Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1990/01/24 - Agenda Packet
7 NL 1 (lXa15t !' ; V • - 8 .. _ s t AG 1977 'WEDNESPAY ,JANUARY 24,i0d 71,00 p,m: UOKS PAM COUM#wT1 CENTER `' ;91�1 BASE ILiiB ' A13CHQ$CIF AMONGA,'CAEfIFORiiSA L PBac*€�.ofAt 1. IL Boll Ca11 Comnissioner Blakesley�, Cdrmissior- Ririe Ca�rnissioaer �itiea: Cs�;Is�ibner .`Talstoy =Ssioner %inbsmer. , IM Announeomeritsi, IV. ''dal of Mi 4 January i0,,.1 w01 V. Consent C s The foilovis' Coraint Calendar items are'expeeted to be routine and norrcontrav is�at. They,.Will be.acted on'by the CQmrnissian at one w ?" tlme withv: dfscuaan. 1f anyone has cortegrn over arc�r item"It shdWd be remvey1-f dr discussion. ^ t A. A StCPT liMEW :OR TENTATIVE:TRACT 13621 - sAHAMA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY a Tt►a deign review of, btsii irtE elevations;and detailed site plan for,'-';, previously ,approved' tentative tract consist in g o€7 single family lots on 61wres o€'land In the Very Lout Resi��,ntSal Dis4sict{lass than 2 dwelling units.pe^ Y' .sere), located at,the northeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and: Hillside 'Road-APId: 20140144q` Related Tt�?e Removal Permit B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVEL'O0AiENT REVIEW' PAS � BUR�.E.. 't VmmiSicC:iAL.,,:�Y:'A95L FiUIBFiT �: .'Itie, . development Of,,a multi-tenant business park. totaling 142,330'. squaei; feet on 9.6 aa► s iaf land in the _Snduatrial Park 'Distriot_ subec a&of', re Inc istc'ial Specific Rlnn,loeatO at the southwest earner. , of .'TY°adea►ark . StreetCentor Avenue: 9 A'P,N:,,210 (f72 33 b0% Um TO Ir I3 Y.14049001 t { s l L .... ... g ttem,$are public hearings in tvhCch concernOaT insiividuais may voice tlaefr,'opWon,cf the related paojs--d' .', !=lease wgit,,to die` k�+acognized by the Chairman alai-address to"O:'Coitrmissioir 6S?siattir ' your•.name�end addiesa: Aii suchoi7intonsshatl.be iimCter�to5!minuLes� M 4, per fndivfdual for each prqecp C. ENVIRONMENTAL"ASS�;'a.MIFtTo1 .�PIl7e"TENTATIVE' PARCEL MAp 12733 -OLETIFED-���9cay Eon of 6.99 acres of.land into c, 2 parcels:in the;Industrial,Paw,A• veloppnent Di trict.a Haven + Overlay,1)istrre't;5` ares 6.of the;•Industrial Specifio Plan,located _ on the northeast coiner of Hage.a,Avenue and Aeacla.Street APN 20S-9[Qi=01: '(Continued from.?�inuary 10,i389,) D EN1l!kiiTA1N&IBP.'t`PERMIT 89-02-EOLO'GROiTPbDS-A.igties� `� t , '#a consider sw4)ensipn or.,Jmvocation of.an entertainment 06PMit approved�por Polo G sands Restairnt,located.at 108TP Faath�l' ]3ouleyard' APNs R'20&=382 10. {Continued from ,fie 10'. 1989.) ) { ' L ENVIRONMENTA71 ASSES§MiiiT AND TENTATIVE RAP 13108-CARYN.CCfgi NY-A sutrdivisiono 19.45 acres of ]and into 2 parcels.in-the;bow AaesrcYentfal Dist dwelling units per ecre) of the-Et fa Specific Plan;located south,. 24th..Street .at.=:Wardmen Butlodc Road AFN:. ,226-211 ,t Related Elie Tentative Tract 13SP F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.8746 MOAIFICATIODT NO.'2-OAS: 1N ORS7 The,request:to most, y the elevatiopp or BtuIdift 12,. Within. tho 7bomas Winery Plaza in thy,Specielty .C6mmercL Iristric't of'the Boothill,;Sgecifli,:Plan, located at the'northeast corner of'Fontllaill 13•oulevard hill ineyar'd Avenue APN Z08= (3. V,AlAkOE,394i ICAik0P request to allok4bdueed lrdrt yeti sctbac on;0 lots,a rear:-d minimum aver��e`frant yard s$tbeck;for':a311otr;height extensosrs shove 35 feet tan 3 lots,ansi a;reduced`'eeressory'stnrctur� setback.on lot 2,-;for a previausly ap{sroeed tract map consisting of 38;.single farraly:inks on 15.2 seffi of Ind In:ttie Low Residetptial District{2-4 dwelling unite pee ee�),loeated'mutti c ast of gIi1l Country C146 Drive smith of Carle Cocazon.-A'PNr' 207 3 1 thru:23 and 207404141; 'thru:15 t, VM Newftslimml II. DE9It':r3 II EVIEWyFO�"Fl3AC'P !DOSS - CALPROP The design review ff,�buildiig elevations and,detailed site plan-for lots 1 through 21 for a paevlously approved tract consL�}tirrg of 38 singIo fnntily late on 15.7 9669s Of land in the,how Residential`:F' twat i x4 {2-4 dweling units per a;cre), I'oceted sortth and east of: d Hill �r Country Club Drive,;south of Celle Conan AM 207 631-01 r �x than SI arnd 207 641-01 thru 10. ' r, S1' bI3POR7T";Ox`STi'Fi3S`®F(3PxRRALL PLA23.Ari3EN13fldExT;89-t16�r ' .AND. "DEVELOPMENTriiBxTrtViEl�'C 89-04 Wrf=RAlMN BY P S T 1}?J S'P.4TUS REP(3RT did 10 TiAL LIBRARY PLA KING:PRt�d'E IX. Co �. `P�I�e�oma�►p .� :' 1"1113 L4 the time afid 7SaC8',FOP the .gener2n public `t0 4dCIZEs3 ttte ' f Colnmiss[on ,,Tterr�s in be dtscussa^� here.•are those which,do riot Calready appearzottthis agffie ? { ' M AeI' Ott s The! .Pi¢nrting Comm#sst4n has'adopted hdminlstratly�? arfaJO:that, set an Ii p;m:cld�ourn neni t�rsTe. Tf-Yt -sas;go2raj�Fnd'that`time, they: . . shall be hoard only with the consent off` he''Camntissior� - 0 4 Etv 1� t� ,• • L� � ti3 .'l 7 CY 4 r 7 '$ 4 r 1�, t = t Y i rti SS t �4nw PJu{® a . MAR -71 mn a—till, - B x r '1!YY+'Y 4t m s ,;i' Su2aea tD7 IBLgo t - I � � '•�- °�raAO raf6teatnCmeL"mar.. , f� � r 1 CITY CF -ANC a GU A1dd01` STAFF REPORT , 0` DATE: January 24,,1090 TO:: Chairsn3n•.and .6bers of`the Planning Cormission}' �RQbi: Brad'6ulIer, 'Ci-ty:Plahner 6Y: Jwrry"4uarracino,,,Ass9st�nt Planner >ri SUBJECT: DESIGN° REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE: 1RACt 13521' '- ' SAHAAi11, 7�1e es gn rep ew o u % . .61 evati a a`a 7e£3ilpd :site,,p;1an for a, pre�riously approved ,tentotive tract ccntisting of,;;7 single family, Tots`an, 5, acres" of Tand-: Very V.oxr", Rpsidzntiai ' District (l4is than 2 dvaell ng`uhits per.,acre}, 1oCated at' the northeast;corner;sof Ner mw-Avenue and bHllside 1{Qe ,- AP-4: 201-10144. ,Related Tree Removal Pet' it".90=01. I. PROJECT DESCRYPT[OP! A: Action Requested: of building elevations and plot �: plans. . . B. Project Density dwelli�agunfit ;"per acre. ' C. Surrounding Land Use art Zoning: North - Vacant.and One�Single-�Fami.lyng; Vary. Low ',Residential (less,.than, 2 �w�lling".units per acre) South - :Vacant amtthicken Ranch;'Yery",Low Residential (less tham 2 diielIiug units-per it East Vacant, One 'Single-Family,Residence> and%Coops, Yery Loa Res identi'al. (less:"than .2 dwelling units per acre) i blest" - Vacant'and One Single Family' Residence; Very, Low Residential ,{less than 2 dwelling units per acre) ~' D. General Plan'Designations: Project Sfite - Very low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre)' Borth - beery Law Residential (less than 2 diMlIing units per acre} South � Very Lots Residential .(less thar��2_d�eliing'�,units per acre). East - Very Low.Aisidential, (Iess"than 2 dweiling,urtitsper { K ANNIRG-,1COMMISS10N, STAFF REPORT 0,• F09 TT 13621 'SAHAMA 9EY L6PMENT COMPANY, January. 24., 1990 4 Page i' West Very Low Residential '(1®ss than 2 dwelling.units per '. acre) • 1?. ANALYSIS- A, .Background, Tentati.ve< Tract: 1362i;' was, reviewed by .the . "Plann ng. obi"ssion on'January'13� 1988, and;vas approved =for t' Subdivision design,. ccnccptual.;grading and design review of 5 new hoiios.e The applicant is>:proposing a new_produst type sor this tract. B. General. -Tne, appiicant=�ropoces taro, 2) flopr plans for.the pro ec , with two (2) elevation d€sign schemes-per plan and ` six W.,color schemes.° _Th 'hones4a e,all ••2ratory�wi.th _3 or 4, car garages, Fohcrete. ti1e roofs annst�acco:c� wood siding P3ulti pined Ea�indows, second `st��^y,; rear •balconies"and `brick chimneys"'and'-building accents'`` (some plans) are:. featu . incorporated into the.design;of these-homes C. Desi n Review Comnittee.l;,The"Design;Review Ccmanit*ee (McNiel, aces ey.an rou p:.reviewad the,tOroposal-on Decker 21, 1989, and. recommended, approval` subject to the ;'it Il.ew`ing.; conditions: 1. Provide a: perimeter six=foot"'masonry'wa11 around the'projkt to match the proposed:wall, on'the sputh. side, of Heal side,Road. The`viall ,should'run`on-the, inside 'edge., of the local .equestrian traiis; !and con tain. gates to provide ..4rail' access Traci fenq'ing should be; eliminated •an favor of tie masonry.wall,on this side 'of the trail-. Z. Provi& front yard return"walls on a11= lots.to - match the perimeter masonry fence . Allother`yard wa11s'shalT be masonry with,a .finish 'tevmatch�_he front yard return wa1. s._,Other yard wall e,,need not . contain rock'pilasters except as,n3ted herein.,.; 'i 3. The perimeter wall along Hillside Road shouldmatch- the wa11 directly'. across the.,-street for Tract 13877 The Schowal ter ,m6numentshouid also matchi the monument' on the. south' side.:of the'street'and should be ,placed. at the,;sotatheast a corner ..the site. 4., The rack/rail " fence detail 'shall, be revised to .substitute the peel;er,pol6 rails kith V x 6" rails to emulate the P.V.C. trail fence i.4iit:' PLANNING 660iSSibN STAFF REPORT DR FOR:TT 13621 SAHk9 DEVELnP ENT Cf1i�PAPF1f January 24,.19go Page 3. j D Tree,,Removal Permit. Associated with the :Design .tevie�r ©f 'this raY ,, a app can, has submitted zi arse removal permit.to remove{ terr (1®) Mature'Eucplyptus trees aI" ig.the northern'orb ca';b^t+Rda v of .l,ot 4. The..trees' are part. an estabii`shed wi�ndrowa aiony,.the r norih property: boundary. They. ai�e. 'being removeij! to a'lI6W the construction of -the perimeter'.masanryi wall requi.r� by the-Design "Review Committee. The gees appeah ,to be orr_the s�uth'side of:th'e. property line; .tiawevee. a continuous wall +�oUld.require:cutting rota the root.`systems;of trees:: This .is A, practice'wnich, is��npt allowed under Section Y9; og.lYtf F"regar_ ng ;protection of-`exitting trees. The Commission maY want,to cn-si,der tRe following opitigns':<' Y. Remove- the, gees; ;build the atat_l at t`te prPoperty lfine .and replant ,the windrow, south .of ;the new;;wall af'with Eucalyptus. '*culata (spotted gum}, Y5 gailan size minissrert� spaced 8 ieet on center, per the dity's tree•repiace.ent prs}'cy �G. 2. Preserve the,existing'mindrow and-require a wallf��wttich,'does riot require a �zontfinuous footing, i e:;, a:heavy tijiered wood ,fenne ` or wrbughi iron Such a fence:.cau`ld be installed rel'atfive y close' to the ex'sting, trees aii;thout: disturbing their' root' systems: A'lthougk this portion of ,the; fence.;is ,a;perimet . fence' at. this"s time; when the property "to° the., orth is developed, this will become a side,yao,fence. 3._ hne. the cval7'..to the south sida;of the'existing`.windrows. This, would req!�ire.the level'6per. to install:, the masonry .gall south;of the. base of t-if, trees. fib a result wbui d creates - foot,wide `:n m »'"s" strip of ,bend ayong,.the'nnrth side bf tat 4. staff,recos nds Optian 1 becaute it wi11 ultimately ceeate�.a Ir ideal condition for the health of the trees, improve safety and prod$de s score per�anent;fencing.soiution. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The project is'consistent.with the General'-Plan,and e ve opmen . o e. The,pro ect tdli not be detrimental to-the public` health or safety,, or cause - nuisances .qr` significant ; adverse environmental impacts. .in 'addition, the proposed use,anif site plan, together with the reVxnended conditions of approval, are in :compliance with the applicable` proviskans of the Development;'`Coda and City standards. Y'� :4 PLANNING .COMISSION_STt T,AEPORT OR FOR IT 13621 SAHAMA OEVELOPMENT CE PAPIi 0 January-24 2Q9 Page 4 IV. RECOMENDATIOW tuff rec at ounends:th the P16"ping•Commission-apprav e es,gn.rev eW of"Track 1'621 and Tree R soval Penni't�90-0 'throw h adoption of the,attached'ResolutioB mi,th.conditions "Respectfully submiit'ed" Brad Bu er City ;Planner. BB:JG/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A Location trap` Exhibit "B"�L Site`Plan Exhibt "C" -- L�ndScapeplan Exhibit "D-" Tree Removal` Plan Exhibit "Ell'- Building°"Ele'vations. °Exhibit"F",- Building E1evatir�ns., Exhibit "G" = Building,Etevatians- Exhibit "H' Build-jng Elevations. Exhitsit "I" Fence''Detail'.. RQsvluti,ap of.ApprgVal With. Conditiops' if 1r i O WON E S 4 H E:`E Y tiny -�a�w ,,,�,:....` ^".-� �♦� ; na- 77 1 I I 1:7 V -4 ip Pat vallt 1 E I � 1 v. cIT3l C� RANCHO ILTCAI�I�NG PLt�N�1IR?G V1.MO1oJ'- � TM-E: f r, ;fie, ---SCAtM-jj F. } L t L pain tw Q Y a3" .. ( .� Y♦ ao��L t 40 n Y.� s�e�• r y_+1 s . 7=W909 �' wt W L .'r••c"'ti �o,68"t+.n. •n xt .< 1 L ns++ oua pa 5TVM �j •�•, '� off'. ��sa�xff� Ra►1C11L CITY. ,F, uNafo. TCe,M Rd kp "ION . jrjM T� SCA[A9—: d Tom, A, r S rK. le 1+11Ifiewwfk4.Jd4u TwL.rN© rts� wo..w S .r4D�Ytl�M r +�:�v.•sria ��l.�w..w.a+r..a sw-w:or w`w 1. h Tea {:itilV,+..l(V'r :or1ci,imi t�i� cgs utrT4a:QrtcFtur iZ �4 J uoa{4nT r¢r L r+zr+lot a_+ ..f.♦: �.Y..;µwq ..•fi y.ffq. rwr. _til..' 'I • �w� .wlo wr.s M ti nN 1 w +.4s ♦� ... a �....... Y .. w i.r r n .rI: .,n....• CI1Y OF RANCHO.-CUCAP4fONGA — DA I 1 L it k � S .l For 0?7t� ems, T;v� a �Q � icneuaivns ,� W, � VrtKl� + � � a�II�TIT.� I. � .' •^� � RildT �.• mer� 2[g9�t�]' a �• � i �� eeee ' E—►--'—� — R Q 5 A ,c em esav eme - YOU I oil an IN �W aR,f"w0. �s01F.X$di tltAa CH CITY OF, RANCW-CUCAMONC-A' e� - ,:. PUN ANWQ D"' les ���rf- I/lt(111111p11R. t Illllllt)fltl, Will 1. •� -� I te' IIfE11fl�, I�1IIIll �� �� Ilm+ ,�� k,. 2wlni� • � _TTy II �li■uI j��. �lIIp111Rlflllfll(itr" , ■ � I1111fN1k ,; _.� � �L�I-••�Il���all� 9 •t d P a IWNfWIf�' , IN \ also 4 11111M� g JIIIII,' Ififi'� }I.kl i 4.71 „�� d K i r � �� �4{r �j-�`' •� It �£�{ R�ir•� :t � � at ' :ii x ^r .�FS 4fyd qi 1 2.7 TWA ate'= k t7 NOW Yl ��7 G r s n iel.l�j t'tr + tom• �1!r' T� � c< ZL- :l(•i! ����:.-.--��t,' t'i� � its j � �,a r 'z i� y�• ■.I1 � � f' .n f� ` ` r a.■, 1. �. r a . .■■■ , , fill F ,( r t is a•`!I �p L-d.. M8a was, rt �pylliN6_ as■aa�aaa an*Mal saa I r, nor rx..: P Y ���3a r■ <... } a �i.0 � �ti it >r < !' � - +** y �; t■■f�', aaw IIf11R11 �� - 11 �' �+ Iu '�� •, t� ��? �:� tit �� ^'+� � -; a �tr°��'E•'iaS�M -rr "". a�`Vh.tY..��#' *r„"� a � s+ 5 t� x ,v _ I, i / it "'+� iq t � ►: � �� � i - .� t t. �N` .`�. . at It ...-0�,C.:'aT�.•�•. i.r �.....- �t• - ..c.� *T. IF x��Ft :1. cy. r• la i RESOLUTION..NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE R XHO.CUCAMONGA PLANNING�CO1, ISSION, APPROVING :DESIGN REVIEW FUit .TRACT' NO. 13621 FOR THE . DEVELOPMENT OF 7 SINGLE`FAMILY LtITS`,: ;AwO„.RELATED:;TREE REMOVAL-- PERMIT 90-ill", LOCATED DM THt"NdRTHEAST CORNER OF. HILLSIDE 'ROAD AND.' HEC2WlOSA° AVENUE_ IN THE 'VERY (LOW.. RESIDENTIAL 'DISTRICT APN: .: 20I-Io1�04, AND MAKING' FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF" A. Recitals. (i) Sahama Investment, Inc."Ns, filed ap"apptication for the Design Review of Tract No. 13621 as �fescribed in .the'"title of this Resolution. . Hereinafter, the, subject Design; appliation" Peerier� .r"eq:iest .is;: referred "to?; ag_."the , On danuary:24, 1990, ttia Planning°'Co�aaission of the.City of Roiicho Cucamonga held a meeting.to consider,the application. tifi) A11 1QgeE) prerequisites to tie adoption af" this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, itlis hereby found9 dotereined"and resolved by the . Planning.Commission of the:City. of"Rancho: Cucacionga as go11"omS:. i. This, Comission hereby specifically finds that a11, of tht facts set forth ir_.the Recitals,. Part.,A, of this Resolution are true and.correct. 