: si a of N3ve!, north cf the Hillside Drainage Channel., I. BACKGF.OUND• f Tentative Tract 12332 (204 lots pan 141 acres) was rigina y approved by the Planning Commission on Moy 11, 1983. ine apPlicant recorded Phase I (5? lots,), Subsequently, xhe app7i <ant revolved a ne.t wpp:^ov4l for the remaining 151 lots on February 12, 1986. The tract plans were, ideni;`7,cal to those previously ap1rcved and were deemed consistent ali;:h the Development Code. Ii. AlAALYSIS: At issue is a condition of approval which states "this l aDA-Mal shah' run with the applicant and shall become !road upon a chsnge of vvnership or if the business operation teases." In effect, -`•his would cancel the tentative map if the applicant tran.ferrcd interest fa another party. Staff believes that this conditior, was inadvertently placed upon: ' this project, There was no similar condition on the original approval in 1983. The staff report and minutes of the Commission meeting of February 12, 19886 contain no "efererkce to ti3:e condition. Further, the project was conditioned 'as all tr -acts are) to expire in 24 months unless extended by iho Commission. This condition would normally be applied only -Lo cert( °.in types of Conditional Use Permit appli4ations where the operation of a use could be directly *ittributable to the applicant. %eref�re, this condition serves no purpose for the tentative tract anri it was not staff's intent it draftingjthe conditions adopted by the Connission to limit the ability of th:e applicant to sell his tract. i �� Tl'E?i TW � . m - PLANNING Ct1FM ssrC � � `€1y�PORT 1 TT 12332 - L.ABMD Novefter 10, 39e7 Page c III. RECW*XQ.AtI6H it is recce' ended that ttra pl &nq ing the �. i�$,nn aw ,Condition A.4 throuO the adoption of the attaiched Resolution.- - Res ally, itted, A'.�. -- Bra *1 0 City anner B3:DC:ko Attachment -: Letter fr Apf"` {cant ExhiMtP w Location mar, J! Exhibit "Bw -- Tract Kap Exhibit " " Equestri n /La.ndNcape Concept �l Minutes 0 rPoruary 12, '1986 P aasntrn �. i sio r ; Re,.oluti'on No. 8;-23 3 s Meeting Resold -Vd o of Approval Modifyftg, r f r october 21 t 11 ;137 Mr. Brad Buller Director of Planning City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 C Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701 Re: Tentative Tract 12i,3 7 re.- `Mr. Buller: I am writing in connecti:= with my review o'. the February 12, 1986 approval of the above - referenced Tentative r1ap pursuant to the City of Rancho Oucamopga Planning Commission' Res- olution 86 -23. In the course of reviewing the staVw% of my prop- erty, and my estate in general, I came upon condition A -4 of the above Resolution that seems to cancbl my tentative map in tb,. event there is a transfer of my interest in the Property. I As you obould be aware, a man of my age cAanot _and should not be held to such a stringent requirement with respect to the approved lots. Although I am, aware t:hAj such a coalition was I Lhe practice, in Rancho Cucamonga fox a short period Mf time; in `1986 when the pertinent Resolution was apeteved it is my understanding that the practice was no longer adhered to. Prom what I have learned concerning the aq&oval of Resolution AG -23, I believe tnat the condition A -4 had inadvertently been placed as a vn ;ndi•- tion of`approva- on„ -the project and sincerely, request y9 ;#- ors- sideration of its *removal. Thank you for your attenticn and consideration of -this request. I would apprci.ate your acting as soon as passible to place the matter on the Planning Commission calendar. Sincerely, Walter H. La nd !y k r WHh:na v vaoee +� sr sdr - ;TE IJ-MAZATION MAP TEN TI MVE TRACT 12332 I\ NUUH CITY OF RANG 14 M.A V1ONCpA -ri :1, ��ati_ MATS_ PLANNI.'`4G U iSIG N s EXHIBIT: LE y 71 � � J' v vaoee +� sr sdr - ;TE IJ-MAZATION MAP TEN TI MVE TRACT 12332 I\ NUUH CITY OF RANG 14 M.A V1ONCpA -ri :1, ��ati_ MATS_ PLANNI.'`4G U iSIG N s EXHIBIT: LE y a MCA 1163 "ENTATIVER T'..ACT 12332 wi.A19 OrAl7imf 17-*$3 i NOR'fH CITY OF RAINCHC CUUVvloN,GA TITLE PLANNING DIVSM EXHIBIT' SCALE; � � a'•t>�+rs{.; ,. ...�rr.c.. +norw.�rr� a1�err at. 1 J� s ,;fir -� V �'• t q fin: a�a 3 � � Cal CI'T'Y OF .: —, —�--- PLANNING DIVISK),N !- E fRrr,_,= SCALE= 41 IM 0. AW4 TEXTATIYEr TRWr 1 =- LMW A custom lot residentIFE, -".5 of '151 .'Tors on approx mat e y B acres`,gf Land i n `thee VL Dis,rict, located an the east side of Haven Avenue, nol, of :'.he ` Hillside Drainage CW...4el - 1,,PH 201- 121 -24. Jo'lh Meyer, Assistant Planner, reOEwed" the staff r , art. .Chairman Stottt wa- concerned that the landscaping along Haven Avenue adjacent to Viis tract has begun to deteriorate ,%nd suggested that the developer tv Horne Owner's Association replace the dead or dying trees and Shrubs. He then t.pened the pi:blic hearing. ' Phil Douglas, 316' "E" Street, Ontario, representing the applicants stated concurrence with the s�caff report, Resolution and iscommended coj, icons of r` approval. Mr..DouglaS was unsure where the responsibilities lie for ¢,placing the cx sting landscaping. There were no furthar comments, thilrefore the public hearing was closed. Brad Buller, City FIamier, advised'!that staff would look inte the landscaping concern and take atoropriate action." Motion; Moved by Chltiea, sewonded by ScNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Tentatit . Tract 12332. Mo`3 on carried by that following vote: AYES; COMM SSTuNERS; CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BAgKFP., R:MPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS; NONE ABSENT., COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried � ENVIRONMENIAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13114 - SCHULTZ - A 21 custom su tuts or. of; . mires a an n ow es en is District (Z -4 du located at the southeast earner of Vi ,eyard and Cal 1.2 Del - '_Jrado - ' _ APN 20 - 1 -03 and 04. Chairman Stout annou that the applicant for this item had requested a continuance to the March 86 ?fanning Cu4moission meeting. He tWn opened the public hearing. Charles, Rich, 8930 Balsa, Rancho Cucammon was concerned that d ,,aft be adequately ad,' ;-ed. i Chairman Stout advised that drainage was the main real a applicant had requested the i,#em be continued. He suggested that if pas +a Mr. ' -rich attend the March 26th meeting to see if his concerns were mitigated Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 1,4 1986�� e . RESOLUTION Nu. 86 -23- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLIANNING ,COWISSION OF Tf,91 :CITY., OF Rk4CHO CUMIONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING _ TENTATIVE TRACT 12332. - WHEREAS, Tr 4tative Tract Map No. 32332, Ft�rein'ifter "Haplw, submitted r i by Welter Laband, appl�i7snt, for the purpose of subdividing, the real property situated in the City v of Rancho Cucamonga,' County of Sat. Bernardirp, of Stalte ' California, descr*,d as a crutom lot developlaent into 161 lots;;regul'�*trly came aefore the Planning Co(Wission for public hearing and action en February 12, 1936; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval Mo subjeet to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning birisJaAl s reports; and W- REREA3, the Planning Coamission has :,ead and considered the � Iz; .� Engineering end Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, tnn P1anninj D;fievssicn of the City nr ,,.Pvicho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: Tho Planning Comm.'ssion makes the €ollo4tpg findings in regard to $entative Trucc No. 32332 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, Devalopme- .'ode, and 'specific plans; (c) The `site is phy „ically suitable for the type of devrilcF,rtent proposed; (d) The da4i( -i of `-'ie subdivision is riot: 'likely to cause substantii:r environmental damage - and avoidable Injury to humans annd wildlife. or thefir P- bitatl (e) The tentative tract is not likely to -cause serious public health problems; if' ) The design of the tentative" tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of ;)the property within the ,,"oposed subdivisio,�. f S What this project will AIot create adverse impacts on the e<Oironment and `'. Ne ative beclaratac is Issued.' SECTION :Y,; ' Tentative =Tract Map 140. '12332, a copy of which is attache":` hereto;—Js hereby approved subject to all Rr the following cooditions and the attached Standard ,Gondition ,- PLANNING DIVISION L A signature sign -off shalt be contained within the individual homeowner CC.i& it's deigned to alert the. buyer as tn the requirement for street ,trees, including maintenance. Prior tG: occupancy,_ street trees and slope plantings at individual parce =6 must be inspected and approved by the City. 4. Parkstrip landscaping and street trees, with appropriate irrigation systems shall be required along streets "A" and' "C ". The required ;Yandscaping` and street trees may be added with a `v phase of street construction. 3. Rooted ground cover is required for slope bank erosion control where required by Standard condition:. Hydroseeding shall not be allowed bec,use of rocky soil.. ENGINEERING 3. Dedication of ingress and egress and maintenance e,e- w.ent, overall inter ;nr streets shall be dedicated a the Final Mai. to the City of - 'Rancho Cucamonga Enq;neerirg and Public Works O';visions; the Cucamonga County ;;titer District; the San Bernardino County Flood Control District; Southeim California Gas Company; Southern California Edison Company,. 2 The as heasterly portion of the project area (Flood District £asene.1t) shall be made a part of the .. act map.. The CC x V5 for this tract shall make prov4sions to incorporate this ar.,a ipty t,ee h! iwne : -s Association once this are€ is developer:.' 3. An iccess easement by separate instr';„ner.t shall, be provided to the property lying east of the proJ�,t area (owned by San Bernardino County .Flood Conte (I Distri;.t). The doc gent S".01 be prepiz �d to tie satisfacti of the district. This condition shall be waive,t the access i •not required by the' Flood Control )istr`Ect,, 0701 -02 X11 -10 -87 PC Agenda Page C a ca�x TM� "tea A. The ftmegwtvers Asso0ation established ,.shall provid(; specific�iljy for sokquate fundirj for the future maintenacte Of the private roacli..dys and the Haven 1- Avenue landscaping. APPROVED ANb AV4pTED THIS 12TH DAY of FEBRUAftir, 1986, PLA COMMISSION OF Tye CITY OF RANCHO CUGAMONOA BY Den s t.. to , ha rniatis r ATTEST. rad u er, epztty Secretary i (i a s I, Brad Buller, Deputy Sec: 'atary of the Planning Commission of the -City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly,and regularly introduced, passed, and adapted by the Planrlinc Commission of the City of RanC40 Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission ;held on the 12th day of February, 1986, by the following vote -to -wit: ol AYES: CO-WISSIONERS: CHITIEk. KWEL, BARKER, REMbtz, STOUT a . NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE i Ff ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE I,. -. «���Y M�t �a�'.•� �w �w�i w.a ���L ��o z�i�.s°i fj wfAc�' w °yN Zzr$ rya+ `.iLOA Ytl *O� YuYan O'S�v.C9O V 15 IS ��}} 7 �Zy pp CC N w 1 g N L GGGGG M Y 2C v Y vzj +�$�$ $ m ^qq�S L CcH'Y�y rp�j.w _ YQ����O Q. aI�sY''y LtYC. 1{YYl,v�tl •a �$q{.h ~C`w} 8' °- ill I.� N�V4fy. 4 AM d, ,w° Cy;iV6N 9��r C y�y4 ^ wu ^�O !11V 4w`TV V0. ^R�4 i�Si.6 d �V cCy6 V. y� ^T ^~w ■ {� CQ iytY.�� r.. A ~Or�'C� ^VSO U� � +I. Ap 4LN Of •�... YY �w ��g"'. YL 4 * rd u= .�. o G va'.�� y`° iii> lb- i[ `o'r� U c. Tcr �u YY i G N 11 e N i `d' o i N Y �y IS "s8 At 5,� ka»+ so. f2jxxiu'j X— M;; Y 8 . Etl °u ^who {�.Y Mr Y�•y wq ML «� N � _NY u �g •. +R+�yOV 3 J to V J Y c'i. �' J ((•1 N Iq Y �y IS "s8 At 5,� ka»+ so. f2jxxiu'j X— M;; Y 8 . Etl °u ^who {�.Y Mr Y�•y wq ML «� N T J RESOLUTION NO. �Y A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OM�i SSION OF THE CITY OF , RANCHO CUCAMiONGA MODIFYING A_ CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVF 'TRACT1233E, HAVEN VIEW ESTATES, A CUSTOM LOT � RESIDUTIAL SU6I ,,SICN OF 151 LOTS ON 85 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HAVEN, NORTH OF THE HILLSIDE WAINAGE CHANNEL A. Recitals (i) There has been submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga an application by W.H.L. Corporation ( "Applicant" hereinafter) or a tentative tract to develop 204 custom lots for single family homes an 141 acres of land located on toe east side of Haven Avenue; north of the Hillside Drainage Channel ("said applicatioh" hereinafter). (ii) On May 11, 1983, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga c:onducte!t a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application. Said hearing was concluded and said Commission then adopted its Resolution of Approval No. 83-66 approving the application subject to certain conditions. (iii) The Applicant record phase I of Tract 12332 which consisted of 53 lots on the westerly side of the'�tract. (iv) 0n February 12, 1986, said Commission conducted a duly noticed hearing to consider an application for a tentative tract for the remaining phases consisting of 151 lots on '85 acres, Said hearing was concluded and said Commission then adopted its Resolution, of Approval No. 86 -23 approving the application subject to certain conditions. (v) There has been submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga a request by the Applicant to remove one of the conditions of approval regarding change of ownership. NO On November 10, 1987, t `s Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the request to remove the condition and concluded that hearing prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (vii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolut'•on have accurred. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part _A, of this Resolution are true and correct. t PLANNING C"r eOt.t?TIOl4 N0. TT 123aE - L,A November 10, 1987 Page 2 , 2. Based upon ,)vidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public h ring, on November 10, 1987, including minutes of the Piaoning Commission heari & ng of February i2, 1g , a written staff report and oral testimcoy presented *ring said November 10, 1987 heaving, this Umission specifically finds-as follows: _, 51 (a) The Aoplicant, W.H.L. Corporation, anticipates a change��3i: ownership of Tentative 'tract 123.12; (b) Tne4 is, no - compelling reason Ter the approval of said Application to run with the,Applicant. 3. t3sed upon the facts found hereinabove, this Commission �Preb;F, modifies Resolution No. 8423 by daleting Standard Condition A.4. 4. ?he Deputy Secretary,)to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED ADOPTED THIS IOTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY or RANCHO CUCAMONGAr BY: �1 arry T. clViei ; rmn ATTEST: Bra a er, epu y ecre Wry 1, Brad Boller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify t"t the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly Introduced, passed, and aduptid by the Pianninq Commission of _the City of Rancho Cucamor.4a, at a req 'ar meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th oay of Novsmber, 1987, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS- NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: r— CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT a r a E Z U A November 10, 1987 1977 _ Chairman and Members of the ,Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Dan Coleman, Senior Planner ENV_RONMENTAl. ASSESSMENT AND DEVEk.0PMENT AGPEEMENT 87 -01 - Ij BCE DEVELDPP4 ENT, - Review oF7,4 Develope o 7,4 n jreeme t ofor a commercial- TesTgn center %icd food park consisting of 10 buildings totaling 144,950 square feet located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Spruce and Elm Avenues - APN: 208- 351 -28. I. ABSTRACT: This report contains information describing staff's efforts to develop and negotiate a develop';ect agreement between the City and BCE Development Inc. which 0117-,grant approval of a master plan for the development of a commerci4i design center. II. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Recommendation of approval of Development greemen�nd recommendation of issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - scan ; Mixed Hospital Office (Terra Vista) South - Vacant; Industrial Park (Subarea 7) East - Vacant; Industrial Park (Subarea 7) West - Harry C's Restaurant; Industrial Park (Subarea 7) C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Industrial —Park North Office South - Industria: Park East - Industrial Park Rest - Industrial Park D. Site Characteristics: The vacFnt site is part of the Rancho Cucamonga us Hess Park. Street improvements (except sidewalks, street lights, driveways) have been completed. Vegetation consists of native grasses and vineyard. There are M utility lines or poles on Foothill Boulevard. ITEM J PLANNING COtCMi SI�gii STAPf . REPORT DHEtOPMENT AeR# MENi 67 41 - BCE November 10, 1981` Page 2 fi E. Ap�p�licable, Regulations: Subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific j F air.. is inteen er fight industrial /office uses and support t servi. a and commercial 3ses. East fool sales is conditiopally permuted. The Development``Agree.e«� would establish a new 1 list of allowable land uses for this site consistent with the "design center" thW,. III. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: State law allows cities to enter into agreements w eve opera, to streamline the approval process, encourage Private participation in comp•rehensivP' planning, end reduce the-)economic costs of development. The contents of the agreement must specify -'the duration of the agreement, peraritted uses, density or intensity of use, maximum height and size of . buildings, and provisions of resservation or dedications of land for public purposes. The agreement may include condit{nns, terms, restrictions, and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions. The following is a summary of the key points of this Agreement: A. Term of Agreement: The term of -the Agreement is 20 years and examen s o ec"eer a1, 2007. R. Construction Peri✓ d: The entire project must be completed in 5 further, years(` unless the Agreement is modified to extend C. �Approved Plans: '.Included with the Agreement is appruvat of a Mster an ndicating coryieptuai building locations and size of buildings, parking -areas, landscaped areas and conceptual grading and drainage. Development of each phasa would require separate application for review ard approval by the Planning Commission. Futiure development is also governed by comprehensive Desi p Guidelines that are part of the Agreement. D. Permitted Uses: E)jhibit No. 2 of the Agreement lists the uses a Are approvO. Land uses that were permitted or conditionally petit teed by Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan :will, remain so. Other uses requested by the developer that are' not presently allowed by the ISP will be conditionally permuted t;nder the Agreement. Uses include financial, business servii�zs, personal care, home design and restaurants. t II 1 p NXNO COW Fi -0% 87-01 DCE DEVELDWENT t REE govember Page 3 an integrated ,c^ AhALYSIS* TY� waster Pre andoncept P PoSGSi e$P ng concept 10 - ---"""� food Pa � laninkste General. des ;gn cente are feet. i A. coal 1� 95Q s st axis driveway that Th buildings totaling east-we entry axis from 11►s t is based upon a strong a n th �,:", laze 'focal d Park ` sike together an to a large a roundab�u • The with the entry axis at a traffic which is tons/ Buildings h ve axes intersec to Spruce X*4 park Master plan. at next Business corner' statea►ents located Cucae►anga dra�aatic and Foothill. Rancho toted tO create and Foothill and at Elm 3 Tolstoy, been . { S Spruce rhit ede irl87,.and intersections o P The Co►msitOct (• 22, Be. Revrew Co it�-proj project on`iitions besi the rou ^ded approval y�ith side of the recomme• sidewalk on one 3 continuous s'4 to link all buildings- provide 1' ast -west driveway P areas, &men /ties within P?dza tural 2, Prrvide pedestrian 5 or structuress architec sty pas, shade tree trash receptacles. 1, benches should be more Guidelines design 3. The Master Flan Design architE --- project is explicit regarding the the entire o P ensure that consistent details to with .a high quality exterior mater/ a1 s, developeturaI Style' arahitec and signage. revises finishes, should be. tual 'landscape Plan trees along the ¢. The conceP dusters os street to pro' +ide particularly Caothiwi: dowse into the streetscap , P width of view windows to reduce the site. constructe of The "doiae" awnings s silt withstand. high 5. durable material that be used on all hould b ilding treatment s no u of all buildings so that 6. Arch ;tectural four sides have a "rear side "• the Master appears incorporated into royal in have been conditions of app nda�tions and/or made These Design co uidelnes Plan ht Agreement the Bevelopme ff -3 9. KANNx C 8W1'..�Qs:STAFF REPORT Dt& ! ENT AGREF. Eli 87-01 T °E November In I987 K 6 Page 4 31 7 r C. Technical /Grading Review Committees: The Technical Review ard ra R7T0_m_ttees have rev _R -__the project and determined that, with f-he reca*endesi conditions of approval, the project s consisU t with the applicable standards and policies of the City. D. Envirowieaal Assessment: Staff has completed the EnviroMental CM-CM-Ust--affid has`Aetermined that this Agreement for the develo meat oU this project will not cause significant adverse impacts, if the Planning Cokalssion concurs with these findings, a recommendation -to the City Council for issuance of 'a Negative-'Declaration would be appropriate. V. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: State law, -requires that the Planning omm ss on in a the Development Agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan and the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The following facts support a finding of consistency: I. The project will provide a mix of different, but compatible, land uses and activities, such as, financial,, busirtiss support services, personal services, home design and eating uses, as encouraged by tiie General Plan objectives. 2. The proposed mcster plan rirganizes land uses in a fashion that is compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The proposed master plan and mix of land uses supports the "centers" concept encouraged by the General Plan to foster multiple purpose trips and discourage frequent ingress - egress movement onto planned circulation routes, such as F,o.othill. 4. The proposed master plan and building design provide land use activities around plaza areas to encourage social interaction and provide a pleasant, attractive and safe working environment. 5. The Agreement, and Design Guidelines incorporated thereto, require high quality architecture. 6. The maste• = °flan and mix of land uses will provide a wide range of employment opportunities with respect to income and skills as encouraged by the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 7. She master plan and mix of land uses will accommodate the personal needs of workers and business visitors as well as the service needs of local businesses. 0 C. Technical /Grading Review Committees: The Technical Review ard ra R7T0_m_ttees have rev _R -__the project and determined that, with f-he reca*endesi conditions of approval, the project s consisU t with the applicable standards and policies of the City. D. Envirowieaal Assessment: Staff has completed the EnviroMental CM-CM-Ust--affid has`Aetermined that this Agreement for the develo meat oU this project will not cause significant adverse impacts, if the Planning Cokalssion concurs with these findings, a recommendation -to the City Council for issuance of 'a Negative-'Declaration would be appropriate. V. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: State law, -requires that the Planning omm ss on in a the Development Agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan and the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The following facts support a finding of consistency: I. The project will provide a mix of different, but compatible, land uses and activities, such as, financial,, busirtiss support services, personal services, home design and eating uses, as encouraged by tiie General Plan objectives. 2. The proposed mcster plan rirganizes land uses in a fashion that is compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The proposed master plan and mix of land uses supports the "centers" concept encouraged by the General Plan to foster multiple purpose trips and discourage frequent ingress - egress movement onto planned circulation routes, such as F,o.othill. 4. The proposed master plan and building design provide land use activities around plaza areas to encourage social interaction and provide a pleasant, attractive and safe working environment. 5. The Agreement, and Design Guidelines incorporated thereto, require high quality architecture. 6. The maste• = °flan and mix of land uses will provide a wide range of employment opportunities with respect to income and skills as encouraged by the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 7. She master plan and mix of land uses will accommodate the personal needs of workers and business visitors as well as the service needs of local businesses. 0 `i P LAN jf� GO %1�SaANE REPORT DEVELOPMENT Aft ;r -M - BCE November 10,3 1981 Page S 8. The Agretwil eneol.rages development by eliminating uncertainty and "time and money consuming delays in the governmental processes. 9.- The master plan emphasizes a pedestrian oriented campus -like setting by providing sidewalk connecti't;'ns throughout the site and 25.3 percent landscape coverage. VI. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public baring in 5e 1) ort newspaper and notices Were sent to all property owners wrtnin 3007 feet of the project site. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or again%,t this proposal~ VII. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning CoMission Turward a recommendation of approval of Developp,�,nt Agreement 117- -ol and issuance of a Negative Declaration ro the City Council. Resp fully tted, Bra Te City anner BB :DC :te Attachments: Exhibit -.�T" Plaster Plan Erh Wi "B" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit, "D" - Landscape Sections Exhibit "Em'- Parcel Map Exhibit "F" - Grading Plan Exhibit "G" - Renderings Development Agreement Resolution Recommending Approval s'9 v d . a °!) -T- �p | | � < | LA $ q � � /xa $ � I �] , fit ! |t \ | �lhit || / ■ . $! | | Sal ■,.. ■. ■ , _ � .. ,,..,. ■ , �a. ■� ; ■.■ ;� ,...,.��... . • #. � ,# , : . „ ■ |! !41 \ ■�■ || | /� | -T- �p | | � < | LA $ q � � /xa $ � I �] L$1 E IL N y 1A L J a ti ON FF ii 10 Ix R lz ! 4 i fin u �F it � t 1 F I I I I'Mkhtc � ' • in t� Fg I I I'Mkhtc � ' • in IL lPe 5€ via ti e t • — `. zz — ei C �t, `• -, is 1 t l I i 1, O• / S t• r v �' � � Y tl� 'st� y � iii w w 1 j w a iidg�g e ��tCtttC6t�� enna "a �n�ela ,� P I G = .ii �aapu y l0�•�`j,�� i I F I t t l ,l _ P92 ` CD ^� gill.; a $. Z gp a A. a § ^ ' J W p r I a W C-) Z � Q m fl Z y 1 1 i 1 J �a�s 8I 1 f 1 t w •C �I IL lPe 5€ via ti e t • — `. zz — ei C �t, `• -, is 1 t l I i 1, O• / S t• r v �' � � Y tl� 'st� y � iii w w 1 j ili A it �k G✓ 3 I w � I G = S i w ili A it �k G✓ 3 I Al I! f � i 7.. �ti., •� - il� � �.�rr L�p'.�I './ ' r, ,?.;:. ,t �, rt�"�, ,�i rf `•} i �� 'w � • \. ..Lli.��i ,' � ty ,'y y c! �5., n +� _..- .�� q -.' YJh�` , # #i `_ i f 5 o 1 k � 3 4 sr Ifs C t i s - 4 y air j N, lit, . fi I fit it AZT, : � \«�� / w<» w h V a L Rim l jil loi �� . � \ \ \ itc ' 'if �t �. 11. 7ZZ �\ k� s a , 1 � 6� ,� r h DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CONCERNING THAT PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUxHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND SPRUCE AVENUE IN RANCHO CUCAMONGA, SAN SEPMARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered, into as of the thirty -first day following final adoption of the Ordinance approving it (hereinafter, the "£ffective Date ") by and between the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation ( "City ") and BCE Development Inc., a Delaware Corporation ( "Developer " W 1`,Ij N E S S E T Ii. �'�gecitals. 1. California Government Code Se f.4:6ns 65864 et seq, authorize City to enter into binding development agree*�njrs with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property ''or th4� development of such property. 2. Developer owns fee title W,tLytd to that real proper,.s located entirely within City, generally located at Nihe southeast corner. of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue, which property isllegally described in attached Exhibit No. 1 (the "Site ").. The Site is comprised of 10 parcels (the "Parcels "). It is the intent of the Developer to develop the site as a master planned mixed use development, including the construction of design and commercial buildings and,,, a food park complex (the "Project "). 3. The Site is now zoned Subarea 7, industrial Park, pursuant to the provisions of City's Industrial- Arai Specific Plan, as`imended to date hereof. 4. Developer has requested that City enter int,; a development agreement relating to the Site. - 5. Developer and City desire to provide through this, Development Agreement more specific development controls on the Site which will provide for a maximum efficient utilization of the Site in accordar+ce with sound planning principles. 