2. Z-� a upon su6stantiai,evidence'preseP.e to this Co�nisSion during the above-referenced;'meetiog on January 24, 1990,, "including written ,)nd oral staff reports, this Cosssnission hereby,1pecifically;finds ;as;falIows: i) :. a) That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the -General Plan; and b) That"the, proposed design As in. accord with the objective of thry Development:. Code and- the purpc, of the district in thict the site is. 1'ocated;'and c) That the proposed design is in',compliance Faith each .of the applicable provisions of :the Development Cade; and d) T1tiat the proposed design, together with, the conditions appl:icabie, thereto, wit, rtot .be dctri�ieritai to,rthe""public health; .safety,' ors welfare;..or, materfatly indurious to;properties 'o r Improvements:in the 4icin1.ty. f PLANNING R60_0TI0N tt0 t DR FOR TT'3?62I f 5AH!! INV2STHEtdf COFfPAN`t j 4r January 24,;199(Y Page 2 c. _ r Based UP" the,findinga"and conclusions:set Earth in paragraphs 1 and 2,above; this. Coissian hereby approves the application subject-;a ch artd every condition set fhrth be ars ,ant in the attached,Standj Cond1t 0 J� attached hereto,and incorporated herein by this" reference. . ., I) Ali conditions af; Resols tion N©: 89'1�5 ~'approving Tentative Tract 13 xI shall ,apply 2) A perimeter -six-foot masonry wall 'Shall tse • provided around the".project to. match, 'the'wa1i, " an Hi,yl'side Road, The wall, shokld rut; an. the inside edge of the I deal,,egges4rian traits and contain gates;to p�ooioe trait aecass: : Trail fencing should be,eliminated ,in ;favor •of.the,. ' masonry wail on this ;side of the trait; 3) Front: yard return.welts, shalt ,be providet! on Al lots to match the, :perimeter ,masanry ` fence. A1.1 other yard wails shall:be masonry . ., avith a sh;ao it tch,'th0%front-yard_ rdturrt _ wa111. ;0thor yard aal it,Hoed not contain rock pilasters, except as noted herein: 4) , The perimeter wall aloR Hiltside.Rdad should tc1r.the .wal I direct'(y aaros4 the.;street for, ' i rasa 13877; The. Schowa]tei� monument, shoal d,. al so,.matdh the Monul ment an :the..south side of ere street " and . sh4utd., tie placed at the suutYieast corner,of the site ; .° �) Ainsens 'ortai detail ei the Schowalter eroriuent. shall.;'se provided`with the..sanstructi�an.pl.ahs = ior-,ft•act 1362x fort rev3,e�r arid.'aQprasai "af`the , Ciytyy Planner prior to "issuance mf ,buildiis§ permits far this tract ' G) The, s°ackrrail fence detail sna11••be`re5i9ed to sybstitute the pee9er 'Bolo rams Vtth 2" is a° rails ta,em, I,a 2 the PAY �.:=trait iepce rails. 7} " The windrow removed to construct the perimeter Masonry fence on the...north, side Of Lot 4 shayl be replaced. ReploceW6t: 'Drees are to. be ucalyptut Maculate "(spotted gun), Is ga torn. minfimum, spaced' Yeet an' center' planted south of the' new,mall H) An additfanai ,3.- Qot'wide tree easement s all "? be,," proviaWd "for .the tree'S',: 'At,are planted adlacerit to the "no 6Y the ty , triat .on._lots a,;.b alld. r PLANNING COMISSION RESOLUTION NO; ; f DR,FOR TT 13621 SpltAElA MVESTKF iT COMPANY Ja`riva y ate;: 1990 ' Page 3 9)� Both street .frontage improvements, including a, ` 'the rock/rail fence, block,.wall 4ait4i pilasters, trail; ': landscaping and,'. irrigation and t :'Schowatter-monument sbatl be cempieted prior to tf �any oqc_ aflC p y;ref ease. I 4. The �cretary to phis Co�rYnission' sha71 certify to the adoption of .tfti s�a4so1 ution , f APPROVED AND ADOPTED HIS 24TN DAY OF,�3ANUARY 1990 r�4 l 'PLANNING CdK41SSI0N JF THE CITY OF RANCHQ CUCAI+SdNGA . x BY: arty I e , a ratan, x - . ra_ Ou,j Ier, acre ary . f I, Brad Buller, Secretary'of the Planning Casission of the City of 6tancha ` Cucariignga, do hereby certify that th67 foregoing Re'soLutio�a was- duly ,d regularly.introduced,,-pass gd, and adopted by ,t6tra Planning`:C®mnissioh:of',the City of Rancho:Cucarisonga, at a regular meetingi•af the Piasinipg Cotts�ission held on the 24th day.of Janpary, 1996. -1b h "foll_p ng vote to-wit: AYES: CC!*USSIONERS NOES: RS Ill ABSENT: COAmISSIdHERS. 11 ; b ct t' VN✓ � 3 0 _ e tl ZM ma Y pY la eat 3 '�.$ 73 ra g°'i W'• wY ^i . Syw U�«g �,b/yy�YMf o:6 @ ��gab y g `U9@��0�«�ry N 7r•'>Op 'py�0 �� .N... r. ��a�y��. �it a' NL'1yY V,Y{y{��pW�gCWYSS _r6M■wM■� .0 ��puuy� �L yby CT 2,31 NNy N C � CCCC W Ig ppp 1,. s � r.o _ a knuh a 'j� 13 �'- jfl 41. beP °T Tz AP Us i►-W � 'S &tea' Q�" " _ � l Sg 'J41 SH 03 age$ $g tl g 0,28 lei eJ&' 4 gyres .a�®ffia �: "� ' 3 If U. all re 1S. 33p11 4 $ M o ti"Emig ;5 Ll g ;7a�®e :•c� � �Qa $� � �+> { LC.r'3®• .4.55"' }$p��.d 't®T6'�6Y c�o 3yy0_s�'p-'3 �q' 9ad3 Lzty® p®Op QCQC4 B"s .'yYy�S egOg Y�i pp b @q�y�SN i9 .._�8 8^yi�l aAp LOt®•SCOY� Lai_ WY�] ® _ Oq�. L _. ®L '_till 866�` tl N m 22 ..0 _4 P � a �� � a8. d u a� $ g ®a�_d a'� e� sla LL 3�s� ��' ��" �� # � �����• �� -V `gip �� �v Tog SIR Pig A Xh Qb 34 jig Sri a Wu11130 �. h ® OI• w r .q = w ENSW 19 A 2 ~ QtlQ }� . 'S� $O u�1^333 bra B�® {➢ pSj � M 4 : b Piq M� •i� O Y ,�O YY+,+S CC {. OpV�W HA Oa C M i,`NNby T1, 1, � s� a�, a 65 % ® qq �ry�yyp ag �I�u By P�{1���q� �$ `g t�L' bjil N. 40.r w gW�y`+l Y�lV S. 'VpM GV bP'VO �Ap� N_ �+�aps rpw6r ail at 1,24 ,24 rN 2YA �I vn6 9,pr W. r�• O '6!V Yrr v of b ® C+ p' r , &It Sb K g�$ ems' sbZjZZ Boaz bu 0 1.2 M >V C? laau ve nb. V �r sg» ® 9g Qtl� O -N V-bi Yu ®a all r -gym �$ll t s tl mkll I s ��: ��� � � � 3r. ���� �" =W� • �t®��.:, $a s s ��gsygg�' g� 'yry$.. ta66gpWe� '0 A a Fw Rl H 4 - b Q �. Q n b tl ,^R . wx Mfg, saleSea Ei! b IA OY AM{YLpg `Y Y nr �. s 9�M 1.s5 (yam p��p g NN •Y s d b d aG ,tii��g$pp� C�� •� y�a � Y��.3 L� 15 gJ�GG� OQQ.ag I 31's 7�.�1d6Nytl rx'R S i �y.. p L CEO 91 � ®_d NV YM• IUT1..�G�, a, N 8- tasa, _S-n aPN 89 •+ ��ag� � _a fibq g 'Sag gy -.e !-m... oo ZL 4e yy pMS �• 6 _ 7�� id V �C IN ggg 1311m, .gam tl$$ Cp{ q ,b � e oCna Yiyq ` ��`q']��"g C py q V P _N O�iI Vw•Gi�. V�i t2 v:y p y Y. a •_tl gg _ 23 ��•$ $x~; .teaIc o N == $ N� � ; �g •+ 3 c gMN g i p g �.. y pn c =$ 12; '�� 'tl $ Y �� �� .. N Yip zg 21 JI'l ub VC a L Y all wpis at `i 13 ZZ wow gig, a" a' kv IC 33 Nt »» Si yyyg Y G t[ T p 22 na- s 32 _ to EMS IM CAM 22 baim rd �� Y P e �e $ s T $ y N a M $ �s141, �_ y -U rs $ w d La � �..•y, � �a� ge s +� $gs use ,.-� N� � 'eD —� it Yr i• Ie�® as aD ^ Q Ago I. I IR 335 r sa e ; a � sg �� s s a3� •—r -t0, .11M Hah~ R all Y r i NZ r �� .� �H � N i r ALZ yy Iti2 Sing r q e�w ice. t `.a. - s� u fiy. Y x� I X" V C fl a 0.'6p QQC 0L > ffr�u. Bi 'tW YgrG�g Y®�L.aW es�pi ��uL ryy�Y r9;: {_O.NSV ~� @Y _■M■w6v a-� ygN :yigf�ly p �. YR LY i 7rV &IM Q �w :Wr`tER@@.wwwEu Sr _r �ezNprry b Sys¢ Y.p iy sY_p Vr Eft ji g 3 ggs w• ,. Y �. N ,. j Sit fAY / s cst a Zi a w IT w a g a5 c Lo s, all 1 3 i:E 91 e y p d� a �s� ��� � rya � s —:_" d• so 88 � " ffi � wig hg= ���d' � ja Air $$ $ . w g • 40 .2 ijz 3 rf ® p � Iswi � CIZX'DF RANGSjQ CUCAML)1,JG°A STAFF REPORT �r January 24, I99L1 ► 'j TO: —.hairman and,kembers of ttie PiahOng Comission FROM: Brad Buller, City,Planner f Steven R ss p (;, &X; o , 'Assistant i anger SUBJECT : ASSESSM69 FOR, 0tVEL.0PNENI REv1Ew 89=25 e ;ve oilmen a a �u enan us ness pa , a n9 142,3:3f? quai.eQet.'on 9 S acres of land in the Industrial. Park Aistrict,'sub area, rn j of the industrial Specific PTan`, 10Cc . at the southQ6st cornea' of trademark ttraot`and Cent0t,0-Avenue = APN; 210-c: I. PROJEC`C,STATUS: t, A. Action Reuested: Staff recends continuance of 'this,,item until pT'annning Coinissian Meeting of'February- I4, i994, pending resolution of technical difficulties. {Le ily itt,d�, 8r a :City Tame -_ BB:SRfjfs r �5 lY C. } 1TY OF�iANC1�iJ CFJ Ah[ONrP�� ... .�( s� T. i i �.a Y t•y A. DATE: January 24 1990 . A r TO: Chairman and Members of the-Planning Commission FROM: Barrye R. Hanson; 'Senior"Civil Engineer' BY: Betty A. Miller, Associate Civil ERg neer �... l SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTA! ASSESSMUT;AHD.TEli9ATIYE PARCL 90-12733 su v s_lon o. . . :acres. o ao n o�� p'arcT-�Wel, Industrial Park;Development District„snd;riaVen Otierla�y Di trice,• Subarea 6 ofr the Industrial Spe3Gific'i�lan;toe:atad`on the nod th,�ast corner of Haven.Avenue and Acacia.Street (,APN 209 40]:- a I. Backgrounl: The item eras originally scheduled for the P,T Y anni�nZ Co�aiss on meting ern November 8, 1989. It was continued .the 1�anuarq liX, g990, ivesint/f;at the applicant's request. .he applicant regyested .an additional: continuance, �.to April of 1990; but.the,Coi g fission .hose .:to grant..a two week continuaa qe„'during which time the appli cant couio 460de �Pether .to wi c:draw or have the Corissiorr act on'.the pject. ` < dI. F!;;alysis: Ci The applicant did not providewa icriaal withdrawal request;°the`refo.z; the prq�ect is being subittd to the: Cai'ssion for .eonsideratiart as described>fi the.:attached Noae er,8, 19&4; staff report. Respectfully submitted; Barrye R. Hanson �� Senior Civil Engineer BRH•BAM:dlst Attachments: Staff Reports of January 10,, ;1990 and K6vember 8 19a9 F, CITY OF,RANCHO CUCAMONGA STV MEPRT " DATE: January 109, 1980 T0: Choi man and members of the Planning Co insion FROM: Barrye R. Hansen; Senior Civil Engineer; BY: Betty, A..-Ailler,,Associate Civil` Engineer SUBJECT: ENYIRONK TAL -ASSESSP dIT.AAd! TENTATIdki PARCEL 14AP :12733 '`GLENFEU l�suSdgv,s on .o : , acres o .an n parce s n, �e Industrial 'park `D`eveiop nt District .and ISaven Overlay D `,str•',ic' Subtrea 5, of the Yndustri.aI Specific Plan;located .on; the northeast corner:of Haven Avenue',and Acacfie Street' O�PB3 2�9u401-01? I;. Backgrournd• The item was originally schedulea,for' the,Planning C ission ruing on Noveoer 9, 1989, but was. continued to tooight°s., eting s` the: applicant's request. The applicant is nna ;re uesting' ,an additional continuance, to the second, ting in;Aprfl, '1990 fletter',attached). iI- Discussion: The original reason given for the c®nifnudnte request ryas. the applict,�t's need to reassess'. thMr ability to Weet the Tentative Parcel iiap conditions. In subsequent !Ulepibfte coftarsations with staft, tltie applicant's engineer has indicated; that the applicant` would like to continue ''the protect indefinitely. St+ir=f suggested that -all.,better approach would:be to a�fihdraw and reapply,at a later date. III, Recormendation: Staff rcc' nds'that a two`week 'continuance tie granted,,during which ti the ;applicant shall decide whether to withdraw the project or have the ssion act upon it. Respectfully ,submitted, Barrye Hanson Senior Civil Engineer Attachment: Letter r a CITY OF RANCHO,CUC WGk . REPORT w r, 0A7E: November 8 '1989 To-; man An nbers of,,thex Planning.0 nission.`- FROMr Barrye R. tiansdi Senior'Civil Engineer Betty Miller, Associate Civil Engineer , SUBJECT: EN►',IRORkgTA'L'-AS'SESSkEPIT_Aijo'TE►ITATIVE PAACEL tAAP. 1033. ' GL'ENFED o, acres 'Or.711and -IMpZ parce`f�"''the Industrial` Para Develo ent, 'D9striet and, Hayenl=8verla� D stricty r Subarea 6 of the ;industrial Specific Plan;, loca "dean,the. 1.'ti'east corner, of Haven.�Avenue.and Acac1ja Street (AP�1�?09=d0 I. PRWECT AND SITE DESCRIPTIONi A.' Action Re nested:' Approval :of the proposed Tentative' P Parcel t� `as on Parcel Size Parcel 1 5.14acres, :net Parcel 2 1.7a aBeres, net Total S:9f;a4res; net C. Existing Zoning:. Industrial'Park; haven Overlap district D. Surrounding Land.Use: North - Vacant South Office Building East,- Narchouse/°'distributien.bull ding vast'- Vacant E. Surruund22 Generai "Plan and Deyel-m-nt Code Dksignations: North - Industrial'Park, Maven Overiay-District South - Industrial 'Park. Raven Overlay DtsteiCt East'- Industrial :,park,!' �est' Ind"trial'Park, Have OverlayDistrict + „3 ram', i 77777 t �z' -LANNING COMISSIOH STAFF'REPORT 7EAiTAT37E`PARCEL. A 1733 6lSNFED NOVEMBER,B, 1989 s PAGE 2 F, Site`Characteristics,. Par:.el 2 �s developed with 3 61iting;buildin gs . . Parcel fl' has s- turf-covered pad. : A]1, panting areas,;And'drive aisles shown �. Exhibit "B 'have been' instat]ed:': ti IY, AMYSIS. Tie purpose of.this parcel imp is ,fig serrate a, previ'ousiy= approved+' pro$ect;into too; lots, ';as ..shown •in, ExFaibit "B"... ' The, afire@.jexisting building,, 0s Parce! Z 'were `constracted Under 6k 85�45 Building'perseits ex®ikd tor- the p oposd&Wilding'on,ParceI ,t wasl reapproved, DR tiB 7, an, 0anuarlr'.25, 1989 Parcel 1 doe a net Beet ttie miniOWa 1ot'sixe°artd depth requi.re�ents. of.the 3;aven' ,Overlay. Dstrict The Planning Commissi on iY �raive these require6ents if the fo11014ing dete ihitions 'are adp t I. That Parcel..1 i ptr4 of asaster. plan•, and 2. That;the proposal,is cons$st@na with file int t t.a ad. �rpose4o� the; Haven Aver.11 . District. _ `Y � •p c Both determinations can., in e, or this proposal Conditions ®f aparov)t�for 'DR;B 37 which are 9ppl:icabld to the° parcel:- map ,have 'been=repeated. ` Addit foul.,iondit#ons hpve, also eeen uggesZed' by Chino Basin Nunicipal `Watee�District,-the_F9etropoi3tan dater 11trkt, and she Ciiiy's Building and Safet- piVision.' ENVIROMENTAL REVLEH Th@ applicant cosy feted Part I_o€t th@. Initial stuud con Ucted'a fie3_d investigation and'cofpte. "Part ,ii, of the Initial Stu(y;, ; adverse: impacts upon 'the .enV�lrorxsent are anticipated as a result of It project, 1dieefore; Its,Uance of:Negative , Declaration is appropriaie'. IV. CORRESP4&NDg1SCE: NotiCes.of Public Hearing have iF@errs@nt to surroUndir`g proper owners and placed in the'Dai1y Report �lewspapl\rA 'Posting;at, the site,,,has also.heed c hied. C, 4` Z\}t 1 .`Ai =2 trl. i . F PLANNING CiZSSIQ�! STAFF REPt1RT 'TENTATIVE PARCEL. 9P 12733 G_LENFED' tidy 3ER C .1989 PAGE.3" - 3 ` T V 1ECQP NDATIDN It iafrecaammnded that tireyPlannirag Commi'ssian consi ir^ 71 npu -an elmenfis af, the Tentative Parcel dap,1.2733 If after "such conslderaiton, the Co Ssion can recaraaend;approval, Cheri the ddoption;° of the a tached'.Reso��atian and; issuance of - Negati.vz Declaration *60 be approph3ate Respectfully s"itted, {,r Barrye Ri Hanson Senior'Civil Engineer B-RH:BA.4:sd - 4 L Attachments s Vicinity-,alp it,�hitiitf"A"a ' s Tentative Map "B"1 Reso7uti3OR and a, Recoa nded.Conditionr,. -Approval a rL F•:r 4 Try sr I v 4 rx 0l RAN ��IO CSC NG I Ci.N h,'Y i�tA� G- Ox. A Y . Adak 10 I 110 -c�=r L 1�'-� asavia:e%a7.Frs .{risr sJ.l: � �j, 1 i �1 Alr r e4e oa. a 1 lu ��� �' � 1 1 �ii a � � ✓ %� .- P:as�, .sa/sue, ,� ��y '" ;'�,,. E.j�; 1 J t, I � �II, ` © 'fie `\ d ;,;�°- •��� ` I All) i 11 `�. O R 1 crier. 1 j 11 o.oJPB8& I '11 a aB I it Gard `' 0 v 1 t I s OIBORifaD j � � 1 1 ` � V I ' e serer tml n;1 '1'Y1a n/!1 01, PARCEt, MAP i.2"i C OF . - r Cs-ENMGDIMON, j RESOLUTION 140' V RESOLUTION.OF THE PLANNING COMs�IISSIONAF ,THE CITY OF RANCH CUCAMONGA ,CALIFORNIA', CONDIT30NAL"LY APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL, ,MAP« NLMBER 12733 ..LOCATED C4 THE NOR-T?'5WI CORNER'CF,HAVEN AVENUE AND:ACACIA STREET APH 2N.401-01 [iHEliEAS, Tentative Parcel flap Plumber 12733 submitted by Gienfed. Development, appltcant, for t*ne purpose of subdividing, into ez parcels, the, :? real propel°,•=situated in the.