6. On , 198 , City adopted Orlin this Agreement. :rve No. approving s— " —"en i Agreement, NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows; Section 1. General Provisions A. Covenants. It is intended and determined that the provisions of this Agreemen ssa constitute covenants which shall run Frith the land comprisiTig the Site, and the benefits and burdens hererof shall bind and inure to all sucftessors in interest to the parties hereto. r B. Term. The term of this Development Agreement shall cormaenci�,pon the effective - afe of this Agreement and shall extend until December 31, 2007, unless said terra is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of parties hereto. Folxwing the expiration of the terse, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated iod of no rther force and effect; provided, however, such termination shall nog automatically affect any right or duty arising from City entitlements on the Site approved concurrently is�tth or subsequent to the approval of this Agreement. C. Construction Period. The D,eyeloper shall complete const. -vction work for the ProjEct on the Site, and all phases thereof, incl%�ing landscaping and off »site improvements',,, ��ursuant to a building permit or permits issued by City within 5 years,,,following Effective Date, that, -is, within the 5 year period comet icing immediate+�ly after the Effective Da }e: If the Developer has not completed said work, d o Site shall then be dee%ed to be zoned Subarea 7, industrial park, and the development of the Site them and thereafter shall be governed accordi ply by the then current provisions of the City's Industrial Area Specific Pla \as to Subarea 7, Industrial Park zoning or the then applicable specific pan and/or zoning category succeeding thereto. — D. Assignment. (1) The terms and c��4itions of this Agreemen'c relating to assignments or transfers shall apply with full force and effectto assignments or transfers of interests in this Agreement. (2) Except as provided within this Agreement. Developer shall have the right to sell, mortgage, hypothecate, assign, or transfer all or any portion of the Property to any person or entity at any time during the Term (an "Assignment" ). Any Assignaent shall include the assignment of those rights, duties, and obligations created by this Agreement with respect to all or any portion of the Property. (3) Th(f express assumption of any or all of the obligations of Developer under this Agrezment by any assignee, shall relieve Developer, without any act or concurrence of the City, of its legal duty to perform those obligations, except to the extent that Developer is in default with respect to the assigned obligations at the time of the proposed assignment.. E. Amendment of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual consent or the original parties or such pfirty -to which Developer assigns part or all of its interest in this Agreement, in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868 and provided that any Amendment of the Development Plan or Development Guidelines as hereinafter defined which is approved by the Planning Commission as provided by Section I.F. below, such as the location or design of buildings, streets and other physical facilities shall not require as amendment to this Agreement. F. Amendment of _Development Plan and Development Guidelines. The Project shalr proceed in accordance ose pans an spec cations Ak entitled "Foothill Design and Commercial Center" presented to City's staff by Developer consisting of twelve (12) sheets inclusive, and date stamped RECEIVED CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVISION, NOVEMBER 2, 1987" (conceptual parcel map/site plan, detailed site plan, site utilization map, landscape sections, and conceptual grading plan) (the "Master Development Plan ), the Development /Design Guidelines dated November 3, 987 (the Development Guidelinesl") attached hereto as Exhibit No. 4, and in accordance with the development !tdndards set forth hereinafter. Upon written request of Developer, modifications and changes to the Master Development Plan and the Development Guidelines may be approved in accordance with City's Development Code Sections 17.02.070 and 17.06.010.. Section 2. General Development of the Property, A. Right to Develop; Ri ht to Control Development. Developer (and its successors 6"a ass' gnsl snaI nave a right"�°de"veT'op Ehe Project on the Site in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and City shall have the right to control development of the Site in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. B. Permitted Uses. (1) The permitted uses of the site shall be those set forth in attached Exhibit No. 2 provided other uses may be allowed by and through adoption of a resolution of City's City Council. In no event shall City disallow any of the permitted uses listed on Exhibit No. 2 during the term of Is this Agreement. The permitted uses constitute the uses proposed by Developer for the Site. In tye event of a conflict between the provisions of this Agreement and any other resolution, rule, regulation or policy of. City now in existence, the provisions of this Agreement shall control. (2) The density and intensity of use, the conceptual size of prapoaed buildings, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and location of public improvements, and other terms and conditions of development applir,,aole to the Site, shall be those set forth in this Agreement, the l+hnster Deml opment Plan, and Development Guidelines. ` (3) The maximum height of proposed buildings shall be four stories or 75 feet, whichever greater, unless a greater height approved as a Conditional Use Permit by the City's Plan,;ng Commission. C. Rules, Re Gig ations and Official Policies. (1) Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, all substantive and procedural requirements and provisions contained in City's ordinances, specific plans, rules and regulations, including, but not limited to, its Development Code, as amended, and Industrial Area Specific Plan,, in effect as of the effective date of this Agreement, shall apply to the development of the site pursuant to this Development Agreement. Further, any terms or phrases contained herein for which there are definitions provided in City's said Development Code or Industrial Area Specific Plan shall be deemed to be utilized in accordance with those definitions. -3- (2) This Section shall not preclude the application to the development of the Site of changes in City taws, regulations, plans or policies, the terms of which are specifically mandateld and required (as opposed to permitted) by changes in state or federal laws or regulations as provided for in government code Section 65864.5. (3) This Section shall not be construed to limit the authority of the City to charge processing- =fees for land use approvals, building permits and other similar permits and eititiements which are in force and effect on a City -wide basis at the time those permits are applied for, except to the extent any such processing regulations would be inconsistent with this Agreement. D. Effect of Agreement on land Usti Regulations. The rules, regulations and ofriciai policies govern— nag permit et ud ses `d? the Site, the density and intensity of use of the Site, maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of thf_ Site are those rules, regulations and official policies ir.--force at the time of the execution of this Agreement. E. New Rules by City, City may apply new rules, regulations aid official policies— to development of that Site which do not conflict with the rules, regulations and official policies in effect as of the date of this Agreement. The substantive development standardi set forth in the Master Development plan and the Development Guidelines shall be the standards that govern all future discretionary actions of City regarding the Site. This agreement shall not be construed to make applicable to the Site those future health and safety regulations (e.g.. building, seismic, plumbing and electric codes) that become applicable to the City as a whole. Sectir ?_ Conditions of Development. A. The following conditions and standard conditions set forth in attached Exhibit No. 3 shall apply to the development of the Site. (1) The Master Development Plan is approved in concept only and future development for each parcel comprising the Site shall be subject to Development /Design Review process for Planning Commission approval, including, but not limited to, plaza details, architectural elevations, materials, and color. (2) Development of each parcel comprising the Site shall be in sutstantial conformance with the Development Guidelines, including, but not limited to, architectural style and landscape palette. (3) A Uniform Sign program shall be submitted prior to issuance./ of building permits which i,i compatible with the architectural style and addresses the signage needs of the design, commercial and food pW'aasers. (4) A continuous pedestrian circulation system shall be provided on one side of east -west driveway spine throughout the Site to connect all buildings and plaza areas. ,k (5) Bicycle storage facilities shall be provided and s ;nll relate to master planned bicycle routes along Foot!iill, Spruce and White Oak as required under the Transit A.nd Pedestrian Circulation Concept, Figure 1.1-7 of the City's Industrial Area Specific Plan. (6) The vehicle stacking capacity of any drive -thew .dcility and the design and location of the ordering and pick -up facilities shall be determined by,the City Planner. The Developer shall submit to the City Planner, a traffic study prepared by a traffic engineer as requireeAry City's Development Code Section 17.12.0400.6. (7) A uniform design of hardscape such as pavement material, trash,receptacies, benches, bicycle racks, etc., for the e,rtire Site shall be submitted for City Planner review "and approval. (6) Location and conceptual design -,of transit stops and shelters shall be subject to Design Review Committee review and approval. The design of the transit shelters shall be compatible to the architectural program of the Site and City Standards or guidelines. (9) Pedestrian amenities shall be provided with plazas and outdoor, eating areas, such as canopy shade trrs�;; or structures, raised planters and benches, and drinking fountains. (10) Parking areas shall be screened with berming, hedgerows, trees or low level decorative walls, or any approved combination thereof. Berms shall be undulating with an average height of three fact and a maxinum slope of 3 1/2:1. (11) jil future building pads shall be seeded and irrigated for erosion control. A detailed plan shall be included in the landscape and irrigation plans to be- submitted-'for Planning Division .approval prior to issuance of grading permit3. (12) Additional street trees shall be provided in clusters along the streetscape, particularly along Foothill Boulevard, except for moderately sized view corridors into project. (13) The materials and construction of the "dome" awnings shall be durable to with,tand high winds And ultraviolet light. (14) No sheered parki -og shalt be permitted for the Master Development Plan. Parking for each use shall be provided to satisfy the parking ratios which are required by the terms of City's Development cede and/or Industrial Area Specific Plan. (15) Architectural treatoent shall be oAsisiently applied to all sides of all buildings. (16) No driveway access will be allowed onto White Oak Avenue, "(17) fie westerly driyeway onto Eucalyptus Street within Parcel S may be relocated to be centered 04: the property line 4atrreen Parcels 8 and 9. 0 (18) An in-lieu fee as coh*ributioli to the future construction � of the median island within 'Foothill Boulevard shr:.; be- pail; k (i) A previous fire flow, conducted 10/86 showed 5923 gpm available. i (ii) A fire flow test shall be conducted by the builder /devO open and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. F (b) Existing fire hydrant locations and outlet sizes shall be shown on plans prior to water plan approval. Required fire hydrants, if any, will be determined by this department at that time. Fire department standards require 6" hydrant head and 4" x 24/2 "1 outlets. ` Substandard hydrants shall be replaced with an approved hydrant. (c) Public and /or-on -site fire hydrants are required. All sue.. hydrants shall be installed, flu =hed and operable prior to. delivery of any combustible building materials of the site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.), Hydrant flashing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. (d) A key box /device shall be installed prior to fight inspection. Proof that it has been purchased shall be submitted prior —to final building plan app y►:i. (!TOTE: Delivery time fore Knox box` is approximately 4 to 6 week;.) (e) "Blue dot" reflective hydrant markers shall be Qurchased prior to final occupancy approval. Proof of purchase must ae shown unless said markers are purchased through Ws department. Section 4, Annual Review. A. Annual Review. Dur?ng the term of this Agreement, City shall annually review tfie ex eni of good faith compliance by Developer with the terms of this Agreement (the "Annual Review ")', Such periodic review shall be limited in scope to compliance with theterrtFr of this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1. The . Developer shall file an annual report with City indicating information regarding compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Said annual reports shall be filed with the City Planner nG ; -4xer than March 15th following the previous calendar year. B. Default Determination at Annual Review. if, as a result of the Annual Review, e y e er,".nes a TY-Mper° -'is in default under this Agreement, written notice of such default shall be given to Developer specifying in detail the nature uf the default and the actions necessary to cure the default. Developer shall have the opportunity to cure the default in the manner set forth in 5 below, C. Certificate of Compliance. if Developer hua found to be in compliance wia Tn1s greeme' —ent after the Annual Review, the City shall, upon request by Developer at any time after an Annual Review; issue a certificate of compliance to Developer (the "Certificate ") stating that, after the most recent Annual geview .ind based upon information known by or made �.Inown to the T -� -7- JP City,,'^ounci`� and /or the Director, (i) this Agreement remains in effect and either (i i 1' Devel oper is not in Default or (iii) Developer is in Default and specifyifig in nature of the Default, The Certificate sham be in recordable from and shall contain information necessary to communicate constructive re..cord' notice of the finding of .compliance, Developer Flay record. the Certificate in the official records of the County. Section 5. Devel�o er's Default. If Developer defaults under this Agrd66e efaul VT aria Taa s to cure the Default within a reasonable period of tim4 (the Cure Period) after receipt from the City of notice of the Default, Developer shall be in breach of this Agre%iaent and no further opportu:aity to cure shall be required. The Cure Period shall be no less than thirty days unless the Default cannot be _feasibly cured within thirty days, in which event the Cure Period shall be sufficient to allow Developer to cure the Default as determined by the City. Any notice of a Default from the City shall state the nature of the Default and r l acts necessary to cure the Default. A hearing shall be held by the Ci` louncil on the Default in the same manner as provided for the Annual Revi :'except that the City will not be required to provide a second notice of Dertlit and a second Cure period if, after the , raring, Developer is found to be in Default. Section 6. General. A. No Other Rep resentations. Except as expressly set forth in this Agreement, no represerr it ons o} a y kind or character" hash^ been made to one another by any of the - parties hereto or by any of the parties' agents, representatives, associates `r attorneys with respect to each subject to which this Agreement relates. B. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the partieg-wirn respe, o each subject to which it relates. C. Waiver, ko provision of this Agreement nay be waived, except in writing, which writ Ong must be executed by all of the parties hereto. D. Additional Documents. ThF ,parties hereto each agrf-e that they shall execute and deliver to the other, upon request to do-so, any and all documents reasonable and necessary to accomplish ar evidence the agreements contained in or contemplated by this Agreement. E. Attorney's Fees, 3R any proceedings arising from the enforcement of this Devei opmen greement or because of an alleged breach or default hereunder, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover the costs and attorney fees incurred in the proceeding and such reasonable attorneys` fees as may be determined by a Court in any legal action. F. Recording. In accordance with California Government Code Section 65868.5, a ter Ieo copy of this Agreement shall be recorded with the Recorder of San Bernardino Cad_ :,California, immediately upon This Agreement being effective. Wig_ G. Mort a ee 'OQtectibn. A breach of this Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid , --dim, n.s ; or impair the lien of any Mortgag��r) in good faith and for value; unless otherwise required by lAw. « ,� H. Notice of t>ei~a�ult to Mort a ee, Right ofaa a to Cure. If the City rece3ve3 M- ce Four a R705 r gaQee requt ng a copy o any no ce of a default given Developer, the City, shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten days of sending t?re notice of Default to DOeloper. The;; Mortgagee shall have the same right, but not the obligation, to cure the Default, including no identical cure period, allowed Developer under this Agreement;. I. Notices. Any iotice, demand, payment or other communication required or peWfffieTe to be given by an provision of this Agreement ('"notice ") stall be deemed to 'be sufficiently given or served if; (a) delivered personally to the party to whom the notice is to-,be delivered; or (b),ient by mail, or federal express addressed fo the party at the party-Is address as it appears in this Agreement, or at any other address as --that ,party may from time tc time specify by written notice; or (c) given by transmittal over etectroric tra►smitting devices, such as IBM System $, NBI, TWIX, Telex-or teleeopy machiioq, if the party to whom the notice is sent has such 'a device in its office, provided a ccoplete copy of Any notice so transmitted shall also be mailed in tie sane manner as required for a mailed noticG,' Any notice shall be deemdd U be given as of the date actually rei,,-�ived;i- except that if the party declines to acknLvledge receipt or has;, chanr,,d hi address and not otherwise informed the other party of the new address +eceip',h aha'll bE deemed as of the date of the attempted delivery. r J. CCo�oop2__ration in the Event of Legal Challenge. ln�tbe event of any legal act'an —instituted y a it par's or o-tWe governeelwal entity or official challenging the validity of any provisions of this Agreement, the parties shall cooperate it defending this action. K. Indemnification. Developer agrees to and shall hold Cfty and its elected offic a s, o cers, agents and employeesr harmless from liability for damage,or claims foe- damage for personal injuri6, including death, and claims for prtperty damage which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of Developer of those of his contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person act;hg on his behalf which relate to the Site. Developer agrees to -,nd shall defend City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees with respect to actions for damages Oused or alleged to have beer, caused by reason of Developer's activities in connection with the Site. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damage suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the operations referrel to in this Development Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications or other documents for the Pr)J ecv. ,T-,n4 -g- IN WITNESS WNEREOf, the parties have executed and entered into this Agreement as of the effective date of thr, ordinance approving this Agreement. i% CITY W RANCHD CUCANDNGA Dated: enn• s L. 'Stow , ai�f yor Dated: _ Bye ever y e er 9320 Base Line Road Raftebo Cucamonga, California 91730 DCE DE:ELOFOUT, INC. a Delaware corporation f Dated: 7 _ Dy' I Dated• 2201 Dupont Drive, Suite 200 Irvine, California 92715 —10- EXHIBIT NO. 2 The 'land referred to In this Agrelpent is situated ip. 7he State of Califa�!nia, \County of San �arnardfno, and is described as fcsll '; � •moo` v- -- a Tentative Parcel 'Map No. 10617, being ��' ' � property: 3 a sioA''of the fol.s� ng described Parcel 9, Parcel Flap No. 6725, 1n the City of Rancho Cw�:aman a County of San Mks Bernardino, State of California as ,.'° per plat ecorded in Book 67 of Parcel Maps, Pages 4 threu4,,j 7, inclusive, records of said County. ± ll { v EXHIB7,T NO. 2 r FOOTHILL CO MERCIAL DESIGN CENTER P r Permitte, Uses C(h = Conditional Permitted (References in parenthesis are the corresponding Industrial Area Specific Plan land use categories, where applicable) ENTERTAINMENT, VILLAGE TENANTS- CUP , Art Store apd` i.Supples (ii) Cup', Musical lititrtMent Store o (iii) CUP Specialty Book afore (iv) Cup Specialty Nine Store Sales and Storage (v) COP Theatres,;(Entertairment) FINANCIAL VILLAGE TENANTS 0 (i) P Accounting Firms (Financial Services) I : (ii) P Appraisal CompaVry (-financial/RealEstate Service) (iii) P BariklSavings and Loan (Financial Services) (iv) P Credit Union (Financial Services) (v) P Escrow Company (Real Estate Services) (vi) P - Money Management (Financial Services) (vii) P Real Estate Brokerage (Real Estate Services) (viii) P Stock Bro0rage (Financial Services) (ix) P Tax Service (Financial Services) BUSINESS RELATED SERVICES (j) P Computer Sales and-Service (Business Supply Retail Services) (ii) P Custom Photo Supply and Development Center (,Custom Manufacturingt (iii) P federal Express Center (Business Support Services) (iv) P Office Furniture Store (Business Supply Retain Services) (v) P Post Office Box and Package Center (Business Support Services) (vi) P Printer and Copy Center (Business Support Services) (vii) P Stationery Store (Business Supply Retail) (viii) CUP Telephone Store 2 5 -3 i J {iii) CUP Bathroom Accessories and Supply Store (iv) CUP Carpet /Drapes (v} CUP Custom Floor Cove r ings' (vi) P Custom Frames Store (Custom Manufacturtn ) (vii) P (viii) P fk }) CUP (xi) CUP (xii) CUP RESTAURANTS M P (ii) CUP ,floor and Space Designer (Professional Dsign Services) Furniture - Custom Deigned for Homes (Custom Manufacturing) Interior Designer.Orofeasional /Design Services) Kitchen Accessories and Supply Store Plants and Accessories Rallpsper and Paint Center Dinner House (Eating and Drinking Establishments) Fast Food (Fast Food Sales) Y A#! l _R PERSONAL CAFE (i) P Boutique Hair Selon and Cosmet;cs Center (Convenience Sales /s-vt j P Custot Frame and Lense Center (C�IstOm Manufacturing) . , .CUP Custom Party :Desio Store (iv3 ,i. (v), --SCUP Custom Shot Rep CUP Custom T'ai'lor, ( Convenience Sales and Services) (vi) CUP Dental Care (Medfoal /Health Care Services) (vii) CUP Designer Shoe Store (viii, — florist- boutivue (Convenience Sales and Services) (ix) (x) CUP CUP Gourmet Food Market (flood and Bevera,�e Sales) Health Club (high, end) (Recreational Facilities) %xi) (xii) CUP Health Poo, Sore Food and Beverage Sales) (xiii) (xiv) Cw CUP CUP Landwape Nor'ery (A$ricul�toral /Nursery, pplies and Services) Men's Hair Sa otl (Ci1nilE'Ri TI�le Saj.eS nd Sewl,ces) Dphthalumo�logist gtVI'0e1 center CTCdi• "TMdlth Care (xv) CUP Services) , Physiacdi fierapis fgedfbal ftalth ;Care So,N —ices) (xvi) (xvii) CUP CUP Phart"ey tCopv nience t1,es and Services) Public image Studio (t",rs�onal Services) ROME DESIGN (i) P Architect (Professional /!Design Services) (ii) CUP Art Gallery ` {iii) CUP Bathroom Accessories and Supply Store (iv) CUP Carpet /Drapes (v} CUP Custom Floor Cove r ings' (vi) P Custom Frames Store (Custom Manufacturtn ) (vii) P (viii) P fk }) CUP (xi) CUP (xii) CUP RESTAURANTS M P (ii) CUP ,floor and Space Designer (Professional Dsign Services) Furniture - Custom Deigned for Homes (Custom Manufacturing) Interior Designer.Orofeasional /Design Services) Kitchen Accessories and Supply Store Plants and Accessories Rallpsper and Paint Center Dinner House (Eating and Drinking Establishments) Fast Food (Fast Food Sales) Y A#! l A I r"I EXHIBIT N,Q. 3 STAWARD 'CONDITIONi OF 5EVELOPMENT ± y i RESOLUTION NO. 4. A RESULUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIOA OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOM01ENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN Oi_VME AUTHORI"ING THE CITY OF RANCHO if CUCAMONGA TO ENYEK_' INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AS ' PROVIDED FOR IN SEdTION 65664 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, FOR REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, A. Recitals. (i) An application for a Development Agreement (Zone Change) has been filed with the Planning Department for the establishment of a design and commercial center on a, 16.93 acre parcel of land located on the south side of Foothill Eoulevard, between Spruce Avenue and Elm Avenue. (ii) The Planning Commission of the City of R;tncho Cucamonga has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required ".;y law, to consider aforementioned Development Agreement. (iii) The subject property of the Development Agreem(,,it is lagally described herein. �r ,j (iv) A; true and correct ropy of the proposed Development Agreement is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution. (v) Mite Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the associated Negative Declaration prepared for said project. (vi) All legal prerequisite to the adoption of this resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETEfPI" ED AND RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Rar. '*,r Cucamonga; foiiows: - I. Al't of t;re facts set forV' in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2, This Commission specifically finds that the Development AgreFVnt and each and every term and Provision contained therein conforms to the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 3. This Commission herebl- finds that a Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended, and the City's E.I.R. Guidelines, and further, that this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Oeclaration. 1 ii 'Ullf'IROG UGN NO. Page 2 _- 4. This Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of ari Ordinance adopting the Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit 09. S. sheo uiy of t(o a) certify o adoption of thiRes ton a d b) forthwith t ansmita copy of this Resolution to the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. APPROV ADOPIb THIS( IOTN DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSIOi? OF VE CITY OF`kWHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. MZN101, I rman i ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the`Rfanning_C xmission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the fore'00,ing 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 10th day of November, 1987, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I! HE 'Ell vvl: LU —4 '13 sit Sor-fig-m 12- il ..--d 0 15 m �j Ej js 2 1 aw - Is In- f-I I W. 0 j3pilsNi -A; a 'j -t OR b.25 4u oa %C3 it Z:O oi W. 0 4 n �J �YL { YIC'y� C�.tON M.�YY N D O� 11 Y « r. »�qp Y�q, ��4Cit tw `� N.N YCYp�+G 9�tgC {�, Y+�N�aZO =C O C V. 7 i .. i�w pyg ya Nyp ..a L N }1 L � •RJ3' M p r sm _Y_�aa~nY cY yr a•cciw S lG � N 13 o C _ w S_ `L OL -p �M.G � L YEN- Y V g oM.°. o w e=4q C cpq N y cO V I- O �' O � gip. xga Oyt�y>tlM rup OG3 9.Y�, V Yyd 4 C-1 s w � r Og T• Qt a'~ Ys O N�i vy. ��1M) � °a«i �ii �_■C Y�lreO r.�631. M ;w^ VfC, �Q E y »w L��9 pig Ni! �4 "Sv; v! t3 ii A KC AMOS ++! .�' +� •� Y r ci x-37 w S_ `L OL -p �M.G � L YEN- Y V g oM.°. o w e=4q C cpq N y cO V I- O �' O � gip. xga Oyt�y>tlM rup OG3 9.Y�, V Yyd 4 C-1 s .qops� +n cp's 41 «`�� `or '•� �¢Y�� g� "La,3� yw�.3`�$^�,y }mom ^'YS'<; � c�u} , OILS ,4.� y My ro^ ^f� itL r9L C! L•.:`4' op 4 q ry. ^y8°eNr big •p$_8 ,feu it ��sa'� �'�^ $ w�^ i�i. .a��3Su�y"�•"N��i y��'� ,� '� -�•_c N N V4! iLx 3a~ 'LZ Yy1'¢~�NN� C6 5 i L N is L C 'p � oV ` A ={�N 4, —" I lsz AaoB +Cy N° 3w -' M L�'Ly oi �����`( \ \ \���{�F�MYYT{FFlrrii✓ }y"i"'.. • A �� N 4. 4V N ` {� g C 4MmN IS 76 vi ilk r $$°'°u =rx e.. •«i «o6CgiG$ «•ei�Fff`((�YYSs y3 "slC". '_'�� ",;:'"�� �O�AN e� bpq e� yy YY q A V=N ^dCC �� ;.� � � e1C6• A� �y ■M Yom°,. N•1 � Y yL ^�,r lit ttI6 nKc ��k� � ��i cr O" ; �� g'�YCL..c, �4 r.r� oii� *•i � G i•�a N i' N� ♦ SC W� •L� � �q N y •N.rs �NpN� � �G �° M �j,! ♦c pi SCL� .�w q.tw �pM�i'��"N� r 3V .m ii S^ +'T1iH ` �piif �F51 �Cp �+.L Hsi v �^ VM _ y IS9 YTS AL •Y VC SlL!.� �r' .`•Y�G Y� 1:15 9 < o <: 3 s Wo .° -a.a. +c'a <`e3 hFO Yw `a �( s a a.+3'3r° a of w I � l � i 2 ^� •Na, y� Vaq <�1S S$� p y Y Y C y � 4 MS a a �Qo 2s! v $ °� aC•t O. Nagyy s6 C �w�ir « V GtV N �� C.s a ^eV Jayy' y CC �u LLaui pCp 4 HN:i. MOLp�p1� il.a 3LY y,^ LM a+ O V yY R t� ���L„ `gip 0 9O oi:L C4arf4� V .0.1 i + w 57 IL C9�L � w. L iy9t 3' O � O. V YL • C S � .O l �au3 Qa*w��i y C YS _py e `OCmpp L .4uup6 t �iy $.' Q>♦tl °~ XaU LY ngig:, ;Sir iy C OYT N� q ayy3 C 7iiS C �# S O� a fff W �4 a • N N S *ff'oo� ACCC taw i a " AAti C tl � { "6 _wt4 x „aYlly C9�L � w. L iy9t 3' uu w tlNNY Y It a.�V N r6 e `OCmpp L .4uup6 t '441 3t §g Z ^ 4 LY CC 34 N W CM N� q ayy3 C 7iiS C �# l6LnY'V pO•t i..6 .Nr MlZ } :� d. f t 0 *ff'oo� ACCC ti�i Na• b�. V A' `�'• na• ~ 4V tiJCCi N Zai ..�. a■Is a• �1 ° -11Ly 4 N L N i igAAj N L'.ppp:. q.p LCiR ■p \71 a °+.pp CiCwO 01 °yM '� m! EuaZ �y MCc 1 a. i{ u.^ • Y•� e$ M tl x L 4R'y 4w �•r Aa a7�p�{ KO•! 7 V y N - ~ y art 4 ixx� C_ 4T ^ ~ F >1L4p' Y 53v V al C' n C Q -M al YY ^ C C` 9 o Q �NM$ I�cL, CC4 N•° � °wry. g .+y�^V�(^ O i G ^"V1ai`Q1 �•�a LL M w T7w Qlir�4 4 .I�WCj C L�O�. uyY� Y Y..N4 taiw VI N rCy S �w .4j1 i.� ^t °: t4 C x „aYlly mN T r V L LXV i. 3' uu w tlNNY Y It � N r6 e ^ LY CC 34 N W CM N� q ayy3 C 7iiS l6LnY'V pO•t i..6 w. d. 1 i� V M CY z `•4 uu E�i0. ii .N. N r6 e ^ tl CC W oy~ `Nq C N� q ayy3 C 7iiS l6LnY'V pO•t i..6 =qo *ff'oo� ACCC ti�i Na• N b {L V L 4 %• p a■Is a• �1 ° -11Ly 4 N L N i igAAj N L'.ppp:. q.p LCiR ■p \71 a CiCwO 01 °yM '� _ +G6 MCc `M y a. i{ u.^ • Y•� e$ M tl x L 4R'y 4w �•r Aa a7�p�{ KO•! i. QV��. 1 i� V M CY z uu L 0 4r yid D ^ Aq CC W oy~ i1'O �LM vY' N M�YN Yr3 s r6 l6LnY'V pO•t i..6 aYy N 7 G C N n V i {L V L y0y6 4Y. ^ N L'.ppp:. 4r. LCiR ■p \71 a °OG ill iS GY "' M L Y 1 4 4 1+ 6.: CY ^9 L!f Q . ■g � �O�tD �s {{d�� ° L CJ E � s LL �oOY. Y 1�' NLS LYw�C° L O.ycYS N L � L V °tlt ^ °O TLw'L HP V> Y 2[ N I°F OIL S y V Ld Y L y CA Z LLI cr CL Z.2 wLO� YY °$i° qN a�oYLC a.2cn v0� V YO+Y SQ A Y..Li Y °yamC� C C GI uty N � • �Oj, � k C sY� .G.Lq VV iMWMrV �S Y y Y V vw C L 1 It VL�I Y N pp i p if a u YCC G.S� LL ' ^uy YY `G {I ^ ^^ ■p ` Y^ L V C C ° w L y V Y L a 0, Y � �4 =L �aCa j1�`'y° O. i?�1 'A 'py��A.yO it V.. 4V iOY VCOF V. �•�y~j 40 `�^ L� �Y ` ^GOM YL p Y T q II O.C� Qb �N �V SN tYti �LC G� W Y 1. ee tir sVA ;:50 �I� tO w G c AMY YY�OIY 111 Yp o _ K u�` ° .�. w wY. L'rS Y «■. ^N pp�j.CC MpCC yCw yyy! ppC Ct�.���Y CpL HK_OG r OO9y-_ /L4 - 6:yyV ��� N V- ®1TL V L` yY 5M L V ^ N Y AY4e^' fSwyio iw aQ" ■pY, p ��li0 3' �» MNZL f +T 1 E"r Ir r�Me yLY ^ � gu�O N$a`i`e GYEIynICC` V Vim' O q S C +ri 'sp eg 1'L: II6 «O. 6 yVy a�I M K.3 O s. .O -. "O ` Vd N M ^ O ■p 2 MMoC�C ° Y y me° ° . LW ' . tC pp 0D) . 4 �G COI yO V p>p L CLV 0^� � � Y Va! u Op i w ° N L+i Y .n~j�{{^ . p V C "7 r 8 ^ �U6 ^ 9O +VO. �dyp°j r 1! X E ^ P y -•V ■N_ Y y.9 f L^ YNIIC qyl + s 6 Y LW`P q RP O tV Cp�tO M4UL 'a MOIO ��•. �V �^ i pW Rqt � C q� NOC^ 9 O C NOp C L N C� �� 8 ■� � .0 Y L Y YY rNN � LCm �C4I ��+• %q V tl gp L yy� N u .6Y u r � C .■° _ � WN WVtJ q Ss wC V� ■pntl W L��.. O ay N'N� p .^+. r p NV VLV UN �N CC Ca «iN C y 3 YE �' pVi �y �' �N Mf,,V C N w �� i T^'' ^► a V L L y 4 .yM Y N N Y y y ;=a riplsy ED. flQ M,J Hit CN VY Y '.W LT m�`e& rm 7:-: •_L3.�r��a`h usw" i c N .� Y$ ointl at 'xvoi 'C ia' i �"fiIYE y yy �V pM X�61r Y� ��ya• y ! LM n� ► L Y� V ° G «Ytl C «N MN..y L�. cV«y4 W TM c IiC � M E w{Li F- QMY. NLL. �1tlr Kt] 6r WYMEI�fJ 24 KYO. q ITV rC. VOYC °p� s 4D YV a.aJY AY iN E.may r+M' pro ni " ^a gS L 6 iM Y O C V« C s 9 Y�Y` yC ii � �O� YC� CW ^nom �v 1s C� LAD 8x «'1- .24 vv <�L LY p>p BGCO ■p w wrrR Or A V..G��u� mI 24 tiI NI � ►��-.5 NI 1 4D YV a.aJY AY iN E.may r+M' pro f! ^�� tlwM► •�O Y�Y` �O� YC� CW ^nom �v «'1- .24 vv �Nw «�C '9iil�p iit'ppL. w wrrR Or A V..G��u� VrY 24 M4CCO V3Jg �jr Qt ►��-.5 NCB 1 � � r�� s„ eQ CC i� y ai C�N IL J Y yy u V M I (1 yyC O L w L i N U Q 44 d8 iQY - r MC-9 L L'h YC L M Y CVO 2 Y4 Iii ... i L U y r Z:g— D YYL w ` y4 pY S u� L O �d.K Yp.. NpYC 4 '� LO .Cy CC Y pN C C y T,wGk 4YdY L +Np OC ~+taC N ~JT C.LOa� N ■ p t Cy CL s' ',i T� f�Y' Y r V t! 9 ,C• ? D• �d� y w. M 6�L w+•.L°. dM u 0 ^O g LO u Y i .^Y. s, Ln' � N `Y' M - v � o yi+d A ,u� t 4 9 g A NLi� U 4 Q �� L6N� s4v w YYA � yy�� yy y V y L i �i 6 6 V M prr ■ � �' Ll V �'. L tf Y 4 NLUd Y'2j. N N Y YY •pIr �C L y. 2 � ■ �qa �.� Y u da ��lYL .0 ��v4 W� �M �`� M �y � �� !� /{4•�Y�� +CriG Y.�G 'u p,M7• {Y{���Y Ia+ yyyyOLLL��I4G{� Y�C ai �� C �tY 3�.� OYq LY� S'.-5 .Yr a r, T, .o MY OF RMcHQ i U.CA410 . PLANNIM 01itl5;0p1 Aug 1* 0 v , Fig lOJbi�3 R PLAtQ D>rSImt (MIDSLINU i�rJOmzu C=IAL DLu" C MER, OW R rUR4? a i WE D 74T INC. 4 2301 Dupont Drivo, Smite 200 Irvin *, California 52715- 1520 'I y 11 0367 �.� . �'�'1410w7t MMITS T NMW 4 TD f DL'tiJxLePM2*i AGAZZKZW NO. -37 -01 I TABLE OF CONTENTS FOOTHILL COMMERCIAL DESIGN CENTER GUIDELINES Pu'pose of the Guidelines.............. .... `;.... 1 1. 7,ntroduction to,-Foothill Design Commercial Center........ 2 1.'', Location........... .... ................^.............. 2 1.2', Planning and Zonin % ................................. 2 2. AppraVals and Subm ittals .................. +.,, ..•••••. 2 ti 2.1 Plan Review Process .. ............................... 2 2.2 Preliminary Flan Submittal... ..:.................. 3 2.3 Construction Document Submittal ..................... f 2.4 Submittal for Center Management Review of Any Alteration, Addition or Change of Use ............... � 2.5 order of Review Processes Outlined .................. S 3. Site Planniog Guidelines .. ............................... hf 3.1 Building Site Coverage. — .......................... 9 3.2 Landscape Coverage .............................. ... 9 3.3 Building heights ........................ I........... 10 3.4 Street Setback... .................. .............. 10 3.5 Parkipg Requirements.... .... .............. 11 3.6 4ccess and Drive Location ........................... 11 3.7- Service and Loading Areas ................. ....•..• 12 3.8 Refuse Collection Areas ................ ........... 12 3.`3 Screening of Exterior Mechanical Equipment.......... 13 3.14 Screening of Exterior Electrical and Mechaniial Equipment and Transformers .............. 15 3.11 Fences and Walls...... .... ... .........,.. 16 3.12 Utilities and Communication . ................. 16 4. Architectural Guidelines ............... I................0 17 S. landscape Guidelines ................... ................... 19 5.? Objectives..................... .................... 19 5.2 The Cent,,. Landscape Concept ........................ 19 5.3 Primary /Secondary Entry Zones ....................... 20 5.4 Interior Zone. .... ............................. 21 5.5 Landscape Lighting... ......... ...................... 24 5.6 General Conditions ... ............................... 24 6, Signage Guidelines ................. .t............ ........ 26 7. Lightin4 Guidelines ....... ............................... 26 8. Appendix ..,. .... ....... .............................., 28 Contact anti Reference List �� ..i.- 1410 -J PURPOSE OF THE OUIDF}UNES The. development bf the.= Fo�thill Commercial besign Center (the "Center ") is controlled and restricted by Development Agreement No. 87-01 for the Foothill Commercial Design Center (the "Development 'Ag ee*ant"), the Deol°aration of Covenants, Conditions and Resiiii:tions for the Foothill Design. Commercial Center (the "CC&(W' , the Master Declaration of Covenants., Conditions. and Restrictictus, for Rancho Cucamonga Business Park, San Bernardino.County, California, recorded on March 9 1981 as in.s" ument number 01- 049345 in the Official Records of San Bernardino County, California (the "Master CC &R °s"), as well as applicable,governmeotal collet, and regulations. The CC &W s are directd ;toward achieving the desired ,harac-• ter and quality le *el of site development that will set the Center apart from other commercial developments. The purpose of the Design Guidelines is to further define the requirements which are specifically and generally skated in the C610 s.. These Guidelines are intended to supplement the CC &R's as an aid in the submittal of plans for approval by,providing more detailed information oa which to base a review. Any specific conflict between CC &R's, Design Guidelines, and governmental codes and regulations, shall be governed by the more restrictive -regu- lations. In general, however, the priority of compliance is first with the Specific Plan and governmental codes and r�_gu- lations, second with the Development Agreement, third with the Master CC &A's, fourth with the CC&R'S and fifth with the Master Plan and Design Guidelines. 'the owners or tenants of each site within the Center should famiiarixe themselves with the intent and requirements of the CC &R's, these Guidelines, the Master CCV.'s, the Specific Elan and all applicable governmental codes &A regulations, anti. through their architects, implement all those,..Vrovisions applica- ble to their specific site developments. Al's development plans, landscaping and graphic designs, shall be submitted to the BCE Development, Inc., a Delaware corporation, or its successor (the "Center Management ") as further described in the CC &R'_. These Guidelin.2s are in no way intended to supersede any applicable Statutes, Codes, Ordinances or regulations of control - ling governmental jurisdictions. Should any portion of the CC &R's or the besign Guidelines be discovered tc encourage violation of applicable Statutes, Codes, Ordinances, or other governmental regulations, thae discrepancies should be brought to t!?e attention of the Center Management. 1410 -5 �A� 11 2A 1. INTRODUCTION she 17 acre Center is being developed for the purpose of providing a center offering support services For the bus;.ness and professional community within the immediate surrounding area within the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City "). The development is being created with -hat image in mind; a carefully planned and maintained commercial enter in a Country o Mediterranean Village -like, pedestrian oriented setting, all unified by these guidelines. 1.1 LOCATION. The Center is located in the southeastern a'kea of the City. It is bordered by Foothill Boulevard on the notth, by White Oak Avenue and Eucaluptus Street on the south, by ii�;uce: Avenue on the west and by Elm Avenue: on the east. 1.2 PLANNING AND ZONING. The Industrial Park District, Suba`,tea 7 of the Industrial Specific Plan of the City and Tentativ�`�Parcel Map 10517 and the Development Agreement govern planning and zoning of this 2Yvelopment and are made a part of these guidelines by this reference. 2. APPROVALS AND SUBMITTALS ..l PLAN REVIEW PROCESS. In order to ensure that the design standards for the Center contained in these guidelines are achieved, a series of plan submissions will be required at different stages of the design process. The number ot'plan submissions will vary depending upon the complexity and timing of a proposed development. Plan submissions will also be required for significant revisions, alterations, additions, or change of use for approved or existing developments within the Center. In addition to the required review by the Center Management, before any development may be undertaken or any building perr'.t issued for a site within the Center, a Development Plan must', -o be submitted to and approved by the City Planner of the City., However, the Center Management must first approve the plan bef4 submittal to the City For Preliminary Review. Checklists for th'r- required submittals to the City are available from the City Planning Department. Required plan submissions shall be submitted to the Center Management, care of BCE Development Inc. Each stage of.plan submissions will require 3 sets of plans containing the specific information described below. The plAn submission for each new development and each significant revision, alteration or change of use shall be accompanied by a Review Fee. -2- 1410 -J S- 41 aj ry l All submitted plans will N. reviewed by the Center Management for acceptability of design it compliance with the Master CC &R's, the CC &R's and these design guidelines. Upon completion of review by the Center Management; one set of submitted plans will be returned to the Applicant along with a letter summarizing comments, recommendations, requirements and findings. The length of review by the Center Management for a2,1 stages of plan submis- sion shall be governed by the CC &R's. The returned plans will be marked "Plot Approved" or "Approved" with -rthe following intended meanings: A. Approved Approved documents permit the Applicant to proceed to the next stage of the - approval process. In most eas;Qs, this will be City Design Review Preliminary Submittal. B. Approved Subject tj Conditions Documents marked " approved subject to conditions" permit the Applicant to proceed to the next stage of the approval process provided the Applicant ,complies with the conditions spec- ified by the Ceiter Management�`1> If the Applicant tabs exception to the specified conditions, tLt Applicant must do so in writing by certified mail addressed to Foothill Commercial Design Center, c/o the Center Management within 10 days from the date of the Applicant's receipt of returned documents. Unless such action is taken, the Center will assume that all conditions are d� _Nceptable to and approved by the Applicant. C. Not Approved Documenit!s will be returned to tae Applican'; with comments descri' .ag the basis for disapproval. Revisea,.documents must be resubmitted if approval is sought. Approv.,3 of the Applicant's plans, specifications, - calculations, or work shall not constitute an implication, representation, or certification by the Center Management that the above items are in compl:ance wit the applicable Statutes, Codes, Ordinances or other regulations. The Applicant shall have the sole responsibility for the comylience with applicable Statutes, Codes, Ordinances or other regulations for all work performance on the premises by or on behalf of the Applicant. 2.2 PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTAL The Preliminary Plan submission is required to convey specific information about the rite planning and architecture of the proposed development. The Preliminary Plan package should be submitted to the Center Management before or concurrent with submission of plans to the City. Preliminary Plans are to be submitted and approved before construction documents are submi, -3,- 1410 -J :-- L4,9 0 .z ted. It is suggested toot a schematic plan of proposed` project be reviewed by the City Planning Departmgnt before preparation of " the Preliminary Plana to he submitted''to -O" center Manageiaent. The Preliminary Plan submissioniequ 'res each of the follow- ing exhibits to be attached: A. Site Plan Indicating the Fallowing: y � 1. :building footprints and dimensione,to property lines; h 2. Building roof overhangs; 3. Configuration of parking -and vehicular circulation ateas ° 4. Location of parking eleatrolier; 5. Truck service, loading area, and trash enclosures; 6. Lines of setbacks "and easements;. �\ 7. Adjacent roadways including curblines, medians and median o_oenings; 8. A material and' „63or sample board; and Tabulation of: a. Parcel area; b. Total building,floor area; c. Site coverage; d. Building co,�Yerage; a. Total parking provided; f. Total parking required; 1. Cc *nceptual Grading & Drainage-Plan Indicating” 1. Proposed fi' ''°h grades, slopes and builc?�ing pad :elevati -aMs; Site drainage structures and systems; 3. Grades of existing streets and cup' - \s; and, 4. Locations of street lighting and utflity structures within landscape easement. 4. 1410 -3 \� :�-q9 C. Conceptual bandtcape Plan Indicating: 1. Plan, mg- erials, sizes, and spacing; 1 2. Walkkjags and paved areas; and,' a'• 3. Othe .- andscape design' features; '- D. Buildinq ElevatioInk of all Sides of all Proposed Buildings In di c y, 1 Wall and roof materials, textures and 0 colors; 2. Locations of wall mounter signing and 1ighting conforming to design criteria quidelin)�s and the City Sign Ordinance; �- 3. Roof and parapet heights above ground floor 4. The profile of any roof mounted mechanical equipment which extends above the roof e� parapet. E. Building Floor Flans: F. Building Roof Plans Indicating: 1. Roof elevations move finish floor; and, 2. He�4hts and loom \ions of roof mounted mechan- ical equipment were available. G. Outline Spec fi;ations of all Buildiiq M gria',s H. Concep%ual,Graphics and Wall Mounted Siga�e 1. Ground signs and wall mounted signs: a. Locations; b. Designs, materials, textures, colors- heights, and areas.; - c. Illumination; and I d. Typography. 2 •birectional and informational sigr;g% a. Locations; i -5- 14lO -J ;�� b. Designs, materials, textures, colors,' heights, and areas; c. Illumination; and, d. Typography. 3. Lirectional and informational signs: a. Locations; b. Designs, materials, textures, colors, heights, and areas; c. Illumination; aid, d. Typography. 2.3 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT SUBMITTAL: All Applicants are required to submit to the Center Mai.xge- went copies of the same construction documents to be approved by the City, in order t-a aemona�;rate the precise construction details for implementing the apprlvgd R,A!! °inary Plans. The construction document submission requires 3 sets of the following: A. fizal Grading and Drainage Plan; B. Architectural, structural, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical drawings; C. Construction Specifications; and, D. Landscape Planting and Irrigation Plans. 2.4 SUBMITTAL FOR C014MITTEE RE«IEW OF ANY ALTERATION. ADDITION OR C ::ANGE OF USE In general this procedure is the same as outlined above for initial development projects. Preliminary plans are required to be submitted for any significant revisions, alterations, ad- ditions or change of use to approved or existing developmeutz; within the Center. Preliminary plans for th=s purpose must be submitted and approved before they are submitted for City Design Review before construction documents are submitted to the City gr the Center Management and before the commencement of con- struction. Revision, alterations, gedbitions or change of use require the submission of 3 sets of d =.3cuments including: A. A writtan description of the ,nature and extent of the proposed revision, alteration, addition or change of use to be undertaken. -b- 1410 -J iii l� B. Indication of propose) revisions, alterations, additions or changes to: 1. The site plan; 2. The grading tnd drainage plant 3. The landscape plan; m. The building elavatians iicludirig; a. Wa l aad roof mat4rials, textures and colors; b. Locations of wall mounted signin, r% k"nd lighting c. Roof end parapet heigh, .'above the ground floor ine; and, d. The \profile of any roof mounted mechan- ical�equipaent which'extends above the roof`,,, arapet; and, 5. The``outldii floor plans. s. Co T-;,a3ation o,.: � 1. The new total building f3glr are &; 3. The new site covErage; 3. The new building c::verage, 4. The Dew parking rrovita,y; and, 5. Calculations demonstratig the new required parking. D. Outline specifications of construction materidls. F. All App). ::cants are required t-a submit copies, of the same construction documents to be approved by the C tt y building officiale, in order to demonstrate precise construction details for implementing aptrnved preliminas °y plans. The construction document submission requires the same 3 sets } of plans, drawings and s;ecifications - >as provided -in Section 2.3 above. -7- 1410 -J 2. `0RD, 7.R OF RF4rIEW PROCESSES OUTLINED: In the course of desi°gnin ro osed dnvelo menu for arcels within the - Censer, additional greviewsand-approvals will be required beyond the Cgnte .Management rvvie -, process. ' he following sumg14ry of tie Center review an�.__Approval prccesses is included to assist iadi. -idual Applicants in under,itanding the approximate nature and sgquence,, of these reviews. > An und+ersto'.id- ing of the total review #�ocPss from the outset, it is hoped, will, contr ;ute to smoothek and more e,ffici nt processing of etch_ j proposed de "velopment, 1 A. The sig process should begin with a,review of 1 the Development Agreement, the Haster CG &R's, th*-. CC&R19, at, Deign Gu; l '3elines, the City industrial Specific Plan, and the applica'iT.e sections of the eurrer:t City Development CAe. Copies _ of the City applioatio�s and submission requ�iremenrs should also tie obtained from the City Planning Department At ttfis time. B. nefore 1,eqAnninq design, a qualified civil engineer and the C =ty Engineering pivision shou14 he consulted as to grading and drainage restrict: ons 4` in the e..7aa. C. Prelim$,ary plans must be submitted and approved by the Center 14anagement before submittal t& the City €cr Site D�_vvlopxrot Rev -'sew. D. Submit plarn to the -City for Site Development Review, which is the 2211 Planning Department review and approval process required before submission for bui -10ing department plan deck., unless the proposel development requires a Conditional Use Permit, a subdi-ision snap, .oi: other City's review 'process, all of ;,.ich have tt «1,,lr own separate City processes not co,ered herein, Site Development Review covers site planning, architectural, conceptual landscape, and conceptual grading aid- drainage design review. i E. Submit plans for City Building Department plan check, F. Submit departmcat;approveA, constr=iction docume! .,a`t6 the;,,Ce -Zer Managament' for 'final aEprovz,l . j G. Obtain building and /or;gxaeing and /or City en- croachnent permi:.r and proceed with construction. ;;i 3. SITE PLANKYNG GUIDELINES 'E, 3.1 BUILD ING SZ G{3VERAGE: 7- ... A. Objectives 1. To ensure that the intensity of _site d:, 1 merit is not excessive or detrimental ro "� perireptiszn of the Center ar a Country - Hed.,terianean -Dike Village. 2. TC promote an integrated pedestrian oriented comercial development in a Country .MeWkterranean -Dike Village. B. Guidelines \< 1. To the greatest extent possible. ":he planning of ;gay ind= y {dual parcel shall. take in! a cons ideraticin the relat,on of the-parael to adjacent Ptreets and the relatiop of the " parcel td-;the existing improvements on adjacent parcels and related open spacr.s, structure and, plaiting so as to rri ,ke the impre,vements on'eaoh parcel within the Center mutually reinforcing. f _ 7, Site planning shall inclty waste!; Aft planning of any expansio; ryp.iditional development which i-- con erSplated within the Center. 3.2 LANDSCAPE COVERAGE: A. Objective:_ Y. To an -are t? s,t at least a minimum portion of each parry'.. Within the Center is devoted to landscape "Taterials in order to maintain a sense of continuity with the Center and to , contribute ,to the perception of the Center as a "V' ii.?tge- Like'" environment. 2. To enhance the visual quality of the streetscape and to provide an attractive ant; plea8an: working environment, ;sn a Country Me,literLanean -Like Village sett ?ng. Within the property li[ieca of a t .rcel ;evoted to landscape materials she l be .�. sliaed in the Master CC &R's and the CC &R!: unless t therwise approved in writing �.y -9- 1410 -J J i '�v the equirements 4 �' andscapenGuidelines sesiI Se•..c ion /( 3.3 AUIUDING HExGkT$ -. A. objectives G 1: To maintain�a reasonably consistent and compatih a he'ght profile throughout the <� Center. B. Guidelines 1.''Building heights ahall be deterpi ned by the average distance P- ieasured at e4ual in!,ervals arou,rd the bu perimeter, from final grade a feet from the ouL�Iziing line to the toys 04 parapet or mid -point between eave and ridgy. 3`, 4 BV EET SBTBACK: A. objectives 1. To achieve a feeling of opennee^s alonra the streexs n,: -e1 orces the per "r eption of the Center'. a CuunAly Msdite,rraneau- Like;.il age env.- ,04iment. 2. To encourage 8 mlr s,,:�1- d gr� a of reguiaxity of Space formed by, buildinas,thro;ighout the . - Center. 3. To achieve a landspaped setting between the street and buildings. 7B, Guidelines I. The bunting setback shall be measuaed from the ultimate street curb to the closest poi *nt on the building, excluding architectural " features or screen- veal's. These distances shall be as established by the City for subarea 7 of the City's Industrial Specific Plan. .L5 PARKING REQUIMEN',c'S: A. 2UeCtiveS 1. To provide sufficient on-site parking within the Center as required by the City ordir,,nces. parking on public roaslwga s or on lots other r projOcts is prohibited. ' 2. To configure parking areih,.' such that they contribute to an increase of tine ratio of on -site persons to on -site vehicles'. H. Guideli.n ^s 1. All users loc,. te:d in the Center shall provide on -site parking and loading facilities,as required by the City o: dinialce =_s. 3. Standard parking stalls shall be a. minimum of 9 feet bv.19 feet with 1 foot overhang. Permitted over landscarre area only. Compact parking stalls shall be a rrinmum of 8 feet by r 16 feet. The minimum backup aisle is 26, -- -- feet. 3. Designated " Handicap Parking" spaces shall be` provided to meei Mate Handicap regnirezients. E4. Parking adjacent tPL tie streetscape areas 4 shat "I'',be designed to screen tears from the sir';*t and ,shall utilize either a turf berm or a 4,,izub edge:. fog: this purpose. S. Designated "Cycle Parking" areas shall b nrovided.for the convensenes of employees using bicyc- es or motorcycles. In order: to J avoid the :»Jutte r of ,cycles parked in un- pl,,aned locations, it-'is recommended that jJ planned "Cyrie Par'Ring" areas be conveniently located to employee entrances and be provided ' with racks has+inq security lacking capabil. -- ities. 3.5 ACCE ^" AND DRIVE LC*CAT:ON: A. Ob j ee; t rues 1, To have arcess drives located such that . vehicular traffic arriving at and leaving from Ore Center as Well as traffic passing continu -, ously in streets, flaw at an optimum level of efficiency-. ..31.. 1410-J !1 2. That utilities located on ;he landscaAe " e4sement are not or are minimally disrupted by the construction of access drives. B. /) Guidelines 1 1. All streets contiguous t�the.Center should be coordinated wih approved taster Plan access drives. r 2. The development of comet�i access drives is required within the Cenr to minimize the ¢ amount of curb cuts.' A5'cess drives should be coordinated wiQ adjacen1k flow of peak period traffic. :q 'I " Access drive designs should incorporate provisions fcx efficient vehicle stacking during peak periods of use. 3.7 SERVICE AND LOADING AREAS: A. Ob7ectiv s 1. To ensure that service and loading areas are located wi::hin the Center so as to minimize the visibility of loading and sarvice vehicles- from primary visual exposure areas. 2. To ensure that the service and loading areas . are designed and locate3 within the Center so that service vehicle acsr.ivities and movement do not disrupt the efficient flow of on-site and off -site traffic. B. Guidelines. 1. The City Industrial Specific Plan proviles guidelines for design of loading and service areas and should be referred to for this information.: -.` 2. Provisions shall b_--`made within the Center for any necessary vehicle loading and no on- street vehicle loading shall be permitted. 3.8 R "FUSE COLLECTION AREAS: A. Objectives 1. To ensure that refuse and refuse container are not visible from primary exposure areas (streets, primary image entry drives, floors ys -12- 1410Md� -of, wage buildings, common visual and, rec�re- i \. tonal a"Tenity areas. etc.). A 2 To ensure that refuse enclosures are effec- cively desi.gnad to receive and contain generated r,o�►fuse until collected, and e"lesed AI refuse contk1- hers after refuse is collected. 3. To, ensure that refuse collection vehicles hays clear.- -and corvenient access to refuse -::hllect:on areas And do not contribute to excess wear -and -tear to on -site and atf -site developments. j, B. Guides linos 1. All-',outdoor refuse containers shall be . visually screened w'. ,Ai a durable 5',0," or higher, solid masonry enclosure, so as not to minimize visibility 'from adjacent lots or sits, neighboring properties of streets. 2. Refuse collection areas - should be effectively;, desi4ned to contain all refuse generated on -site and deiosited between collections. Deposited refuse should not be visible from outside the refuse ror,,eairer. 3. Refuse collection enclosures should be 0*signed of durable materials with finishes and colorn which are unified and harm6nious with the overall architectural trheme. 4. Refuse collection areas should be so located within the Oenter as to provide cleat and ;convenient access to refuse collection - 4hicles and minimize wear- and -tear to on -site and off -site developments. S. Refuse collection areas should be designed and locatf-d within the Center so as to be conve- nient for the deposition of refuse generated on-site:. 3.5 SCREENING OF EXTERIOR MEECHMUCAL EQUIPMENT: A. Objectives 1. To have all exterior components of plumbing, '. processing, heating, cooling and ventilation systems not? ;be directly- vijable from within the Center ,6: from adjoining streets, lots, or1�� �. build,nns. 13- 3411 -1 S-.D _ t9 B. Guidelines 1. Exterior com onents.of plumbing, ,processing, �LL heating',,-, ,�ocling a.� ventilation systems (iµcc.lud 'sg but not limitso to piping# tanks, - cackv.r collectors, heating, cooling and ventilating equipment fans, bl *wars. ductwork; ;1 rents, louvers, meters. c"4rress'6rs, motors, be incinerators, ovens, etc,.) 3ha11 not permitted to protrude above a plane 1a1 with . the 'cop-of the parapet, unlese o� -herwa ,�4 v approved in writing by the Center Manag; meat and the City Planning DaipartmeVt. g. It is recommended that n the case of roof u -' mounted _i44echanical equipment r that buil(3±.ng parapets'be of such a height; that .Too', mounted q screening_drvicas not be required: at do de " building iarapeto „ot rer&iv ,ttie required screening, mach nical equipment shall be tnobttusive screened by an- screening device that Fill appear as an integrated part of the ovekal -I aerchitecxural design. ` 3. -any device:_Amployed to screen exterior components of plumbing, processing, heating, cooling and ventilating syste'ms `rom.direct "an view shall appear as integrated pn*"t of the architectural design, and as such, be �r constructed of complimentary and durable )i aterials and finished -in a complimentary texture and color scheme to the overall architectural design of the Center. 4. Any exterior componexts,!pf plumbing, process- ing, heating, cool::ig and ventilating systems and their screening devices, than will be visible from upper floors of adjactgt build - ings e;all be kept to a visible miPi�num, shall be installed in a neat and.compaot fashion, and shall be painted a -color as to allow their hiending with their visual background. S. No exterior components of plumbing, process,, ing, heating, c,aoling, and ventilating systems shall be mounter on t ny bukldiag wall unless they are an t-- ;agrater architectural design feature, and in any case shalt, be permitted only with r.he written approval of tfic -Center Management and the tidy planning Department. r -14- 1410 -J � 714649+ it Y- 3. 10 9Vf9iiii�LK 'iii 1XTjMz(t zLr=Rl AL , An KWWICAL I?iPXW !►M TRANSFORMS S 1. TO Rlizinate the visibility of, exterior OeatrlCal WiPWIlt and t-rana.lers4rs from pr=xy visual oxpca►uce areas (*treats, primary 1ma90 sentry, drives, floors of isle buildings, and cakaon visual and recreational amenity areas, oto.) F 4 a. �iui8illia�s ." t. TratnAlareWrs that may be visible frck any primary Visual 6sp081tary sr" Chall be seam td vtitb piattbia�g .atasdor bergs cr a durable A04-CoUIbustiblt 4nc,%osure {of a design .~ cartifuration acceptable to Southern t Catliforn#-- ftison company pcssiblae, it ; t► ra6l6"ndieei that refuse conttinors and transfor"vi be integrated Into the Sam G ' e�tsloeura. r Translora r enclosure* shoulf , of durabla aatorials with fini0es and colors- a1VA which whi are 'anifie& and harmmious w1t�P4 the IV ,overall architectural theme. 1. Sloctrical *gUW*nt should be elounted 011, Interior Of a 3uildmq wherever possible. Won intrariar nounting it tot practicaikl electt!"I +Txipwnt shoulb WA-0% ted. IA a ' lecastica Where it is substantUaly 909ee0orl fry public view. to no cmas ahn6ld aat.ari tar eguipmtnt be mountoA ea the jL-,.raateidte cc primary exposure ,Mdse of any building, _ e. Onterior mov ated electri=l 0 I at W4 quit be should kept to a t+i #1 C mats* un, ,- viskible be -where shall .iw�tajAed Sit a v,. _:jt and orderly fashion, and rawi i bo paUted to blond with its munting backpound. S. At4v& ground mWitching &WICto (*.ge back floes gr*v ontors and give oystasi) D inastaljod aos pIrt of the b6ckbono utili•. a►ybusea, 4►t�3C are Visible - - -= fC= ad ace'A attQe,*t � 8"U k4 *cremnod with p�antirkg andifer horses. S a U 3.11 FENCES AND WALLS1 A. Objectives 1. ;To have fences and walls installed such that they are ir'4onHpicuous as possible or designed as 'an .integrated and complimentary:, architectural design element adding interest to the overall architectural design concept of the Center. 2. To have no walls-or fen�tis reduce the intended quality of the development or reduce the perception of the Center as _a Country Medi ter raneai4Like Villa 3. To discourage the constEructior of walls and fences except as necesiAry_ -�,;6 screen outside st-,orage ,3�ading, and service areas. 4. To ensure that fences and walls do not, ' because of their height, location, or design, contribute to a decrease is the safety or efficiency of traffic flows on -site or in fronting Streets. B. Guidelines 1. Vo fence or wall shall be ronst Tted within setback from the curbline of a ..-.nting street, except those freestanding or wing walls which are an approved part of the architectural design W! the buildings. Any walls or fences fronting on -Iny street which are over 3 feat in height ar, subject to the City's building setbacks. 2. Fencing shall be of a substantiaily durable - fireproof material. No wood fences will be � permitted. 3. To ensure that fences and walls do not, �I becaust of their height, location, or design, contribute to a lecrease in the safety or efficiency of traffic flows on -site or in fronting streets. 3.,12 UTILITIES AND COMMiMICATION DEVICES; �t. ObZectives 1. Tb have the entire Center vismally free of unsightly overhead power and telephone lanes, utility poles, anO other utility at? &;r _*mmu- nication equipment and components -16- 1410-3 ~in r 4. d "�I J� 2. To protect jff -site utjlity� systems from ;f beb ned oming over - burde by irMvidual lots utility systems. y3. To achieve minimum disruption of off -site utilities, - Paving, ar %,landscape during construction and maintenance of ap -site utility systems. B. Guidelines 1. Ali exterior on-site utilities' including, but not limited to, drainage :systems, sewers, gas lines, water lines, and electrical (except transformers as addressed under Section 3.11), t4lephone and communications wires and equip - meh'� shall be installed an9 Maintained un- derground. 