-City of Rancho: Cucaonga County 'of .San Bernardino, State of California, identified.'as::APN(s) 209-401-0i, loceted at the northeast corner of Haven,Avehue.and Acacia.Street ad-";-; WHEREAS, on November, 8,' 1989, and,; 'Itinued,-to January ,10 and January 24, 1990, the. Planning..Cemnission held. a dulyadvertised public hearing•for the above-described map. NOW, THEREFORE,,'THE,RANCHO CUCAMUGr1.PLANNING CONV9ISSION RESt1LYED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION,1:' That-'the following finding's have been made: 1. That ;the .map is consistent I..witlti they General Plan and the Industrial Specific:Plan. 2. T�iat. the improvem€nt of the'•.prdposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and,the Industrial;.°Specific Olin., 3o That the. s?te is physically,` suitable for the proposed. ' develohxaea►t. ` 4. : That" the proposed :subdivision and imp rovmnents will, not cause substantial environmental' damage or public healt, problems or have.adverse'etfeci3 on abutting property. SECTION Z:`"This. Ceii ssion.,fiads and�ceetifies that'tae project has been rev eweiTaa considered in compliance with.k the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and,:fur,Cher, this Commission hereby issues a Negative `Declaration. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 12733 is hereby ,approved subJect to�T"2 attached, Standard Conditions, and the"following Special Conditions: 1. Existing Overhead Utilities a. Oth :Street (vacated) - - .The existing .overhead ` utiiities.' (commuriicatians° fop-.66KV- electrical) along ths. pro�e.t's north boundary shal,T he andergrounded"from the first pole on the west side of Haven Avenue to the girst�pole off-s#te - C`g PLANl�I 6.'" SSION RESOLUTION NO. TENYAT-`r PARCH. 14AP 1273: - GL.ENFED Y JANUAi.Y 24, `1990 ;. PA&E 2.= -east of;:the roject.t east boundar prior to public Improvement acceptance or, oceupar�c whichever. ofturs first.. The developer,may request a mimbursement-agreenent to recover one-half the:City adopted.cost for undergroundi;ng from future deveiopiseut as it: occurs;•on the north side of the AT&SF Railroad. b. Railroad 'Right-cf-Flay ;- An "in-lieu 'fee as contribution to the future undergrou�tdi:ng of the existing 6erhead.d'v'Mities (railroad' telecopmunication lines) on ,the�projdct' side of the AT&SF .Railr, 1.shalI be 'paid ..tQ the City..prior to recordation.of the-:Final Pawcy3fiap. The fee shall be the full adopted unit amount-times° tfie-Iength from the-center of ` Haven Avenue ta' the .east pra3ect bou��dary, The developer may request a reimburse e.at IagreIement to recover%one-half the City adopted cost from future, development'.as it occurs on the north sit°" of the.AT&SF Rail road. ,t 2. Chino"Basin "Municipal Ytater, DS :,:ct own acid operates the Non-Reclaimable, Flaste Sever on the north`,side of this map. The developer shall be responsible for any relocation, codification; or other construction 'of this system 'required :dJe to the development.. Such tork shall includL, but not be limited to adjusting manholes to grade, real.igntie�t of lines to allow other utilities to, be constructed and other,similar construction. If any" modification r or adjustment to' District f�'^;-lities is desired, plans shall be'' approved "`by the, Dii 'ot before proceeding. In addition, _the,easement for the`sei_.T and other ' utilities on the north side of this subdivision sha1'1. be shown on theFinaV Parcel ;Map. 3. Record a reciprocal parking agreement-concur.,ent with 'the map. 4. The City's slope easement adjacent to Haven Avenue shall be extended to the noi:4;1 property,line. 5. A Convenant and Agreement' Regarding Maintenance of Yard Ease ts.for Buildiing B shad be recorded with the Final ,Parcel Map. The agreement shall be submitted for review and, approval by the Building and Safety Division prior to recordation. 6. The Metropolitan. Plater District easerwent on the north side of Acacia Street shall be.dimensionally tied to the map boundaries on the Final 'Parcel dap. 7. A permit from the Meetropolitan Plater District .is required for. work within its right-of-way. ti •a i _ PLANNING CO*ISSIOwgESOLUT.ION N0. ' TENTATIVE,PARCEL XAP I2733' GLE..WED JANUARY 24,,=1990 PAGE 2 APPROVED, AND,ADDOTED THIS;24iH DAiY'JANUARY`.i990 , PLANNING COS ISSiON_OF Tme CITY�&:RANCHO CUC NGA' BY: arry a ATTEST. Brad BU 11 er, ecre ary.. I, Brad Buller, Secretary; of 1 e P1anniag Cap hiss on of, the City of;Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby ,.Certify that the foregoing ^Re_toTution was .duly .and regularly introduced, passed, and adapted by the P1�hning;Conaaissi9h of the .. City of Rancho Cucawnga, at a,vegular meeting'bf"the Rlannino Commission heId� - . on the 24th,day of January;, 1990, ,by the`fallowing'vote:-ta-wi;t. AYES: CO* NOES: COMISy10NERS: ABSENT: COMISSIONERS 1!` �t �titi ��ll O �� •rV OQ A � `p Na. 0.6 �V l ♦ C � = N R {...� .0 Gw Cam. ��0•-.. .Yi•� .f _3:. 'd L VNC a wy V� 'V j gr peY � N •� p � a _ W N Y � .�'. V� N Allk 41 Hs it ew M i E le p d 3a In .19: Z. 0C Qy f ! � T c�==>..:SoLYc � �'. $a.:�`I YI�W V.. V124{v. iZ 6 NYC O:L b10 (O �€ >'91 fi c as rw Lp 4a{ O alW. Y L:GO ^. Y L .8 fi WWWWW p FgN Y wp Y� ++>zOLY y b V CC u N@ LN Q� 6'4L+� lo:V WV' O YaI Gi9yYt V o b _ � 14 e Y1 YO, 1� OyrM41:6 b L � w.0 �� A�►. ar rc A. a ti 4 IM ip Rb AR q ,. qY -.Zs Us 44 .ate+ tVC 'V tl a ^� Y Ate.. YS yf V L > G w e a u. gQ w N 4 L 4 Y Y e; )� OK� T M , a Spy y 4 C A 3T C M 1 iq`. LAL qbu Yuu �A Y'.VwKy Yp} YpYS�.N. �, C4ApS. GyeYi�,p Q>M V4( A ZpprCl4 .2:~ tVt 4.Y. 1,31 CKY�:. _ NU4 w[vC.p CL. K , A uM � •. 7ti 1� .Ypt} .-Y�Ep ii R.'MAyM w.t �f~(y��,p DtV ° :O~ ee> oY wpr ; o qy v4 q p iifJll 4 V k ^ 9 C O Ad VUl Y K v c u 41.2 " oo N,r y.I 1,4iqua : av €Oy ^a F� �hl LL ice- `,! wQ. Y■rM .,. 1R. O<to f O'M. .N Qy� .Cy 44Q9�p.� �L�"� _'�E use � ~Y�■ �4:� >y" RANCHO CJCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ' �TA OR LJ DAZE: January 24, 1990 70, Planning Commission FROM: Lloyd B.' Almand, Division',Chief/Fire Marshal S1JBJFZP: The Polo Grounds After many months of meetings, plan checks, inspections and waiting, I am pleased to inform you that,Mr. John Ramsey'of the Polo t Grounds _Restaurant has satisfactorily met 'all the requirements of the. Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. All items of non-compliance have, been boared ,and a permit to conduct a public assembly -has been issued as of this`date. On -:��half of the Fire Safety Uivision, more specifically Inspector Susan Wolfe' who couTdinated the inspection and ;compliance efforts, I wish to thank,the Commission for their insight and patience with this. matter. c Y rti. XLI CITY OF RAl`,?Giit)CUCAMDNGA EPOk STAFF�jR 'It ATE. January 24,, 1990 T0: Chairmarf,'and MO,of the Planning Cpamission FROM: Brad;8ul lers City",Planner.' BY: Nancy Fong,°Senior,Planner SUBJECT: ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 89-02 - POWGROUNDS - A request" to con sl der- ,su sp ensi on or, <revoca -cn' -an ,entertainment ` permit approved for Polo Grounds,Restaurant, located .at 10877 Foothill Boulevard APN: kke-43&10. (Continued 4 from January "10, 1590 meeting). 1. BACKGROUND: At the 'January 10, 1990'Meeting„ the Cow scion rec s W to prepare,two Resolutions:'-;One fi)r suspension'_and the other one for declining suspensi "n of-rntei-- Uinment Permit 89-02. The. Cornission, then, continued, th6 h'ear�ng £c this regular, meeting. The Coninission indicated to the applicant that failure tol meet all.Fire. District *uirements would result in a suspension. However, should the applicant be able fib resolve all outstanding issues,then the suspension Y:4ld be declined and the - entertainment allowed to continue. The suspension of Entertainment Permit 89-02 woaId prohibit Polo Grounds Restaurant to conflict the following entertainment uses for three (3) months: Live comedy acts, entertainment 'concerts, and jazz.' However, staff would like to inform the Commission that, there is a previously approved Entertainment Permit 87-01 tfiich allows +or disc jockey doing vocals and `daring Should the Commission's intention be 'to suspend all entertainment uses,-then," ; staff should be directed 'to set pubTic'hearing for suspension of Entertainment Permit 87-01-at the next,meeting 1� full t Br Er, City nner 68:NF•mlg ITEM D a" ' f�I:IINHYN6,FOR gI'SSION STAFF WOf aanuary , . Page Attach2nts.. Exhibit aim a�Entertainjant OrMinance;' Ex�sibit °B" - Planning. is low I Auto pf.`' }lovea�Rr 29, f9$9, Draft Planning comaissi'on Min��tes of Anuary 10, 1990 EXhib.it ".Cn = Fire.District P1anx,Gheck.Anport of_`, Ho►ember 27, 1959 , Rosoiie:ion of Suspension for Entertainjrt. t'Perrratt, $9 02 Ra'solu"tion:0eclining Sut !Asicin of Enterrain �f 7 1� 7-7 fff l r f a rn .F 't 4 } I p l 1 � T 1 5 32 tT10 �5.12..o3tE f 211 ' Chapter S.12 REGtJWiTION Or ENT BRTATNIMT Sections: -. 5.12.010 Permit:.required. 5:12020 Entertainment defined; 5,12.03). Exclusions. - 5,12.0tj Application for permit .,_ 5.12 650 investigation and,hearsng, 5.12 0,30 fiiotice of hearing.' 5.12:00 Actibli-at hearing., 5.12.080 . Denial of application. 5.12.090 Conditions iMposedon permxt..> 5.12.100 E.-Aspension or revocation o:E permit. 5.12 120 Time '£dr filing application. 5.12.130 Security guard.required at dariees. 5.12.140 Chapter to overn.; 5.121150 Prohtbit, land penalties. 5.12.260. Civii xAme.x es available-. 5.12 010 Petinit recuired. No person ors ' si;ness entity shall operate, conducat, at manage any,p:. �� dr premises open to the pub*'-whet, food or beverages are ;.. sold., offered for,sale,,,or given away, and where-ary form of ontErtxinment, as defined herein,;is provided or furnished' without first ,obtaining a I PsM mit so to do,as-hereinafter provided for in:this chapter. (Ord, 290 S (part1 ', 1986) 5.12.020 Entertainment defined. "Fnt¢i`tainment" means every foxzE of live .enterta nment 'music, solo band or or= chestraneact, plop,burlesque show, fashion ,show, review', burlesque p g ,, act or song, and dance. act, or any other act or performance participated in by.,one or more; persons for the purpose of holding the' attention of,, gaining the attenzioa,and interest of-, diverting z3r =amus ng . guests or patrons, , (Ord, 290 51(part) r ]Q85). 5.12.036 Excx'usions. The provisions of this chapter -pall not be deemed to require a ;permit ft.;s_the following; ,-, 'For the u� of a=ra3io or other-,electroniea�"s play �4 back device in any a:tablishk4nt, excep'`,'when utilized •by, an announcer or �d3�sc jockey" why at any ;time provides, ariy form of vocal entertainment, including; the announcing of song titles or artists° names in conjunction therewith; B, For, any 'sntertainment. provided for .member their guests at'a private c1�gb where admission.is- not.-open tc .the public; (Rancho Cucamonga {^z ! I It ' o 5.12.040 C. For entertainment conducted in connection with a regularly established motion pasture theater, recreation park, circus,,or fairground; D. For entertainment conducted by or sponsored by any bona fide club, society or associati�n, .organized or incor- s porated for benevolent, chaXita)sle, dramatic or literary purpcsesy having an established`membership,,,and which holds meetings at regular intervals of not'less than once per. three-month period, when proceeds, i£'any,° arising from such entertainment are used .for the purpose of such club, society or association, E. For entertainment provided solely by a piano player or harpist playing music for the amusement t�`f guests ,ur. °patrons of an establishment; F. For entertainment conducted solely<on or at any premises or location which is-.owned or operated by, or leased by, to or fzamt the 'United States, stage eof Cali- fornia, county; of Sian Bernardino, or any agency or subdivi-. sion thereof. (Ord. 290 51(part)1 19.8(i) . 5.12.G10 Application for permit. Applicants for ' entertainment: ,permits shall file a written,.,signed and verified application with -'the city Manager, or his designee, showing: A. The name and permanent address of applicant; . B. The name, proposed and current, if'any, I business address of the applicant.. If the applicant is a corpora- tion, the name shall be exactly as set forth -in its 'articles of incorporation and the applicant shall show the name 'arid residence address of each of the officers,: direci 4s, and each stockholder owning not less' than twenty-five"percent of the stock of the corporation. if the applicant is. a part- nership, the application sha12 show the names and residence addresses of each of the members', including limite-�' part nets; C. `A detailed description of the proposed entertain- ment, including type of entertainment, number of,persons engaged in the entertainment, and any further information about the entertainment or entectainera, as-the city manager may deam necessary; D. .The date, hours and location whez:e the entertain- ment is proposed to be conducted, and.the'admission fee, if any, to be charged; E. The name or namesiol the person or persons respon- sible for the management or supervision or applicant's business and of any entertaimment; F. _A statement-'of the nature and ,character of ,ap ccnt's business, if any, to be' carried on iz conjunction -*;.t_h such. entertainment, including whethar o'r not; alcohol will be servead as part of such businesi; G. 'Whether or not the applicant <v,'r any p'ersan .or per- sons responsible -for-the•management .or supervision of ` (Ranc;ho Cucamonga",,-", 90-2 5.12.050--512.(? 0. 4 applicant's business have been, within the previous ten years, 'aonvicted of a crime, the nature of' such offense, and , the sentence received therefor including conditions of parole or probation, if any; H. whether or not applicant has ever had any permit,or-.* license issued'in conjunction with the sale of alcohol or provision''of entertainment revoked, including; the date thereof and name of the revoking- agenc ` lz Such other reasonable in formation as- the city manager, or dmsgnee,'may deem necessary. (Ord. 290 S1(part) , 1986). 5.12.050. Investigation and ,hearing. After the appli- cation for an entertaxuaent permit has been,filed, .;the city w. manager shall cause' an investigation to be made of,such application, _and after such'; investigation"has br"- completed he shall cause the application to be set for''.heaiing before ;e planning commission and shall notify the ;applicant of the date of such,hearing. (Ord. "2.90 Sl(part) , 1986) . 