2. No antenna or deice for transmission or reception of any signals, including, but not limited to, telephone, television, and radio, shall be placed on,any lot so that it is visible from 5' -01" above the Vround or ground floor level at 3 distance of :505 feet in any direction, unless sge4%fic w�ittca z.Wroval is gr, nted b,� t ke Cent�'r � anagepent and `:6y the City;Plannincj'Department. Ttansmitteri and antennas shall be screened from view by berms, planting, or a combination 6f bath. 3. Temporary overhead power and telephone facilities are permitted during construction. ARCHITECTURP.L GUil. LINES A. Objectives 1.. To encourage high quality architectural design in keeping with the Country Mediterranean -Like Village setting. it is intt%ided that all buildings will be designed using simple orms organized around the following des :i-n ele- ments: Building masses with paintt_ -and textured finishes; and, ;pedestrian plekzas and courtyards. These elemel,►ts,!zill be designed into all future building! (A4► 1(jpments within �� the Center. , 2. To be multi- tenant buildings with office and ,commercial uses, all of which will have varying service requirements. -17- 1410 -J d "�I i. N B. 1` !uidelines f l�Thd'-design of each building within the Center, i, olether witt the colors, text t,, res.'and ,materials used in the dc,0,an and construction of each building, shall t,e:roi,si,mtent with the overall design concept for, "the Ceciter as a Country F9editerrnneari Likqll Village.: 2. � All roof ._-�gaed equiipment shall be screened fiVm. vie4'S rapets ox other building forms. - 3, All exterior lightli%q shall be 41s gneci so that the liyht,paj:ce is concealed. 4. r Design consideration ek,ould be given to: a. Views and vistas, both from within jf building, {.and from off-site; b. Solar )rieutitxon and climate; c. Oriantation toward major streets and thor9ughf4,,res; d. Vehicular and pedestcia!,�,`fiows; e. The character of surrounding develop- ments; f. Expressions of a facilities ftictional orga,iization; g. Expressions of the individual character of each business; h. The satisfaction of physical, gsych��,- logical, social, and functional. Reeas of. facils',ty ugars; \ i. Energy coservation through facility design; _ ,, j. .pnhancemi nt of the overaa,l landrr!ape ,,haste;; ��lar ; and k. Rocf exposure. 1 . El it iii ,,, hlr.w inabzp� 5* Cons nation should ng izchi i_ of the toll arch£tactur :l design ratio ' ^: lanrs shall have a IK' le to create c' . aASCili �Ctus i p ,,suit form variation £n depth snd ang +gsriot�r and intszsst tc Chs ; nd at- and oil as ti buildiA I sar' hip es a VO4sY pasinclude tafi aid�txr b. Articulation of the but ourtano,'��ris encouraged through t" Use encouraged and -r essas creating use of rolled titlXn4 thTCUQ rovidinQ liiaua� banding tad cdrrcicss aril lots ,. banding to the overall balm windcws,ll through. the •uoa of lmlti-pa coffering undernaath soft gutters; arA , interior doWnspaut and g a cmglimwfttarj hl Colors, ktath dy vAc textures in ton �uznction with dYnasaic farms is enooli*agod as e�cent C building li bt earth tans„ z, treatment roof roofs of a / stucco, and awnings An 1.Zl=oan Color he city hPltAning Cunt* approved by 4 Department. 5. LAM :ApE GUIDELIM 5.1 Ob ect vse3 give form k. Thi�,landsc8pa consiatThu$, the Char &Ctero! the to exterior spas**• el nts Such as Strsl9ts landsoap is crsatsd by y placement of. and building setbaoks,,�the varlet hting, waik1layov- e1esento such a dignity.• site lighting, of major and plant material s# �u �r, prniso sAtr'stetst functional element s It ics areas# etc. parking lots, buil4inQ , E. GivRn the project sFehiteCSCure and building sitea�. s- r► the Center will 1il sly be O a &T1 ;l s" aril rises landscaping as a and gilivey£ng the phay the key role in creating ovrerall ch�raot *Y so a "villag+i" worki', environ' 04tr • the lr&dtor then of thnoo guiaellnes is to pride 8osxgn criteria, wt. ichunatratandablR image that is distinctive, clearly unifia3. NEW fS.2 'The Center Landscape Concp2t: I A.- The landscape is a key ingredient iii blending arubitectural massing, various `<and usr-, ana.City l'+ criteria i.nto•an overall charac #`r. The landscape ° serves to orgagze circulation patter�"r solar influences, areas of differing uses and open space , into a duality image. Country Mediterranean -Like Village references are an integral factor in the proposed developmeat. The landscape framework Ahall reflect land use, roadway widths, -atnd open'space. Evergreen corri- i dons runnier, in a north /south direction_ wi3l provide shidg'rpatterA's while east/west corridors l Planted w3tr' deciduous trees4ncourage solar penetration. Pedestrian, bicycle and sehig =filar circulation patte ;ns are designed to avoid con- flict. �, -The landscape or interior parcels shall recognize landscape frameworN and extend the framework where appropriate. I Trees, shrubs, an vines compliment the arch *:ee - ture and soften building massing. Shady pf:xkit.g -i areas occur under evergteen /deciduous canopy trees, Plrnt materials aro'selected for their aesthetic qualities as well1e.a= `off maintenance a d 1 R` watwr requirements. Automatic irrigation and maintertaace of -.ill P planting ensures their viat;;lity. I, l B. For additional information regarding the landscape ,framework, see: !.he Center Plans. 5.3 Primary /secondary entry zones. A. Streetscape component: 1. Foothill Boulevard, spruce Avenue and elm Avabue shall in luxe a continuous turf bermed ed -ie,, groupings of platanus Acer folius + ,("european sycamore") at 25 to 30 feet on centers Viand evergreen accent comers ca:sisting i of pinup.- : *lderica 1 "mondell pifte "} at 25 to 30 JI feet on-:enter. T4%e trees al6n� Foothill Boulevard may be grouped to aljow `i visual windows" to t',e Center at such lodations as approved by the City Planning Dapartmeit. 1!, - Foothill Boulevard shall have a 4' widen meandering sidewalk. ` I �i "�, ffie'2 T- =1—�^ 1121 S "�1L , Ithito Oa Avepuee and Z=AlMam Itroot shall iaseludee a contimaous 9raun4 cme:r edge, g'itszpiags at ti'i ane colot accent carafes as Platanus acerifoliuz - aurdteean Byfie mr* ifir g - Q' on dater Finue eldrrrics ► Amdall, p=im at 25-30, an cents rr Alnuc rhoobitolip: - Uhits Alder at 35,40' an center - Prunus caro siferal , 'Atropugpuren' - Purple loaf plux a. Primary vatmAce driverweysa The ptimtp entrance driveway location's identified by a geometric tree pattern of a spelecim" s3se l k evergreen or Simi- evergreen var,iet (36" box Anus rlx�ifolis) and #oenented by two ligbteed bollards designed to iaooruorarta the indivitual panel s' nimber (or projeert address), C. Secondary entrance dtivawiytea a fto $, aOndsry entrance driveway locattdn is identified by a geometric tree pattern of a - peeciatu sixa &miduous variety (36" box Alms nccobifolia) and ae nto by two 1,19 fed bollards 4essvAed to inoupw4tf 'the L=ividurl,_ pares). niter for projut itit ` 10. - -tnt* ri6r parcel son** A -J are oonnects4 by two. �riasrr driveway corridors, . 1. - 4tre s Avenue !a E lea Avenue driveway corridor is strengthened by it:4 east to west connection of ftous rubigine»a. 111uildiag ratay ee+.aeaest, trnos of Lxgeratrownis indica#,1ta$&ialephis iaelicsa standard, and /or Neriu* erleat4wr, standard interrupt ,this rhyme to atcebt building ontr!:en &Ad pedestrian connections. - 2. Feathil,l Avenue driveway e:OV Ie AII, i.; intended to be th& Wjor prbloct entrif with ='sus set(otett to act as deaid-..ZUS va zt, de Al i0con�y'�. (i pules higra "itaYiexa�" d/c r 1e?ltatra *c� acerifolia), 'J n -21- - 1l� 0701-02 011- 10- 87PPc Agenda 3 5-4 Interior Zone: T.::-interior zsne encompasses all exterior r^ for elements within an in �vidual parcel excluding the streetscapas and the building {s} area. This zone is subject to the needs of:each individual owner or tenant and thus is meant -;to have,a greater degree of flex - ibilit! ;, than the'streetscape zone. Common concerns with -Ln this zone include: landscape amenities; parking lot arrangements and landscaping site lighting; regu- latory and eArettional signing; service area screening; and side and rear property line treatment. A. Propertx ling .lanting: Property line trees are intended to work as "hedge -row" framing elements and will typically be vertical. Property line trees are as follows: Brachychiton populneus - Bottle Tree Eucalyptus nicholii -� Nicholls Willow- leafed Peppermint Liquidambar styraciflua - American Sweet Gum Pinus Elderica - Mondell Pine B. Screening shrubs and ground cover: Screening shrubs and ground cover along property lines wi 31 be evergreen flowerix,.", varieties witn an optimum nontrimmed height Zor tae shrubs of 6' to 71. Shrubs shall be a max7mum of 36" high within 25" of driveways for safe ­ ihil. ty. Special consideration shoul�' ne �;,ven to screening parked automobiles from properties. C. Parki.Ag lot planting. Parking lot trees have been chosen which will not only shade the parking area, but will break up the visual mass of the parking lot. These trees predominantly lie in islands and planters and are to have low ground cover throughout and shrub screening at the end bays of each island. Parking lot trees are as folloras: Platanus acerifolius - London Plane Tree Podocarpus gracilior - Fern Pine D. Building perimeter planting: Planting around ui ing perimeters is intended to be colorful and more highly accented. Trees an] shrubs have been suggested which have either colorful foliage or flowering characteristi,'s except where restrictive areas require'a more vertical species. Major building fen'tures should utilize more intense plantings of '•plored ground cover and shrubs. Vines are encouraged a larger mall massings and wt lording and trash screen walls.. �f-o7 -22- 1410-1 �.a Building perimeter trees are as is follows: ARL Deciduous M rstroemia indica - Crape Myrtle idambar;'3tyraciflua -- American Sweet Gum - $a6"hW4 vas aegata - Purple orchard Tree Ever Teen !, 11 Euca yp;;us ni.cholii Nich6j leafe� Ltr"ppermznt Sro•:hychitop populneus - Bottle i'r+ee Magnolia.a�andi €lora - Southern magnolia Screening (Transformers) —s 7Pinu a erica - Mondell Pine i Shrsabs are as follows: R: General Pi ttPi sr'� -'�` porum tobira - Wheeler's Dwarf Herium oleander - Dwarf oleander X,,phielepis indica (Pink) - Tndia'Hawthorn �. =erocallis hybrid - Lay xly Agapanthus africanus - Lily -of- the -Nile Screen: ing (Tvansformers) -onia °kradesi° Escall - No common name Grouml rovers`.,�ure as follows: Di Redera helix - English ivy Lantana sellowiana - Lantana (in small Coprosma xepens areas only) - Mirror Plant `iparagus' Vrengeri - Sprenger Asparagus Lonicera japonica - Honeysuckle Sedum - Stonecrop Gazainia mitsua yellow - Yellow Ganzania Vines are as allows: Trachelospermum jasminoides - Star Jasmine Ficus xepens - Creeping; Fig Parthenocissus tricuspidata - Boston ivy Turf: To match streetscape, E. Pedestrian plazas or courtyards shall he provided immediately adjacent to or belt or building entries as near the perimeter green The appropriate. areas -23- 1410 -J " shad be designed as focal points toenhance the "village community" character. P. Plaza; ground 'plane will consist of natural color 1 '71 concrete /'binds and an infill of concrete interloAihq Havers of a consistent color. G. Planted Arbors/pergolas, Will be required as a ` historic tie to the Village vineyards. These. Arbor structures shall be independent or attached to the buildings as ascents to building entries, shelter for lurch courts. structures shall be planted with . course textured vines. Cissus antarcitica - Kangaroo Vine Disticis buccinatoria - Aloodrea Trumpet K Vine ratshedera lizei - No common name Hedera canariensis Algerian Ivy f> 5.5 Landscape Lighting: A. Landscape lighting with no visible light source may be used for accept -q the following conditions: 1. Shrub masses r "\�" 2. `Focal elements, and 3. Trees (upli'ghts) 5.6 General Conditions: A. Irrigaation 1. All irrigation systems shall be fully auto- matic. 2. Low-volume irrigation equipment is encouraged for all planted areas within the ;individual sites and shall be completely aut'amatic. 3. No overthrowing of irrigation water onto walks, common area, or any architectural walks will be allowed. 4. Utility cabinets and irrigation hardware to be screened by evergreen shrubs. 5. Controllers shall be placed in a'vandal resist-4 .:­enclosure. -24- /+� X410 -,l e bibs shallrw se i fated hou C. or s othe wick coupling, � �`' a x �'• by imum aQntig x.on• y site ueat ,all be Provides chart•1 Charts �ha< tags.keYed troller f 1. contra lads and valve t3cn systems shall " valved izsga toe of scope• 8. Separately ot+ middle and stems shall occur at irri4at.ion systems roundcover Separately,valareas and 9hxub /g 9. in hart i` shall t occur: systems aria areas• ixriga s $ e,vo tion sure* f yep .Irately valved digterent Solar t._ 10 • in ar` -as of u'' *ex t - oc�3x ' oP water rate distribution recipitation .l• A `u`9ii° mite and an even Pbe Provided. tire Stem shall 11 be used in all azea� within each $Y • sprinylers hicular circulation t SO R 12- of Pe estri� and hall be des ngot e%ce d $ y Irrigation systems time does the total operatin8 ned so that hours. shall-, of pater Per even Irrigation Can apply O. Be ek within the g 7,a. Trzi9 water Per qp apri1 50N5ot war- or water b. and time• olsr' allow f operating that and cYcling• Use automatic can]:e start tames 6 multiP 15• budgeting anCe� Mai,�ter: ..- be +. to Landsca in, ==".r� arcel sl allwith the �. Si within �sch accordance landscap'r rials in- identified in 1• Ail ,,ed W th, mate ,and criteria trees, planti Palettes the ISesign Guy �ubs.s and v, nes very shall be grounCco s not in tuxes ter of mulch area inch redwood 517.0 Janting, Z• tQp dzessed wi ith ae 2" X gull s e t �r oc� rhea a On and bordered `laminated wide UOncre tc t. headerboazI t 0 minimum seGtions'c or installed as per the masonry curb• approved. 11, unle s otherwise 3. plan rnaterial5 following deta 1g1Q-J -25- ,�- 71) El ear 4— All areas of each lr>t not used for structures, walkways, paved driveways„ parking, or storage areas sh311 be at all times maintaihad by a professional landscape enjineer or gardener in a ful:y landscaped and well -kept condition. 5.1 The owner of each lot shall at all times keep and properly maintain the entire premises in a safe, clean, sightly and wholesome conCition, in a good state of repair, and sha1.1 comply in all respects with governmental, health, fire, and police requirements and regulations:. 6. Sites that are not- impreved or built upon shall be maintained "at all,times in a clean and neat appelrance by they. property owner, by removal of r!aeds, grasses, mowed brush; and trash. The Center rind its representatives have the right to perform the necessary maintenance and charge the individual tenant or property owner as necessary. 5.7 Use of Alter",¢zI,e Landscape Plant Materials: Center Management ma;,� propose a ternative landscape plant materials for those materials described above for use within the Center subject to, a}>'rocal by the City Planning Department. 6. SIGNAG£ GUIDELINES. F.. objectives. 1. To establish a uniform design for sufficient, though not excessive, business identification, while adhering to and not exceeding the City sign ordinance, and meiritaining the architectural and landscaped concept of this development. B. Guidelines. 1. All signage shall conform to both written and illustrated design criteria. All drawings by manufacturer to be approved by the Center Managez�ent . 2. No internal illumination will be permitted except as approved by the Center Management. 3. Tenants shall pay for installation and maintenance of all signs. 4. All signage not expressly covered in this criteria shall be allowed only after,review -26- 1410- -1 J -? t e t.!an3 approval by the Center Management, who reserves the right to deny approval of any sign presentation which does not complement the architectural and landscaped concept of _ this development. ?. hIGHTYN- GUIDELINES A. Qbectives j 1. To have on -sr,',te lighting contribute to the safe and efficient use of a development site. 2. To have on -site lighting contribute to site security. 3. To have on -site lighting compliment and reinforce the architecture and site design character. 4. To have on-site parking ,ot lighting fixtures and illumination levels be consistent F throughout. 5. To prevent oa -site lighting from casting glare onto adjacent lots. 6. Tq prevent on -site lighting from casting glare ( onto adjacent lots. r 7. T6 encourage lighting design that is in c6nformanc6 with energy saving guidelines. B. Guidelines 1. All lighting potentially visible from an adjace,�t street except bollard lighting less thla 42 inches high, shall be indirect or sht;ll incorporate a full cut off shield type fix4ure. 2. Paa'king areas, access drives, and internal vehicular circulation areas - all parking lot lie 'hting fixtures shall be approved by the Center Management. The light source shall be metal`halkde with the intensity within the City guidelines. The parking lot illumination level shall achieve a uniformity ratio approved by the Center Management. 3. Service area lighting shall be contai,4ed within the service yard boundaries and r enclosure walls. No light spillover should t -27- 1410 -3 =;3 { ecir C:ss s occur outside the service area. The light source should not be visible It= the Streets 44 Building illumination and architectural lighting shall be indirect in character. (No light $Ouse visible). Indirect wall lighting iaa,+"wali washing" overhead down lighting, or interior illumination which spills outside is encouraged. Architectural lightinp should articulate and animate the particular building design an well as provide, the respired, functional lighting for safety and clarify of pedestrian mov scent. B. Pedestrian walk and area lighting is segmented into 2 tones. a. The first son* is padestrian areas lighting. This Is for outdoor pedestrian use such as courtyard entry way, etc. b. The second zone is pedestrians walk lighting Where point topoint lighting is to &WIMptibls with no specifIQ illumination isvels raviA•ed. The amain emphasis in this tonal sha4:24 be to €lsarly identify the pedestrian walkway and direction of travel. 8. APPENDIX CONTACT AND REFEM E LIST DEVELOPER SCE Development Inc. 2201 Dupont Driver Sul4e 200 - Irvine, California 92715 -1528 Telephone: (714) 475 -2765 Jack S. Corrigan FOOTHILL CQ2+ MCIAL DEBTOR CRUTER CONSULTANTS ARCHITECT gilbert Aja Associate* Two Corporate Paris Irvine. California 92734 Telephone3 (714) 474 -1775 Gilbert Ala, AIA a28- 1410 -J # tJ LANDGZ ARCRxx tOo/Runa r i 1'ivia P1alta� 1u1 160 Uwport Beach. califarnia Talephante (714) 6401 --2340 CIVIL AwT1!',= a` 9iG�ilbKiE�l3RAi�ALGs p� 4 e `r City of "4vZ o CueamnQa P!2Q Baseline Road Raneho CUO&SOn as Wi DrOla 91430 T41OP onat 1711} 919 -1211 P19"ing 16partm*ntt (714) 409 -1141 building 4 Safety !Sept, (714) 089 -1843 21191neerinq Dapastallts 0141 $49-1863 i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGk STAFF REPORT DATE: November 10, i!�v TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, BY: Betty Miller, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Aun IrUTATTVS: PARCEL rk LVU.Li - IDUC ' �Wan Y - k7sUbdivision of 16473 acre,,7`oan nto 10 parcels -ifi-TW7ndustrial Park Development District, subarea 7, bounded by Foothill Boulevard, Spruce Avenue, White Oak Avenue, Eucalyptus Street and Elm Avenue (APN 208-351-28)., PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Re guested: Approval of the proposed Tr-tative Parcel Map-- ass ihiownonExhibit "B." B. Parcel Size- Parcel 1 2.41 7 2 3.32 8 0.93 3 2.16 9 1.25 4 1.70 10 1.23 5 2.01 6 Total 16.93 I. C. Existing Zoning Industrial Pork, Subarea 7 of the Industrial Spz-,ific Plan D. Surrounding Land Use: North - vacant South - vacant East - vacant (bank southeast) West - restaurant I TEM K , JPLAii14IN0 '* GtNi!i1SSI9 oliT Pi,) 10617 - NOVEWER 10 PAGE 2 E. i1 Surrounding "General Plan and pey� elopment Code �i�lnatfons: ~ North -- Office �'k, ;aria Viso Planned F:�wunit-,- i V South - Industricl Park, Sir area 7 hospita:= & �affice park East - Industrial ParA.,S,ubarea 7: office Dark Rest - "Industrial Park, Subarea 7: food park F. Site Gh5racteristics This site is vacant and slopes gently tv'the south, Ii. ANALYSIS: The purpase of "this Parcel Map is to create test (1O) separate parcel_. that could be developed separately or in groups. A developwnt agreement for the Parcel Map area containing a conceptual master plan, is on tonight's ages t as DA 87 -01. No specific development plans for ary of the individual parcels have been submitted as yet. The public streets aeJacent to the parcel map area 'A,4e already imPrOvee,k with the exception of parkway improvements which are required to be completed upon development of each parcel. A single, driveway is proposed onto Foothill BouleVard. It will.fie right turn only, therefore an opening in the future median will not be allowed. A right turn deceleration lane into the O*iveway is ; required. Caltrans has requested trsat the driveway be moved 150 feat to the west, but staff is confident that through further negotiations Caltrans will agree to the proposed location. Also, the non - vehicular, access rights Will have to be vacated for the width of the driveway III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW,• The applicant completed Part I of the n t a ti y. a conducted a field investt4ation and completed Part II of the Initial Study, No adverse impacts upon the environment are anticipated as a result of this project. Therefore, issuance of Negative Declaration is appropriate. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surroun ng property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. Posting at the site has also been completed. k-;-- 11 K] 1 PM 10637 - NOYEtR ECR9$ - " PAGE 3 f V. RECOMMENO&TIQN: It is recommended that the Planning Commission .t. consider a nput and elements of the Tentative Pa�tel Map. I€ after such consideration, the Commission can recoa%�nd approoal, then the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Oeclaratibn would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Barrye R. Hanson Senior Civil _Engineer BRH•BM ,i- Attachmentsr Vicinity Map (Exhibit "AN) Tentative Map (Exhibit "B ") Resolution and Recommended Conditions of Approval V� J W � � J W Q^ tL V i - 3tv ^ -a3g7" Q 1 Ui A\ -/t cwa Q �a n v W CL CL d V i D Lij V� J W � � J W Q^ tL V i - 3tv ^ -a3g7" Q 1 Ui A\ -/t cwa Q �a n v W CL CL d V i lo-_1 a lvi gi cl: cc U3 �z U4 1� C) Z C) LI A DSO C uTr RESo`uTIJN No. Vf PARCN�,TyG PC,gNNIN Qal I0AWen" Fqs� Te EC C'R Io61�o O DIT p OF TyE 8ernarprope�.t °PWfca ntatyve ICY A pR V of Foothi dyno, S Sit for. for Parcel jNG Avenue' and u7eyard °f al !a the purposeaP Neer Of advertiseWf7F�AS ,Spruce A�enie, kb t tifiedancho �ding ��ntoubmitted FCCCGNS• oyPuTyi� h aringe'orrt10� 198 a oak Av nue� Eu a ps1'28a my e sf She fRfFORF he abov �- tha tus Stre ound an °CT Tyf RANCHO a describednning Co et f by S� � Tha CuC�NGA P' map. ►nnfss'0n held 21. TThat the map the foJ vVing finely BANNING Co,�MISS1pN R a du)y J. c nsisteryt' With vet t o tent IV he have been made FSQCVfO AS 4. Proposed de elte the G9n rahepjanpased Subdivision not �a See Proposed nt, physics)7y suitable �sron is been SF Pop a, cause roblems antra7 de �i or1 and for the eclar t o tofa19 cons Co"is have adve "aff,smagnpub/y)I n. 70 and, for in con finds a on abuttip9 subject SrCT10 thery n►P7iance and cer Cond1troA t e a`tached Tentatyv this Co nissiop hea ff, ache pr °J� 21. No dryvay Standard Co Map No. Ip6 y 'ssuesna' egCral ac 17 'rhe Wes is 8 and ocate7'Y dryvew"y )J ,e a71oiled o and the f °71 W ng SproyEd 9, to be centered on the tusnSthite oak Avenue. Pecia7 Property ne bet OrcP a may arcos PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTI04- .1 0. PM 10617 NOVEMBER 10, 1987 PAT 2 ' 3. An in -lieu fee as contribution to the future construction of the median island within Foothill Boulevard shall be :raid to the City prior to the issuance of bull dino.- permits r,- approval of the Final Parcel Map, whichever occurs rlrst. The amount of the fee shall" be one half the cost of the median (currently estimated at $60 per linear foot) timer the length of the pro,ect frontage from a projection of the easterly right -of -way line for Spruce Avenue to a projection of the westerly right-of- ('s way Iine for Elm Avenue. Payment of this fee shall relieve Parce5 8, 9, 10, and 11 of Parcel Map No. 6725 from further obligations to construct the, Foothill Boulevard median. Any previous payments We as contribution to the median for property within said parcels shall be credited toward said in- lieu -fee. 0 4. FWttU 11 Boulevard D4�,way: a. Final appro.- .. -wil be required from Caltrans. b. It will be right turn orl ,'therefore an opening will not be permitted in the future raised median islar:d. c. It shall be con.-tructed in accordance with City standard No. 306. right turn deeeleraton lane shall be tmovided on the west side of the eriveway. It shall be ,:y0 feet long, 10 feet wide and have a 90 foot trans'iion. e. A request shall be mad: to the City to vacate the non- vehicular access rights for this dri- ,,Way. _ f. The existing stoma dra,�n facilities located at the proposed driveway location shall be remuyed and replaced to provide proper drainage control. Easements recessary to construct the new storm drains snail also be provided. g. It shall be located as shown on tlr plans (approximately 650 feet went of the centerline of ilm Avenue), but can "be moved westerly up to midway between Elm Avenue and Spruce Avenue. 5. The meandering sidek.'lk along the public streets shall be constructed in accordance with City standard No. 304. a /i.. �., PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. .§ AP 'NOVEMBER MBE ti 10, 1987 PAC! 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 1nTW DAY OF NOVEMBER 1987. PLANNING COMMISSICN OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: arry e , Chairman ATTEST: rao azY -- =retary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commistaon of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and r regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the, ._Planning CoWsslon of the City of Rancho Ciicamon�a, at a regular meeting of the Planning Csvmmission held on the 10th day of November, 1987, by the following vote -to -wit:' AYES: COMMISSIONERS- NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: k4 8 a IS O It g A E 4 "!l �g Q Y J i �v L ` Z a8 a� 4 6 V ;: SN gx N C yy3� i r'r qW ey� i C q E Q G A a cea�i NvIb�pj� `MiY Nit �" 04J "6�YV V l`j cW jI 1 11 L E m Bow ?y'�' Ypwu'�` - i US ��pp Mw.r ''^S. -F U 01 k Lp WIN h t e Y Uzi CAA. rcl WM `. ya°i 6.. CV M y y a � y� VII. ♦ E 2i � ! 11 L E m Bow ?y'�' Ypwu'�` - i US ��pp Mw.r ''^S. W 6 CNZ V e Y Uzi CAA. rcl WM `. ya°i 6.. CV M a � 11 L E m v NY L C� Ar� �' ,y c E Lt 3 L� Y 1 ��^ gv �Fy •a.°. It8a L YV J Ot a, ii Y. ■ G V L L p C � L p � C p dig ~ kN ,� La. L •Liu E ,O • a 4 c J-2 O M; u 3 V yCp.i OWN C V P y � �jL�• T 1 y Lr� a• •Oy� L� CN¢Ocpy�Y L wa O NTl V O'" LO {rpy� i ^,a. mva fin:. _�$•€ 6LL ut 0�,4 p N NY r pw �p �' �� ■qy= V•w Y 1 ��^ gv �Fy •a.°. It8a u ■ G V L L p C � L p � C p dig ~ kN ,� La. L •Liu E ,O • a 4 c L N OWN C V P y i� Y T yk y M L wa oa -B O�,G Li Oyu' y0i {rpy� aAL L N i L O V. 6LL ut 0�,4 p N GV �L. V•w Y '�'•'Y' ��^ gv �Fy •a.°. It8a u ■ G L p O p � C p dig kN ,� La. L • a 4 .L.iyY OWN U V ^� s L >QV O�,G Li Oyu' y0i {rpy� Y CIT OF RANGHO CIIC9XoNGA?� ST"F REPORT F U• DATE: November la, 1587 1917 T©: Chairman and Kembers of the Planning Commission r PROM: Brad Buller, City Plainer BY: Chris WesUan, Assistant Pianne.r � � SUBJECT: ENV IR NTi4L ASSESSMRENT AND DEVEi:OPti"cNT DI,cT� TCT • , � - - raga. a amen a U evelopmen D s r c rom low, Density Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) to General Industrial, Subarea I,,for 2,31 aces of land, located at the northwest corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue APN 207- 541 -6U. I �1 We are requesting to-withdraw the application from consideration at this �I time in order to explore the possibility of expanding a Zone Change and Industrial Specific Plan - change to properties to thl west. A new description will be released and the r� uested Development District Amendment and Industrial Specific Plan AoWo' ment will be on the next Planning Cor,Aission Agenda of November 25, 19LvZ. Res ui l .g i!m tted, .ru Brad huller City Planner BB:CW:te ITEM L (i CITY OF KANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFFREPORT DATE: November 1 t, 1987 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Chris Westmans Assistant Planner SUBJMT: TIME_rXTEHSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85 -19 - PARCO - A proposal to denTopa-357,557 square root general re ail center .on 3.72 acres of land in a Cotmeunity Commercial zone, Subarea 3 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Ramona Avenue - APH 208 - 301 -15, 16, and 17. I. BACKGROUND: Conditional Use Permit 85 -1D was origin ;t'. *y approved by the PTanning Commission on August 14, 1985 for a two year period. Within that time the applicant submitted plans to the Building and Safety Division for, building plan check, however, will not be able to complete that proces,, prior to the expiration date. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a one gear time extension. II. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the Conditional Use Permit and finds that th proposal is in general compliance with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and the General Plan. The project was approved prior-to the Planning Commission's policy of undergroundtig utilities and, therefore, has no such requirement. Staff would like to include as part of the time extension approval of the requirement for undergrounding utilities and/or in -lieu fees. The developer woui6_be required to pay an in- lieu fee as contribution to the future . ndergrounding of the existing overhead utilities on the oppo0tQ sides of Foothill. Boulevards and Ramona Avenue. in addition, the developer would be required to underground the overhead utility lines or; the north side of the alley to th -, south. Included in the undergrounding will be service lines to nine existing homes. 1I1. CORRESPDNDENCE: This item has been advertised in The _Daily Report newspaper as a public hearing, notices Were sent to a pr property ownerz within 300 feet, and public hearing notices were posted on t.,4 : i te. I T�1 AM M. /l it f ,..' r RAiiCO 1OVe3�rQr ` "�" rx° Page, 2, n IV. RECOWENOMON. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission ,. aFprove .Neese extension and modify the existing" conditions of apProW for Conditional qse Permit 85-19 as written in the attached Resolution. '! Respe ally su tted, > Br 1 r ? r, City Pl nner �' �. .. 