5.12.060 Notice of hearing. after the city manager has-.set the application for hearing, he shall cause notice of the hearing to be :t given o all property owners within;,; three hundred feet of the proposed or actual location of the applicant's business. For the purposes of this section, notice to p,�operty.owners shall he sufficient�iff given to those property owners who appear, as such on the`last equal- ized assessment roll. Additionally, the city manager shall cause a public notice'to be posted at the location e' wherthe business :or entertainment is to be conducted. All%notices provided for in this section shall be ,in the form and manner as prescribed.by the.city manager. The applicant `shall' bear- all costs and expenses in mailing, printing{,:, and posting such notices and shall Fay such Costs. _to 'the city,'pricr to the :time set fog'public heating on the spending application. Failure to pay such costs by the applicant shall .be grounds to deny his. application. (Ord. 7.9f..Sl(part) 1956) . 5.12 076 Action at hearing'. At the time and place set for public hearing as to any application, and as may be._ continued from day to day, the planning comdissie ..shall hear and-determine all the facts, and evidence relevant to, the applicant and supervisory employees, as well as the' entertainment proposed, including, the nature and location of 'he proposed entertainment. {Ord. 290 Sl(part) ; "19fl6).. 5.12.080 Denial: of application. At the canclusion of , the :hearing before 'the planning commis�ion, _tI planning commission shall grant, rconditicnally ;grant, or deny the application, which decision 'shall be final.unles5'appealed in 'accordance with the provI signs of Section 17.U2.08,OB- of r. r the' Rancho Cucamonga,Municipal,Code. Such decision shall be'`. 90-3' (Rancho Cucamonga Orr, r r! yea S J rt.f. ti. 5.12.090--5.12.100 �- set forth in.a resolution which shall be adopted within thirty days after such decisian is rendered.- The planning commission may deny said application if it shall find and, determine any of the Poll -yring: A. The conduct�of tie establishment or the granting of - the application would'be contrary to the public health, safety, morals or welfare; or, B. 'The- premises or establishment is likely to be operated in an:'illegal, ,improper or, disorderly mt ner; or- C. ' The applicant or any other person associated with him as principal or partner, ,or in a.position or' capacity, - involving partial or total control over the conduct'of the business for which.such permit is sought to'be ;issued, has been convicted'in any court,of-competent jurisdiction of any,' offense 'involving the presentation, exhibition or perform- ance of any obscene show o:f,any tiind,,or of;a felony .or; of any crime involving moral turpitude, or has had any.approv- al, permit of license issued:in."co�r unction with the sale of alcohol or the-provision'of'enterta.,cnment.revoked within the preceding five years; or D. That granting the application would_create a public nuisance;-or' . E. That the normal oper`atiosi of the premises would interfere with. the peace and quiet of any, surroundinq res-, idential`neighborhood; or. F. The applicant has made any, false, misleaiirg-or fraudulent statement of material fact in the ,requ;red appli cation. (Otd, 290 51'(part) , 1986) . 5.12.090 'Conditions imposed on `permit: ' After the public hearing as to any application, the planning commis- sion in granting any permit may also,impose: such reasonable ' conditions as to the use or extent v.`. ;-uch;.perm 't as it deems appropriate. (Ord. 290 Sl(part) '"' 986) . 5.12.100 Suspension or revocation of 2ermit. - A. r After notice and.hearing, the planning commission may, sus- Pend or revoke an£ permit-granted pursuant to this chapter if said commission ,finds�'and determines that any.parmittee, his agent_ or employee, or any person connected or associated with the perm3ittee as partner, director, officer, general manager, or other 'peraon who is;exercising inaragerial. 'au- thority of, or on behalf of, the permittee or any enter- tainer acting under the authority of such permit.; 1. Made any false, misleading or fraudulent state- ment of a material fact in the ;application ;for permit;,or any report or record required to be filed purSuantL to this. 7 ��hz,pter or 2. Violated any provision of this.chapterp or>®f' ' ' any statute, ordinance,, or condition 'relating.to his permit feel activity; or . dRancho Cucamonga 90-4 '., - jf.. 3. %s ;conVicte� of,a, felony, or any crime involving moral turpitude, or i 4. Violated `any rules, ,reguZation�i or conditions Adopted by the plarinang cbmnii ssion or-c iy-,!council,relating - to the ermiti"I s,,business or.P permit, or � . 5'. Conducted..a permitted business itr a manner con- , trary to the e�ce� health, p , zafety and of the,pudic: or r, 6. Demonstiaten 4-hat he,/she is: unfit to.,be trusted with, the privileges gn ter+e i by` such a permit; B.r The decision of�the.planning'.=commiss"ion.shzil. be set forth in a ,resolution which shall :be adopted within ' thirty nays of the date of such decision' and shall be. fiial �.; unless appealed; in accordance with 'the;;provisions of Section- 17.02.0808 of the Rancha�Cacamonga Municipal Code. (Ord'.. 290 51( -art) 198E,) 5.12.I1tl. Fees < The' fee 'for an Qnterta`ir me)at'permit. } shall be eventy-five doh;pears; payable annua ly .on.or before January ist of each and every`_year: Such-.permit.shaZl be in addition to any:business 'ia. cense fee as "may be r�+quired by- the-,business" license law,of,'the rdity. , "How.eve,r,"I or..the year 1986, the.fee for 'an entertainment. perrtit shall ,be.: the 'Sum' of forty dollars,payable upon submission of an application., (Ord. 190'S1(part) , 1986),. 5,12.120 Time for filing a plication. All..persons' who will be presently required to -file for and,°obtain, an enter- tainment ;permit, by reason of the ':provisions of thi's chapter shall have,to and inc uding; November' 1. `1986., within which . to file their applica` ions for an entertainment permit ;with the city manager. (Ord. 290. S1(partD ,'1986) 5.12.13.0 se'cur.ity award-required at .dances. All persons conducting- a.,public dance or any entertainment vtiere dancing by; 'patrons or customers is permitted';, shall have in attendancek.at the premises :fo=-the purpose of-supervising the dancing'�And,the conduct of all patrons and' customers';.•a duly licensed and uniformed security guard at all `timrs;'such dancing is per 3tted or ailowed However, the'psovisions of this saction, shall apply`only' to;those estaoUshments or premises where a dance ,floor or dance area an excess of'one hundred fifty square ;feet_-is; ava lable� or designated for, dancing by customers or patrons. (Ora. 2901(par't) , 1986) .. ± 5.12.140 Chapter to govern. Ali provisions of this , title which are inconsistent withfor contrary-to the pro- visons of this: chapter -repealed to the extent.such" provisions are ynconsist`ent with contrary tia the.pro-visions this;vhapter. ' .'tOrd. 290 i�1;(part) , 1986),; (Rancho Gucaonga � t �r S.12.1501 Prohibiti6h and penaltiea: : 1 It is ualaw- fkll for any person £irm, partnership or corporation to v9;o:late'.any praviaian ar to fail'to comply with"any ,of the requirements of thk' -chapter.. Piny ;person, firm, partner,- `. n>ip; or `corporatipn,xyiolating any provision,df this chaptez or failing to caYeply y pith-.any 'of its '�}equirei ierits; shall be jJ deemed guilty o an it°radtion.and upon convicticrirthereaf - shall be punishable as loliaWs: ]. Avfine not e�`ceedinq one,Hundred dollars for a' first violation, fine not `excedinq two hundred dollars,"for a second violation of" the,`sa1��:ordinance"within one year; 3. A fine not,exca tinq :five hundred dollars far each',additional.violation.of the !.same os,4,nand with?n one B. Each such pemson, Firm, partnership. Or or. 3. A shall be deemedguilty of a. se offenrse for each,and every dry.or any portion t�=reof during which any';violaCion of any of the provisions of this :chapter iLs ,coirani.tted;-con-" tinned or permitted by-such.person, firm;" partnership, or corporation and shall be deemed.puntshable,•�herefar. as'.?; provided in this chaptel_ er �. The pro ions of':,this •chapter shall not.he Co strued as: permitting.conduct nrc .pr'escri?oed,herain, and shall not affect t:;�e enforceability 'of any other applicabke 7pro- ` visions of law., . (Ord. 290, ,51(part) , 5612.160 Civil remedies available A•�rzolafion of any'.' of the'provisions of this chapter shall cdnstitwte a nui sauce and may be abated blr the city through ca vi 7 ;process by means of restraining arder ; .preliminary or: permanent injunc tion or in any, other manner prrs vide d by Law_.--for-the aba,.e ment of such nuisance. (Ord: 290 �l;ipart) , `1986) s„ �1 f"r 1 1 tRancho Cucamonga 90 6 i H. EMTER`AINMEPdT PERMIT 89-02 - POLO'.Gmiia3g A request to consider suspens on or reviceation of,an enterta nrent'permit approved for Harry.Cas restaurant {presently yPO o Grounds}, located at 10877 Foothill Boulevard APN: 208-352-10. Nancy Fong, Senior "Planner, presented the 'Staff report. Commissioner 81akesley asked how of entertainment ,permits .are.,,normally ;. reviewed. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated t�,At entertain per' its'•.are renewed annually. i Commissioner Blakesley+ asked when the subdes;%•permtit siiouid next 6e reviewed. ti Ms. Fong suggested that. the permit Could be reviewed. in November. 1991. Chairman Mc Niel opened the'A'4bTic hearing. 1 John Ramsey, Polo Oral} �,;�10B77.Fa�thill „864teva d, Rarcho Cucamotgh, ,stated tie submitted plans within rtwo working day:; of the: last Oeeting� He said the Fire Department returned` the, plans 1E6 him yeaterday; He b' three conaernS about the Fire' Department comments: Z) Theret appeared "' be='in addition error on the ceiling calculations. 2) They requested a comp'leWIbuildirg'. sprinkler plan, and he, had- submitted, only the tenai:t 'improve avt chr�ges, which he felt shouid'be adequate. He stated, if necessary, he c%auld'have a plan prepared and,submitted within a month, 3)-): The piarr.checkfstated. that fire extinguisher placement would be determined .at time-of`f'iral 'inspection. He said that Chief Almond had told.. him where he needed to locate the extinguishers and he would place. them: in those lacationsL and mould object if l the inspector wished to move arty of the 'extinguishers.. . Fir. ':Rams ey ;further stated he would wprk with Brad Bu1l6r on the p.1zzenent of bike racks. Ralph Crane, Ranch( ,Cucamonga Fire Districts stated that,'during the period of waiting for plans;', theWO, Grounds had, s_0stantial. �cpTliance. He- , j recommended the hearing be continued until fu'l'i cosr�liance was achieded.. He said the Fire District requested ;the complete, butldirg sprinkler plans in writing 'in August. He said there had -also been conversations:with the fire protection company that the Polo,,srau,Ods had hired. `A Commissioner Blakesiey asked if there had been tiny ocuparty load violations. i Mr. Crane stated there had only been aria unsubstantiated cortpla nt. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing mat' losed. Commissioner Tolstoy stated h was Ired of wasting th ;Cow,iI siort.'s� t'er ct -1 this item. He said tie was .wilting to allow one more .continuance to `achiey'e full co�rliance, but he would appose eny further iontinu&M_es ' NAe felt the applicant ?tart toad plenty of tfime to;resolve' the situation: a Planning'Cortmission Minutes -10- 1�'vember Zg, 1189 Chairman Mc Niel reopened the`pubiir`hertring. Motion: N -pd by Bl'akesley, seconded by Tolstoy, to continue Entertainment. Permit 89 Oc rp January lO, 1990. on carried by the folioninyy,yote: . � AYES: CamilSSIONERS: BLArZESt EY, CHTTI.EA, WNI EL, MLSTOY, WEINBEtRSKa NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NDNE re ABSENT:; C"ISSION.ERS: -carried I. VIRONHENTAL ASSESSMENT"AND- CQNDI?IONAL USE i RMIT''88-18 DIVERSIFIED A quest to modify a prev oui us-ly Approv lister plan for the development . of a, ast food restaurant pad in the 'Ne.ighbbrhood :Crmnerc. al District on the no beast corner of Haven and Highland - 'APR% 201-271-66 and'fi7. Bruce Abbott, socials Planrtlr, presented the staff reQort and presented a letter 'from W Stones oppAs,ing; thn"proposed parking con figurai ion. He s«ggested adding condition tq the Resolution requiring approval from Wcky Stores for the pa ng conf�lguration shown in Exhibit A, but'allb4ing ..the configuration shown i rxhib;it B as an alternative';, He discussed the parking options shove in Exhibi A and B. Chairman Mc Niel -obJected the ;parking; Configuration shown in Exhibit. B becaise of four parking ,spac Ialong the dr.iveway,, He 'stated.the.City is not in the position to resolve any flicts betvxen the applicant, Lucky;Stores, and the shopping center owner. He asked if the newly proposed condition protected thO City's interest. Mr. Abbott stated that if the applic t could not `get approval .from, Lucky Stores there would be no.project. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that r'en the i was reviewed in Design Review they requested'a fence to block pedestrians f crossing in front of traffic. W. Abbott stated that the plan would, be revievied staff during plan-'check and the, fence would be verified at thac'time. Commissioner Slakesley asked'if the authentic river rock s being used. Ban Coleman stated the proposal called for La Habra stucco one, as used on the remainder of the shopping center. He said that th Design" Revie Committee recomwnded matching tw materials to.the rest of the: nor. Chairman McfNeI opened the public hearing. John O'Meara, Diversified Snoppirg Centers, 2910 Red Hill, CostvNna, reed with the staff report. H: felt option A'would be the best site altern We, for the 'project and thought,'Lucky 'Stores would agree 'to the option, -.It t Planning Commission Minutes lovember 29, 1989 it .r !� 4 that ta' mmended a tyro-week'continuance.t� a?low`the applicantt' decide whether ithdraw the'project or reque+.t, that the Plannin ission•Ac �?on the a ation:° Chairman McNiel why the applicant had requeted ay.. Ms. Miller responded he applicant's engine d indicated the applicant is trying to determine yproject would romicaliy .feasible-with the recommended conditions of� 1.' Chairman 14cNipl,opened .the public i There were no public comments. Commissioner Tolstoy concur `°.' ith staff` oinerdation for a two-week continuance and suggested staff contact t icant to advise that the item would be continued 1 January 24 He fe at would be, sufficient time for the applican ecide"whether to proceed w e project. , Motion: Moved b stoy, seconded by. 'Chitiea, to con, Environmental Assessment and hive Parcel Map 12733 to..January".24, 10 ion carried by the follow ote AYES: MISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHI IEA, MCNIEL,'TQLSTOY, WE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE A CemmiSSIONERS: NONE =carried. B. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT `8A 02 = POLO `GROUNDS- A request to •�'consid . suspension'or revocatiar „_�f an entertainment perm;t .approved for..Harry C'"s' . restaurant (presently Polo Grounds), located at Y0877 Foothill Bouhpard APN': 208-352-10i, (Cont ;nued.from November 29, 1989.) Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McFtiel opened the public hearing. Ralph Crane, R ncho Cucamonga Fire District, stated the require'ments. had still not been met. He stated Mr. Ramsey,requested a:neeting at 4:00"P.M. today and the Fire District rearranged'their"schedule to meet with Mr. Ramsey. r i Chairman McNiei asked what remainedTto be done. Mr. Crane stated that the District and Mr. Ramsey had not agreed-on seating arrangements. He said Mr. Ramsey had 'submitted sprinkler plan at,their.4:00 ' P.M. 'meeting but that did :not 'allow :time for the; Fire.District to`'review the Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 10, 199J' plans before,t..lnight's meeting. He said Mr. Ramsey. atated_Othey were a poor set of plans. He said a plan sti11 needs to be submitted on =.he alarm system.' He stated Mr. .Ramsey"had agreed"in'principle at today!s meeting to' accept the Fire District's suggested seating arrangement until he has`time to submit a revised seating arrangement. Mr. Crahib stated a field.Investigai�on was still deeded to verify that required items are aci:ui+lly in place. �. 14 Commissioner Veinberger asked if Mr. Ramsey had given any reason why the items` were incomplete. Mr. Crane responded Mr- amsey said the Christmas season was a ,ma3or burden. Commiss finer Tolstoy asked iff the sprinkler plans tF:e "Fire District had receive` were complete. Mr. Crane, responded he would not knoW if the plans,.were,complete until they have reviewed the plans submitted this afternoon. He+.said a letter was sent to the applicant on November 29 outlin,ing�--he remaining requirements I. missioner Tolstoy asked for clari:ficatiort on the'seating plan A ssue . Mr. Crane stated that the initial ,plan submitted. was reviewed ,and sent back approver; with corrections noted. Ne said the Fire District disagreed with the .' seating arrangements proposed by-the architect,: as the code didl�not allow as many perPle as proposed, but Mr. Ramsey disagreed, with-the;Fire District figures. Mr. Crane added the" Fire District does not require additional seating; plans, se long as the applicant agrees to the original occupant load tinditionO ly approved by the District. He said as of ,today's meeting Mr. N, isey 'Mdlcated he would accept the seating" arrangement as proposed 6y the Fire District, but plans to resubmit new seating arrangements in the future. - �`• Hearing no further tes';,imony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the Commission had spent too much time on the item. He said the applicant knew °even before the November. 29 hearing that these were requirements` and he thought the applicant had plenty of time ,to comply with the ,requirements. He felt that there was the possibility that the public is. being exp;,"sed' to danger because t1e Fire District has not been able to review the sprinkler and alarm plans to be 'sure they, are safe. Commissioner Tolstoy recommended a three month suspension of the Entertainment Permit to allow the applicant time to concentrate on :complying with the requirements. He thought it was important for the Citp" to have'establishments with entertainment, but felt it is necessary to be sure they are aperating under safe conditions.; Commissioner Weinberger' agreed and stated she was surprised the applicant not present tonight. r'Airman McNiel suggested that staff "oe directed to return with both "a ho,solution of ;.Approval and. a ..,Resolution 'of. ,Denial. -He said that.' if the applicant ,ways then in compliance, the Planning, Commission could adopt the Resolution or Approval-. Planning Commission Minutes -3- JanuaF';v 10, 199D, Commissioner 'Chitiea felt that public 'safety is critical She felt 'the applicant had been given more than sufficient time to comply, Chairman McNiel stated that the applicant had upgraded an existing location had dramatically improved upon the prior situation. He stated the applicant had expanded the facilities and was therefore not in compliance. Chairman McNiel suggested both Resolutions be retc%ed and the Commission could determine. if_full compliance had been achieved. Commissioner 'Chitiea stated the. Commission was ''looking for compliance. 'not, punishment. Commissioner Blakesley stated it was not known why the applicant was not present tonight. Chairman McNiel reopened the public, hearing. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, to continue. Entertain,dent Permit 89-02 to Ja;�u;ry 24, 1990, and to direct staff to prepare both ,a Resolution of Approval and a Resolution of Denial for consideration., Motion carried by the following vote: - AYES: COMMISSIONERS BLAKFS'_Y, CHITIEA, MCHIEL', TOLSTOY, WEINBERGER NOES': COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried e shopping center, and were directly related' He stated the app for Item C was not present in the audience, and su d the Comnissi it wish to hear Item next.' D. ENVIRONMENT SMENT AND COOITIONAL 6::E P RMHO PERRY - The development of a square toot `retail bui n 0.5Z acres of land within an existing s aentar i:, the v'Commercial Dist ict cf the'Foothill Specific P ted southtatt corner of othil'l Boulevard and Malachite`<Aren,u 261-2% Brett Horner, Associate Plan sente aff report. Chairman McNiel open ublic hearing; Alan Smith, rchibald' Avenue, Suite 210,, Rancho Cu stated ,§ represen icant Forrest Perry. He said they had wo h the Plann " artment .and he.and hi client were attempting to in red- r f' Manning Commission Minutes -4- January,l'k 1990 f3 ti_ PIMECTION DISTRICT 27 � RT PLAN CH"iECK REP Polo Grounds 10877 Foothill Boulevard Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 The: following are the findings or the fire district re: the floor plan/occupancy calculations for the Palo Grounds. The figures. as submitted on the plan for the "Basic Allowable: 'Occupancy and the "Proposed Occupancy%, are not racceptable and have been revised to cer^-ly with the measurements provided and uses noted. The fire district has the option of allowing ` only th• bar/driukiag maximum capacity of 168 persons. The dance floor is'an accessory use area with it's own ma-imum capacity of 100 persons. At this time, it is the decision of the.fire district to allow the Polo Grounds to have:a combined., maximum .capacity in the bar/dance/lounge area of 268 persons, if the following conditions-are maintained; 1. Management will provide axl implement,a dependable, mghod of counting the number, of occupcnis at all times in the bar/dance lounge area. This method is subject. to fire'district approval;;.prior to implemention. 2. A copy nf the approved floor ,plan will be .conspicuously posted in the bar/lounge r_„ 3 An occupant,4. sign, having npmbl h and letters a minimum of 1, inch high on a contrasting batkground, shall be posted inside the south entrance and inside the north entrance'of the bar/lounge area. The maximum capacity shall be 268 persons on these signs. 4. Unannounced inspections will be eonductcd� verify the maximum.capacity:is not exceeded. '-",zlo Grounds employees shall have the current number of occupants immediately available upon the request of`the inspector. 5. Failure to maintain the maximum-capacity at or below the posted maximum of �r 268 persons shall result in revising;the maximum capacity of the >` Pounge area down to 168 persons. The dance floor will be classified as an ace, teary:-e area and its occupant .load will not be figured into the overall maximum capacity. New. occupant load signs will be required. Provide and install a maximum capacity sign in,the banq fet area to read "Maximum Capacity 53 persons Letters and numbers of Lhe sigh to be,a minimum of I inch high on a contrasting background. Redraw the plats to show no more than 53 seats. Submit this plan to the fire dis„sct for approval. A copy.of the..:'7pproved floor plan showing the placement of the tables and chairs shall be conspicuously posted in the banquet area. if management wishes to chutge the seating arrangetnent in this room, a scale draufing shall be submitted to Vhe fire district for approval, prior to implementation. Maximum capacity cannot exceW 53 persons. i - Correct the dining room plan to reflr.et_seating.as noted in red. Rcsui mit corrected plan to the Oro district for approval. A copy of this plan to .be maintained on the premises for employee reference. Provide and install a master maximum capacity sign, in the lobby which whall read, Maximum Occupancy Capacity Lobby 29. {- Total..Dining I82 B-iiLoli* "•Drinking; 168 Ba A/-ouuge Dancing 100 Patio 30 �iuhbets and letters to be a minimum of 1 inch high on a contrasting background. low E . �f', CK , REPORT, i� Polo Grounds'Plan CheciC" Paget v Provide a cuinplete .building -sprinkict plan ahowing all revisions., additions and, deletions to the existing sprinkler 'system. Numerous requests for"this plan have been made since luly.189. Provide a complete plan of the fire alarm system, including wiring, showing all.. revisions. Previous request,for this pls.,,had been made as;far`,back as August 19, Fire':extinguishers will be. relocated by'the Geld lnspoctor at the time'of final inspectlo�t. Extipjjiishors are required 'to be,visible on the public, floor .,Have the neeec ary' tools .rady to relocate the extinguishers at Ce, timn_of inspection. All exit signs and exit door�hardware now 'comply *pith.fifecode requirements as. , veri W by inspection 'October 7. 1989. `This information should 'have been Included on this T.I. plan as " 'Isheet items and a door schedule, A plan check fee of $120 is"'du. for'q\m plan review. Call for rm&,.inspection after corrected -banq_'et area and. dining roof� plans.t sve been submitted and approved. Deadline for submittal is December 11th•'l� A public assembly permit is rr''vired fore"this occupancy. A- permit fen his alrosdy', been paid. Currect ill defcien_4 noted h\`this f;;uort Immediately. c a }"i r =s _ .2 ` n t s :. ;, i l {f RESOLUTION •,,r,, A RESOLUTION :OF 'THE,PLANNING COMISSIGN OF 1'i#E,CIO ; _ RAN 4OuCUCAMONGFl�, .CALIFORNIA, �5USPEdfDINf �ENTERTALNPlENT PERMIT 1942, t,OP, POLO GROUNDS RESTAURANT/NIGHT" GLIB, LOCATEry°5AT 10877',FOUThILL BOULEVARD, AND MAKING FINDIP16S, IN''SUt3PORT_TNEREC,.7 � APN 208=382-I0. t' (i) On Ap fl 26, 1985, the Planning Commission adopted `Resolut�an No. 89-51 declini!nd ,,r�'uacation , of Entertainment ;;Permit: 37-01 for .thp entertainment use of disc. °Jockey diiing vocals and dancing for `lorry,&s.(Pol6 y Grog:A5) Resta�ran# and'' Rosalztiorr, -td4 89=54 approving inter}air�neo� Permit 89.r07 expanding tM'^r e0terta.inment "uses'•for slid reStaUra'irt to alld'W ' live -cam, 'i; acts, `cori�eri c, and, jazz., The �o` approvai5;�itere-Su6lect to specified`conditions and a<miiKtitoi4rg.rc�{iew pe*iod of 180 days p`, C d Ocobe25 1989( i) this Cortenis$ion conrsuc ed a meeaing'tL revj�a the compscarrce of the,conditions' of approva� Lfon'cntartainmPnt Permit 89 A. 0uring._the>,18O-8-y;monrtaring ,period,;numerous physical. :"gges, addition to a chenge of 'a- rship, ccurred. -,The C&M ssion•detcrm�ned that tha applicant, John Ramsey 'of the. Pole Grounds, ,had mat"compi,ied. 'ixth_Vie Minor Oevb opmeat; Review process. and the dire Protection District requirements. Tha Com,�s� on,directed the applicant to_comply witi1in 30 ;f8y8;. and, directed staff to se•' public hearing for snSpen=ion of°tnn Cntertaihment Permif',09-02. "' r- (iii) On November 19, 1989,.this Coisaior, Conducted a duly noticed public hearing en Enteriainme,vitt Permit 8a`02 ft .ound that `thc applicant had complied with .the-require-itents of-,the mrapr Davelpprnegt..R ��ew,b{,t had ;not i complied with all lt?h* requirements af' the Fire-.P.rotectiartrflistrict,. The Commission gave the applicant an additi,nai 45: days to,comp1y oi,Y'continuen i the public hearing 'to January, 10, 1990:`�, 00 On January 10, 1990, the ..ommiE �_Jn,`diter hearing�Yestimony -' from the Fire Protection` District and `examining #acts` during. this'. �� continued public hearing, determined thai; the applicant had.not 6610 J vtat5� all the requirem2nfs. The Commission directed staff=tb pre a'R so7�jtiort to suspend the Entertaisimant^tPermit 89-02 and continued tb1js'publjtc ; at Ing to the January 24, 199.b meetfng.. > (v} On January'?, 1490, this Commission concluded a duty noticed (� public hearing and determined that substantial evidonce,exists t4 sus;Pend, Entertainment, Permit 89`02. f f {vi) All legal_prereguzsites to the adopted, of tfsis.., esolut on l^ have occureed. F , F s ' r . ' PLANNING COMMISSIONSRESOLUTION EP. 89�02 -,POLO GROUNDS January 24; 1900 Page � E. Res6luton., 15 NOW, THEREFORE,At is hereby Foun 1ve4, by the Planning Commissioa'of the (:iiy-Of" ancho Cucamonga as foilows' _, , I. This Commission hereby specifically ;finds that, all of .the facts set ferLh in: @he Recitals Part' i, of this, Resolution are'true. and correct: 2:'; Based upon isubstantiAl'; •evidence inntudinq: ,Written staff reports and further testimony and written ,evidence presented By the Ranc v , Cucamonga Fire Protectioh- District ,-during 'the hearings:descri8ed in the > Recitals, Part A;abaVe, this. Commission'nereby!spOcffica7.ly finds a�;'follaws. (al The applicant,hat failed ,to`e:Mply with `a7; the applicable requirements of the Raincha CuYcamcnga Fire Protectiari ➢isi;rict.. 3. Based upon. substan*i=.1 evidence presented to- th�iiu'k umniss4on ' and upon the specific findings`of?ractc set forth in paragraQfia Land 2 'abave, this Comission hereby finis and cnclud s,as.`foTlowss (ay' The aF{a13cant hds violated, fhe p'er,tiner+ care ,Protection, Ord nance.;and conditions of,approval-eel a: n his permitto actw'lt+ty and (b)_ 1 applican` has violated the part .e.t'�regulations and € C i eonditional of approval `as adopted, by!the Planbing;£ortenission relating to the permitee's business; and, (c)` it,is de:d �"strafed .that `the applicant is unfit, to be trusted with the priv�L�ka � granted uy-such a permit 4. Based upon the, suGs'w+tia1 _'vi}denro� ;wei ented tr. •th.is Commission and' upon the specific, fire.A`o, set.forth i� pati"agraphs 1 2: and 3 khove, this Conr��isson hes?b�r susper,'��Fntertaiirrent Pe^mitt.89-02 for period of 3 months. 5. The Secretary � this Comm;ssipn shall certify to adoption of this Resolution. APPt`i JEO AND PvOFTEtt lYIS .24Tii DAY OF IANUARY, i9' r X PLANNING CDMM*c `` �'.',��=Rf,NCiiO CUCAAdki 4 y Y r t R; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION VO' ' � EP:89-02 POLO GROUNDS ;��, ,�y, ,✓�" January 24 Page 3 r Larry. T.McNieI Cha7raran c ATTEST. Brad +CX�1 er, Secretary. I, Brad .Bull r, Secretiary; of tF Planning iJ.amm�s on of thet city:of Rancho Cucamonga,; do _hereby eertify t,.hat- the, ;foregoing'.Ytesolution was.-',dU1 and regularly i 'trodeiCed, ��ss�d, and adopted by'Vtije Plar+nira9 Commission of the City of .;anaho Cucamppga; at'.