86 :C :te Attachments: Letter from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan t Resolution of Approval for Time Extension /l S it f S 7, V 'AwRC � PY I VELOPMENTANC 0 J&iy 14, 1987 OP RANCHO CUCAMON,1A PLANNING D,VjSO.,, U W7 ?V Chris Westmen CITY OF RMCKO CUCAMONGA 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Chris: Please consider this letter as a request fora time extension of the Planning development review of CUP-85-19. Enclosed please find a check in the amount of, "',12. 00 for this service. If you have any questiw o, please d . o not h�jsitate to call at your earliest convenience, Sincerely,f,' PARCO DM-aLOPMENT, INC d M. Ba sz , 9:vDavi veiopment Project Manager DY.81 j h Encl. IV Uhforniab.71; L7�D t ""&�Omw�w mMW--** I WLUGD WCOMW LIA it �+wwsre�woer 83L11C�OQlY Id0lltYid 51pMVd 1 I 'Vy e® i I E I' i I 1 n • t I �i i l .1 F ,d► Ij__. ,o SRLVIWISV "Oeim vamvdi I IrY ii ii r-- ill I flb YM igilMif7l!!r 'e .lii�i 111 � �. wwww��ww •aw..wssww+..�lirb.alw.tir.�aaw • (i. Sit ILI �f• • j1 S: I I A � w 3 »r > x� yWI Y i w ! �I Y Ca -MOM IVI WISH I k =-,-m -,V M"- il .Mk ;4TW* Monvu CHOmm-- --i . Vw Mo►ow ". -413M W" I IZ7 DIMON clo oiu�uii� iZ d i C bt9t��Mrl�It? �tM.t3�i as�a s+attrt� u�mvd .; 41 MI f i �9 RESOLUTION NO. 86-114A A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION, APPROVING THE TIME EXTEKSIO;: FOR�!,CONDJ -ONAt USE PE IT TI RN -19 - AND ADDING CONDIT?.'�ONS REQUIRING UTILITY 85 UNDERGROUNDING FOR A �5 6,57 SQUARE FOOT GENERAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL CENTER ON 3.22' ACRES OF LAND IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCiAL ZONE, SUBAREA 2 OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, SPECIFIC PLM LOCATED AT THE SO "-EST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND RAMONA AVENUE - APN 208-301-15, 16 AND 27 WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a, time extension for the above-described project, pursuant to Section 17.02.100. WHEREAS, the Planning Cpvai�slon conditionally - approved the above-described Conditional Ust Permit on August 14, 1985. WHEREAS, the project i; in gejeral conformanc,* with the provisj,r�,tt required by the Foothill Bouleva.-d Zpecific Plan. SECTION 1: Ths- -Rancho C�ilcawnga Planning Commission has madd- the following firodings A. That provalling economic 'conditions have caused a distressed market climate for development of the project. B. That current economic, marketing, and� `,inventory cond.itlons make it unreaimpable to develop the project at this timi. C. That strict enforcement of the 0nditions. of appi,oval regarding expirations would nO be consistent with the intent of the Delveloprtent Code. 0. That the granting of said time ixtens , ion will not be detrisental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECT;QN 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grants a time exte=ns un=o Parco Developmpnt foir' Conditional Use Permit 85-19 until the f August 14, 1908 subject to . ,6110wing condition being added to Resolution No. -35-114: In -il PLANNIJG CONM S000 �# .� I -ION No. TIN£ EXtENSiUN FOR. 00P 5 -19 - PARCO November 10j1967 Page 2 Engineering Division F 8. Underground Utilities a. Foothill Boulevard An in-lieu fee as `contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications), on the opposite side of Foothill Boulevard shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The fee shall be one -half the City adopted unit amoj:: ".4 times the %, th from the center of Rana Avenue to the "westerly terminus. b:' Ramona Avenue - An in -lie, as contribution to the future undergrou 1, q of the existing overhead utilities (electrical) on the opposite side of Ramona Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to the is,vance of building permits. The fee shall be one -half the City adopted unit amount times the length from the center &� the alley to the northerly terminus. c. Alley :: hq existing overhead utilities (tele- communications and electrical) on the project side of the alley, including service lines to the existing homes on the south side of the alley shall be undergrounded from the first pole on the east side of Ramona Avenue to the first pole off site west of the project 1-it boundary, prior to public improvement acdeptance or ozcupancy, whichever occurs ' first. The developer may request P, reimburs%meet agreement to recover one -half t,. j� City adopted cost'-.,'or undergroundir3 from future development (redevelopment) as it occurs on the opposits side of the alley. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1987. PLANNING C"ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: awry T. McKlel, Chalrmart ATTEST: ra u era Deputy- Secretary �R i tE � iw • tf' y F a ON NO. C Y - PARCO e , kawen�er lO, 198' , F Page 3. a I. -Brad Bult'er, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Canna 'isSi4l of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, ib hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution al was duly and regularly introducer!, passed, and adopted by the Planning ComaissIon of the City of Rancho Cucalai*k, at a regular meeting of the Planning Colsf;�;sion held on the 10th day of Nover,,1987, by the following vote -to -wit. ; AYES; COMMISSIONERS: ` NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: y, i� F A yC 0 I ,f DATE; TD FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT. Novw+- ,,,,r 110, 1987 Chairman and Members of the Planning Comgi(�siorj grad Buller, City Planner Chris- Westman, Assistant Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS14ENT AND TENT.- TRACT 13697 - DALY HOMES - t res en a su V TIon „an es gn review of ssTngiefamily domes on 29.9 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling Ltnits per acre) at, the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Carrari Street .LPN; 201 - 031.12, 18, 190 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Reque,4ted. Approval of the subdivision design, conceptual gi -AM plan, and issuance of a Negative Declaration for a 48 lot subdivision. B. Project Density: 1.6 dwelling units par acre C. Surroundina Land Use and zoning: North °= ""Sing a Family Residential; Very Low Density Residential `,less than 2 dwelling units per acre) South %- Vacant /Single Family Residential /Church; Very Low Density Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) East - Single Family Residential; Very Lrw, Density Residential (Tess than 2 dweliing�vM is per acre) Best - Single 'Family Residential; Very Low Density Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) D. General Plan`�Desi nations• Project Site/,Z Very °` ow ensity Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) North - Very Low Density Residential (less than 2 dwelling unity per acrel South - Very Low Density Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) East - Very Low Density Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) West - Very Low Density Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) ITER N PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 13697 - Daly Homes November 10, 1987 Page 2 E. Si it , Characteristics: The site is, %c'urrently vaunt and is Tara e w -n -TR=equestrian Overl4y Pistrict. % grade is approximately 8% which runs s';Zt11 Wes'U-. There is'' 'a natural drainage swale on the east side of lot. There are existing homes on the north side of Cirrari which were approved circa 1976. East of Haven is Deer Creek and west is "The Woodsm. The area south is currently vacant but a church mL'ster plan and 16 lot subdivision have been approved for, those"parcels. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant has submitted a proposal of single Ta—Ury--homes that reflects the same, buildin, construction techniques as the prAlect directly east. The -intention with this design was to mize the amount of grading that would be necessary to corple'i.,a- the project. The average square footage for the lots priposed is 22,555 square feet in area. The homes range in size from 2,068 square feet to 2,665 square feet. Staff has had contact "with a few of the home owners from adjacent properties and two specific concerns were raised. Property owners to the west are opposed to the removal of any of the existing Eucalyptus grove and homeowners to the north are concerned about views to the south. These could be mitigated through sensitive grading and trail placement and by siting single story models-,,on Carrari would allow for a view over them. Along with the project a major portion of Vista Grove Avenue wound be constructed between Hermosa and Haven Avenues. B. Trails Committee: 'The Trails Committee reviewed the project on August 19, 19al. "me proposed tract map includes a Conaunity Trail along Haven Avenue and local feeder trails throughout the tract. As a result o,' that meeting it was required that a 10 foot easement be granted along the west tract bour4ary for an equestrian trail. The purpose of this trail is'to provide access to the rear of lots 1-6 as reqy,5ired by City Codes and policies. The Committee also required a 12 foot equestrian trail along the south boundary of lots 11 and 18 in order to provide a trail connection to Tract 10414 on-the southside of Vista Grove. The Committee indicated that the developer may wish to provide a 12 foot trail within the parkway for the entire length of Vista Grove in lieu of sidewalks. N- )-I ANR'I � �i � TT 13697 - Dav y l3c�es r November 10, 1987 l Page 3 Ilk C. ti,si rt Rev Committee: The Design Revihw Committee (Tolstoy, er c , r'emait revue d the project September 3, 1987 and recommend.'' approval subject to the fol1 ing: 1. The garage fronts should be given extra design treatment such as staggering the double and single doors. E. Window treatments should be consistent and be provided 3600 on all models. The particular windw,� treatment s Could reflect the overall design theme of that i'Mividual model. D. Environmental Assessment :, Parts I and II of the Initial Study have en compleved 4no no significant adverse environmental E impacts have been found as a result of this project, III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS., The proposed use and site plan together with e recommen a conditions of approval are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Development: Code and all rather City Standards, The project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or cause nuisance or significant adverse impacts on the adjacent properties. The project is also in conformance with ttie General Plan. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in -The Daily Report newspaper as a public hearing and notices were sent to all property owners Within 300 feet�of the project site as well as notices beiv4g posted on the site, V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve era ve Tract Map 13697 through adoption of the attached Resolution with conditions and issue a Negative Declaration. ` RCS c' _ �Ys Brad Buller City Planner BB: CW: vc Attachments; Exhibit "A" - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "B" - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit "C" - Elevations Resolution of Approval with Conditions ^ 1 i� 9 Num CITY CO' RANCHO CUCAMONGA TnE.', %npr- t-op PLANNM EXVISICN EXHMrr. SCAUt A(-)/ law ,�� �~•). �_�` fY {`fy`�Li � 7r lam 3" _ J t4 N try c � tt tN6RrH MY CF , i rEm.. T 1` JE "� X� RANC TiTLE: �TMT�y� �{ ITME- R4�![� ;i t`A !: -. �: 'ii 777, SRI' Pa. � MAA ' Au IN •�I ,j7 lift, q ,7z MAA ' Au Arm Ir yp�, .:; Pt(.M 3 � ayq�� �� �� � ,,, 0. ^� � , i^a.�11i.9 ; arar ®, �� + � � a� .r ��� �.�� rin �' 4� k s�6��t a`�y \�7� 01 r p +�i �t �Hr��� � k:..id'.s r. -: �� � t .> �t 4 �° P }} ��� �� a viW# .x� y �� !� _ JA ��� � _ ' i rt a, ®a :, � k '� �� -. ,X+ �� . .�. a� iyr�, �� _�i �'1 ��M 1 �_ � � �:����7 *'ti's +�j r. F $°—.� �,. �� rw+�u.� ���1JF ... .... �$� r .. �� , �,.., -� �= �� s��' ?` A ZEE ar "' p All r s.+ Lx1` RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE PLARNXMG COMMISSION OF TOE CITY OF RANCHO cUCAN-DWA APPROVING TENTATIVE TWT MAP-90'. 13,697, AND DESIGN, REVIEV, tHE'R1100 LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND C`ARR`ARI STREET IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT - APXi A. Recitals. (I) Daly Homes 11 has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 13697, and Design Review thereof, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred tows "the application". (ii) On th4 Oth of November, 1987, the Planning Commission of City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (III) All legal prerequisites to the adOPti9n Of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. Now, THER-EFORE, It is. hereby found, determined and resolved by Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts' set forth in the,Re citals, Part A, of this' RJIsolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon --Z6ustantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing- on November 10, 1987, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby spe6fically finds as follows: The application applies to 29.9 acres located generally north of Vista Grove Street south of Carrari Street and West of Haven Avenue; and (b) The properties west, north, and east are currently developed with single family detached residences; and (c) The type of construction proposed will minimize the amount of grading which would be required for the proposed project and thereby be in conformance witii the goals of the General Plan; and (d) The design of the homes are compatible with existing homes in the surrounding areas. N-IE- AiRS-06TI-OW NO. , WE) TT— November 10, P6,7— Page 2 1 1.17-� 11'�11 7 ` � , � 7- 7 If' .1 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set firth in paragraph I and 2 above, t concludes asi follows: !�,,s Commission, fj'ereby finds and (a') That tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; and Ah) The design or improvements of the tentative 'tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; and CO The sita,is Physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and (d) The design of the subdivi'sion is not likely to cause substantial envirenmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife ce their habitat; and (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serIoLs public health problems; and % tentative tract will not M The design of the conflict with any easement acquired by 'he public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property withi it the proposed s0division. 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has ;Ibeen reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental INality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commissipo hereby issues a Negative Declaration. 1 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 abOve, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Division: 1. tt shall be reflected in the covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's) and ,-ticles of incorporation of the homeowners association that the existing stand of eucalyptus trees which are located at the west property boundary of the tract lots 1-6, shall be preserved. 2. An eqiestrian trail shall be prDvided along Vista Grove adjacent to lots 11 and 18. 0 PLANI �7' ,7 'rr 136917 - 0 November 10, i9 7 Page An equestrian trail easement shall be Provided 41049 the west Property boundary adjac411t to lots 1-6 subject to equ3st ian trails COMZfttA!e review. )rhe . trail it rov em6 , nts and al lment shall take int6'consideration tree preservation. 4. he, . garage fronts shall be given extra design treatment such as s aqgering the douMe and single doors. �k 5. *i window treat ft-nts shall be consistent and jirovided 360' an all models. The particular window treatment shall-,reflect the oiverall design theme Of that individual model. 1. A storm drain system shall be Constructed in,, but not limitp & to, Vista Grove Street from the west side _� -0 Hermosa Avenue to the first north/south street east of the westerly property boundary. Additional extensions Of' t"- storm drain may be required- upon review of the final drainage report. The City storm drain fees or partial r0mWrs&ent from a previously approved project shall apply towards the construction of th,!r th master plan portion of 0 storm drain System as approved by thi? City Engineer. 2. IZe street "nuckle" at the northwest corner of the proposed tract shall be revised to the Satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to recordation of the final map. 6. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission 'shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. A "YED AND ADOPTED THIS IOTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1987. PPRL PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, UP rman ATTEST:- Bra# uu1TTr—,UWFWL-,Y Secre tary #-17 -, Page 4 Buller, Deputy r 'ary of the Planning rog-'4s�i on of the City. "of Rancho tucamOnSt do -h-Ore Y certify that the foragoiAgA"-olution was duly and �egularly introAu"" d ce 6 Owed, and addpted ok=,,-he pt vilng commission of the City of Rancho tucAmong-a it a regullar 'meeting of the -Planniffq, Commission held on the 10th day 1_qa� by Vie following vote-to-witz F. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: UTES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSiONERSt., 2! 7." Z r V lu �$w`a��y else Y ga °ow t L`ptl �Ya 'vo sYd �L{Y�y -5- � Qpp Y"2= �c°LOo O9pa.YWa-t�i-i V990yy GL pAM �Ma ++pi it Q C i *^ g« Tip «� ue ^ L N« S-6 Y{T MR. 4 r ^. _3 w Y V p M y � a � 7 G V i a s� «� °3a3N�id$ �$ .-u fi�o .�`.`�� aya r � Y 2 ^o rg6 Y¢Y�.it y�s$xesd� a�� a 4 p i� s NY UY�Y�is� y kOMi P.ay� iOC N ^+i CCN ��aN it TL GG Y i ~ M C C 4 Y N C M N �C, sea Y ` O �L �Gyy yy _t, yyyy��cc qji a _e9 YN iM uCis.e��FAM t�D�'ah GYM tw.N. ��� .`o7C �i 6.tY. nss Q W � H ~ V 0p2�' z in O 1, A _, I i r Y •� � S Y� L C M O O g}�va�� Y =M,y 000 R O D n' tJ _ M e E a�� d A NeO sN ^pti r'Y^p fQ. to aiC ' Cy� ^ =Y� O�'QO v a L_�� � � �' V 0 p`■ ^ a' � �� f. w rig 6z > ,y E: � �� fi— 3:: Y ^��� pt r�L 4, s`p S y waai yp TT �D LVNYY nc tie xxV •� 2 a! h�,� yy �<a, 1 J N -; A _, I l�^ {,,� 34 W�IV j\l�M OyYC$ Yy I - � 1I. -- .r ��l nay & s at Y„� n1��i��,pVQ V~ Y V� pML.y taaiN nNaSi� S C,C y �aC ^YO y • 0 i y NON. Y d M OQ Y Xi^ Yw N.'_ Y rte. Yl4 �Y €La ~^o ICJ 'C...E... gw NSwo� 3Ta�r.'Y Y.�zior _'� .w iLe �.i�•F 4C10CN��r «`iA 6P #�'MLLYY N N:! 1r9Nyy wG�aYC 311 'm S, V C.VpC aL+T }� C \" Y a tl °\ Y M M• L r 9 O y F ' Iri YM +CCVi 5fy6wggP~NNN �y a, .zi 20 C�..sC SS R�{j �.N •V 1! rs V�i11 MY,4f1 2wi _ C C L qs+ r''''t�V� pp���Mee. f�•A41.R LLY.aC Y o4 y� eq < J C S M v Y C M u N N t H M C �4f 4� V Cip1O Gf.� p� �r � lC�O' C� • pa � � G `t• �v 6p OLNC V 1 Y.. N� •^ y O � J , w O�gppN� r py�G s�•op► Y,u pi6 r9 N F �t� C •i 5 t &'E� _gpa it ZOM �q BRIO O GC <r,M� Vld 4�OY V�. Ste; �y^w �7 ; ,J <�n/asJe� ^� De• ^i�j. Oy�p< Y�O• ' ~G wr C Y OC Nw.Y MN,tl��3 W�,y•i r E � C N �` C i i w,,,'� 1. M 2 C -a, y w ^pp O V o g C vy $ yYp$. •"� -i, ;2 i 6NFNty iut M. M G , NjN ia�`Ct�_L. NL sO ��Ng s� ew.M ttt{{{MJJJ��� ywCO 4w ;1 C }Mdf w.,�V�yy,N NNt.�g4 CiyLa iM . C OHO Y' q,.4N V y�w tl C�YY �01 VI M �V y,41 ;ate =g S= r`� q30 c4 _f.M�g 0 y°` 9t � yM C=Y ES �. t 1"NI "IYp' �±' g � =4« N R p{`QV q C N= M+ N L r> N r ��• • C 7 7� O_ N� N� C N C 3 = ^ss.SSy�y�� VCCIySO N3 Y=V MG�~4 t6.M ■6 � Raj- Md. S ;iCN�,�+ O Y �Q a+QJ MJ st Jq CC2 Nei. NCY O iiC v01C'O CO 4 uii co 11 YH i d J s ! -., 1 ° + a � � � y � 6 e yyY a�i ar yyl w r��.. £$1c -2 s� +�iri`���> > oi.N-. % >S+�Sa v Mo. q �•a"" �RYY Lip q I. pjy; ZM I OYT yY N+.MY.. $'o2`.� L �L 1.. �... ^' V u yC LyY •-� UtL ayy�Lh �,n �\[! p,. 6YY' YY y� ��G�L Oyy Nd �Li1p <r.Np. �wi r+\ZZ N- K] e 30• D r p O. O C pY Op 000'wM OY \y O .YC.S MY C L: y �Y4CCV �L Z ,W� m A.L � 04 �y.LQ^ L Ij C 4 jt��a Y {Oz Aa1 �fV V� tu��C11 NY G'wC` �O�fi •_re L y C S p` C C._. Y flfoa y re it / QQ" OV 4 C LlY'Y B:: p, ? je` V yC C YC4.Y L ^O N h 2 Ya rLp 0 9# >NNY LO L A ®5O L�q Y qw ^qY L i�.L O• V' wwy Y L C O d . '` a L g q Y q 0' u J� yy'' rr ^iOOY q ^ 4Y w O` -. M rte _ A.� N I Y - R I O Y K M �� YMN ya t Y�• N wC �.a � N 4 CNO�« 'Y�N y�� = ^`141W3 -,VYJ_--X­9 y 1.42 R +y��_ cj G pp C Yl LC LC L.G°NO Y .0 G %.i y#s q L O R� K M w L • yy a=,-- O 0O fT !�1 V o '-d � q 1. } °4' g38 � 3� "a N•cay �4z -asa -!Zr" k L4L �,1pRi pe V1 MUU 1x14�YL yvgo 4�Ra �A1 yt O� f �a �~Y �yp0Y 1 1 O f{l''°01 dpu3'� N C M N � COy44L G wC`• s '^ Na` N n N 1 T C C4••1w N {'.NQCO ,L � Q C 5T 0 YM w u � wV M w XM G --W: N CN�C _ X w yC � �j N qwc Y Yp p �sw C .� 1Y� 4 aatl~�� �.�ppy �� d�a .��= �.�dW NYq V�6�6 O�� C' `O. �•..qp$'� Vi <p ws:.o r M p' l r gq • Ya w � u µ :W C C t �Y6i Cyyy 7 a Itz RYA pG Q C pp ^■!y MQ X.2 O 7 6 t4 RL r G Q L^ µ C L k NM T LC Q M CY B� 401 Nw 8t ]��[IY a M_•L ~ C 1 Y{� ^ �... CQ y Vii • >�.O yCC CAS �s1 V q N � ygµ4 `M k% Y Q_N 41Q° T,JL 44 CY 4M« QL V'� A2 CEO aM�,NjY N=�qG ��C 'pC4 Va �C V..q� C 6M�6.4 •' #. µe Ny + O.CC •QG�p >4aY�Q` ^`.C. y a E ^ °� oG•q t1 :Ck s.... i°N f4i QQYYYiY? zyC Y C y� C Y 5, ^N CG Nµ wil �t C 7w �L Lµ �. pq^■4■ YR �N4 Y Ldp v ~C N Y 6 ^ r QRY v oC �O' L rYv I �gCO y =iGi M . .R ' VN C V •'s.µM17L . ' 6 O ky C iL p■ tepr3 ' Gf.a q4L L � �Q4 O M�4jp1V !Y � L .C. y icCY-_�M v N.. 4 ��Ly Q V NN Ltwp CY la�n0 N OWC y yOO ��c� ky� 10 M"�V e4 y�j C1 iM ✓1O yyY�r yy 13 [11L NN C ~LC Y VYy41LCl 4G +! L i L • wy `CC C O` yl Y~C AtVq C3�T .Ez �° !1. Ny„4! YyiypQ ^ ° 41 NA ■■_ YY M i 4 y L iV�{O NR GAY HRN gµ q r tVN Z <O rOYtw �. G C KN WG Ry Y1 V�Ow \JCS {{)) 4( {. ' E _ LE ro L O Yrob. +a�4�. _�`» �CYa Y Y DHr- 6j, y�g L » V U. *O ■ yOC p ^U1r Gs^ +NYY C NN. vyp[yp�y O wLT.A`+. iEN Vy�yu V~yV 06 ba. iLyi. U�» yyyy��'� ^�( «��uEy� �' wOCCM 1`pr p`[[u f1 »e0y. 14=t' ~ �O G �iCq y0 U.f N iti�OY �4 YM � ��y,G.t p �7 s i j 42 8 ° qp� "' '�¢ .R %+ I T Z" U > YCCy 1i.i.CV�•( p`1 UG » v p 7E yy SYYl VYL a q hY°C .4C Vy� L�MCR «4= r ^tE� �YiY, �y rp p'O�Ey M pp.. e »TLMl`ML O~ N »r OM�O 000`�Y N G pip +L tl N OY CP L�.YNyV` L f +Y _ i C It Eta n't,A Elea Y m 'Z �I s q c Owl x. pr w r6 y yc� s V o, ,�j' °... c u u L ZZ r�4a4ppU qT yyw: E� CL 2!B 6G ■ Y¢ O ��.. Y � � Ca + y w C_L s qCi° +y yC �Y'N fYgl D aO ya R .... C O A Y. w�. •.+. C '}��Q,ji! NYN Vy� � + >�C y� L °9Y. y «U �A$ � y MY $pn{{,,�� • `y L } • YLye Y Y�pG y�Mq: q. y. �iL y_d am E i {{ +y%� yL �4p41 �� d CQpC L O1 pCV ° MQp 4■ V C L y N SN Y ■'� N 6+ �gC ^ Z 0 Y 9.�J °p� ��� Ua� i�VN + &` Lyv� ^ i'� L« L+/}' M.Sop �.'rtq�' qN =�• N.. � _ x g$s � Oft N.`:yi ° g d4� V��Y aC»�+ fY. }wY l►C•C }MU? ACVy qY C CY V H V BET CO1fY �. yGl'a 1'�,. LSLg tiF� 09 `LYg ��. C 4� OfY Y'1T� �yW C w N � 1vJV�Y a+ ,,) A`..w LwOtldO L.M. a ar �' cO N.O L 4 $ y «Sii$ °^ otlw a. $Nu 4 c N W W «; .° o $ €' 8 •, �21 [L 4 a yYM tt►Y•- CNV Y Z ypQ C'..n �tY: r°, o � YY �. p "��6Ryr�,�+� $ `$ ° � Vy_ � � .Z � v�`• 1'N7F � � }p1 � `e i" S CN ! Y N C QK Oyyy al -C Gl� N O +r+.■ w� YVe p 1N y♦ y Y .�� L N t QY'1 N O HN ♦w yyY 29 21 P •� � s C Tl��O'wjC ^�•,Y Yy00�� SS w 4iR L• � �� trw. yi.N a � w 1 C• a q p Q O � o� bO.G. �± .cbC O : `40' Y YWw MyMwYrM La+fY 3= �� C =yM �w +p� 1, C��a -4l ae gpM y� s $n CR+i w N.'�. w� '; �Vi �j �`jjCy V .G yf L uu V pp $ If N+�Na: w� y+ $ y N tall: ii Y♦ MY l.l= aN "c $4g tl YiL' 45 �$ to «i $v a. O .+.$ _yy. �� ��3 Y °�.��O�r �•yi p u y� � ow tl'Q(� O^JJJ¢�JJ¢ aw �•jYY N � +^ Gwy�� ��� °yyy p.�6 N N * Y.Q p1 vI ; e ' � .. L OY1.�r ,;�.QJ y Y. L +} 0 � �p� a C C� tl� N1J rLOC C,Y w $i . r M Y 'GOy yyp � LC N . 'OC� E ✓ ) $ N �y, �r IL Y yV a w iN. aL y iC W 11 42= in ilk IN 6 L O ..w b L i Y � w 5w y t A b V � O N Yy' ,V .J « YLY iS N 4 y5' 3 ES M L ae sLS W N C N C~ K W W `+f N a �vP �t + N y. rs Y V t. � O .gp8..- rtte A 4 D tti T .A U'' f Q�y� Ik D O V CPCS � -• Q" Vd a` s _i w A[ Y x Y p C e1 4 O C ti . C Ell i . t N rNt C °l�C LLTM~. �4Lq�$yTl Scs4. �y M L tf all N � 4 wF y Ny�ifwh �'�p" Y ±' sO{ �qjN L O ..w b L i Y � w 5w y t A b V � O N Yy' ,V .J « YLY iS N 4 y5' 3 ES M L ae sLS W N C N C~ K W W `+f N a �vP �t + N y. rs Y V t. � O .gp8..- rtte A 4 D tti T .A U'' f Q�y� Ik D O V CPCS � -• Q" Vd a` s 1 4Y tv■ �U yyY=1 GU 'It au Of I y1 qq v 'O YWYI`u p ptii= N•yN t T w � + = Y O{G' e OAYA itj ir Vr`w tOAty�i i Rs� N.t�ll w4M.NUi <GC � 7 3 �a � 6 M^ e1 4 ti . C 1 4Y tv■ �U yyY=1 GU 'It au Of I y1 qq v 'O YWYI`u p ptii= N•yN t T w � + = Y O{G' e OAYA itj ir Vr`w tOAty�i i Rs� N.t�ll w4M.NUi <GC � 7 3 �a C9 X u 0 L Y n ou � uw fir. a �Lno n� �u rQ q�Y aNt ,oaZ Yw T�C 0 0-0 �J? �Rw �TY. 0My 'D w v y t ql y S V kvaF aAOY u ae�. � 'x pp� Ie •wd .�. (a�N `Yd r' a . E G 8"2 r y Y Y N Q C V OrPAL �,O _yL _� ti$ pp y1Zc(�• M' i4 q�e'Y L[ _Yw�N itR 66 ®M C lytyY py��,LL Y.Y.f fY S S w t+ 1Z .: W ALf cK Y N Y w s 1 10 0 �Vr M Ly L4� b04t w b Q�. L N Y Eva '0}1 P N L i a Sam a —Gw Elz ICY g h V� �SaY1a�> pYwE Nr��1 ZAN F> yj,sEY� ((yyy as E W A ENO . E . � ti 6 P C LM(lJ O Y Y�� N N a- 4�y� � C QW6 t i G DANE: 10. FROM: BY: SUBJECT: fi';1TY OF RANCHO CUCAIVION6 AL) STAFF REPORT Hovem,ber 1ir, 1987 �Z�Oma.n and Members of the Planning Commission v 1977 , Brad Buller, City 4Ianner Nancy Fogg, Associate Planner ENWRONML±lTAL ASSESSMENT AND C©NDITIONAL+_ USE ifmr 'a, (;. RMST -"lire eve o menti o an acre n egra_,e4 r' s Ali pi fi`gcenter consi stirg of 4 retail buildings totaling 87,581 square feet in the Conunity Commercial District of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the south.eas; corner rf Foothill- 'Borlevard and Hells -r Avenue - APN 20 &461 -58 I. PR6JEC7 AND ITE BESrRIPTION: A. Aiciion Requested. AS proval of a neighborhood shopping center, eats a ssTte ,gTan, elevations, and isstiaRce of a t'ejatiNe Declaration. B. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoning: Abr"Efi" 'moo e7 s`A66i a o -me ar`k, Sino`t F, *ily Homes, Vacant; Mixed Use District. Sat :th - Single Family Homes; Low:a` , �ntial District (1 -4 dwelling units per acre'' fast Der WeinerschnitzPi, WoL._.Afi /Perry's Market Center, Mini - Warehouse; Community Commercial District I West - Apartments, Sil:gle Family }tome; Medium -High Residerit;ia" District (14-24 dwelling units gar acre), Low Residential District (2 -4 uveli=ng units per acre) C. Gene_4'� P' a� clesionatinns• rG e- ,'� _M 77 y"' CbtumercioI North - kixeO x South - Low !,z --tslty Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) �a.t - Community Commercial Medium -High Density Residential (14 -24 dwellil:, units der acm<), Lea Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) L,. Narkiri3 Cdlculations,: ---- ?dumber of 6umber q f i,fpe Square parking,,. -' Spaces Spaces i o#� Use Fo;�taae Rat_�q,. gequired orovided 75,696 1/250 303 344 �taurant 5,145 1/75 69 69 .V, 1 Res ,y a . - S,C 1/300 60 60 Total 432 433 2TEF3 0 a. 7 PLANNING CWISSIiI I STAFF REPORT CDNDTTIONA! USE PEiii�lIJ,,87 -16 NU EST November 10, 1987 Page 2 E. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant with no si5nif''eant vege a —T- "slopes gently from north to south at approximately 3, percant. A swell or dike, transverses tite site at ithe south side of the property which ;:rotects the southerly single family homes from flooding. A Taco 'Sell restaurant exists at the corner, of Helms Avenue and Foothill Boulevard.. F. Applicable Regulations: The development of a shopping ce;:ter is su 3ec to a on 'iional Use, Permit according to the current Development Code. II. ANALYk S: A. General: The prop�*;ed' project would be the first to be ev e7oped under the Faothiir Boulevard Specific Plan devel)pment standards and guidelines. 1Yae proposed site plan clusters four retail buildings in a "U" shape configuration. The developer has integrated the existing Taco Bell restaurpnt in his design of: Bite Flan. Pedestrian connections have been provided t„Koughout the ,site that link buildings ari' parkinE areas with sidewalks fc"promoting convenient and s8,e pedestrian movement. A %4ajor focal point has been provided in front of Bit 10ng Retaift "C" that inclufte a 4-01 tower and a large piaxa,- 4i ;e6: A64 tional plaza areas have ! ^_n provided between Pao "A" and fAV "1": Mijjor.,access is "provided from Foothill loulevard, Helms Avenue and kl:lman,Avenue. Access for service and track 'traffic is vainiy from th_ secondary driveways off Helms Avetwi ah� Hellman Avenue. The proposed elevations project a contemporary spastics; theme. It includes architectural elements and �atai1 encouraged by the F.ioth:il Specific pan: such as covered arcades, curvilinear gables, 0wers with subtle variations in detailing and design, °rellises, piaster cornice, impost molding and accent Eev_&Fc tile. Detaili5q and other architectural elements have been added to the rear elevation of the main liuilding to provide visual relief to the building mass. The same detailing and elements have been added td the rear elevation of those buildings that have Hellman Avenue and Helms ,avenue ztreet frontages. B. Design Review Committee: The Committee sBlakesiey, Chitiea, " Krout-TIT—Fast rev eweo a project on September 17, 1987 ?nd found it to be aceeptakle, but recommended that all design �te:ms and technical issues must be resolved by the applicant through working Stith stiff prior to being reviewed by the Planning Commission. The develZper has been working diligently with staff in resolving all the terhnicai issues ,rid addressing those design Items recomemenued by the Committee as follows.- is ' 4 0 ,? t Amok �o PLANNING C"ISSION STAFF REPORT d CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87 -16 - ' ;NUWES November 10, 1987 Page 3 II 1. The pedestrian connection between Shup.'3" and Retail "C" shculd'be further improved tqq,ensure it is safe and cc-.,} -7ient 1for encWraging pedestrian usage. Thin could be achieved by increasing the width of'' the pedestrian, connection to 15 feet and flaring out at. the northern end adjacent to the main ;laxa area. Two free- standing trellises should be provided_,. with additional pedestrian amenities such as benches, free- standing potted plants _and j adequate 4ighting for safety purposes.(--- (Revised as shorn in Exh4ult 2. A similar pedestrian connection with design as mentl"ied -above shoA1d be provided between Retail "A" and Shop 02 ". (Revised as shown in Exhibit °f{M 3. All pedestrian pathways across circulation aisles should` be of textured treatment such as interlocking brick pavers, exposed aggregate or a combination of both_.,lConditioned). � 4. T`.a existing stamped concrete texture pavement fj: the existing driveway of Nelms Avenue should A- replaced with textured material consist *ent 04th the 0toping center. (Conditioned). 5. Pedestrian amenities should be provided in front of Fad "B" ( Ionditioned). 6. _ R'­ndom stacking of roof the shou'id be provided. %onditivaed). 7. The applicant nhoul'd work with staff in resolving the design and technical issues for the stretch of Foothill Boulevard between Hellman Avenua and the first driveway to comply with all applicable City codes. ( Revised as shmin ir. ; Exhibit 010 She developer addressed the design issue by providing a aaeandering sidewalk behind a 5 to 10 foot ride `�andscape turf area. At such time as the crtch basin will not be needed,; the , 3 foot elide concrete drain inlet could be reverted to and integrated as part of this landscape planter area. boil, the City Planner and the City Engineer have revieyed this design and found it to be acceptapl.x� ,3 U ww CNn V r NUWEST November 19, igB% Y Ogg 1 tU i) 8. tie applicant should, work with surrou'rding residents and staff *- developing accoptding solution along the ffer zone at the south property boundary to itigate the concerns of noise vier, privacy d Security- fThis issue rr311 be further dis $ed >in Sections C and p of the report), }, A significantTy great amount of trees as well as increaseo,,jiumber of box-sized trees should be Planted along Foothill Boulevard because there is a 7 to 8 foot grace difference from the top Of the curb to the parking area and ,l 2.1 slope with a 3 foot high flood wall. 7hererore, 15 notlbe see if plan ednwithin thedslope area, MrMtioned). 