�.regalar'meetm�l�`f the Ri�nning Commission held, on the 29:th day of Uanuary 1890, by the< Fol,toa ►+g 5ote,¢to-wit. c � AYES: "COMMISSIONERS.: WOES: .OMMISSI6NE.FS ABSzNT: CommISS16NEC,S. f 4 }1 l.r. I ' ^t gr !r 4r to LY 1 }y � h t a i 4l U t � RESOLUTION �} A:RESOLUTIOK OF THL,�PLANNIN6 COMMISSION'OF' THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA . CALIFORNIA,'.'DECLINiNG SUSPENSION OF " = ! ENTERTAINMENT PERMI•T :' - 89-02 FOR POLO GROUNDS RESTAURANT/NIGHT" CLUB, LOCATED AT', 10877 FOOTHILL, BOULEVARD,' AND' MIAKIRQ FINDING5 IN SUPPORT THEREOF AM L3E-382-10. A. Recitals. (i) Ori April .26, 1989, the Plann',•g Cognission ad opted', esalution. , ' No. 89-5.3 declining revocatir^, of 'Entertainment Permit? S7-Ol for 'the entertainment 'use of disc, 3ocke,�A6ing vocals-and danc -ng for' Harry;,C'js'(Pole '> Grounds} Restwurant and adopted an N : 89-54. o Eo ntertainment Perr--;t 89-02 e0anding the entertainment uses. for:. aid restaurant;-to allow live comedy 'ac+s, concerts,,-and jazz. The awo=.approvalwere.`su9ject to specified conditions aiid' a-monitoring review. period of"''180;dayS. {iij On Oetoheri'25, 1989, this ConanTssion ;conducted a mFetin,,*o review. the compliance of the,conditions,o.f approval for Entertainmennt Permit 89-02. During the, 180-day ;monitoring period, 'numerous physical changes, 'in addition to a change of,ownership;, occurred The Corrar+issian determined.th"at the applicant, John` R,ams�;+ of 'the.',-Polo "Grounds ha no't�°cgr�pPi,ed with ;the Minor Development ' Review `prgcess 'and., the Fire. Protection . District equirerr^�ts+ The Ccmmissan directed the applicant .to cocpTy,withiri 30 days.; and, directed st ff to,'.set publi�rlr-aring for suspension of. the Entertainment Permit 89-ir2. Qn November 29. ti189, this Commission:conducted a.duTy noticed public hearing'on.Entertainment ermit $9-02aand,found-that the applicant had complied with he requirementsKci= 'the :Minor Development. Review.,but had .not complied with all the requirements nf` the Fire Protection District: The ' Commission �1jave the applicant an additional L4.5_days to comply; c.,Id continued" - the public hearing to Januar"y 10, 1990. (iv) On January.10,• ,I990, the .Commission,.after heating-te ktimony iron the Fire Protection Oistr'iGi and' examisiing all facts during this continued publid Maring, ;dQ term;ned that V! applicant had .not complied with all the requirements. T*a CorrmiSs.ion dirvtei.'ths applicant to reso]ve.the cutstandiug issues with the Fire District and continued this pubt.ic hearing to the January.24, 1990 meeting. (v) On January-24, 1990, this Conimit,s%n r,®ncluded a duly not,ced public shearing and determined that therz .is substantiaT e-vidence`, that the entertainment is being operated in confarmancQ with,-'City :requirements 'and Entertainment. Permit 89,02, in particular, compliance with the" Fire ,Distra ct ; requirements, (vie- All legal prerequisites, prior ,to, "the', adoption, of_ this Resolution hayl occurred. ' Y 4, S' h , PLAi ,146"1OMMISSION RESOLUTION NO EP U9=42 - POLO,GROUNDS ' January 24,1990" Page '2 B. Resolution, NOW, THEREFORE; it is hereby, found, detetlmined and resolved by,the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga!{as follows. ;` 1. This , Commission hereby specificalily finds that' al ' of the -(acts set forth in the Recitals, Part',A, of>th ii.Resolut correct. on are true, and Z. Based upon,substantial 'evid?nce l ncly�ding writtan staff report and further testimony °and written evidegice presentea\by, thet-Rancho'Cucamonga Fire Pratection District.,during the carings desc1ibed' in the '.Recitals, Part A. above, this Commission hereby specifically fi ds since Aprii. 26, 1989, the applicant has ` established a record of,operation in compliance with conditions of appro,vai of Entertainment ?ermit 8!,1-02. 3. Based upon- substantial evidence presesst'id to this Commission and upon the specific finding's of?facts 'set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby declines-to suspefd Entertainment Permit 8942. 4. This Commission further finds that •611 conditions previeqzly imposed by Entertainment Permit Nos. 874I and 89-02"anje0lanning CoW ss on Resolution Nos. 87-102 and'89-54,,shall-continue in all respects=and With full force and effect. a. 5. Tne,'.Secretary of th?3 Commission shall certify to adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JANV RY r>1.990.> i PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAP4QN� BY Larry T. AcKle , Chairman ATTEST•, Brad Buller, Secretary I,- Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the C;Fsy u° Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify, that I the' foregoing Resolution itas duly ;aed , regularly introduced,. passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,,at a regular meetinq of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of January,1990' by the foiiowing vate(-to•wit , II PLANNING CO �ISSIOF1, ESOLJTIOhI NO EP 894t -'TOCO GROODS Jar aay94J�1990 Page 3 AYES, COM4IS5IOtiERS. .r NOES: COM14 SIONER,- t�. r, ABSENT COPIP9ISSIONEM + ;r , 1A r r 1 f ; t Yrti Y j`F,j"; t � CUPY,OF RANCHO CUCII.M0" STAFF MEFGAT jl li DATE: Jamary 24, 1990 T0: Chairrnan and f�embers of the Planning Coaanission' FROM: Barrye R. Hsnson, senior Civil "Engineer BY: Betty.Miller, Associate„Gvi1 Engineer SUBJECT. ENVIRONME�dTAL dSSESSPSEFaT AilD' TEATAi�IVE 'PAR►.EL !SAP 13I06"=` CARYN` =� su v s on .acres; o an n o parce s: n e cw Residential District (2-4 dwell:ing'units ®er` a.re) :q, Etiwanda Sp we c 'Plan located:;south of 24th' Street at war n- Bulloek Road}JAPN 226=111-09): Related'file'Ttntativd Tract'r1�566. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTI�€ ;t fir, "+ A. Action Requested: Apvroval os the prop¢seJ Tor;tatiwa Parcel"Map. as. I- : shown on r R. Parcel Suer Parcel 1 - 4.66 acres parcel 2• - i6.61•acres , Total ' i§M acres C. < Existing ZanLng !bw Residential De Surrounding Land`lse: North SiatigleA:amity (Under-ton truc-1E n South - Flood Control Basin + A East - Flood Control Bs,in West - Vacant E. Sairrounding General Plan and Develoment Cede.Desiiae� tions: 71 north - Low ResidentialG ' south,- Open Space ,. ..; East - Open Space,; Hest - Loan Residentia eri l F. Site Charactstics:: The sign 61a= be�fnrough graded'per Tentative Tract, 13566 +F PLANNING COM6tLS5%liN STAFF P.EPORT TENT PARCEL HAP'13108 'CARYN COtANY`, JANUARI`-24, 1930 PAGE 2, II. ANALYSIS: The purpose of this parcel.,map is'-to subdivide into two parcels, nor. resale only, the: r"eMiining" portion of"approved;.-iTentative Tract 135,66. Tentative Tract 13566 was :approved Kith a:,prtsvisian.aliawing. phased, develO' nen>. Two. phases; Tracts' 13566-1 and_'3, hw6, been recorded and are currently, under construction tExhiblt °6"?: Toe parcels,created by this parcel, map (Exhibit "C") will be further;subdiv.i'ded in:whe fotpre as;'._ additional, phases;- of Tentative Tract 13566,: which;` is the dashed' parcel lines and .streets`ar� shown on the Tentative_Parcei t9ap The condi.tions;of`approvaI regktre that the parcoislonly,be'developed in accordance with Tentative Tract 13566' precludcnr, a single hope'being constructed. on each parcel. Also,_ offers of dicdtion.' have 'been f required' far War"an-Bul.tock, Road and t)ie ;streets north of War�an, Bullock Road, to that'these streets 6l be i�provod upon development,of ' either parcel. III, ENVIRON.MENTAI. REVIEW: The 'applicant,cc.pleted Part 1,;of the Initial uy., r a con acted 'A field investigation and co�leted�P!pt II of the Initial Study. No' adverse impacts, upon. the ,,environment are anticipated as a result of this project Therefore, issuance of Kag6tive' Oe(;,, 4ation is appropriate IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public,Hearing have been sent to surrounding praperry�owners .and placed in the Deily,Report N�oaspa`per.. 'Posting at the site, has also been completed., R' V. REC'JMbY.ENDATIOM:, It is "recoora:ended that thj planning`Coymission Orsider NITAinput aTele�ents of 'the Tentative Parcel Map 13108. <If after suc5 cons�4eratfon, the Cdr mission can.rec nd approval, t6.en`<'the adaption': of the attachedr Resolution and issuanc' of a .Negative Declaration:wot:(d be appropriate. , . Respectfully,submitted„ gar.rye Hanson- Senior Civil Engineer BRH•BAN:dl!v Attacht,�en+ : Vicinity Miap (Exhibit Tentative Tram 11M (Exhibit "S") ` Tentative Hap (Exhibit "C"), Resolution and Recom nde "Npdt ons �f Appr oval'. k n 0 ti V . V I� i pk&�\sw ! StOWT AVE. Gum !.:cam FRWY: AV ij CITY OF AAW�►1� RANCHOCUCAMONGA IMA ��1 ti XI —'�' •� r �� - _ a. _.•� ��-'. [ _�•Y ���..,. !fir to- _ �-fie.=a• c_, � �S -:a3e: r'.as'r. r i ftt d - �� S�.rw 3r.Y �/gip, y!�[[[�����yjjj a� l••� � (-_: _ - ' � •i � - �- arm .' /� ,s tz � fell �� / � 300 L1r ( •-� {f w� 47 !! 37 10. M - - I �3 S _�•+_ 3D r � - rr .J+� � !� T� I � mot ' .� -.�._-:.� �_1.0 rP• � � t � J. i CIS OF PAILLEL CRAP A106 eaGINWING DIMON, a„ 41 i RESOLUTION 14 A RESOLUTION' OF THE PLANNI�ir, COMMISSION OF THE' CITY,OF RAiitA :'CUCAMONGA,, . CALIFORNIA.,4'CONDITIONALLY APPROVING " TENTATIVE PARCEL MkP`NUMBERi'13108, LOGA'fED Sj�JU:H OE 24TH STREET At WARDMAN-BULLOCK ROAD, AND 'MAKING FINDINGS IN ;SUPPORT THEREOF - ApN 226-111-02 WHEREAS, 'Tentative Parcel Map ;Numaa_,r'13108,_submitted` by The Caryn Company, i$,P 16nt, .for the purpose, of subdividing`-;into.2.parcels,.the real-( property situated in the City of.Rancho Cucamonga, County' of Saa' 8ernardino,� State of CalU rn a; .identified as ON 22641142,`located south: of 24th Street at Wardman-8016ZA=Roada and: WHEREAS, .on January 24, I990, the Planning Commission ��ield a duly�,f advertised, publicfhearing for the above-described map.; _ . 4 NOT THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CtlCAMONGA.PLANNING tOMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS; SECTION 'l: That the following findings have been made: 1. That!the map is consistefit,with the General Plan. 2, That the improvement of the proposed subdi0sion js consistent with the General Plan. 3, That the site is .,physically' suitable for the proposed development, 1t 4.` That the\\oroposed `subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or.public, health problems or have adverse effects on=abutting property, SECTION 2. This Commission ftnds'and ,certifies that the project has been reviewed and `considered in compliance with jhv Cal Iforgia Environmental :I Quality Act .3f 1970 and, further, this. Comm i:3sion,.hereby issues :a Negative Declaration. SECTION 3 That Tentative- Parcel I'fiap 'No. 13109' is hereby approved subject to' the attached Standard Conditions and the ,foliow.nq Special V, Conditions: 1, The developer shall dedicate to the City all building'•�ights on ?arcels 1 "and 2 until such time.as 'the property ,is further 'subdivided pursuant to ldntat.ive:Tract 135'66. i� ail i „C •�c , ,. ua..%'. .� r t J✓,{ ��f� PL1ANNING :COMMISSION" RESOLUTION NO'. cr ; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP,13108 THE` CARYN CC'NPAKY ~' JANUARY 21tl 1990 PP 2 .2. Irrevocable`offers` of� dedication.' shal l be 'made for. Hardman- -�' Bullock load and all conpectio'w% north'of �Iaedman-B_uLlock oad to Johnsi:on Place z^d'San'Sevainei Road. '.The cffer�+f dedi.ca 6n , for 4lardnan-Bulloc�.` .Road sha11 'include both�a. 100-foot k de. straight. section on Parcel.: 2 and t62 additional right ) rehired across , e soufliwest corder.;of. Parcel 1 td�l begin' a I50tl'=fopt cer^e�13ne radius to curve meet the`ei5 x _irc�'4lardman- Bullock alignment on the north side of'24t Street APPROVED AND'AUOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 1990 z _ �+ PLANNING CONMI'hSiION OF THE CITY OF hANCA CAN VGA I BY: Larry 1. NcNiel,'Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary - ,) z� 1,' Brad Buller,. Secretary of the Planning-'Co the` pity of Rancho �yF. Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing �Re'aa'lutinn aas, dU and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by r the Planning cortmission of, the :1 City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting'-af the Plana Commission held on the 24tn day of.�4anuary 1990, by the following Vote-to-a�it AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: C6NNISSIONERS f� ABSENT; rcf�IISSIONER iC r 4 $ I ' yy aN $ < F~V■N r�S �q A S y� aV 5� r� � �� _ OT � fib La,, m �li ffi to .5 ' yIIffi �ggg ffi t. tea34 x, aI f x for = e a mks $ '. _ o _ " sit. : r A P._ .1 $ 3ilk $ s lift �: s uaR. c . H r $$ 9ff I ` " b _ J. fl. I -al S1 W .Ill tl l� 11 f'f�� ` N ..gyp! •� Kll t i _ a l 3�n a5 Zvi], ii L il• K A m ' loll • e _ a J e 4 3 C Ar a .j p q Y.sp 2 O O - Y ZED 2 8 L T e¢ Qp C gy Q �S� rox 'gam 4' 4 LE N � -2 y 4•Lw4 u00 CotN:'. �a'O ^NVe $rngC eNY.. b e4 Tad. o�ai L,L:� dY� aesk �u$ eel d d'. wN dC`w.:= ppQc3yuy;` it U L S C Y< ><0 0 R 9 D S•t p e In V IJ tl y qY1 CAI UL SN -I So YSQ dp N N� -Qy •.Dg •L01 p� CC l N C . o pC lm =~ ,Sw ram. CL wP C Sp �b�.yY vY.W'r. ` td.` GVS �V NC Y G d X 6 C C q'C "O`v ffi L V ' p Qa. any T pp _I ail Yt t1E-" it �-- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA S..T"F REPORT;' . DATE:, January 2Q;, 1990 TO: Chairman a6d pebers of the Planning commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner _ UY: Mancy Fong, Senior Manner SUBJECT: COWITIO11AL. USE PERMIT 8746. M001FICATION il0. 2 - OAS e. request, y e e eva ons ,or TUTT ni g 43 within the Thomas t�ie:?s P1a a to a 5pecial.ty Commercial District, of the Fof�ffiill aulevard "Specific Plan, located at the northeast 1.as�rer of Foothill, Bwulevars'jiaM Vineyard Avenue - APN; 20� 101-11 and,iD. J I. PROJECT;AND SITE DCSCRIPTION2 I A. Action Re.uested: Approval of detailed site plan and e eve ons or ,u ding,D B. SurroundingLand Use and'2doninas Morw - vacant..Single`Family itmes; 'Low Residential, District (2-4.t+ ilinP,nnits:per acre). South - vacant,-,Mquor;Store; n ty°C ercial District East - Shagging'"Center; C nity ' erical District. ktest - Roller-Rink., Restaurant, 6occupied``Building; n4y Coa�ercial District ij C. 6enaral Plan DMsignations: PreCt Site Specialty rical North - LW Density Residential Smut - COMMty rciaT East - Community C rcial t#tst Comm ty Coreial D. Site"Characteristicsi Building D is .pant -of=.PhaseXII cons,ruc on an s rough graded. �PWE-, EX; consistipg Hof 2,r Buildings G', N �� I. �is under consfiruction�rA�iln-Phase. J,fS completed, =sf PLANNING CbMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 87-26 HODIFICATION.NO. 2--.OAS1Ni1ESTORS January 24, 1990 Page 207 E. Parking Calculatiops:" , . Number of , Number of Type quare Parking 'Spaces Spaces of Use footage. Ratio Required Provided' A. Restaurant 7.,628 .1/100 90 90 I B. Retail 13,875 1/250, 56 56 C. Retail 3,97.5 1/250 16 16 D. Retail 28,166 1/250 113 113, F. Retail 7972 1/250 32 '32 Office 6:061' z" 1/250 25 25 G. Retail 8,710 11256 35 35 N. Retail 2,902 1/250 12 12 I. Retail 99909: 1/250 40 40 K. Retail 1,500 1/250 6 6 Rattauraiits 8,500-: 1/100* 85 106 , *under 6,000 sq. ft. far each, restaurant II. ANALYSIS: A. General- The .applicant ( ~� indicated that a,:smaller iize rancH market 011 be tie or tenafit-in. Building D. 'The square footage for Building D' has been reduced from.36,000 square fe6t to. 22,800. square feet. .Copies of ,previ.ously approved elevations have been ieicluded in this report for your reference.- B. Oesi�n_Review Committee; The Committee (Chi.tin,,'Weinberger an g l er;)iev,ewe a proposed elevations on ,January,_4., 1990: The Committee, recandfided ap;,raval subject to the following conditions: 1. Eliminate '6 parking spaces,:, in front of the-.major., storefront, 2. Extend the textured pavement =into the main -circular driveway aisle from Building n to Building I: . 3. The double reveal element on the nort elevation should be wrapped around the east elevation.-,to a`'point where the building steps. doian III. _ FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The project is, consistent'with the General Plan, an a oo ll Boulevard' Specific Plan. ' In addition the proposed use,'ibuilding design, and tite`plan,. together with the recommended,-conditions .for 'approval, are in comp ati-ce uitii .the. , Foothill Boulevard ;Specific' Plan and all ether '°applicable...; t r� '. o� PLAMIC CODA%SSI N STAFF REPORT CUP 8Z-26 A4OWICATION .,2 AS iNdE�TORS �anUary 2+E, Y r Page 3 { provisions-c thdsCity's s.Landards The`project 'will 1. not cause any. adve�se.anvironmental. iUpacts.- . SV. CORREOAiDEtdCE This ftet�9 has been adver's�d a3 a publiic hearing � +e' p Y���Y port .r ,raper, Public hdarinq i��tices were vent to all proper e: Kt$hin 300 feet%0-f the'Oraiecti i `and Sub. witw- AieYtire ea 2oftYeF6 �$31 BoUTte 6Y evard, ng na6d , ef frppi� hPi d. REC1gtMATiOtY staff reca► ends that 'ire Planning 'Cos�nissio1u approve.: a eaa�ificaton to Cdnd'iional Use7-26, ' Res dl7y` fitted, Gity anner, BB:RFfJfs t Attachstentsa Exhibit "A" DMiled Site Plan Exhibi Laeidsgape Pian Ztbit CO' Previa"$l 'Appreedlevations for N'''din Exhibit "!}" Pcpase�_Elevations (2). rj EXhibit pE"' Flaor play.' = Resolu�ioaV"'af Appraual *ith Conditions' ."7 ty r t 41 r a ti ��•2.�so HsssiR�i B $EH � � � �� �4. ,��S��E. oft fil - =i s, � __—_ 1� f• � ,�I T ! t�-� 1�I ,�_ I �f �>s4 E i�i i I I I I { ICI •s1 i�Iffi tU ' FIT— lit = I I 1 114 Ilfl'll6 1 i r iP � '� 19 �l�$� .. es a �� , � ;.. •.!� !e iEnp s...,, L. It If i a ' '711 1� io - r r � _ t — all Z _ J;itll • t lill fly �.� { - AZ 7 Anew" i a 1 h ,, b A� 3` �itt 9i t� It i9 �it�t9t�t , f ��tt a s t aD 03 .O fit s sb )' o } a : ;.,,; �i1-.�art� a'� .�i=; ��. f � G s'�[µto,-� � �t ,��— �i�'—+--"^, tBa• m d; si'.:.F l s:?.: �; ,� r L � � F'T b' Y � '� 4 � R R ��j Y)E . s �x r z � ��£ k ��Qr �a 4�q ? :# ,�. t 1, ,d J. �. �, �� �is � /lSf ,-�¢,k, e p 's ,, 77�a��' �tt`�i �'�►I 'w �7t �,,1� Zx �Y� ��� �p,b. .,.w.. '` 4. �« ..,x a., y>t tk�r �;i ..r!a. s'; ���... :,,. .� :, � '" � qY..'" F� 4 ���� R ��R�N Y I' '1 �.5 t, +�. r r °,��: I �i NNhNhN .3" f - � Y exF R � �t�•y � 1 lARM*, i r T i�1i1 Af NAjELr VORA \t 5 _ �kFt 1 w'!t Oio �i _ 1 ! f ,I 4 g I 1 i W 4 I 1 Q I y 1 �a l A� 1X $ O sJ , RESOLUTION Ru'. 88-17C AlRESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMbP7GA PLANNING 'C0111iISSION APPROV!!;G CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 27-2ti 1CATION NO. 2 FOR THE REQUEST TO MODIFY ELEVATIONS FOR 8UTWING 0 WITHIN THE THOMAS 'WINERY :PLAZA LOCATED AT THE:-NOTHEAST CORNER ' Of FOOTHILL AND- VINEYARD IN THE SPECIALTY COMKERCIAL 'DISTRICT OF THE FOOTHILL 'BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAW AND MAKEUP FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APR: 208- 101" 0 aNQ z1. A. Rer+tals. 0) OAS Investors has ITed. an appTication for the modification to the Conditional Use °Permit No. 87-26 asodescribed in the title of 'this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, ;thle. subject Conditional Use Permit request, is referred to as "the application". (ii) On. the r!'4th of January, 1990, the Planning Commission of :the City of Ranch+ Cucamonga conducted ,a duly noticed public hearing` oti the application and concluded said hearing on that date. -,r! (iii) Alt legal prerequisites.-to" the aa?�rtion or' thisr Resolution have occurred. 0. Resolution. NON, `THEREFORE, it is hereby found, deteNined and .resolved by the Planning Commission of,the City, of Ranchoucapaoriga as foliars; 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds Vat all of the facts set forth in tIR.Recitals, Part.A, of this Resolution are true, and..correct. 2 Dased upon substantial evidence 'presented to this Commission during the " ,vP ;eferenced public hearing on danuaryy 26,, 1990i including written at. r oral staff reports, together. ?with public testimony,,: this Commission hereby specifically finds'as foll- rs: (a) The proposed elevations for Building D provide compatibility to the established architectural ftheme. (b) ' The modification will ,not, deviate, from the -previous findings as contained in Resclutiom ft. 88'1IT. 3. Used upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upcm the specific,r finding of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2.above, this Cissien hereby finds and concludes as follows:; [ 1 PU WNING OMISSION RESOIUTIOW 90 88-17C�`" CUP 87-26 MODIFICATION NO, -2 OAS INVESTORS January 24, 1990: Page 2 (a) That "�, proposed use is in accord wi�tr .the General°"`Plan, the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purp'nses. of the district in which the site is located.. K4' (b) That the; proposed. use, 'together, with' the conditions applicable thereto, will nat .be detrimental to the public health, safety, .or, welfare, or materially injurious to properties or,14rovertents in the vicinitt , ic) That the proposed use coiplies with each of the applicable_provisions of the`Deveiopment Code. - 4. This. Co.ission hereby, finds and certiftftm.that the project hae, been reviewed and considered in c*lianoe with S:;he California Environmental Quality Act Iof 1970 'and,, lorther,- this, Commission hereby issued a ;negative Declaration on January 27, 1988. 5. Based upon therfindings and conclusions jet forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Co mission hereby approves the'ippl cation subject to each and every condition set forth below, t. Conditions of Approval- 1) All pertinent conditions contained in Resolution. No. 88-17 A b B shall apply.. 2) Six M .pawing'spaces shall be elimiinitted-in front of the major, tenant storefront to the satisfaction of the<City Planner. 3) The teuturdd pavement sha11 be:,extended 'into the mai& circular, deiveway,aisle frog.Building D to Building,L I. The-skat8'rials used shall be consistent with the existing ,material on the chopping center. 43 The double reveal element on the north elevation shall; ,wrap' .around to the" east elevation;to the?point wheet the building steps down. 6. The Secretary, to this. Con issian shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PLANNING COMISSION RESOLgrION NO. 8841C CUP 87-26 A400IFICATION NO. 2 - OAS INVESTORS 1 January 24, 1990 'Page 3 r� . AQ APPROVED AND.ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JANiD 1' 1990. PLANNING CObIMISSION OF THE CM OF RANCHO CUCAMONfA BY: Larry T, KcRjel. Chai Man ATTEST: ' Brad Buller, Secretary , y I, Brad Buller, Secretary, of the"Planning.,Commission,of the City of ,Rancho Cucamonga, do,. hereby ,certify that the foreg6ingl,Resolution was duly and art regularly ir>troduced, `passed, and adopted by,the Planning Co issiorr of the r City of Rancho Cucamonga, at;a regular meeting lof the Planning Commission hold on the ;24Mf day of January, 1990, by the following yotr=Co-wit. AYES: COMMISSIONERS.i NOES: COMISSIONERSs T CO +i ABSENT: ISS7.ONERS: ' ('3 �. ����; GzA SV 9�! N C4�Wt ► S S t �NN.tk J P1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING JAN I$'QgQ RANCHO CUCAAbNGA PLANNING NINtG COMMISSION p1�$1�i�i�i�i�i�1�►�5i�' The Rancho Cucam,0ga Planning Commission wits be holding pub.11c hearings at 7:00 p.m. on January ,24, 1990 at the Lions Park Community Building located at 9161"Base Line. Road, Rancho Cucamonga, `Cali fornia' 91736, to consider 'the followingt described project(s): VARIANCE 89-12 - CALpRop - A request to allow r,?diced front yard se ac s-cn c s, as recTuced average minimam,front•yard"setback Ifor al rots, height extensions above 35 feet on 3 Lots, and a1 reduced. eucesso y , structure setback on lot 2,. for a aravilously, approved tract map consisting of 38 single family,lots on 15.7 acres of lurwfi in the L04 Residential District. (i24 dwelling units ;pere,acre), located -south and east of Res" HiII Country Club Drive,, soutf: of Calla Cc razon'. AAA{: 207-631-01 t"ru 23 and_207-641-01,th,, 15. - Anyone having concerns or questions an arljr of the above item is w-1c to contact the City Planning, Fivision at M-S) 9894861.or visit-lire offices I=ated at 9340;13ase.lane Road, 'Unit B. Also, anyme objecting 6;j'n fhvor of the alcove, BAY a"i:lsar in per&;w: at the alcove-des r3D Meeting I submit their,,c erns in' writing to the Planning Division, City of. Rarrch�,1 CUcawnga prior 17) said meeting. January 12, 1989 Rancho Cucawanga Planning Commission Da e 13VC�C 1. CAN N07 P-77 ��,6� , � W 0f4' FE COP � C)A W !�7 TH Rood S� I Rog¢rL&'L)onuaiesPaciati C WS Red LM Combs Ckb Dr, ' ReMAo C=i;saga,CA 9173ir (714)94616% f CITY OF RANCHO CCCAN1ONCA STAFF REPORT DATE: January 24, 1990 711 �} TO: Chairman-and Members of the Planning',Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner," BY: Steve',Hayes= assistant Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW' FOR, TRACT 10635 _CALPAOP - The design review',of u ng el eva ons :and,detailed, site;plan for . loft,] through . 21 for" a .previously app�oxex' tract consisting of 38 single family1ots brci a aeeee, of land in,,.the' Low Res'dFn,'c at-01 r.ict (2-4' di el ling,units per, acre), located s1^uth, and east of Red'kill Country Club Drive., south of. 61l a Coraz©n' APN: 207-63141 t-t; '11 and 207-641-01 thru 10, VARIANCE 89-12 CALPROP - A request to t ,''educed , F' front,yard„sez acts ;an l ots, a reduced' resin.,, average front yArd setback-`or,allr `1,ots, height extensions above 35 fee,,'on 3 lots,' and.-a reduced 'accesscm, sit'' Lure setback on lot 2, ,for a-' map consisting of 38 single family lots on 15.7 acres of, f land in the Loan Residential District'(2-4_dNelling ;unit�-per .acre), located,south ,and' east of Red Hii.l 'Country. Club Drive, south of Cal Ie Corazon - APN: 207-631-01 thru,23 and 207-641-01 thru 15. I. PROJECT Ak- OES'CRI:'_TION€ A. Action R€ nested: Design Review for approva'i of building Ta ons an .4.p ,ot plans fAr lots -21 and a variance to a11oa► reduced rrbnt,yard setbacks, reauced.accessory, structure setbacks,-height extensions above the 35-466t h eight'limit and ! . a reduced minimum°average front yard setback for the tract. B. project Density: 2.3 dwelling units pAr_acre C. Surround6g` Land Use and Zoning:,n' North Single, Family Residential; Loan Density Res1dentia3 !?-4,dwelIing units per acre) South - Vacant;,U eral.tdamirciil . East - Railroad 'and vacant;.Offlce/Prof6isidnaf and fl6d kest - Taernhjjres; Madi'um Density Rdside tial I&A4 dwel ring 41 :units per,acre) " � r I M C,9 OWNING COi�'IYSSI,OPx'STA�F`:��PORT '- OR i3R`TRACT-10035; yA 89-12 - CALPROP January 24, 1990 Page 2' D. Gerteral plan Designations: PraSect 31te „ Lour Denn ty'Residentiai units per.acMe.� north = U'Ad Density Residential (24 Iwelling units,per acre)' South - :to tercial. East - Office, flood control +st 6+lediuss'Density. Residential (8-14 dwelling=u "ts per acre) E. Site Characteristics: The lots are currently vacoft ,tith s open rang,ng"'- romm percent 'to greater than 90 percent. The site is with+n.the;City designated .geological stu0I,a6ne_ for R?d :3y5i P•ais5t. . <geotechnical report "fdr ,the sits wAs reviewed and aptaroved lay''the RT in of isiay1 with a w6vidus design review for the!. ;tots within .this tract. The Tots,are ' currently in, with curb, gutter and the:iidewalk. H. ANALYSIS• A. Bacr rouad� 1his.tract'was originally approved' one year en rc l26, .1981, and subsequently, granted an . IS,month: extgri'&ion by the.Piahning Commission on January 13. 1982.' The , ' . applicant requested a finwl 18 ttonth time extensicn`o`n August 10, -1983. At that time, several concerns were brought.`up' pertaining to &; project and-the item was Continued' to the September, 14,:.1903 meeting to allow, the app "icant;to respond to the-Commission's concerns. Of particular concert to the CoitSllission h'as the appropriateness of the project design: ,relative to the. ,shape and topography of the site. Red Hill is a . land. Form L designated as having City,- widP significance'and projects are to be designed to minim to alteration-1 the natural. land �orsr according. to the: General Plan and Dbveloprrnt code:. The j Commission was concerned 'that, the. proposed design of .the subdivision was more conducive tca a standard "flat land" subdivision rather than the deweTo}stnetst:Eeing designed tt:, Fiw , the hillslde nature of the prcperty,' Another concern was that due to the seywity of the slope,, extensie�e. cut and fill' of the site night, subject the urea W potentia slope .failure. The project applicant At the time assured the �:om.issibn that the intent of the,subdivis-%* was for`curtom homes sensitively' designed to the physical constraints of the site. 'As a method to insure sensitive, 'development of the site, the ,Gommiss crt. ' conditioned r that any proposed development .of the tract �isV1d be subject to Design Revf�-V apprval. r Rl.Afl�lIt3f C`OSPlISSION STAW REPORT OR FOR TkACT 106 YA 89 I2 CAL PROW t January,24.,1990 Page-3 R►aY 28, 1986 the P ann 1 ing Commission apF�oved'the Design Review►- of lot"s 36,: 37,. and :38 Within cne tract. The residences incor�parafed the uses of split;level floor,plans with -the;`garage set bel;oW the,Iiving areas, At"that time, ` Planning.ComrissiOP-sated that.th. grading,`of.;tha lots on.,an (� i'ndi'idual basis' weuid be,discouraged , i Th'e'Planning'•Cbrra►tission .approved'the site !plan and, buit'din I elevations •for :the:-remaining''35'lots' .on Januar, 28,. TgR79 i Seven;,basic flo9r, plant were developed to fit'the constraints' of.``the _seven -_different types:�of tots,'•fecund within.- the subdivision again,-.these houses.•were desigsted..tm tiinimiae grading tiv utilizing items such as interior retainin_• I' s M and split.glrigeftloor,cads. B. -Genera rFfie app�scant is:proposing t revise the units on e a s on the ;oath side.of.tpino Predera (lots>I 21:). Hens te+odels ,?-e designod. to ;meet current`market d�na, by incarporafirng an increase in square footage and house designs tha" t.'