1C• This stretch of Foothill Boulevard should he designed as a suburban parkway Mere the l adscape treafament should he dominated by informal clustering of London plane trees,,_ Cal iforaia Sycamore and crepe Myrtle. Al 1 the parkway characteristics include rolling turf berms,, meandering and undclattog sidewalks and h,ar•dseape to compliment this informa; landscape treatment. (Conditio10). 11. Increase the number :of trees and box-sized trees should also be planted along 'Hellman Avenue tc� make up the landscaping Within the public right- of -way consisting of 12 foot wide sidewalk and a 3 fooi: high flood wall. Landsc-'.�pe mounds, Should be provided up to the 3 foot high fla,' wall` %i (Conditioned). ` 12. Within pl -?a areas, specia'i landscape treatment ouch as actenf''"'gees, specimen size trees, and an inereased',. ,exer of trees should be provided- (Conditioned). 13. Dense landscaping should be provided along the entire south property boundary with trees, and a double row of shrubs, 5 gallon size and planted at 3 Feet on center and with' the appropriate . ground cover. f d;tf ). 14. All walls such as flood w611S, retaining walls, screen walls, should be 'of decorative design c0ftSistent with the architictural style« {i; itioned). 7 v %k "ITT Tr' HST None C Aomoborba o 00* ,pad mftong held on July 6, to, ipoie proposed prtsect to tog t aAd U 06ta In — im f I,e4dba4k ,e In rev wew:�, ro, pcess,, relf ftU, .*Vd, p—eseft t jt,,ing. The r 0 met following, s . i 4uArYo of r cdInt-eirtisr. a. Seouyft and Sa ftftiy Haza-rd The esifdenlis thtt t 4 a fiel, 3 -at hi,gh wall hV with the U-0" pi nq at the south property bound bry could create seciiri-ty and safety fte4ard, in that, it Nay ,not stop people �from Jumping ever 't, wail 'ie Into their side or back yard. J.' Increased"noise from- commercial A vehicles, les, autos and from the collection ''trash, of especlally WhM the trash enclosure areas if are abutting- at tyhe south property 4viundary area. c. Trash The trash enclosure area being "back in the could contribute to -trash being 3,iilled over and could create health hazards such as increasing the, amount of rodents and other unwanted animals. d. T;%.ffic At pres4nt, vehicles and trucks are using Helias-Avenue and Devon Street as t-Wroughfares tO' bypass all th!!• traffic signals on Foothill Boulevard. The proposed project would increase the amount of traffic along Helms Avenue. e. Visual The proposed project (,oLrld block their view to the mountains. f. Privacy - The amour il of parting spaces in the back and service drive invade theit4, privacy, in that it could- encouPage loitering, fixrease in crime, etc. 2. On Septe*er 1987„ -, a second neighborhood 'meeting was held with 16 mesf&it,,� in attendance. The purpose of this meeting wis for the developer to inform the residents of the type Of mitigation measures Uiey eire proposing t 4 $ - .� NoN. Toro Page 6 u f, :ass theif: concp;;hs. The fol pw.ing are pa'gposed- mitigation a sares from Chet` developer, a. Security aXru Safely - 'The develop .r is proposing to raise Mae 3 f0,04, k�i � � ,3 ock wall to feel high Two wrou -96% "iron gates that Aire - 'l ockabl a will be f ncl ac -­' - to a >lllow for morkers to Md�ntain the 10 foul; l4advd'ape arm: The developer also is proposing to hire a private securfty, Biro, to patroi the site, "pecially during the - night. u b. Noise - The deaelop�'', stated that the reap. par**,:ng IP2t -1s for erployee parking only and that service and coaauercial vehicles do ;.ot involve s' emi- trucks. ,Therefore, rye . noise levee generated { Goal{.d have negligible,impact. c. Trash - In regards to trash tollec. ion, the developer stated that t4i shvi ,'ling { cente* does not include tupermarket r where the type of gaobage wiil.,not,be as ssY• (StOf cotes that new City regulations require self - closing trash dumpsters). d. Traffic - To - discourag.? additional traffic fror.�_ 96ing`' south of project along Helms Avenue, the most scuutherly driveway will be closed. To discourage vehicles from using the service dr ee in the rear as a thoroughfare, speed bumps will be installed. Parking spaces will be designated Fe'- employee parking only and signs fould be pos:ced for "no ove +"night parking." e. Privacy - the prrposed six' foot high block wal7 would prevent casua? sight Invasion of the homeowner's pr.vecy. Further; bougainvil3ea or similar type of vines will be planted along the entire stretch of the block wail to discourage, anyone from climbing over C/ pit. Wth the parking spaces designated for 'employee parking only, with signs posted for "no overni�,t parkl�Lg" and g woth adequate light in it ,; would discourage people from "hanging �`Ut" in the parking lo. u El PtAtVTi` 00 REPORT COND:ITi0N�4i. O _e Ili -26 L NUWEST fiov ber 10, 1987 ' Page 7 p The residents at the meetirng rc-viewed the Proposed mitigation csasures from the developer and stated that they did not adequately addres their concerns. The rain issue is the service driveway and the parking spaces, which could create the problem of invasion of privacy, security. he n developer should look look Bother alternatives in site plan design where the back service driveway could be eliminated (see example in their petition). The residents also " stated that the pad' elevations for the building should be lowered so as not to Obstruct their view of the- Muntains. 3. On October V"1 1987, staff conducted an informal . meeti -ng between the residents that abut the site immediately to the south and the developer. The purpose of this meeting was to s''iow the final O design and treatment of the buffer zone at the south property boundary'. Staff also invited a member of the Sheriff's Department to attend this meeting who could answer questions regarding the issue of crime and safety. The residents reviewer! the buffer zone treatment but did not have any consensus as to its adequacy irk . meeting their concerns. D. Environmental, Assessment: Staff has completed the nv ronmen ec s and m ' has determown ined that the development of the project y `have the falli adverse impacts: 9 potential i. Arailla e ' The development �, - of this project may expose people or properties t) water relatEI rszards such as flooding H ;lm�;r kvenue is historically a waterwcarryiq street. The %ite is within a flood zone. The project itcclf 4111 not create any significant additional .uRoff onto Hellman Avenue. � wa e. - ilood.ng the sing?e faintly residences to Mitgi a�tion measure A drainage /hydrology sttcdy �� prov ne that determined mitigation measures is handle the surface water including -tile 200 year flood. A 190 foot catch basin will he installed on Foothill Sculevard including a 72 inch pipe that tbnnects'south along Heilman Avenue, consistent with the City's Master Drainage Flan as shown in Zxhibit "E2 ";' The installation of such drainage facilities w•�uld alie'viate the pest problem of excess surface "al -W W- REPORT CONbTTI(3 ( SF iT 87 -1s NUWEST November lei, %.987 Page 8 the south. In addition, the City has scheduled twa capital improvement projects to be completed within the next few years that would reduce the flooding: along Hellman Avenue, as shown in Exhibit "EL" 2. Traffic - The development of this project will ncrease !„ vA�icularr traffic- . =`�the residents also raised con6'.'gs t,►^at th'h ro cv would add to {= _ the traffic Tong Hers Aven�. At present, vehicles and trucks a c ust,11�- 'Helms Avenue and Devon Street as a thoroicg►ifdre .emu avoid Signals at Soafiniil 'and Archibald and Foothill - Hellman, and Miti ation measure - Foothill Boulevard, being a M' M'3or.a -erlaa find having a raised median island with no Opening, would be able to move the traffic'at are acceutabie level. In regards to increased traffic on Helms, the City Traffic Engineer 'stated a traffic signal will be ultimately installed at the i section of Foothill Boulevard and Helms Ave;,,. the City could put up "no truck traffic "rsigns along Helms Avenue to prevent trucks from using this route as a short cut. The street is already Posted for a -,peed lip "t of 25 miles per 3. Noise - The development of this project May 'n cease noise levels for the single family residents to the south in that, the rear z_rvice driveway aad parking spaces would generate truck and service /deliyOry traffic. _ , HIM `ation Measure - A time limitation of 7 tic a.m. 0737s ou required for all service and dslivery activity along the service driveway. All` -trash enclosure areas have been oriented away from the south property boundary. The parking spaces should be designated for :eV%yee parking cnly. Signs should be posted tFra* Indicate "no overnight allowed." parking Tie block wall along the scuti property boundary should be designed to atfenude noise. According to the s Citv' MuN, � cipal Cade, refuse collection fcr shopping centors ; -dr= are adjacent to residential districts would occar before o a.m.. not ;, 0 -- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87 -16 - NUNEST November 10, 1987 Page 9 c� 4. Light or:G1are - The require�Wts to 1 ght the d niTi g, service driveway arts the parking area 'in the back could increase the light and glare Ito the residences at the south property boundary. Mitigation Measure - All light poles shall not excee d a maim -m-- (eight of 15 feet meatured from UM finished grade. Vall mounted light fixtures should not exceed 15 feet from the finished grade of the parking lot in the rear. All light fixtures should have shields to prevent light from spilling over and should be, of high pressure sodium type (orange color). 5. Crime /Securiiy - The residents stated that the eve lopment of this project would attract additional. crime ai this rear parking area and service ;drive. Vtitigati,..l ileasure -' 17he developer is proposing %hire pr a a security firm to patrol the site, together with the installation of block walls, landscaping, lights, signs posted for no overnight parking, parking spates designated for employee parking only, and time limitations on service /delivery activity, it may, *,,crease the chances cf crime. Baser on the abovs mitigation measures, some of which have been incorporated into the project and the remainder being added to as conditions of approval, staff nas determined that there will not be significant impacts as a result of this project: If the Planning Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS• This project is consistent witn the General Plan and tne Footp-TTI Boulevard Specific Plan in that: The design of the project creates community desi9fn lmtge, that expresses end enhances the unique character and idonk =ty 6.'1� Rancho Cucamonga; the proposed project facilitates of 'i�,ient and safe vehicular and pedestrian traffic; and the project maintained the highest possible quality of the environment by balancing the impacts o4 development to the surrounding areas. In addition. the props %sed use, building design, site plan, together with thg recommended conditions of approval are in compliance with; ,she Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and all other applicable pr isions of the City's standards, The project, with the added mitigation measures, will not cause significant adverse environ±nental impacts. 0 -y CQ °�t F REPORT NxL SSE _ IT `$7 -16 - XUWEST November 1l^Y„ 1.re1 Page 10 i� IY. CORRES DF,NCE: This item has been ��vertised in The Dail 'as -1 ewsparper R�e�� �o�rt public hear)�g,i -,At "property Posted, an -es �nt� Sant to all prop i � within 600 of the project site, and wittain Subarea of th a i; BQ1evard Specific Plan. :n addition, three neighborhood meetings were held by the detolopjr. Y. con 6�tENDAT"': Staff �r�'-Imwnds that the Planning Ccamnission con uc a prat hearing to consfe!er all Input. If % concu the Commission Declaration and ppfovalfofdConditio al Use Permit 87 =i6 w)dIative; in order. jl Re ect 6 ly'$ fitted, Bullet• City Planner BB:NF•te Attachments: Letter, from Residents Exhibit "A" - Locatibn Map �j 1 Exhibit "B "- - Site utilization Pip Exhibit "C" - Detailed Site Plan - Exhibit "D ",- Buffer Zone Cross Sections Exhibit "Eq''a Conceptual Grading Plan (3) Exhibit - Conceptual Landscape Plan "F Exhibit G " - Plaza Design Exhibit ` Pedestrian. Connection Desigry j "in Exhibit I * Cornd�� & Foothill Boulevard Streehscape Design l Exhibit "J " -- Lighting Plan Fxhibi , "K" - Elevations - - 1 xhibit NO - Stordfrnnt Design. 'A Resol:, : on of A�!prdvai with Standan. 1 Condit) ns 1 A August 'l, .1987 AUG Q�-ar Commissioners, Honorable ikayor, d Council Members: AM P4 On duly fs,' =987 a public meeting was held by the City rf Rarc°ho Cucamonga Planning Division and a developer to discuss the proposed shopping cent3r to be located 11t the Southeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. We the undersigned, after careful examination ,of the p.opased plan, found that many important Issues warp, not properly addressed. These Issues - security, no tse,' garbage#' traffic control, privacy, and land vat.ue are among the major concerns that will have a direct impact on our community. Sec•lrity The proposed plani(Sightline Print) outilne, that a buft.f - - - - -- - -'aone of approximately 15 -20 fe6t wide at s, higher elevation than the existing property barrier wall be Implemented. This buffer zone in 11self compliments crim;tnal activity. The scr,,eetUgl wai, appi',oxi mate Iy 6 feet hellht does not provl�la a good deterren-`, in that a parking lot sit adjacent. The parking lot providez a rxesting place for all kinds of unwarranted activities. Th* proposed lighting also creates a prison effect by lliuminatinc the houses it wout,•) {ace. Noise - Traffic, both autele and commercial vehicles, *111 creatq an - - - -- unbearabte .^.,rise level that doesntt even ex!s+ at this time. The proposed buildings and elevation will create an echoing effect tnat again adds to the destruction of a quiet residential neighborhood. Garbage - The buffRr zone, as well as the parking lot, wlII be a haven - - - - -- for refuse. People, autos, and commercial vehicles will ce;ttrlbute to the poilut.ng of our neighborhood. Refuse colectlon is another matter with bins being located in the rear of the buildings and collectors constantly spilling will provide a residence f)r rodents end other unwan +ed animals. Traffic Control - Today with Taco Bell, Winner schnitzel, Woolworths, -------- - - - - -- and Perry's Maa,ket, autos and commercial vehicles are using Helms Avenue anv Devon Street as thoroughfares to bypass traffic signals at Foothill Boulevard and Archibald Avenue. The proposed plan will create additional traffic to the already overloaded local streets. Further ore, a new thoroughfare (parkins lot) will be created between Hellman Aven!1e and Helms Ave.we, contributing to the overall congestion. Privacy Privacy (s invaded by the elevation (SIghtIIno Print) of '!`he - - - - - -- proposed !plan. Again, the homeowner, who Is Immediately adjacent to the parking lot, is subjected '�o visual inspection by t.'... patrons. Retail Space - .f provision should be Implemented that no 24 hours -- --- - -� stores be :-llownd. y -r We propose that at " `3onai studies be d,�rie on each of the above issues. Enclojed Is E samp!`t.vj of what can be done to appease a 1, concernec+. W.: l f waral v hnna +hm+ fhaea f ee.+ae he t 0 injnow. I m, 0 0 i Al ommumn f 4 ; - .;- _.•3•.. �-. ter'.;; tw ..�. _ .. ., n �i AUG, I t r ` T t 1 1:1 r ti..r 0 -, n -:44-c� C. -- ^.� - °' - Afz,,s arc J t 41-4 - u �. • - --- - . - . -L . _� v7 y 0701 -02 o 11-10-87-PC Agenda 4 [ ƒ o '3 \ .G� @ og K I � z -C \ \ Pk W $I -1 I 4k 'qAc#o « # # $ ' s - ■ a � 49 t ' a § ■ 2 ■ ■ © y r � a ■ # f ■ � _ s s d � � a ± S Z $ 2 § $ $ § # B 2 ■ k \ � Pk $I -1 I 4k 'qAc#o ■ §V § k ' s - ■ a � 49 t ' a § ■ 2 ■ ■ a � ■ © � � s § $ $ § # B 2 ■ _ .$ �m 0 Lr m .7k, "R 1 .- i,� :� �4 a.M� iiMU e- ._.r..' ♦ y Wry` L 0 x3 yi if CCU .% . -i't—• ___,. µ.7r -.✓• ?. it 0 `[ t' t: it 1I! K I fit: 1 9 i mo �i i f s } I � s All I E t + rnMrer! � { + �\ '*r>. -., ,>tY.• a •1 1117\<.li n'. \ •b' 4 k iM.e lot wt r•. a f t , i ,� �� • 1' w 1,'. rt +ii • \I1 sy, ti r: ;Y �''!�t, -`�rT'. AN �, fit � e� ° r �,. ,� ®r� + ti ,•.s >, . j 1 �^': F� � `l.' J F� +I � ✓ -, S�}-.s EAU � � ,S '^' � c' . ` K 1} ` `. �._ b. f:.''� .4t � .'•.l't 4'x°1 .� ' .� ! TTT � �A} •. F • � � i J i SCREEN WALL 04 �±,RET, WALL 5TING WALL : 0 SOUSE T- 6" lb CURB WD 6u , TIER s E 1,-,, —110�41 RAN SCALE V, Ao� 70' rw T6, o AM GUTIER 13 R EX!5T. WA,14 SECT 3-3" SCALE =1" 1 10, CITY CF rrEM-. cY � 40 RANCHO CUCANKXNUA TrrLE: ,-ko EXHIBM SCALE:' FF = SZ.! 70' ^_ 19,• TES cs22 ��F, t HOUSE `�--CURB AHI GUTTER . 1 79 �I � �. SECTION "C C" SCALE V- 101 '701 . -E x i ST. 1 y Fs HOUSE ® .o EX IST. �ee e" r, --CURB r,�► rE 511E SECTION 0e'c•E SCALE W = 1011 _10' S' A _ -70' _ ... _ �i�.o��• LF.F. 0 f �,CURR & GUTTER L--PLANTER CURB + SEC ON "F Fe. � SCALE 11/ ►0' { CITY RANCHO C �'_ -� RANNIM DFVISM ExxtW=__� SCAU- �- D .0 10, 10, --------- 30% V. ti SECTION G. G.. SCALE I,, it 4 SECT ION IIH-H$o SCALE I V-101 RET. WAL F. F. -,, . Uw SECTIGN "1-:L of SCALE 111-10' - CTI"'Y OF nim: 6JUI-16 RANCHO CLUANKX*JCA icee PLAMM DFVNM TTrLE- EXHINT: SCALE, 1.4 *1- y 1 MAX f-- 17. MIN. G B. SECTION SCALE : !" = r0' 3.0' FL043 WALL ,yp3 1s Ia SECTION L • l SCALE Rt-` 2C' t a• = �'i2" R.C.P. • a N 9 -F. F. =95,0 s p�•0 125.0 X, .SE ETION of N.N SCALE . !" s !0' �RTH PLA,NNM DPP EXHINT= E 17 ��— i 0 � 9 a 4 S 0 'i` X 4' 20X � SECTION lip WP„ � SCALE* 12` Zs' ± F.f. - '33.00 6 0� v �v =�L SECTI514 "a, °(3.lf SCALE SECTION "R-R" SCALE : N' c 10= .F.R =93.00 NMrH CITY ': RANCHO cucAmoNGA nTu. A. PLAN NM DfVEM EX% W-- - SCAlE• - - D a3� 3 U NORTH TY OF ff� 1 0 -d it Wee tab t i, e1 cis Li- it IOPVN ,g m I _ _ F YYD.BMIY :�i�l9Nk. l �d aaswar •nwnar.•�aeciour = r.ror � °a�^r. . R 5 f Ak- do ro J.1 7n x I 7n IS ,+ �� • _ " ,+do- . t7► '7. i �h � � � '� ', D -30 Fj dh a 6 l• D -30 Fj dh one-" me L tj 0-31 = tol, I � 4 - -rn, mid h. uam , T•, WEST EJ'EVjkti 3l t ,k "MI : y _Et�ILpCt'!l11 :?^ l�i fdi ;7 .i 7•q.1k, �f � ..fir, �,�� ;r. Fr }p��•;�, � • EAST ELEVATION 1/1 '. ,,,a, ��� •.•r" iSw- t"�t'''--=`• .i SOUTH ELEVATION ' •%y.~ � ?�' >',•��C''�!'..+ "���5p��' {+�r��{�y��•ry.7pi��nn r.aa.- err. -«d�!_ . - .� I �' �1•, Mwera�{. ht ;�'c�7!,vP! ^nh0 }Plpf1t1i1NhR! Mj lxirin�.:n���:: �N .+uYi` i,. I L NORTH ELEVATION :vcxtrx CT1` y CF re m. R A,NC'� O COCA n " A AM-.043 DIVi'SM ExHM. SCALE ' 0 cc UJ ui oil CL C5 M N Cam. C Us' US .J rc iiit e' ie Aj ) 01 AR, I 14) 0 uj 0 z rup"k' .9 glf �tlw .�.:, �s,,,_,._.__;�,- �..�.. day :� o � A s J - ®- �r� .� �d �� �,� r. � � . ,# � a 1 f� 1 r � • YY �, b ' . ���� ,.,,, x 0 9 RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROV114C CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-16 POR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN 8.2 ACRD INTEGRATED SHOPO ;NG CENTER, CONSISTING OF 4 RETAIL BUILDINGS TOTALING 87,581 SQUARE FEET 'LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HELLMAN AVENUE IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRIL''i - APR 208 - 261 -58 A. Recitals. (I) NuNest hjs filed an application for .thi issuance of the Conditional Use Permit N,. 87 -15 as described in *re title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in *,his Resolution, the suf3ect Conditional Use Permit request is referred to:hs "the application% (ii) On the. Oth of November, 1987, the .Planning Comnsissien of the City of Rancho Cucam6�,ga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of 'tie facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this 'Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on November 10, 1487, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commissiot hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property bounded by Foothill Boulevard, Hellman Avenue and Helms Avenue with a street frontage of 1,535 feet and lot depth of 612 feet and is presently vacant. (b) The property to the north of the subject site is developed with a motel, mobile home park , the property to the 's6uth of that site is single family homes, the property to the east is developed with retail commercial shops, and the property to the west is apartments. cc) The proposed project complies with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan in that: The site plan design and architectural style enhance the unique character and identity of Rancho Cucamonga; and, the site plan design is integrating the existing Taco Bell restaurant and eliminating the existing driveway off Foothill Boulevard, and facilitates efficient and safe vehicular traffic along Foothill Boulevard. -51 OMoN No. CDNDii')DNlfL USE MW 87 -16 - NUWEST November 10, 1987 Page 2 have been addressed with mitigation measureslbe ngadverse added environmental toothen project ctaand added as conditions of approval to ensure this project would not result In a decrease in environmental quality. �. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific fin ings of facts set forth in paragraph 1 sand 2 above, this Cameission .hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. (b) 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. I1 (c) That the proposed use complies with each of the_) applicable provisions of the Development Code. been reviewed and Commission in compliance and with cerVfles Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues a Negative Declaration. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in; paragraph 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the application, subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions attached tereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Pl anni ng' `:Division; (1) The pedestrian connection between Shop "3" and Retail "G "_, ard between Retail "A" and Shop "2" shall have-`additional pedestrian amenities such as benches, free- standing potted plants and- adequate lighting for safety purposes. The building elevations along these two pedestrian connections shall have recessed window areas rather than popped -out window areas. Detailed design shall be submitted for Planning Divisio- review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. (2) All pedestrian pathways and .across circulation aisles shall be of textured treatment such as interlocking brick pavers, exposed aggregate or 0_qO PLANNING COWIMoN It SOLUTit}N ND, CONDITIONAL ELSE PER14tT 87v -116 - NUWEST NOVember 10, 1887 Page 3 a combination of both. samples shah � submitted for approval by the planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. (3) The existing stamped concrete textured pavement in the existing driveway off Helms Avenue shall be replaced with textured material consistent with -the shopping center. (4) Pedestri ?n amenities shall be p rovided in front of Pad "B ". (5) Random stacking of roof tile shall be provided. (6) A significantly greeter amount of trees, as well as increased number of box sized trees, shall be planted along (oath "I Boulevard. (7) The corner of Foothill;-b�iulevard and Hellman Avenue an;? along Faoth%�I Boulevard shall have special landscape treatme,°+,gnsistent with the i suburban parkway design Videlines of the Foothill Boulevard Spacific Plan. The parkway characteristics shall include informal ? clustering of London -, Plane trees, CAlifornia sycamOre and s^,ra[ie SPtle, rolling turf berms, undulating sidewalkk and hardscape to compliment this informal landscape treatment, Oetai]-,d design saail be subject to City Mann& review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. (8) An increased number of trees and box sized trees shall be planted along Hellman Avenue to make up the 'landscaping along the public right - of -,way consisting of a 12 foot wide sidewalk and a 3 foot high fiat wall. A landscape around SrOuld be provided up to the 3 foot high flood wall. (8) Within plaza areas, special landscape treatments such as accent trees, specimen size trees and increased num4er of trees shall be provided. (10) Dense landscaping shall he provided along the entire south property boundary in front of the six foot high block wall with trees, shrubs and apPrapriate ground cover. In addition; bouganvillea vines or another type; f vi a that will 4r6w rlong this entire sire' % oT block wall shall be planted to discourage graffiti and discourage people from climbing over. v i4 !v r rry� v!� raNw November NNW Page 4 (11) All walls such as flood walls,,recaining Screening galls shall be of decorative design cOnsisterit with the architectural style. (12) !tense landscaping'shoald � provide,' 4 ':in the 14 fort Landscape area along the'-,Qt...,, south Property boundary with evergreen trees, shrubs and appropriate ground rover. (13) All - service and del)very aCtivity along the rear service driveway shall occur - ietween the time of 7 a.m. and 9 P.M. (14) The developer shat -i provide security personnel to patrol the site daily anti; at all times. Documentation shall be submitted to t) q Planninj Division dnd Kept on f }l °e. (15) lho block wall and 'landscaping along the south property boundary shall be designed to attenuate noise AI acoustical study shall be submitted to verify noise .attenuation for Planning Division review and approval prior to Issuance of building permits. (16) Signs shall be conveniently posted along this rear service driveway and parking area for "no overnight parking", and "emplayee parking only. (17) 1 light pole fixtures shall net exceed the height of 15 feet meast4ved from the finished grade. full mounted lights for the rear elevation shall not exceed 15 feet Measured from the finished graoe of the parking lot.. All lighting fixtures shall have shielding mechanisms to prevent fight and glare into the southerly properties. (18) A. uniform hardsccpe and street furniture tre.)totem including trash receptacles, free- standing ballards, Potted etc plants, hal l be eutilized and for it . he shopping center snd shall be designed to be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs !slrai� be submitted for Planning - pivision r iew and approval prior to issuance of building permits. (19) The site shall be develoW. and maintained in accordance with the approved site plan which " "kpcludes architecture elevations„ exterior D Materials and colors., lance aping find rorading PLANA(TN+R COM�i�tt'"�,��lT'IY�N N€3. 'o- CtlNDiTit�N�,i. USE 'PBR�t�I' B�1•3:B - vs, November 10,:1987 �1!'l4FEST n Ftge S . , on file with the Planning Division, the conditidns contained herein and Pavelopmeat Code regulations, Sn ineeria q Division g i1? Flood protectien 'aeasurgs and necessary easements shall be provide as described in the preliminary flood report and as may be required by final flood report to include, but not limited to, a!, catch basin and storm drain sys", flood walls and road driveways. (2) The 'existing overhoad utilities (telecommtnicat ons and e1'e,- trica1') on the project side . of Hellman Avenae ° = „c'n be ndergmundeu along the entire project frontage extending to tt7e - first pole south of the project (611 poles along the project frontages E shall be kvoved) prior to public improvemen` F acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. , The developer may request a reimbuf0maht agrement to recover one -half of the Cii�y adopted cost f0 ,undergrounding from future development and /oi- Tedevelopment av it occurs on the,opposite side of the street, Cam) "Nu parking any time” pones shall be provided along FootKli Boulevard and-Hellman Avenue to t� the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 6.The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY. )i Larry T. MUM, a rman ATTEST: Brad u T wr, Deputy ecre Lary it i n0 t Pae - ry I,' Brad Buller,; Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City, of Rancho CucaQOnga, do hereby - certify that the foregoing Resolutlow was duly and regularly introduced, .pused.,�� and adapted by the,P7amm�g Coseaissian of the City of Rancho Cucaa�or: a> at a regular sheeting of the Planning Commission held - " on the loth do y of November, 1987, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: a. NOES: COFQ9ISSF,ANERS:,. ABSENT: COMISSIONERSz a- i C, P r 0 _ Iq �w oOnYINO ^u yV��Ly. qN (LJC6Gi4V ±N«31vT Li1V �L q` r�Cp payY �W CN .,. OI 10�OL' tq•R� •�C�A1 RN ^COY �a L�p 11 N n< C g yp y uc W Wn�e'�N.11af gJYY :PV S�V2-6 ��Cyp.0. 9w. ii99 .aJ�4p M °- bV +i CCCCLLV"`1III •c ii Cr CC?��� `4Y� Cp °'i0 Nq�.pL �l aC Nay slit sgacg -m- as h � �� $ y SY �M$ wn w NYC VIE P-Dj Y ^�oLa�"w u'N .�'s^Y.�•+'�d''- nY'�wa Cuv vj d Yr�T�. rg >'q nY N�c� >'° •Yaa .+ 5 ui°' $T, iXe «X�inN��n$a ;4 uY MHz y y Nq 8r Ye M c 5 V ` �0�1 � E g vp � y ;n � ep ■p � qn C� « W _QNp aV Y y> �'.NMOAL 5.Yo r qNa M y W. �� M1i rLp.. c iuC qq.�O CAOCy�N¢1� 6'M a �, N4 ■N ^p ��L CH gM N y 61 Qq i J�31 N s. y E r 1 YQr O > > •� O�� =YG� C nl CC r Y O d C yq� �VYC GaY� ) �L�L MMY 'pO +7 y�11 0 W < \, `p Y.9 o> FNt G.NNa YYVM� rruIrr) 0,'N ^uyj iiV Otd � �aY{1 �C VM tl NY Z. M pS1T!OY ye C �Hqp �AK ww'Y" �N n�Y MY � MC 9- LQw`C� hiiiy'G@ ��W 1f ,��Y Y6rrCCw~6� .O�OC �CC fW Yw� n ..y �D-': Av � q��� �j =P� LY9TW ,�y �N4 Y�( +���L Y•�CM.. � N� ~��I »Ltl �. <pi N L �M�� YdiYO"C��� �.N 6 »RCC OfY� LNy L pi��C M VS 'U" 1UeOCL L, T' .,Oppw",°a" , 4gNN ^ q t Y L . p N Y �NV Np : O �ii � v : p$O a i's �4.'q I aG NY igyJ l .�e . • ±6'Ya€ 11 It 1 3 $G1 "-o- ft _12v 1 O _5q , 41 N ` asg W lM I G Y 5 G a - �w.� = 0• .Yi. aNc9 � m G M E - a v 6 O <N _d yyi c G °JI i�}c+ , wY �+L i.GY-rW NL ye a�w TLtO0 A Y•. L �L + 21 LLL 5 LM�1' Y V ^ qi�Y5.'•7L Y0) � .Y v N yOY }��'p, .. Opfl,G•. o •`n � _1iL .g` MIZZ24 YaM � L C 4E . s ry _ w CY =V p pp f L1 4 $;N S�" ss °4 e/OOW. �N c Cp � VfG U; ti C N Rf� Yf t ! ! V , A;543 �. ^y�9 F ffC ft4^ L w tli� O C'. 1°yY Y 4 6 N` C Y qG N~ y'�!M k Y ` w OM b- ear C,9 b.61 G X4I.!Li 41 M1i ycN V1l�Aw. A _nn V. CP' A � C �a W O 4/� yy� 44�tl y�YS A ��,,, ■ u Y �NS1 i! g M N^ G� N A VFY #MV NT C it a(�lkla a � $gp := r�. yt�s V. rsmgEj Mi.M CO �° ��M 4a1�• Sr- 21 raj as moo W O 1-2,o Vip t]i^ xSt$ w /f C�.9 HIC NN 4� f`•N� ° �tlC ivQlV �p f� �C1~``gOO�P� rCM..Y Mba 1.+�~ OCG Fm aO.na ya M�}�j} Su V `y LyyA "V �p QG �tN ba 40..0 y'°r =' V�yQ p'jQl1 sy�N N. 4Yg Yfyu'w Nyi ;1P L'y YNy Phi �O�NRW �a�Y7N N N Y Y 9 g 1 E y ij V y J �}o'c Y {1- �Y Y Y Y. M yO� L O Q V Lv1 Y. 4ap ° SO 6 Yy «x.aM9 � YI. N FY i�GYif+Q > r T WY 4 gYO G "y L e "SI a G Qy1H t0.fQI t d.NN>. .wMGYwY 4 O{>C� 1 ~9O Gp Qp q ~ E 1 N LJ pp ryy� f AO�.6 ma .Oy n G GG4CM +�N #Yp+ w ..Sp. �u0 Y hN x w C O V4 NA N N E O V G V Y w x f�W VVN 9Lp 3�Y ��yylq p. VIMV arpd V rN `.yA �OUL NVM qL °'r �� vV rWYyn ��f%Y�•�oyE C� C7 #��tMY ^�Ta C qSe� YO �N9 'Ny Y{A��NRpm #£d s�N O'$. qp =� uy OQi$9tLgvg� OIY �iw fd�''Pr C vy C f y q o-1 q N8 yN t�rt ire. y1 ►• ii ,.Gµ.,K � C L C +. Y •. G L L ° N 6~rI y� 6F i[ p N ! �p G � ■I L# +�N L YAVgV C.Nyq _G� yCyr M t NDLL ty� =a's f4.ML L e44tL R� YN� yr�N ^ C ��yyV Or VL MSC �6 q- � (t 1°+CCn 9.�n■ �I Cy.w+ �i aL QLQ i�G/r 4� C.q. P �y O * O L� QOM Y�•0'y�° I�■ppp � 3 G. ^ b e6 � y S as C 0 . C L�# # �^ Y V�O � ■U N � 9� L V�� .O` � #� tNq�� s 9 > rSq *' •'- a� Y µ .� .=40T ate. �+�^ 'Gyu apg arJ gr t l> CC O A 3 ■ 4 N V g q M q y # _V � 4 V C� V O V i q 0 #� O f`V{ c qn.+ w yu�i Nui w_r •aya in" c.. Y�`a ^. °pa #.'3� pp P 4 L .c N 2 O id ` iUtN° Y �.ON 1`6 <L1 i9 LC+O N�� �OY S <H Y WG 4rtZ ✓� N r D i N N n f yy IJ f") ■rpL. G_ g yl� O� �Iv N$ yT° v�y�3C.LV Ol�C�y =UN �Ca {O�d i+ ■yG�y a ■G¢� ViKi �+.■ � Y Oi �PG1 y� i gGg 4 r E j C N wr R id W. i p`p9 J ,a to i� y Y C.r 22 1 1 $: a. �uee«, ���Yiiii �yyO oL {W�Vj }{i�CLw 1�� � DIY Y+^V� dry CL d ��P {y� •s�° v�YS�.�i.: _WAN �"cYi��+ ao'�p�i` » �` $ 0 0 G Q t O d M r, v--z' 1 C +Yw �xs »TL>�Tw q.�S Aq^ +uy L.. u ^> ��pr GVWY` Y6rL Y. �CY+ g1.1�YO pYd�� E1 «O pp aLpy Ar ♦ Y^ O v �R � r��•pw LY7 �yMppµ� • ��j Y. � �..G- p j+p Y o$Y3 <S Y>2 �tG +_VaA CLt' w i Yw� N T »C.M r yy °�y�y.. Q'�p9 � ��Y>d dq A r u�CC ttY e zp N mu 7 y in o ,C_N r L G ~ 8 •�^ u Oa Y Y o 4 0 F4Vd � £6 aLWN F. i6� S`as Eli +40 N 6Y� PE 13 b \h 1 a X +�waA y +� �L ��jj 4Ky wCVC dM L0 M. r�yi :Y Y4YI CAC C4�r 4 std �CC �QLL Y Y�• = 1".� MYC w «r_T W7G p LtY...C. d w i �t Ss ° § Ada: + u t yt T� o M$�yyy -M C Y Y M I w yy L eeA L3 Ny� «pp N OA xC. �VC 1fdL ,yd, »` ' i r Ly yf » ►" p�°5 �� N °a vii °$"aC I»Q}R� ■Cd � ,� pp4 �V6 �l.O ��VV L T °A .CN d> apN+> V^q,� �.�� �Y ^y ~0t1y�= C RL LQI �L NaCG �{ d » L! it` OII. C C i i N Y O O N N^ .�MMJ4 � N - t•^1�lIgJ�4 �1 f3��8G � CK�ttO N��i �p d3 Yr tom^ CjO rry� MC _M Tc EM V O+ +� Le 01�ig � OC� S �9g 1gcVy� �xAjq'• yd LA.� n d 7 �1 O d Y t T Y L rte. C r d G d ri M S t Y Lc ^ L O Ace L _ 6 Mat. (+T'f iJ}` N 2 .. JI. �+.. t Ati + °.C. CKA SH _ AI E2 _,all Ij C4 \I E Ll- 90gM� ynLL4B Y+ N Y ■ Y � _fib � Y OV e i3 tp 4 § CO) C v O OVt uu x -am .YYS T •- s`++ V ` .pN. 5` �' 3 N g p. N ^C ii +etCZ4 L�My oY3 L .�'a �YAT Ybf u eui &a .r'1. eu,z f9Y ` +aofC 9.2 ar �Y « �oR o I - c azi Yy s~i c ha or fS o o�o oaf o SM .{���G_V NO v1 �pyY �e�� Yfit �L g e M C Y w^ Jl ~ iZ� C �~• 1P Q p Y Y G v C 'o `e`COigil, P 11' _ i'.EN. 8O O� s a'CS ,`Yti4 a vi Z 4 �i 40TP quewry ; Cy ��[� cM« ~ ~' .V a.4 q L + uYY +b 44 ' O =N Mew Ly�uOf.Ff. �i,j OgL01t9 OlYI a � � 'L�V YL4 L� 4.� +Y 40 na V11� Y ^N Y �4O ` YM L^. g1f4 MS V1 yl�y� i jY� !app 0 . Cpy ° �.�St LYO �fy � N t V y C O iY O MM� w N V O 2 M Est i Cy 6 y N fh i• Yf W A W Y avc —a� o�Y a £'Lg ~ r Lo.. .N 7.1 Y�'8 8g '6 FS ,I,x.i ej �C ^C TL p NI+V uff�_� Yi. ,C +YN^'� yt �Y4N 0� Y~ �� py�y y_^ ZA,y Ea 9 �Ga cq ^YN`C 6 u tYiN7 �oY�q� N Yp`^ t —F-i tv y.w yr Y+CNH pS *N$t.A; e.°N'?G6O:ewCwYOY.f 3 Y� Jipp1'~ 1YL .lb )1 t GG y CL W YVw ~" ~M «+ 1 w�iyY'b i u3 G YO. +� ~ Na F a�S go-- ig'o� p''.. 2, _!i a0 ti O� r�M N� WNN� N LL 3 _ t C ` o � agp � + s '+ ` ~ t? 1. of N « y 6 C �O ~ O V O� -.as- 4.91c V +>� O a M u,g °f. v I. ^i l b. N ' > �I $ °car «ueu .o a ~q }w 41 i ti'o I>e Z3333 �$vvye N y .CCY is y•.~ ' ` Q�1^ lT¢¢ 82 Y� L gyJ N+ CC L �� .°■- Tido +' �oO agy Qti !_3 g M D.i O�N+ it Toc �� O M «= � �L MtpT gel It. r L N V Y +yLO A O.a YY p ■,+� V M�pp 3i >Y �+.5� -a i1N rE2 H v;yZ. p$�� 4 V Lif '�yi,�N L � LN>� Yi M '"avY 4'.+ Zse x5 «y LcCo.« 5Ng v v v�u3Ji^ .�vws iVii.- i ENV Ax N 1.1 ♦ G ^ Nf raj !� � � I tCf t 2c w A Y 3 R w M O Y w N O�ti N � � Gi} So�i� FY wW �y r r : � Y y Y s $ O e L L1 ■� 2 4 C V Y �ma NG ig- T Six tltltlOOpLL� G +P C SLyO�Ll 6 F N 4 W 1 oM -CiY ! 6N Y ■ •S Yx1 =w � � wVw•• �G Q g � y Ji _ � N� s G N EMS g� a Y L N N N V« N Z v yY y M i R4L O N` ■■Cy jO R S N� � =C N ��« « � ` N � r Or'SO ( ■G IZ ^NYY �N%,1 t c S N m nt ai 3 . :5o L LOw y � q MCN � Li° NY o = p(1 1�. m� IT Y C ; {cC� y V$, L J.'. '•• �. •. ` p ^,. �W .ae SF GCY C r �YE� R� t.Q ^C+ Cp Ln. 6sR ��q �Ytltl �'PYt N6 YO�GYp Y«0«gi w !� Y + ^ Y P M L i ye � yQN � L � YMYfJ H` (dC ■fir{. OM q V � a MW Y R. w lzq CL OO YC « y� O La r VN OO' R YYL �Owt%M Y'• {{.� V1V m yL, x.0 Re .� CvY !bi a i C Gam• X L L yy Y Y WMNLLfi,'. •MI �yy =6 .mn t yP �tl K' L qry p i �V �y�.. I i � I .�. � cz I A Y 3 R w M O Y w N O�ti N � � Gi} So�i� FY wW �y r r : � Y y Y s $ O e L L1 ■� 2 4 C V Y �ma NG .OEM T Six tltltlOOpLL� G +P C SLyO�Ll 6 F N 4 W 1 oM -CiY ! 6N Y ■ •S Yx1 =w � � wVw•• �G Q g � y Ji _ � N� s G N EMS g� a Y L N N N V« N Z v yY y M i R4L O N` ■■Cy jO R S N� � =C N ��« « � ` N � r Or'SO ( ■G �LfC ^NYY �N%,1 t c S N m Qt nt A Y 3 R w M O Y w N O�ti N � � Gi} So�i� FY _ O Y .-w I « �Y LuC Rp g�E� +'CCS co wv �ma �N po�Y L A T « tltltlOOpLL� G +P C SLyO�Ll 6 F N 4 W 1 oM -CiY ! 6N I w V � p t bY• ~ w M O Y w N O�ti N � � Gi} �� LuC Rp g�E� NLG�� �ma y ci�71 vY« =� Vy Y ■ g � y Ji _ � N� s G N a� A N M i R4L {4L6 ONe��y�� wT p6 p�� file p ■'tl��CC POYLP Yy♦ LMYYyL '�N "Y Or'SO yL�W1 �LfC ^NYY �N%,1 N4W Nr� YLYa ! GW �, IS {Gtr e W W a4 4 JS VL 4 G; CO Y .b C - M i.. •i 10 Ulf Y La i�VaiY C7O� Lww L N 1 G C O N L yo���ru� � 4M4 M,GL �OBit iZ eYi Q' N a = tai: R MY C�V, CpYLaN yyY V► N &�$ YY C VyVy I `Y S >>1 i� N� i� K W 6 r K i 6 N � ��J ► K p, �:r Y L N o -mot C p > L �I ► yC a� v ,Kq wiL i � m► L YY �4yyy Y r Y L �G� b Jw� L u i bw p Y sQ +'f M► Y"b GAY ^C> = C � Y wra► w.,,G„ rev►. � �w par lY�v � N L Oa�Y N> ua b ri a4 4 JS VL 4 G; CO Y .b C - M i.. •i 10 Ulf Y La i�VaiY C7O� Lww L N 1 G C O N L yo���ru� � 4M4 M,GL �OBit iZ eYi Q' N a = tai: R MY C�V, CpYLaN yyY V► N &�$ YY C VyVy I `Y S >>1 i� N� i� K W 6 r K i 6 N � ��J ► K p, �:r Y L N o -mot r I i 1 c a4 4 JS VL 4 G; CO Y .b C - M i.. •i 10 Ulf Y La i�VaiY C7O� Lww L N 1 G C O N L yo���ru� � 4M4 M,GL �OBit iZ eYi Q' N a = tai: R MY C�V, CpYLaN yyY V► N &�$ YY C VyVy I `Y S >>1 i� N� i� K W 6 r K i 6 N � ��J ► K p, �:r Y L N o -mot � I L YY i +'f M► Y"b GAY ^C> = C � Y wra► A YYy L �w a3 it SLY y�C tJ0 , S Q V C uT t^Yi L'7 a'a�Yr7 ri A. � r4' .�Y y; Y ti ti N q �� Yr L K � ►yy M � Y s+ r.dt1� iOtL ��-0 a CITY OF RANCHO CUCi MONGA STAFF REPORT Date: November 10, 1987 To: Planning Commission From: Dave Leonard, Park Project CaordinatorG—> Subject: Request for consideration Private Open space Credit for DR84 -22 LynnHaven ;BACKGROUND: Application has beef► made by D.L. Ring Associates (Exhibit A) for Lan Bentsen's, LynnHaven Development. Under provisions of section 16.32.030 of the Cities Municipal Code, Ordinance 105 -C allows ,I'd-radit for up to 50% against Park Development Fees (Exhibit B). This is based on consideration of Private Open Spade Development meeting certain basic recreation needs within the community. LynnHaven is located east of Haver Avenue, between Lemon and Highland Avenues. Built on 15.37 acres, the 316 rental condominiums yield 20.58 units per 'acre. The applicant requests consideration of 3.1 acres of private open space as identified in Exhibit "C" in meeting the minimum three acres required under the Ordinance:. Also being evaluateO -are three pools, one childrens play area, one game court area various buildi..lgs and areas for picnicki iig. The application was reviewed—by the Park and Recreation Commission on OctoY.sr 20, 19" The commission feel= the application is nr::. in kee* tg with the intent of the Ordinance. First, -the 3.1 ao,es identified include numerous areas that are.pedestrial circulation corridors and not as the Ordinance requires "... adaptable for Park and Recreation purpose." Second, two Of the Recreation Elements are represented, but not functioning as proposed. The Recreation buildings are laundry rooms and rental offices. Additionally, the site has no permanent picnicking facilities that would characteristically includes Inarbecues, shade shelters, tables, etc. Lacking these elements, the development does not meet the Ordinance minimum requirements of four recreation elements. Based on the above, the Park and Recreation Commission feels the development does not qualify under the j;' Ordinance requirement. ITEM P ,r V LynnHaven Credit for Private open space { November 10, 1987 j Page 2 0 • RECt)�A IOKL Tha Pang recommends that the Planning and 'Pecreation Commission deny the Commission request for credit for Private open Space on the LynnHaven Development. t s DL:bs _ G 0 • 1+1� � rf-00 associates • planners OCT 1. Uy of Rantft Neamonga The Rancho Cucamonga planning Commission The Rancho Cucamonga Park Development Commission attention: Mr-Dave Leonard, Park Project Coordinator Community Seryicen Departmept 9320 Baseline Road, P.O. Boat 807 Rancho Cucamonga California 91730 1 October 1987 page 1, of to re: Request for consideration, Private open Space Credit Per Ordinance No. lo5 -c Ladies and Gentlemen: Please accept this request for cor. `."Ieration of Private >open Space Credit, per the requirements of Ordinance 105 -C. I am making this request on behalf of Lan Bentsen Interests for their development caZsed Lynnehaven, looated at Haven and Highland Avenues. Becalase of the significant open space and installation of a significant amount of active recreational facilities and equipment proviled, we hereby request a 50% credit toward the parkland fees. Ordinance 103-c, provides that several findings must be made by the planning Commission. For your evaluation I have noted below each finding which must be made along with our str..ement of hone this requirement has been met: Req irement: (l) That Yard, court areas, setbacks, and other areas required to be maintained by the Zoning ai'd Building provisions csf this Code shall not be included in the computation of private open space. Suggested Finding: The Lynnehaven development contains a total Open Space Area of 6.95 acres. The Gross site area of is acres rESUlts in a total Of 46.33* open space. The Zoning ordinance requires e minimum of 3 acres of open space to achieve credit. This project contains 5.6Q acres of open space not otherwise excluded by setback lines. within that area is 3.1 acres of qualifying open space, which is called out on the large exhibit provideti. This development, therefore, meets the minimum standard set by the council. Exhibit "A" A California Corporation Q Land Plar ling and Design ❑ Environmental Analysis 10722 Arrow Route, Suite 616, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (714) 987.7077 Park Fees credit Request Lan Bentsen interests Page 2 11 Requirerr„int: (2) That the private ownership and maintenance of the open sps:ce iw adequately provided for by written agreenunt'. (3) That the use of the private open space is restricted for park and recreational purposes by recorded covenants Which run with the land -in favor of existing and future owners of property within the subdivision and which cannot be changed without council approval. Suggested Finding: The Lynnehaven Development was submitted and approved as a condominium. As such the covenants, codes, and restrictions were submitted to and approved by the council as a part of the original, approval. They are now in - force. in addition, the State regulates what Land and areas 'gay be used for, along with requirements for maintenance long into the future as a part of the condomindum fee structure. This guarantees not only the use, but also the maintenance (and replacement) of community facilities. Requirement: (4) That th4, Proposed private (common) ,open space is reasonably a�y4table for use for: park',.,snd recreational purposes, taking into consideration such factors as size, shape, topography, geology, access# arad location of private (common) open apace. Suggested Finding: The open spaces within the Lynnehaven development are established as essentially separate areas of different character linked by walkways with an overall waterscape theme. There are no very large ezcpsnses of clear open space nor use (for example) as a soccer field. -The open spaces are more useful for passive- recreational purposes. For active recreational needs there are -a significant numbsr of recreational features and facilities normally found in public parks. These facilities are listed below: Total Open Space: 6.95 Acres Qualifying Open Space: 3.1 Acres Swi —ing Pools: 3 each Cbildren Vadii'.g Pools: _ 2 each Spas: 3 each Lanndscaoed Ponds: 4 each Fountais-ts: 6 each Tennis Courts: 1 arch Basketball Courts: 2 each Tot Lots with- Bquipaent.- I each Clubhouse: each Laundry Building /Cabana 2 each Park Fees Cruet Request Lan Bentsen Interests Page 3 O If Nevarement.- /(5) "That the ,,facilitics proposed for - the open space are in substantial accordance with the provisions of the ROOT-Tation and Parks 110MMt Of the General Plan :for the City and ars.appxvs7od by tha planning, Ccx&kission. )y Requirement: (6) ftst the 1MInIMM Open SPM.-Lj 3S6r 'Which:L credit will be considered is three acres and PX'-Ovldes a minimum Of Z*= Of the 0103"Ats, listed belcnr, or a cOMbination Of such ,md other recreational inprovesents that will vast the specific recreation park needs of the Future residents of the area: Criteria Lint: A. Children►s May Apparatus (I required) (I provided) B. Family Aarloocue picnip,Irequired) area tl required) (0 provided*) C. Game Court Area (I required) (2.provided) D. SWIM Pool with adjacent' Deck and ancillary faciliL -Jos tj' rocr .-J. provided) ided) Z- Recreation Building re I L ided) Total Requireients: (4 of 4i'ove) (9 provided) *The development is a condominium. Occupi�Iqts are expected to provide ,Heir own bar-b-que�- - ' grills supplies. The "area" is J� VIAd, but there are no pe=a aria, Lhent facilities installed. Suggested Finding,- The Recreation Element of the Genera, plan is found primarily on pages 100-114 of the General We believe the required finding above can easil,p be jqpt. The Lynnehaven development provides more than :.wise the facilities othorwis& required to meet the minimum reimbursement creditts. This development provides for active recreation nattda of the residents throvic .Th the provision ot a, privatli tennis court, a private basketball/ vollyball court, three swimming pooli, Three spas, tw-'- children's wading pools, a tot lot Vi,"h play equipment, and a community building, which also ircludes complete clubhouse /kitchen, facilities. In addition to the active recreational'; facilities the developer has L=dscapod the site u3ing all water element (ponds,, fountain3, and streams) to provide fcr additional passive recreational ploasur*! of the residents. 10-s", Park Fees `= radii w Lan Berrtsan me it Page 4 7 - Aft I i The Following Exhibits ire �u ;� pitted with n i !h this letter: 2. Rendered Sita Plans the approved T awdscape Plan. sot is composed of %oar (4) inaunted, co).rezed Pr::IAt,; at a scale of 111-201. Plant materials are" shdvJ ate _pure spread and are,, color coded. Selected Ahotogr'aph, of the" oven sparse$, recreaional facilities and community buildings are mounted on these prints ' with symbols designating locatiobs on the site plans. 2. Site,, Plan shouting 1 siza, Iocat I or, and areas of the open Y, spaces proposed for . � ts. On these drawings, the community buildings,' are also ',,;.G isd out, as are the other recreational facilities. ,This exhibit consists `of one. large print (four prints splice!i together) . �., 3. Rendered Details Drafitings showing Sal et'jd ��iails c,f the pools, fount-,�in azea:�v open space I&ndscapzn,,- - ;end selected facilities. Set is.' composed of three (3) mounted, colored prints. �rhotographs are mounted': on, these drawings to further illust: rat a thess amenities. [. 4. Floorplans and Elevations (three (3) sheet--) of the three (3) E. community buildings. :5. Thre$ wet "s' of Floorplans and Elevations of the three" (3) Community ruildings construCEed fgkr this 3ewelopme +t. 6. One 81 x lip transparency of the large print, as reques?ed. 7. A Detail listing of the recreational. elements. I\ t 1,y Park Fees Credit Request,, Lan Bentsen Interests Page 5 •t Detail listing of the recreation elements. As requested these :laments are set out below: :,, 1) Main Community Building % �Clubhouse Area: 1,496 sq. ft, Rooms: Kitchen, Office, Meeting Room, Walk -in C1G�set /Storage, Mail Room, Restrooms(2). Fetrn Lure: 1 white sectional couch 1 coffee table with squax;e glass top I, white octagonal pedestal table with round glass top 11 white rectangular pedestal table with glass top 2 rectangular desks 1 executive desk 3 matched desk chait -set 2 matching upholsterer chairs 1 credenza 41, matching chairs/ seat cushions, padi4 1 16G1, sculpture 3 6' tall silk potted plants 3 2011 tall silk potted plants Equipment: 2 Brass ceiling Fans 2 telephones 1 whirlpool microwave oven /l whirlpool refrigerator 1 whirlpool electric oven` 1 kitchen sink 1 sharp calculator 1 Panasonic typewriter 1 lamp I- 1 wall sculpture 1 community wall map ' framed pi sture 4 1 v-. .riding machine 2) Cabana Building/ Laundry Area: 783 square feet Rooms: Storage Room, Restroomt: (2), Laundry Rooms Furaiture: 1 table Equipment: 1 vending machine 5 wqs) -'. ' machines 6 d,,ers PaLk Fees Credit Request t ,an Bentsen.lnterests Page 6 in 3) Laundry Building Area: 420 sq. ft. Rooms: Laundry Room. Furniture: 1 Table Equipment: 2 vending machines 11 washing machines 5 Dryers 4) Pool EquipmenT/Restroorr. Building Area: 336 sq. ft. Rooms: Pool Equipment Storage, RestrOOMS,(2) Equipment: Pool Equipment Pa:•ed Patio /Picnic Area: 1,186 sq. ft. (%z9lusive of Pool) 5) Pool Equipment /Cart Storage .Area: 300 sq.ft. Rooms: Cart Storage, Pool Equipment Equipment: Pool Equipment 6) Tot Lot Area: 40' x 601 - 2,400 s4_ ft. Fenced Perimeter for child control Equipment: Timber Playsystems, Type TR /228 with `tire Swing (Mfr. Brochure reproduced attached) 7) Swimming Pools Clubhouse Pools (SWP 31 swimming Pool. 31' x 451 39,450 gallon cap. Spa Pool 9' dia. 1,244 gallon cap. Pool Furniture: 8 Pool /Picnic Tables 8 Umbrellas 32 chairs for Tables 15 lounge chairs 8 planters Tennis Court Pool (SWP 1) Swim. ing P:,ol 41' x 45' 23,065 gallon cap. Family Area Pools: (SWP 2) Swimming Pool 20' x 32, 14,963 gallon cap. Toddler Wading Pool lo' x 10, 151 gallon cap. BaLy Pool 10, x lot 151 gallon cap. S. Tennis Court Regulation Doubles Size Tennis Court Perimeter Fencing Night Lighting 4� E---" 5i Park Fees Credit Request Lan Bentsen Interests Page 7 9. Basketball Court`/Vollyball Court Paved 30f x 60f Two (2) regulation height basketball backstops rA hoops 10. Fountains A Total of Six (6) fOuntaf-'Is have been installed b 1. Ponds A Total of four (4) ponds havr-,btien constructed. P Pond I (PHD 1) 201 x 344 I-J Pond 2 (PND,2) 107t x 7.141 (varies) with rapids Pond 3 (Pft 3) 1091 X 10-331 -(varies) with rapids a fovztain Pond 4 (PND 4) 311 x 161 with three (3) fountains 12. Open Opace Areas Area: of Total: Total Site Space: 15.00 acres 100-% Total open Space: 6.95 acres 46.33% Qualifying Open Space; 3.1 acres 20.66-1 The developpr has worked hard to develop an exemplary residential area with above average recreational and open space facilities. This extra, effort has cost a docuni nted total Of $901,992.51 for the landscaping end recreational facilities. Therefore, On behalf of Lan Bentsen, lnterp-Stl> I am respectfully requesting your consideration and appxoval of a request for 5Q-1 credit of the park fees for'this project. -Few, if any, outer developments• within the city will meet the level of facilities found hers. This development does not merely meet the City's recreation minimums. The development exceeds them significantly. For this reason I believe the 50* credit should be granted to thi- applicant. RespectfU111 S mitted, Donald G. King, PhD President Charter Member: har i merican Institute of Certified Planners Charter Member. American Planning xtsociation Associate Member. American Institute of Architects ° -- 16.32.010 -- 16.32.020 A. The subdivision as shown on the °tentative tract map has the potential for two,hundred dwelling units or more if developed to the maximum capacity sh&n on the adopted general plan or contains one hundred acres or mare; and, B. The council has previously found that transit services are, or will within a reasonable time-be available to such subdivision. (Ord. 28 -B 51.608, 1981). Chapter 16.32 PAPX AND RECREATIONAL LAND Sections: 1:5.32.010.-Intent and general provisions. 16,32.020 Requirements. 16.32.030 Procedure. 16.32.040 Exemptions. 16- 32.010 Intent and general provisions, The intent of this chapter is to provide; for the development o£ pare ai.G' recreational facilities throxr, ,ih subdivision regulations, in an area where the need for residential use, shall, as a con- V dition to the approval of a tentative map, parcel map, planneq, community, land development or real estate development, dedi- cate lands or pay fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, for neighborhood and community park or recreational purposes•, Land to satisfy dedication requirements shall be conveyed to - }v at the Lime of recordation of the final map or parcel map. _In lieu fees shall be paid to the city prior to the issuance of build ng permits. (Ord. 105 -B §1, 1982: Ord. 1015.51, 1980). 16.32.020 Reauirements. Land or fees required under this r:.ccrion shall a conveyed Or paid directly to the city. The city in accepting such lard or funds shall develop the land or use the funds as provided in -,,his section: A. Use of Land and Fees. The land, fees, or combination thereof are to be used Only for the purpose o£ providing park or recreational facilities which w111, reasonably serve or benefit future residents of such subdivision. B. Establishment and Development Ti-me. Any fees collected under this chapter shall be committed within five years after the payment of such fees or the issuance of build- ing permits an one -half of the lots created by the subdivision, whichever occurs later. if such fees are not committed,- they shall be distributed and paid to the then record owners of the subdivision in the same proportion that the size of their lot bears to the total area of all lots within the subdivision. (Rancho Cucamonga 5/83) 45 -18 Exhibit "B" 0 0 1. 11 i 16.32.020 C. Land Disposition. In the event that opaortunities for better recreation facilities than those provided by the dedication materialize, the land so dedicated may be sold with the proceeds therefrom being used for suitably park and recreation facilities which serve the neighborhood in which that subdivision is located. D. Only the payment­:)f,rtes shall �e required in sub- divisions of less than fifty lots unless � ;geed otherwise by the city council and the subdivider. E. Standards for Dedication. The araount or land to ba; dedicated or the fees to be paid shall bear a reasonable relationship to th e use of benefits of the park and recreation facilities by the future residents of the subdivision. The city„ council establishes a ratio of fivet, park acres to dne : thousand population, in ,:cordance with the adopted Park and Recreation Element of the city's general plan.' F. Amount of Part Fees Required. When the requirements of this code are complied with on the basis of providing park fees, the minimum amount of fees to be paid shall be computed by using the following formula: FORMULA: NSP (LTD) ,000 minimum fee 1 WHERE: N = number of proposed dwelling anits. S - planned park acreage per 1,000 population. P = population per dwelling unit on a scale and density set by the responsible public agency. L fair market value of parkland per acre is represented by the land being subdivided. D = average cost per acre to develop park as determined by the public agency. G. Amount of Land Required. Whenever the requirements Of this section are complied with on the basi�L,of providing park land, the minimum amount of land required shall be the amount which could be purchasedj;with the fees computed in subsection F of this section. _ H. Park and Recreational Use Land Fair Market Value. The fair market value shall be determined at. the time of recordation of the parcel map or final man in accordance with the following criteria: 1. The fair market value as determined by the city council: or, 2. If the subdivider objects to such evaluation he may, at his own expense, obtain an appraisal of th2'pi,�perty by a qualified real estate appraiser from the general area approved by the city, which appraisal may be accepted by the city council if found reasonable. I. Combination of Park Land and Fees Required. When a combination of land dedication and in -lieu tees are 246 -19 (Rancho Cucamonga 5!83) 'I y �I 16,32.030 required as a condition of approval, the fair market value t`f the land to be dedicated, as determined pursuant to subsection H of this section, and the in -lieu fees., as computefT uiOter subsection F of this section, shall, be of an equal val';e to provision of subsection F of this section to the entire subd;vision or planned community. i J. Notwithstanding any ether provisions in thi3" chapter to thO,contrary, for tentative maps and parcel maps approved or eorAitionally approved after December 31, 1982, the amount'bf land dedicated or�fees paid shall be based upon the resi.den.,ial density, which shall be determined on the basis of the aomroved or conditionally approved tentative map or parcel mtLp and the average household size and sbr, l be the Proportionate amount necessary to provide three acres of park area-per one thousand persons residing within such subdi- vision. For the purposes of applying the formula found in subsection F of this section to such subdivisions, S equals three and P shall be the average size of each ClfSS of house hold within such subdivision. T£ any such subdivision con- tains more than one class of household,,a separate compu- tation using the formula in subsection r of this section shall he made for each class of househol4l within such sub- division and the minimum rtis for the separate calculations shall be added together to determine the min:.•nuts fee for the subdivision as a whole for the purpose of determining dedi- cation requirements. (Ord. 105 -B 52, 1982; Ord. 105 52, 1980). 16.32.030 Procedure. The requirements of this chapter shall be met concurrent to the approval of the final parcel map, final subdivision map, or the planned community, or prior to issuance of building permits, by the provision of park land in whole or in part, the payment of a park fee, or by a combination of both as required by the city council: A. City Option. At the time of filing tentative tract trap or a minor subdivision plat for approval, the city shall determine whether dedication of property for park and recreational purposes or in -lieu of fees are necessary. If _ the city desires dedication, the area shall be designated on the tentative tract map when submitted. B. Ac--.;.on of City. At the time of the tentative tract man approval, tiie planning commission shall determine as part of such approval, whether to require a dedication of land within the subdivision, payment of a f-- in 1,44 I:reo = -, or a combination of both. C. Prerequisites for Approval of Final Map. Where dedicat on is offered and accepted It shall be accomplished in acco dance with the provisions' 'of the SubW vision Map Act. W,,nere fees are required the` -;game shall be deposited with the city► prior to the issuance of biuildinq permits. (Rancho Cucamonga 5183) 246 -20 11 I-] ��� 9 16. 32.030 D- Determination. The planning commission 'shall de- termite whether Ip to require land dedication, require payment of a fee in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, by can - sideration of the following: r 1. Recreational. element of the general plan; and 2. Topography, qeoogy, access and location of land in the subdivision availaae for dedication; and 3. Size and shape of the subdivision and land available for subdivision. = E. Park and Recreational Use Land -- Credit for private Open Space. Where private ;= open space for park and recrea -, tional purposes is provided in a proposed subdividion, and such space is to be privately awned and maintained by the future residents of the 'subdivision, such areas may be s credited - ag4inst not more than fifty percent ' of the- require- ment of di dication and development for ;; ;rk and r4tteation 'a- §, purposes, � set forth in this section, "or the pAiy e_nt of €-es in lieu thereof, as set forth herein, provided the planning commission finds it is in the public interest :o do so, and that the fallowing standards are net: 1. That yards, court areas, setbacks and other open areas required to be maintained by the zoning �.` and building provisions of the this code shall not be include the ,in computation of such private open space; and ­z=- Z. That the private ownership and maintenance of the open space is adequately provided for by written agree- `,, went; and 3. That the use of the private aspen space is re- 3tricted for park and recreational purposes by recorded covenants which run with the land in favor of the existing and future owners of property within the subdivision and which cannot be defeated or eliminated without the consent of the council; and 4. That the proposed private open space is rea- sonably adaptable for us: for park and recreational pur- poses, taking into cons:- deration such factC'rs as size, shape, topography, geology, access and location of the pri- vate open spice land; and 5. That facilities proposed for the oen space are in substantial accordance with the provisions -of the rec- reat;on and parks element of the general plan for the city and are approved by the planning commission; and 6. That the minimum open space for which credit will be considered is three acres and provides a mini_ -,,- of four of the elements listed below, or a combination of such, and other recreational improvements that will meet the spf - cific recreation park needs of the future residents of t,t area: Criteria List. a. CBildren's play apparatus; b. Family barbecue picnic area; c. Game court area; t 246 -20a (Rancho Cucamonaa 16.32.040 r,. Swim pool with adjacent d--r-k and ancillar y facilities; e. Recreation building. The suidivider requesting consideration for pri- vate open space credit sha?1, as part of the submittal fil- ing, include: i. Written r. ;nest for such consideration by the planning commission; anr� ii. Submit detailed plans and specifications for areas and improvements within such proposed private open space. The plani"na commission shall, as an element of the review for privae even space credit, solicit comments and recommendations from the park development commission on all such applications. F. Credit for Private Open Space -- Planned Communities. Where private open space for park and recreational purposes is provided in a planned community and portions of or all such spc,ce is to be privately ;owned and maintained by the future residents of the piannei� community or publicly dedi- cated and maintained by a speciSyl assessment district, cred- it against the requirement of dr3ication for park and lec- reational purposes, as set forth'in Section 16.32.020G shall be determined through the adoption of the planned community text; provided, however, that the park standard for the planned community is the same as for any other development and that the planning commission finds it is in the public interest to do so, and that the standards for private open space, as set forth in Section 16.32.030E, are met. G. Planned developments and real estate developments as defined in Sections 11003 and 11003.1, respectively, of the Eusiness and Professions Code, shall be eligible to re- ceive a credit,,_in an amount determined by resolution of the city council, against the amount of land required to be dedicated, or the amount of the fee imposed, pursuant to this chapter, for the value of privace open space within the development which is usable for active recreational uses. This subsection shall apply only to planned developments and real estate developments for which tenative maps or parcel maps are approved or conditionally approved after December 31, 1982. The credit allowable pursuant to this subsPctioa shall, if applied for, be in lieu of any other credit; 'low- able under other provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 10. 63, 198- Ord_ 105 -A $l: 1380; Ord. 105 53, 1980). 16.32.040 Exemptions. The provisions of this chapte -. do not apply to commercial or industrial subdivisions; nor do they apply to condominium projects which consist of the subdivision of airspace in an existing apartment building which is more than five years old when no new dwelling units are added. (Ord. 105 54, 1980). Rancho Cucamonga 246 -20b 12/84) p- /y is 0 Y SOT LOT IL AREA POOL T & POR'.L T AREA AREAS FOR OPEN ASPACE LYN 1 �r�..�?"�V EN COMMUNITY ....... :.a. RECAEATIOld ELEMENTS i-s.�;�s1Cl4c CUICAM�'3NGA,. C js Exhibit "C" 1H 77 CITY OF IANCHO CUCAMO]kA F REPORT OATEi, November 10, 1987 TO: Chairman and Members of the P1,1nning commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Pla;iner BY: Ban Coleman, Senior Planner SUBJECT: MINIt-AJM UNIT SIZE/MINIM!JM LOT SIZE MARKET STUDY 1,191117 - �7 7 - ASSTRACT: The Building industry Association (BIA) and their consu ltant, Peat Marwick/Goodkin, will be uresenting the `findings and conclusions of a Market Study prepared to address the minimum unit size/lot size issue. The report contains ,'tven recommendations in response to the challenges of sman,-.7pt development and small unit development. This presentation'As provided for your information only and to provide the Commiss i� with an opportunity to ask questions of the consultant regard ,!g I the Study. No action of the Commission is necessary tonight. Thii issue will be placcd,-,on the November 25th agenda to r0nstitut� liscussion of this importafiiAssue. II. BACKGROUND: On September 17, 1986, the Director of Community`; Deve apmen presented to the City Council a slide presentation on the issue of Minimum Lot Sizes and Minimum Dwelling Unit Sizes. A,D711owing that presentation, the Council accepted the DIA's offer to fund a study of housing and marketing conditions In relation to the lot size/unit size options I presented by staff to the Council. The study was commissioned as a factual survey to provide data for tfie-' Courcil to use in the decision making process. The primary objL-ctive of the study was to ar,31yze what impact the proposed or any increase in lot size/unit size 'would have on -the housing market in Rancho Cucamonga. The Planning Commission held a workshop on Decembir 4, 1986 to review the causes, problems and a'ternatives concerning small unit/lot development' Further discussion of the issue was put on hold pending comp1t,irn -F the Market Study, ITek 0 o I ��` t ��. \, �;�- _ r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: _ RAN HO CV, ;AXONGA HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT eUIIIE%INE RECOXMtHDATIQNS Pea` Marwick /Qoodkin har- completed an enalysis of the Raacho Cucamonga pouting mar;4et. The purpose of tl�* study is to provide recousiendatio i to the City oil' 'Rancho Cucamonga regarding residential evelopment guidellwis. Specifically, we Have devsloped cone usions ai,l recolawijAd d guidelines for small -lot siriju family detach:;: development and unit size guidelines for attacked and detached housing. A. Rancho t�,ucamonga hue been among the Inland Empire's fastest growf,ag cl-les. it ranked atecond to population „and housing growtk,betwoen i9so and 1886. It has grown to become the reg ")n's a,econd largext city. It is projected to become the fax-z}cat grdirine city between, 1986 and 2000 in terms of population and househe'A grop" tis” The housing stock has -,.,creased an avrrage of' 1."82 urrlts annually in the past six y,ars, with an lncreaae of 4,611 units in 1986. B. Recent growth is changing�-% -s demographic makeup of the community. Just a few yeArs ago, Rwieho Cucamonga was 'a suburban community exp_.,3 ncin�- modest growth. Regional growt'a velocity and get:;Traphic `?tc,�nds have caused a rapid i »crease in Rancho Cuoamonga's growth. Inmigrating households are Iarr,.:>„*,y y�.,` "Ag couples without children or with young cildren. They are aft *n professionally s;aployed and about hall' are dual inc"e households. Many commute from. western employment centcts in 1,4a Angeles and oraage Coat. ties. But - burgeoning local job grow::h is causing an increasing share of hcmebuyers to be employed locally. C. Afforiability is an ls;,ortant issue with homebuyers. Many chat work in western employment centers make the lengthy commute to the Inland Empire simply to be able to afford a home -- either their first home pur-.hase or an affordable move -up horse to aaccomaodate growing farilies. Q. To comply with counts lAts faced by homebuyerts, many bui.iers !.a the Inland" Empire, In&luding Rancho Cucamonga, have been 6uildic- sma)ler homeQ_,ou smallel, acts to maintain affordable housing prices. E. This smaller development has occqrred in greacer numbers in Rancho Cucamonga than the city anticipated. There is 'concern about the suitabii ty of housing desigc, Fns', its impact on tYo communi y. F. Th4s-e xihs inferior quality and design exhibited in higher 1 density development in past years. current development, however, rafleitt� higk quality design and constriction and,, is increasingly built by some cif Southern California tisst- homebui -ders. The Rancho: Cucamonga housing market has evolved frog, one dominated by .local, small homebuilder3 with 1 United ,,cpabillty to produce quality higher density j houstrg. Builders -now active in Rancho Cucamonga utilize some of the industry's best professionals for design, ccnstruction and marketing. The result is improved product quality and neig"orhood quality in Rgn::z Cucamonga. Additieaa:l.y, there is an evoletior occurring in the type of households moving to Rancho Cucamonga. An ir.creaming ,•ercenta,a of buyers are move -up households with equity accumulated from prior homeownership-- Vierefore with the ability to make a Jtrger dawn payment - -arc "with the need fur a larger home and yard to ;coomnodate a larger family, this has caused boilders to recently plan, process and sell larger homes than in past years. G. Too such higher tensity development, if it were to continue to occur as before. ray be undesirable and cT•eate a homogeneous community. However, is do not fgel that currev` higher density development apps, ><hes a sacuretioa level. We believe, instsad, that the cu :rent balance of housing is responsive to market demand by a variety n' homebuying segments. Many of these -- incl..ding first time tuyers, first tine hove -ups and move -down households -- need smrller, higher density .causing, H. If the -vnte3mplsied changes in minimum lot site and rt -n ;muse unit size are legislated, housing prices may rise subatantil,2)y end impact a: signs- 71cant portion of the humebuytifmasket in Rancho Cucamonga. U, for example, lot s�.%es were increased from a minimum of 3,000 square feet to a rinimum of 4,000 squarF :feet, housing prices for these unite may r #se about $lu, -77G. This would disqualify about 11.3:3 percent, or =ever 2, 7$3 houQaaholda from homeownership in Rai.cho Cucamonga, If nininux lot sizes were increased 7 ti i E. This smaller development has occqrred in greacer numbers in Rancho Cucamonga than the city anticipated. There is 'concern about the suitabii ty of housing desigc, Fns', its impact on tYo communi y. F. Th4s-e xihs inferior quality and design exhibited in higher 1 density development in past years. current development, however, rafleitt� higk quality design and constriction and,, is increasingly built by some cif Southern California tisst- homebui -ders. The Rancho: Cucamonga housing market has evolved frog, one dominated by .local, small homebuilder3 with 1 United ,,cpabillty to produce quality higher density j houstrg. Builders -now active in Rancho Cucamonga utilize some of the industry's best professionals for design, ccnstruction and marketing. The result is improved product quality and neig"orhood quality in Rgn::z Cucamonga. Additieaa:l.y, there is an evoletior occurring in the type of households moving to Rancho Cucamonga. An ir.creaming ,•ercenta,a of buyers are move -up households with equity accumulated from prior homeownership-- Vierefore with the ability to make a Jtrger dawn payment - -arc "with the need fur a larger home and yard to ;coomnodate a larger family, this has caused boilders to recently plan, process and sell larger homes than in past years. G. Too such higher tensity development, if it were to continue to occur as before. ray be undesirable and cT•eate a homogeneous community. However, is do not fgel that currev` higher density development apps, ><hes a sacuretioa level. We believe, instsad, that the cu :rent balance of housing is responsive to market demand by a variety n' homebuying segments. Many of these -- incl..ding first time tuyers, first tine hove -ups and move -down households -- need smrller, higher density .causing, H. If the -vnte3mplsied changes in minimum lot site and rt -n ;muse unit size are legislated, housing prices may rise subatantil,2)y end impact a: signs- 71cant portion of the humebuytifmasket in Rancho Cucamonga. U, for example, lot s�.%es were increased from a minimum of 3,000 square feet to a rinimum of 4,000 squarF :feet, housing prices for these unite may r #se about $lu, -77G. This would disqualify about 11.3:3 percent, or =ever 2, 7$3 houQaaholda from homeownership in Rai.cho Cucamonga, If nininux lot sizes were increased 7 771 `above 4,000 square feef, t'ha #pant srouk�( !�c Increasing eini*um unit size tar, single- a;,i,� �l � housing wiH 10so increase housing costs and ,p -ro-1, %a F portion of hozebuyerg and ren,ers from obtaining n Tod. housing. ! " 1. We believe this is''a significant portion of -._the homebuying market, ,and,-:-that it alcht be under r4;ireaent.ing the sctual i*pagr,based upon the trouble new haa;ebm ers t,ra having gauiifying for Mortgage loans. Most devsloOera and t aale3 representativac k -sVort that a high, percentage of their homebv jars aarely : uilify for their mortgages.; J. Our recotimen.Antion is to, not reviasc the 5ubdivision Ordinance to pxrlhibit stall lot detat,i ed haasaag. We believe test the` provision of sma12 l -7t; loosing meets homebuyer need3 in the community'. If iae0l sot production is desmad emzessive, and we do not h,111eve it to at this tiue, ft may be limited to a rea�4— - , :e portion >, if total detacheu housing development. Wet %eve that a 2K percent its :tl, *tim distribution of praduct A ,. 'than 55,300 square,fest J;4- reasonaiale a,Yd would accomi ,. ,"rket demarT a while rnsuring neighborhood qual -- -ty, - ? . t- 3 i Ft pU7,AlIDN CiROFITH TREND- City' of Rancho - Oucamorga; A: " t( Since Incorporation (Hay.,19 ?7) C., ,., -�: mss= aassaYFSaaaa: aaai7asYaC����(laesss= as =sssac s5f�a�ss=�,¢ /+'•r *.. . t'lnar �.� Population a� Scease j laze 44,6PO ] X30 55 s I�0 11.5 ( 1 ! 1931 5 �, 664 2.3 �. Y98r 68',592 3,4 ! ! 1949 $9,832 r ! 1985 56.9,12 7.1 ,r 1986 11.9 Source: Stats-Vlnsnva Depe rtment (January, lw( a) Federal Census - Fzat Marwlck /GooC� kin � S*L5ti9,pV _- �, t F_. u Z C ! 0 � C x LT :® N jb 0 r!+ T ri 7 S1 ri h Ir jkk E, e s 5 ' ) ` : 7 lr d' f Ir k ,F.. A Y t OVIND 1011- tf4T MS BY CIM 5 "0 f_ Se3� ___�_ +__ — .��6�_— +.iSZ =.�••5�_."CS�i �__� �- �. "'SSSL32�— ..�._�- ��32iy.�_� __.._�_._3__SS3� Growth % Growth 1 Cite 19M 1_Ie!164 2000 RankM� IIW 2000 Rink 1904 2400_ - - - -- N „# C-Mno AMON! 45,850 57)814 5 111964 3 26 E Font�'�d 37,397 45+590 6?04 3 2411115 2 54 Maitclair 1:"21955 2o1IOO 301487 6 61287 4 25 1 I Ontario 88,657 1 1041260 129A& 2 251185 _ 5 24 I .I Rancho Cucaaon�r 55,119 -, 61)600 152-;400 1 9018W 1 - '147 Up,and 47,335 J 52,900 65,688 4 13,688 26 1 1 ; Total City VA 1531 3331850 506,480 1724311 52 1 i Sourct. State 0 Catiforniai Departaent of Finznct Feat Marwick /Goodkin -_ 976t16,pc y I� h Ir jkk E, ( t *� 71 Ww 14 ,I p G7 W �, A co m au m 42 � m" an 07 w �f MI Pry 77" 7- f �+ ER ON) Err! OrKir, PROJECT IM, ." Sr CITY N:� S�Ir ERE: 191 - 1967) 1495, 2 (10e i R Total Srov+h >: 5resth f City and Sphere 1980 19137 14`ii ' 2308 L5"Ca ZL�Osi 195Q-Z118e i Chino 45,943 55s5DQ 63,60@ 65,600 l 14,5117 42 I Fomana 1 CWS7 lob,O (1e 1951080 146,(1(1(1 74 +643 M i untriair 11J05 34,5(1(1 34,30e 411500 13,445 EB i Ontario iiB,3'T IY6.6118 138!806 14558'0 64 i Rancho Cucaunge 55,381 '; 10319011 ` ,13517 Ei 4421200 56,677" 157 r i Upland r. 50,631 6'1,500 72)7N 12,46@ x,269 i r '!' i Total City & ".'cohere 336,Io3 d43is0e 587,50 607,WID 273,737 82 x I Totai test End 301 SW -i 467,000 636,4 @6 6951040 347,(1110 101 ` Frurcu Njiliar . Lawrence Cospaly, Inc, l , 1:.. E1jodk in Group 976ti5.pc g k �f MI V f �+ V f �+ Li k La LLI > 0 4A LLI uj 'fom to %M CD lw cot gat cc l`' k,. f SUATm 1M W- ME CITIES', 1980 1496 300 2010 Rancho Cca■anga 23$726 \\ 32$252'58 75408 Ontario 362b7 �i� 46$&58 5b$751 64$130 Upland �) 23,1ai _ 23$79$S/s�b 34$901 liontch" 9$360 11$000 1408 16$374 J r Chino I &$370 141361 230465 26,755 s`oraana 121454 14496 261698 Z6$755 ' Inland Expire Vest (ine.) 121IM7 151$96 ' 21J,1166 243223 Scarce'- The Pia,ming tenter the GO-4kin Group rarkxrs Ij i� "44 U tiH .i- kt. i� L'An31A# , cF�6 r6 �� ci rr�an .9BB 1936 2666 2916 do J i'3nrho 6ucaaotgS 6.T1 3.25 6.37 ii.35 f,f Ontario 6.39 6.4 0.65 0.67 `gym! 3.31 9.32 0.4 6.81 lfcn:rlair f1.38 6. „5 6.8 6;8 China �' 6.32 7.31 11.39 6,38 _ Fontana Q,38 6.226 6.28 0.39 ;n+ and Expire Vest (hr.) 6.33 7.33 6.88 8.86 Sourty Tht Plannias Center ?ht 600dtin Group lobs I IF m: a ` = PERCENT IF TOTAL tiOWW DISTRMTiDN; ;= b.i Aue or WA W t9oIi5EP4aLm; 1988 -M-1441 SAN BERld4RDIN0 COWTY ; I Total I5 ^24 2ra-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65•-14 75i 1 t 1 1110.00 9.i 25 35 17.99 15.92 14.3i 11.06 6.SD f 17% 100.99 7.37 26.x„ 22.07 15.24 11.63 10.117 i.3r j; I I 1491 190.80 7.94 26.5 20.94 14.04 12.56 19.13 637 I Source= National Planning Doti Corporatiox 1984 Census 'C- The Sood4in Group 97at11ac T. 7 y S In �t4• �, `' i%iUSEi101D QiSTR1i3UT10N, III AM of HElkr1 OF IdDI!MIOIXER, \ y L , = SAN,13£6#{ALNO COWTT } Total ill 25-34 35-w 65-54 55.1A �WU 7% 1 %'211227 i MG 306)613 281$2)`! 78,731 55)533 46,363 11,772 31)150 1 - =f E I 1481 893)651 3110M 1051712 VIM 55416 A4,A51 42)239 27x133 1 1 1991 468,A4& 3 ko 1221an 16`3,173 71431 -_ 541480 47)190 34AM i 1 ): I !lverat+ Annual Lange t I 1980 -M 6 • 17412 413 514911 5)115 '11750 1)036 41616 11742 I I ` I I Averao Annual Change 1 I 1986-1941 * 14)959 482 31425 41113 31303 1ri1111 990 1437 1 Source, national Planning Data Corporation G� (980 Census ' The 6oadkin GliNp 975t12.ps � �I t — �I TI r i br "i f lid � lJ 20> UJ in cc x � uw - M o 1 a a cc _j � o� U. UJ ra all so " m 1,0,701-02 011 -10 -87 PC Agenda 5 T r17 NEW t # Yj� 16 %UCT60 is LAW EK91RE CITIES :% 19641 2010 f �, 1%6 -2008 r Annual Annual I I (Pirtent Inland (Percent Inland I I apire Wit Empire West I city z } 19% 2680 2010 Total Total 1 [ RinC6Q Cucamonga ;7,839 24,43$ 45466 60448 x,816 1502 1 4 l I Ontario 31)339 36811 4%146 571131 912 { let I I (23 %6 1231) 1 I I upland 18,495 21,761 24,816 271560 $28 } 218 1 l I 1 ' 1 Montclair 7.60 81692 11,531 131386 13@ 203 1 I China 11472 13,365 17,'? "3 211256 1811) 19 %} 1 1 1 I Fontana 13,961 19427 20,440 34,96 911 644 1 l (24 %) (17%) I s> I l I Inland Empire West tint.} 106,966 124,494 jv,.� 2 241,231 3,921 3,778 1 i (11)(11) (160% I E y- Sourer The Planning Center Pert Mare °tk7Gaadkin Haasing.pc # Yj� 16 '��� 17 M DIM F011 bftO INCOME SELUTEO tHlW WIRE CITIES 'IN-2018 t tied 1986 2000 2010 i �s `bank 5 I City Rank s Rank » RokM 'r� t Rancho Cutaeongr�' 1 17,834 1 24:438 1 45,456 1 60448 Ontarioi 4 311339 4 36!811, 4 441146 4 51x131 E Upland 3 18,595 3 21,761 3 24,816 3 27400 # - I Montclair 5 7x860 5 8,692 5 111532 5 133306 ; t China 2 111372 I 13:365 2 17,192 2 2147,30 I Fontana 6 13,961 4 19427 6 28440 6 34,796 -- I Inland Empire Z'ast (Inc.) '` 100466 1241494 177,J42 2411231 1 ., ' Source- The Pl,nning^Center Feat Ma,•eitiklkadkin Hous i ns.,gr '��� 17 ,3 s tom;. r - ,• EXHIBIT IV -IV I. 2 3, 4. S. tOT SIZE AND CHANGE ANALYSIS: - -- AFFORMILi'R'Y AND ELIGIBILITY ANALYSIS METHOW1,O(;Y; CVTY OF RANCHO CUCAKONGA AND j SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY -- --- -- --------- --- --- - -- --! j Determine implications of a change in lot ( size on price of a lot j ( ( J ----------- - Datermine M implication of change in - - -- - -I lot price on price of a h3me j ( t f ( - - ----------------------------------- ( Determine into' requited to buy j homes at t{ , pprice level 9 (Afforiubility) t t - - --- ------ ------ - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ( Determine the number of households eligible ( to purchase housing at various price levels, ( resulting from analysis of lot size changes j j (Eligibility) j -_-- - -- - - - --- ( Determine the change in affordability ( and eligibility at various price levels Source: Peat Marxick /Goodkin. lot.p+c 1,- 18 �`r i LOT SIZE CH*GE AMLYSIS SINGU FAKILT DETACHED HWSIWj: =r AEVi:LOPW COST APPROACHI CITY OF RAHCH4 CUCArft& Lot Size Cc;t MOD 41000 51000 6400 P14ASE 1 I. Land Basis 8,000 18,E26 131115 1516% 1I. Off3ites �� 51000 6,579 6,657 11,390 III. Onsites 5,080 6679 8457 11,390 IV. Soft Casts 5,400 7,105 91128 111540 (9 30% of V. Developer's P t 0 Z,60O 31421 41395 5,556 (a ICX.af lot Price) ', x VI. � Fin'isht ,.ct Price �x�`st� �sssxszaR �e_�ce'z xx 26,000 341211 1431951 " x�- afi2�c 55}563 { X25+ �5�.••• wEiiESS. �«••° c-----== �••°- +.+- "-- += x33Ca3sSaS:ptsS; FSSX:axs�sti ii Relative No*,, Prices �j Averase Unit Size Cost 1006 1,)00 - .1200 1,300 f PHASE 2 1. Finished Lot 26,L__' 34,211 431951 551563 _ 11. Construction Coots 341800 37,400 401800 44,200 (au per s.f. ays.) 111. Soft Lasts 18,000 212483 251425 29,9r (0 3n% of I 1 11) IV. Oeveloper's P S O 81667 101344 12,242 141410 {8 10% of unit price) V. lnditated Urrt Price 861667 103437 122418 144,102 VI. Price per e.f. 06.67 94.03 102.02 i1O.85 -«:zca-'vzzszszessee ' z�zzzz�x- zzszra�zx�— szxszx- wesazazatsszz S£urcet Peat (larvick /Ooadkin hiafinr2.pc 19 1 t , +pd UNIT SIZE CHWE ANALYSIS V., ` SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOUSING: 9SIVELOPHENT COST APPRORCH; CITY OF RANCHO CUC MONC,A Lot Size .... Cost �i+0l�0 30 PHASE 1 Relative Hose P Prices 1^ Land 8106D 10,526 13,115 15)686 IL . �,f`sitet0 51000 6.579 81657 111390 IfI: Onsites Moo 61579 8:657 111390 I. F Finished Lot 2 261000 3 IV. Soft Casts 5:400 7,105 IS128 110540 (a 30% of 11 II L 111) 343006 3 37400 4 401800 V. Developer's P L O 2,680 31421 4:395 515% (a lox of lot price) Soft Costs 1 161980 2 20463 2 24405 2 28:989 (a 309 of I L 1I) VI. Finished Lot Price 261000 341211 431951 55:563 a�». xz�oszaa. �.: s��sssaza�s= azzsa= ea :xssr.- 'sge�zasszrzszaesas�sr ' 20 Relative Hose P Prices Average Unit Size Cost 9 900 1 11000 1 11100 1 1,200. . PHASE 2 I. F Finished Lot 2 261000 3 340,211 4 431951 5 55)563 _ It. C Construction Costs 3 301600 3 343006 3 37400 4 401800 ()334 per s.f. Avg.) III. S Soft Costs 1 161980 2 20463 2 24405 2 28:989 (a 309 of I L 1I) IV. D Developer's P L 0 8 8)176 9 9x853 1 111751 1 13019 (a 10% of unit pricer V. I Indicated Unit Price 8 811756 9 98626 1 117)507 1 1391191 VI, P Price per s.f. 9 90,84 9 98.53 1 106,82 1 115.99 es---= e;: .- :sssaassarss. - -� = -_... ... =.... �s�szessxz� Sources Peat harrick /Goodkin 6iafinr1pi: it 20 ��a� sir► ,� � - -, 21 rw AFFORDABILITY ANALYSIS: RARM CUCAMO Q AREA; VARIOUS MN6 PMrES, 80 PERCENT LOAN T"AUE RATIO a 10 PERCENT INTEREST, �1;' szrxa= a- xz�zxxssaxs3 �zxssar_ zs axaugy.: xzr_ xtsassz_- a�szxaszsxxxxszexxxszzzxszzzzxszssxssxxsx I Annual Housing 1 I Cast Components -loan 80:000 861667 101437 -MQ.80 - -- 122,638 1441102 1501000 1 !- to Value Ratio: 0.80MN p .80 0.88 0.80 0.80 .1 I ftetsage Amount WOOD 69,33E 821750 97,934 1:5,282 120,090 1 1 r �`r ! Housing Exprnses. I ! f Principal I Interest 61789 7,3<5 9,778 10,389 12,229 121729 1 (1011 30 yrs.) f 1 - 1 Property Tax (11) 6D0 867 11834 1424 17411 ! ', 11,500 1 y I Private Mortgage 0 0 a D 0 O f i Insurance (0.51) I I Hazard Insurance (0.360 230 '' 250 298 353 415 432 1 ! Annual Housing Expense 71819 ' 87471 MUD 111966 14:085 141661 1 I Required Incest= 4123/458 257413 30,331 351897 42,255 423255 1 1 (311 Ratio) I f I Source' Peat Marwick /6oadkin aftord6.pc fl + '� ��a� sir► ,� � - -, 21 Yj { 22 r AFFOROABILITY ANALYSIS; RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AREA; VARIQ(Ei HOUSING PRICES, 90 PERCENT LOAN -TO -VALUE RATIO a to PERCENT INTEREST azaoxsaaaasaasazzaazazas :aa: asaaaasansaa�asaasaasapes asasasaarusa�zasaaassaa 1 ;._asaaaaaaszzza� I Annual Hous(og l I Cost Coapone0s MOM 861667 101437 122418 144,102 1501000 1 (' I Loan to Value Ratial t 0.90 0.40 0.40 0.90 0.90 I 0.90 I ! t I Mortgage Aaount- t 72000 78,060 931093 1101176 1291692 I 1351000 I I I Housing Expenses: 1 I I Principal L Interest 71638 81274 91!75 111687 1317H 141321 1 1 (-+.0111 38 yrs. ) I Property Tax (3) I BOO 867 11G34 1 224 11441 i,SM I I Private Mortgage 360 390 465 $51 648 I 675 1 Insurance (0.5%) 1 I I Hazard Insurance (O.W,1 I 259 281 335 397 467 I 406 -I I l I Annual Musing Expense 1 ri 057 91812 11710 131859 16,314 1 161982 I _ 1 I Required Incoae: 271171 29,435 35431 411577 481942 48,942 I (311 Ratio) I 1 Source/ Pea: MarvieklGoodkin aiford7.pc Yj { 22 r ,.y G^ _ ID Source: PVy.NrrickMoodkin afford3.pc I _ J 23 µ ANALYSIS: WHO k`ANCHO CI>1`A11(i O _ VARIM HUM PRI(:ES, 80 PESEN9' LOM- 10- ME RATIO 8 it PERCENT INIIST SSi' iA22= iS: Sii= 23= Z73YSS23422L2' Y.. SSS^ �T32ytiS33� ��SY .�wCSY2tS9Y3224'_'Si�2233232'Y1 ' ' Annual Housing ' 1 Cost Cocponeats 8x,000 861447 _103437 1223418 1449102 1.50,000 t I Loan to Woe btio: I 0.60 0.80 0;80 0.ru 0.80 0:80 + 1 I I Mortgage Aeoart ! 64,900 691334 82,950 97,934 115,28Z 120,000 1 1 1 I I Housing Expenses: 1 1 1 Principal 1 interest 9,139 91901 11,817 13,9@5 16,63 17,136 f 1 yes.) 1 I Property'Tax UP 803 867 1,1134 1424 11441 1:500 1 I Private Mortgage 0 0 8 0 0{ I I Insurance (0.54) I I Hazard Insurance (0.36X) 1 I-------- _- ---- -- ---- 230 250 298 353 415 432 i 1 I Annual Housing Expense 1 101170 111017 <., '_3:149 I5,56Z 181319 199068 1 1 I Required Incase: 1 30,509 33452 39,447 E6,68bf 54,956 54,955 1 (311 Ratio) ( 1 1 Source: PVy.NrrickMoodkin afford3.pc I _ J 23 µ r r 4MLySI RANC HO C VC, S , S AREA 90 Pskoi t pRICE$ � N 0- !67a KLE RATIO 1tY ( �sxa =xa ( cast al Hausin9 to►Ponents =nx :xx_xx_x, 80,000 667 - --�--- -86,67 1p��7 Loan to Value jI Ritia, 122,118 I ` I Mort U. go --- ti I46,IU2 I a.98 '--- •..,,_ $0,000 j I 9apr A ;Ount J.98 -� 0,70 � I I Hcusins Ex ! Expense', 0.90 1 78'UaU 93,093 0.90 1 1 110,176 1 p�incjPUj A Intrre (ItX; 3U st 1��000 r Yrs., proPrrt 10,282 13g 73,291 I I Y Tax (1X) 1 I5,7, I p�iv sr 1 Insur tr f�nrtSa 800 18,520 f 867 19,278 I J arq' IU.SX[ 1 1'� j 360 3v 1,221 I Rood Insurance US 1,611 ' S51 1'5110 j j (0.36X) bt8 ! "---� 259 675 jl I _ -- _"'.- --� I Annual Ikusin- __.• s E" 281 335 1 ruse '.y,_�_�� 167 E� J - :1'fed Inra �_- ``_.- _------ -_._ -� j 12,L76 15+1 17,905 -'- - -1 (3a1 Rati Ae: 3 ( o) -._.r, 71,877 I "."".._,. 21,439 35,18 ,► f 1 38,028. .W63,2„� �- 15,387 'I Source: �...`'. 0 63,230 affvP j.pc k/�ovain -� r r V i, „7 �a % 5TIMTE0 1966 INCOME QIS7RI9UTIONt 25 CITY OF RASA CMAMOt4',A —� 1 i 1 Y Estimated I t Estimated 1906 I Estinted 1966 Reverse I Estimated 1'966. Reverse - Cu aulative 1 i Nousehoid Intone 191!6 Percentage Cumulative Perctata". I I Range Bistributiae' Qistributtan Distribution 01strtbut;an i t f 0 - 9,999 1,562 6.544 244191 ~ Man I I (10,000 - k4,3�9 1,?f7 5.03 22409 9146% t 1 515,000 - 24,999 „2x995 11:36% 211342 80. a I 1 $25,000 - 34:999 41933 20.39% 10,397 76.05% I I f35AM - 441999 84711 27.7416 134464 55.6$% i ! (60,000 - 741999 41934 20.42% 64753 27,42% .. 1 475,000 at mart 1,044 7.50% 1,814 7.W I Total 24x191 100.001 2401 i 100.00% t =a=zssa = =asp := oxen — $ME: CACI, Inca Peat MarvickSWUR 25 r J li` 26 (; - r�ri�ca� at5fRleuTlaa =` SM Waim CWKY ( Estimated ! Estimated 1987 ! ( Estimated 198 ?; Reverse f ! Estimated 1967 Reverse Cu4tuiative I I Household income 1967 Percentage Cumaulative Percutage 1 I Range ._, (11st0bution Distribution Distribution Distribution 1 71499 511869 12.771 406105'2 100.00% t ( S 7,500 - 14,999 63,469 15.63& 351,183 87.23E ! i 315,000 - 19,9°9 42,384 W441 296,714 71.60% 1 520,000 - Z1,999 40 273 9.92% 248,330 61.16% 1 1 MOM - 29,999 `� 341868 8.595 208457 51.24% l 1 530,000 - 3' -�79 35,340 8.70% 1731169 42.65% 1 1 5351000 - 3MW 300009 7.39% 137,849 33.951 1 1 S4D,000 - 44,999 420119 10.37% 107x840 26»56% 1 1 550,000 - 74,999 491029 12.071 65,731 16.19% j 1 57500 or more ( 16492 4.111 1602 4.11% I Total 4061052 too. on 406,052 1 100.00% 1 Sek1RCE: CACI, Inc. Peat Marwick /600dkin sbincdis.vks li` 26 (; 'r r 1 1atto,to P ##tp r is I Ices !f 1QparrPnt ..,tiw` Al.rC! n.tQ� '• r46� `��'•at�� rOr �a4uiCOS. Au' Chas d !{�£ /i9i a ��a ��=x�• .. 1� st� �G W,ix fy. ••���•�••,,,,�� �A`` �s3 5`a�•s••~;••�•'�T.��•• !1 sld,bb) 80x a�,3 1 •``''o APr�Pnt ' , Frr9ib /�ardr�u Co !: is�3�v '1 14 ae��P f144'!5 t ?,e?j 74• Poi. �• .,�.•,• A P,,fis3 s ..,PrCON 11 13,8 66z 118,? 03 5!/•4�X / 41.94x ,1 3 ( ,o s3p 9 bgrrrs ? ? `p 2 � 21 't s � i '667 144 4� , 3 '43) 987 i .41x t� sOUOrP: AP `�•. 51fj418 ' - 7,71" P, r�s�'nrei! ~��.. •` -.D2 R , p� 4,Fy1 44l 149 16 "P8.r WkI, Vr s535'�97 11, 48 IV. Ipp' 1 -•�`' $63' 6 Bits ssx 4761PP "X41 B 47, 41T 10.85z 1 t 4?. 14 Q 1 17 X03 Ov 4c jJ Md Coo 0 LLI 6 tj` uj N N N 0 �. Q Z z _I 0 a \K,X _ � r J 5E a! iY J 1 v I --------------------------- � W � Z 0 H_ JOS q 4 r fj �Q 12 3 z _♦. iS�ff s 29 \/ ~ � - t § ■ �, � \ � y � I � k I go .. 0 CZ) fJ�Q5, �3$� J J A Rvcccn # 2 'r & ■o � _ in ¥. �40 - ■ � � D ■ ■ .�� N � ■ �, � \ � y � I � k I _ go .. 0 CZ) fJ�Q5, �3$� A Rvcccn # 2 'r & ■o � _ in ¥. �40 - ^ D > § §\ «�C'k F. N 0gv�. k . § - AN . .�.k� . 2low : _ 31 LB Raz Is A a A M M 1. _3 1. 31 MMIBIT IV-IX HOMEOWNERSHIP ANALYSIS: P'ROP'ERTY PURCHASE AND FIVE-YEAR HOLD A. $65,000 HOME PURCHASE IN 1982 B. 5 PERCENT INFLATION ANNUALLY I. YEAR Ii,,Ond of year) - $68,250 2. YEAR 2 - $71,,6sa 3. YEAR 2 - $75,246 4. YEAR 4 a $79,008 5- YEAR 5 - $82,958 (Estimated 1987 value) 0. EQUITY BUILD-UP OVER OWNERSHIP PERIOD 1. PURCHASE PRICE - $65,000 2. LOAN -TO -VALUE RATIO ­80% 3. MORTGAGE AMOUNT - W-;-JOO 4. 30 YEAR TERM 0 10�'XNTERE%,kT S. ANNUAL PRTNCIPA1-,1'AND INTEREST PAYMENTS - $5,015 6. ASSUME 5 YEAR PROPERTY HOLD 7. TOTAL INTEREST PAYMENT IN 5 YEARS.- $18,591 S. TOTAL PRINCIPAL PAYMENT IN 5 YEARS - $6,484 9. TOTAL PAYMENTS IN 5 YZARS - $25,075 10. REMAINING LOAN BALANCE AFTER 5 YEARS - $45,516 11- ASSUME PROPERTY SALE AT $92,958 12. SUBTRACT OUTSTANDING LOAN BALANCE - V�37,442 EQUITY BUILD-UP AND PROPERTY APPRECIATION 13. SUBTRACT BROKERAGE COMMISSION or $4,148 - $33,294 NET SALES PROCEEDS D. APPLICATION OF NET PROCEEDS TO NEWHOME PURCHASE 1. NET 3NTRY LEVEL HOME SALES PROCEEDS OF $33,294. 2. ASSUME 80 PERCENT LOAN-TO-VALUE RATIO, 10 PERCENT INTEREST RATE MORTGAGE 3. MOVE-UP HOME PURCHASE "FORDABLE WITH APPLICATION OF 100 PERCENT OF NET PROCEEDS TO DOWN P*YNENT $166,470 4. AN 80 PERCENT MORTGAGE LOAN - $133,1;5;; S. ANNUAL PRINC7.PAL AND INTEREST PAYMENTS ,w $12,843 6. OTHER HOUSING COSTS INCLUDE: (a) PROPERTY TAX @ 1.0 PERCENT = $1,105 (b) HAZARD INSURANCE @0.36 PERCENT ­'t479 7. TOTAL ANNUAL HOUSING EXPENSE - $14,9811/ S. ANNUAL INCOME REQUIRED @ A 3:1 HOUSINP COST-TO-INCOME RATIO - $44,961 Source: Peat Marwick/Goodkin 976t27.pc 32 0 Probable i HamebuyCr Household Type 1 I Singles ! ! i I f Young couple I I without ! i child I I Young coup;* 1 I with I I child I wiw I ! I rove -up Family C ( I j--- -- » - ---- --- --- --i I Empty Nester I - - ------ - - - - - -- —j { I C ietirre 1 I { love Over in size) i (up in designr quality! I and ntislNborhaod I Lot Design` Options 1 1 I Center Piet I i I� I I Stang�rF; { 1 Staggered' I I Zero-lot-ling I { I i { 1 Duplex 1 { 1 I µi I ( I Cluster 1 I Attached I 1 ( t i Cluster i 1 Detached I :» 1 i l I Vida - shallow i Lots I MUB; T iz�yIi :xlZIRS PRODUCTION DESIGN OPTION MATRIX= PARTIAL LIST OF ALTERNATIVES Architectural These and Landscape Cape Cod ! Country i i Vlctariir i I i _ I ! Spanish I i 1 Witirranean I { I 1 _1 1 I Dutch I f »Colman community I i mason -y walls> I 1 signiyer sidewalk i I and curb desinns i i I - yCommunityw� - ( f fountainsr gitebos, I l ben6ts I Source= Pert Nardick /6nadkin 33 976t28.pc Landscape and Technical Saftscipe Specifications ! r I Attractive I I front yard I I landscape I i inciuded with I I purchase I 1 i I I I Fencing inciuded I I with purchase "{ 1 ! I-- - - - - - -- --- ---- -- I I I Uater system { I Included with i I purchase I I ! 1 t� t I Community I I front yard I I maintenance C I 1 { I I Selected I I neighborhood I I placement of I I large treest bushes I I and other I I saftstape I I t�rge bac4 Yard$$ ! smaller ! fraat.Y�rds 1 I25 foot rear I yard setback! I Large front yardsv ler back yards I �J25 foot front I `':aTd setback) 1 Exclusiveiy one -story homes i - 1» I Exclusively I two-story homes I One and two 1�, story I housing mix r 4 ��$ W T 7 VM } � )� - lf�i ;� -�� �`- � �� � ����}� } }} § � � ©} f�k} }\ �� | � | } } 77 }{ 7 k }�I� �� ~ � /: � \ �$ | � -- }---- �---- ®- �--- ® - - - - -� ` | }_ !!_, } ^ } ! ! }� ; $ } } li;: |.i z2l2 ;S! . ��_ ;Z ; -e a � - | �ak� | ! 9) } §}9 34 T 7 MY 01' �a 1�NIGA November 3, 1987 Planning Commission ) ATT• Chairman We the people petition that the meeting set forth for November 10, 1987 at 4 00p.m. to discuss the proposed plan for .Hellman Avenue at Foothill Boulevard be con- tinued due to the fact that the people are not able to be present to voice their opinions about the proposed plan. A meeting scheduled for the evening lours would be more appropriate for everyone. since ce�rely, f G.tx��rn r Aldo Capocc'` L rr ¢ozzo Larry Williams Date: November 9, 1987 Ae— I To: Planning ommsson % C ii I ft � C) From: Dave Leonaxd, Park Project Cvordinator Subject: ContinnAion of item 1pl,, Request for Consideration, Private Open Space credit With the, change in meeting dates due to the Holiday, a conflict was created for the applicant for the Lyn.-Xaven Development. They request, the item be LOntinued till tne November 25, 1967 meeting. Thank you. I7 EM P Wr atr�sa" fait as roV �, yr aa,ac ctaa �� aet 9*a* CITY � - s ZT h t w 4. G itlt= t:� 272- V, E r r5T 7 4a 5 5. X30'r4 P,+�'f3 7. 70. 11. l3. 14. 15. 16. 11. 18. 20. 21. 23. 24. + 25. 30.