-Ju' advantage OV the spectacuta�"•view of the vatlty, yet "fitting". :the ,n&tural slope contours by; uSing ` stepped garage;pads, stern walls; driveway ' der lay structures, _ and h'euge.piotting paral3el� to the natura'f slope 'contours . The e three Floor plans (each•.wi'th two exterior elevati.ons)_ are j des igned riifh .thy`flexiability.to fit,-the ,.;onstraints.of.each of the psssibl`e slope conditions. To :tie extent possible, given the :fact that the lots are. existing',•the applicant has attempted to coRIply with the yrpposed Hillside DeaeYopment` regulations. "Inverted ,Mans (i.e. living,'.areas an 'top floors ahi bedrooms belox;} are proposed to .take further advantage'-of r the view capr+e .opportunities .(see, Exhibit Previri.s quit sties of the propo se,d houses' ranged,from 1,825 to 2,435. suare feet; the proposed residences with this application range from ' ,548't0 3,16g Square feet; ' Garages are given a "f.loatiny° designation ,and arz desigttedl to . minimise the.• oStrusiveness .into the streetseape and minitolize blockage of views'of •the.�ra11.ey:.floor,below.;. Fn 06st�instances', the units 'are designed to'use the inter ior' , &1 as .,tvtaining wj1)s ;in .order,to minimize to grading nece SS(ry on the lot. ,As as`resent, the only:,grading proposed . be for bui►ding footprints and drivearays. -In order` tq meet the.code requirements of a'rear usable yard* area_ of 15 feet, the.-:applicant<has made use':of`deck Aieias''of 715; to.. 79 square feet,, depending on• the_.unlit and "1oi. . constraints 4 - x 1< �'r '-� rLANNING C01fiiYSSION STAFF, REPORT - DR FOR',TRACT.1D035;.YA 89-12. 1CALOR0 ' > _ January. 24, 1040 Page 4 Because of the extreme slope on, th61rent portion'bf lot 2 a wood deck.underlay ,structure has beer.;designed to provide ,an urea of lever slope for thee,driveway. In`keeping with staffs. concerns. of fire safety in such a .. steep slope 'area,. the `applicant. is •proposing.to utilize. a s r' landscape palette that isffire resistant and drought'toleraRt. C. Variance: In conjunction with this ';proposed design revieav' {1 request, the applicant has` also• subrlitted :,.a •variance a{,�plication to allow reduced rront,yard setb�cks�,on� eight�-of t`ie 21 Tots, �n overall reduction;—o,f the required ,minimum average. front .yard, setback for all ,lots, .an':extensi�p above the,,re4u1rd& li4ight Tifnits `on three lots, .,.and the reduced . accessory struct,Ure setback, on `one lot Again, i.t;should be nosed that the.'applicant_hiI atte,,npted to'fol_1ow the proposed Hillside D'evelgps t regnl,ations which are different from.,the current Development Code:standardsi, ' 1. Front Yard.Setbacko" Section„ 17,.040-(B) dof theme Development :Code requires a miuimu front yard setback in the "low Residential Development District_of 324eet,and`an average front yard setback of 37=feet;.as.measured Iran-the,face of:curb, for, all. tracts.- Seven of.;the houses '(lots , -79 8; 14 and 15) are plotteo^aith a 17-foot setb"' "'and 1of 3s plotted .with :a 2R.foal '.setback. ;.The proposed-.Hillside. Development_'re9ul stions ', require .'a .20'.,foal setback hack of'.sidewalk.: The applicantfeels, that the reduced ' front yard 'setback;, with a '.subsequelt reduced average front. Bard setback',: is;necessary due) to the,, unusulmly . steep slopes ;found;'on'site, espe'i.fly`' near ':the, faint setback lines If ;these;; houset' `were ,plotted at.,the _ revsire;d front yard setbacks, the, result .mou.d be level greater 'garage/floor ,splits than_'proposed and/.or a mch greater rise.atx.the'rear of the house,, creating a need;for unattrktively high stem walls and drivewa sa:r�i:th':stee`y per: .. slopes for longer distances, thereby. increasing the chance of°�8_ccidents. The City s En ineerin Division. has expressed 'concern .with reduced front:yard setbacks, in that cars �y park in �Public , rightof-way portion of the driveway, thereby y blocking pedest'ian .circulation ors.', sidewalks and Increasing, the chances of-auto/pedestrian,accidents id :the x public street °.Yn Meetings:' ai$h the . �applican , 2ngineering. supported the ;use of a 17=foot front yard, f;r setbacks as, opposed -the 22'�f�+nt setback; so that :people , PLANNIM COMISSIO.4�STAFF REPORT DR FDR'TRAM. 14035, VA 89-12 � CALPPOP r Jenuary 24, 1990 Page 5 �wou1(t be discouraged' from park`.r�, them• vehicles in driveways ^R at-*Zethzr, , theieh;y parking 'parallel on then street. A�;22 �o�Jt°. front.;=•yard setback.. may .gives• the perception tjrat parWypg is'possible In'=the driveways, but most Iikely 'part o:' the-,public: rfght�of-way wauld -'be'. blocked. The applicant has made an effort to addreos this; concern by, utilizing; the 1746ot setback; on ,seven of the eight -lots ;that' ^require a --'Variance for, .front yard setbacks. Qn1y loi; ?is. set back22 feet from;the €ace.of, curb. It is the ok.iion•of, staff; that the above reasons justify the variance, for reducedi*o6tyard setbacks °on etight :lots an the. overall average'front yard-setback reductica below the,minimum as required,by Code:,` = 2. Heigh,. Limitatfons: Also, a -.variance to exceed the maximum a1.Mowabie structure,. height of 35 feet .(as Her Section 17.08440' (B) af'the, Development,Code) is_required forthe residences 'oe 'lots 3, 5, and 14i. The highest proposed residence,blot 5),-I', proposed,to'be 43 feet above finished grade. -,`be primary ,. . contributor .ta .this height problem i ¢he,'need W Plotting residences dose to-the street some lots atop as much as 35'feet in relative elevation"(a slope nea, percent) .Withe bu1ld6g'`envel,ope area: ';Therefore, based on the,City's'„current methods of measuric�g.finished grade-, Mi.!, `structure: :higher than 35 feet'above•the base le�tel .of the ;structure,=' uld'� "require a .vari-ance: Given;this information, ;;no structure :could•``be. constructed an the front' portion: of. these° lots that;' would meets the,City°s_" height.,criteria. ,Pest ofteO, it is the- front, `one story Portion of the strueturds (garages, sntratices) that exceed the required.height.- As,menti&,—A;'.earl iew;�.the;applicant justifies,the hoUse,plotting' elose `to .th" street to reduce " the.stem wal'I cons�'trvction as •seen'.from Foothill''Boulevard, and to1reduce-`the slopes and lengths of driveways. It:is r° the opleon.of staff,that the 4pplicant has`made`'efforts to design and plot houses3'which preserse viec _carridors t; and are sensitive fio`ttie aesthetics` as seen from Footh#11 Boulevard. Therefore, for,the above referenced reasons, staff can support,:the' variances needed; for maximum allowable heigsrts on, these. lots. 3. Accessory Setbacks:.. Section 17.M ON' of the Development Code., requires, all accessory structures to be constructed maintaining a. j, MOP,,, ,setback of 5 feet in the inmHor side'and'reor yarozo.:, The. 'patio: for lot 2 .is pr`cposed 'to have: ',an x, PLANNING C014MISSION STAFF REPORT' DR FOR TRACT.I0035;,VA'09=12 - CALPROP January 24, 1990 Page 6 i"eri6e "side. and. -s y etback of ,zero. . ,:The 'applicant 3� ti f ies.the ""reduced`setback to;�give-the owner of"this residence .the .same amount-,of usable,patio`its all other houses. Furthermore,,:the "slope-of'this'.1ot,is steepest of any to the placera°nt,of the patio in an area.of le"ss . slope'is critical. An effort was,mode to 'place .the deck in an area,;where its eoverha;ig#ng "appearance would be., reduced as seen from;FoothiI Rouleward,`whi;le 'presery ng .' the ,vew corridor into the" valley. As 'long as:no safety' concerns arise from the placement on the ;lot line, staff can support this portion of the variance: In su►unary, r 1, it..is staffs o anion that L,the 'applicant" .has designed houses 4hat effectively mitigate t e;negative impacts of. slope. devrlopmenL, The .incorporation o"i,stepped building pads, "floating"::garages, stem walls, and l!4rading for pads Ohl y is ccnsistent with tthe.intentions of all. future hillside devel opment tr--O'lghout the: City As you :``wi7i "recal l, the Planning Co*Jiston recofended":approval, of�."the: proposed H111tide Gradi.d Ardina nce g on December`13',"1989., Al though.the ordinance-has not been '°officially adapted;=`staffs feels that the applicant has proposed a residential product th"at,-for the most part,.is in. keeping with `the intent of ¢����e.hillside development within ,the City: It is.''step-i�cpinian .that,the variances ;'are justified far the' project from both aesthetic and a safety standpoint, D. Design Review.Comi ttee: On Aecertber;2l, I989' the C66M ttee (Mcmel,; a es Bey, routii) riwi ed the -"project and. rcommended.approval'subject to the folo►�ing,cond#bons: i. Return .walls .and 'combination retaining/block walls should be` designed 3n such a. way as to not. be a».obtrusve element in the overall .conceptual.'architecture and.design of the project. 2. Al ggarage`-aerations facing streets should be upgraded.to , inrtude arch,itecturai' .detail that`4s cdnsistent ,wfth :the h9n '-=ej` of architectural detail presented" on the - Proposed residences: 3. The deck underlay for the "driveway on,.lot 9' should i�orporate exterior elements provided' bn . the lot 2 residence. 4, wYariances .for`front yard ,setbacks, overall f hei;ghts,, and r*;accessory structure setbacks will be considered before the •Planning:.Commissicn 'concurrently With `the Design Revi for .the;.propose ,resi'dences. ,�r" _ PLANtfItdG C0i9�ISSION REk?01�r . DR fOR TRACT:10035; VA 84-12 - CRLPROP Janu,v P,4, 1990 E Gradin .Committee On January^2, 199Q, the grad'g( Committee concep a y. approved the proiect Th �Cosmmitteefelt.that the proSect.has been designed ,to minimize the amount of,cut - an .�fili; anethereby is in`keeping-wi'.th thesp•irit and intent o' of future Hi l i tide Development in the_City. : III. ,FACTS FOR FIND NGS*. In. 'ordOr. fbr the' Planning .Cammissioa to °approve, the ,; s gn Review for hots 1-21 of':Tract 10035: and Variance 89-12, 'facts` to. svpport�the folTowing',l udings must';be made A.' Design Reveir'for Tract 10fl35: 1.-That `the, propbs'ed� project 's., con Is stent with the ob$ectives �of;the•General 'Plan,.and , 2. That the proposed design is in accord ati6 the,objectIves of the Development -Code and the purposes of�Yhe district .in vhid the, fte is;located; and s 3. That the proposed,design is co=ispliafice:id each of :the appi icabl a pz�ovi lions of .tree Development;Code'.,,,,and= 4'. That the proposed, design,; together with the conditions appi�cibi,e thereto, wili, not be:detrimental to;the,public• safety, or �aelfare, ,or :materfmy injuki us to �, p fpertieg or improveMn% in thd.City: d N. VOjance Thaistrict or literal' interpretation and enforcement of, " the specified regulation, woui result. in °,.practical f difficulty, or,_`unnecessary °physical hardship inconsistent 1 =J with the` objectives of.the Develoment Code. 1 r ` 2'. -That because excessive•. slopes, exist cn site, drivevray . construction with a,` slope in excess of,`20 perceht. vma1. occur `if the .hous44� were constructed at .or.;behind, tie 'i required` front setb'?ck:.lirie, thereby mak fig,accessibility fpr passenger'vehi-d Os difficulty (: 3. That -Scause' some lots have the"-steepest .slopes in lower<rear, portion_.of .thee lat;.:excessiv� rear elevati�;� `stem 4rall. 'construction would be.neces-ary if _#�se�"•houses were plotted at or behind_the required front §e4bacl�fline. " ,, �t . \4 PLANNING COMISSIOWSTAFFAEFORT "DR FOR TRACT 10035; VA 83-32 - CALPROP January► 24, 1990 Page 8 4. That , because .each .lot 'fins it's own spec?fic site characteristics, there- are exceptional or extraordinary circismstances or-cnnddtions appl cable`ta the property invol ved or'to `e. :int��ndeJ"use oX the property that do not apply generalCl�.Y apply to,oilier properties'in. the,:same, \�k 5'. .'That the. graigting��ofJ _ Variance wi11 .not coAtti�tute a, grant- of-W`speL 1 ,privilege Inconsistent With the limitations -on pother ��naertie�,1classified i'rt„ the same zone. 6. That the granting .oiF a",�Var=once ?t nit be detrimental. to the,- public ealth�,, 'sa;qy, o f¢a* .or, rtdaterially injurious �to .proper�fes'�'oi,improveaaen din the vicinify IL1. CORRESPONDENCE: The Varia �W.'al +lication, as�aen,.advertised as a i ii T��c e'—fi-a �in. the Dail ,i ce or`l,newspaper-,and;propew y Posted, and notices have been sen o adjacent: property owners within . 300 feet of the pro3ect. t V. RECOIENDATION ' 'Staff recommends `approval of-the Design Review To ra T_TU , lots`1-21, and Variance 89-12 through .adoption of the attached Resolutions of _pprova1 , Respectfully, submitted,- ; 4� Adu11 r City Planner BB:SH:js Attachments: 'Exhibit "A" `Site L`tilizatl Piap Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" PI A,Plans _^' i- Exhibit 008,-~Conceptual Landscape Plans.,- Exhibit, j NV - Site features Map Exhibit "F" - Slope. Zone Analysis Exhibit: "G" -�'_F1oor`Plans Exhibit s "li" - Detailed Typical Building Elevations 'Exhibit "i" Building Elevations, Exhibit "J" - Typical Sections Exhibit "K" —'Variance Justificatiansl Exhibit "L" - General. .Tract:infmation Resolution of.Approval for the. Design Review,for Tract 10035, lots. 1�21, .aii�h Stanrard Ganditions Resolution of_Appraval for Variance 89=I2 U _,Pr' vp9 r,�y® . ♦ Via► ,,�R q' e.elemw all r®a ;w a • i l I r Tacr ram. IOM lr1.SMIPi It RfiOlitiLL OrLL CiIr.. •. ro 3-7 r lt•I.mataatY lliPaWr..r[T - ®illiUr®r.a r.ro,lor.l�u IA�IN®till pl � d001aP:O/e:d �� i 1 • ra °�® - we • a avt��, "f 41 '."�.•[ ecid 11 � 13 LO7 PEM 2 ` a nat� a' the Ey 141 13 IT �;. "r •s EWW LEVEL .a.w — r —LOWER LEVEL Aal r poll yr �� a.w i �J rrC_3, I m•�r - r 'y� YpiO# (1771) Iw -ENTRY LEVEL SKYEY.'- mv Lovlmq !.Ells. . r i ' ww„ ! Ex 14 1 G.I'r ENTRY LEVEL L®VRR L mom aB16P3� no flit (( re� Q fX#ir3T • onus s - �J L - TRY LEVEL c A --------------------- LOWER LEVEL my 'D 1107 rp ® om .1 It G':` x N u�l I + v R@ 7 S' �, r,. r���(�#����� 'f`# n;� ` ""!p v ®� .� :moo ,a � ,�I�MI "'' �. �. ,� B � .� � �(M` �,�A,, � . �� .. _...._ _ v,,, :� � �r. _„�ac .,I _ _. s= l��jT (J� �� di �® �+� 1 F �� � ` ... :. .. S ^ �34 . .f. ��. r a " +o � ENTRY LEVEL r ' ., T L LOWER LEVEL i @ll I I —am — - �/ Q� 1 —� —mum NINNMM PAU c! nn ppygno �roves.• a 4 � _ t h COPY e t• �• ' i ' _�� is d i== _ �� ENTRY'r LEVEL. L® . LEVY i ----------- "MCA" 9 oats' ` ,ros r�o:emo�a the j �,� ao :� --IeG uuo� rt�■� ��" � ass - f s v LtJT PLAN 1 �� k� th sa�� copy C 7ENTRY LEVEL �' xr - M ` BLMDM SECTM _ n..am J ail-�o`1� G° LfLl JC8M ,. t EX W[13 rt rs, •' - f 80 �✓—� l LOYVM , Lu 101, PO UA H , TO �, aC9We6Wta , The R I a:KED rT ok a. (14 -� yn.-1 sc+b.f-k ENTRY, LSVEL r .. - LOWER t EM> A Yanl:an�t - i � 5 oL oan•.w..® j=ua 461" !ON yr low min T ;�luicini�tl® �� PW ENTRY LEVEL w. uLr d, RL SLOWER LEVEL pis PLO F PLM ,TUO -16 ,2 ENTRY t Via$ ` SE CTRA LOT RAM U U o ae asaer�►' , a�aa e�o�a rhoIts Sk 141 A IT as i •' i� a ��, F v°" ENTRY LEVEL Fw � i __ __ •• o r+w nil " ' a i 2 LOWER, - _- y, BULDM •sus — — _..i_ _. .ara re - LOOT I.j'LM I19 o ®• i L1Q.wln /� ENTRY LEVEL �, �- �• __ ------------ LUVVTR LEVEL 5 - i r ,• —i . V _ r _ BULDM A the oar C-r 9' E a} w,.tgo.ov' i Cup c E 1't.7 LY,VEL S+ --- I i M Wan" =am 13 Lr .=M."1,1 AM ON ti�k k.� ��* �„, ' _�� �"`� t � l'1� � _* � � _'�t�n= ..,_. =:.�,� ,'ram. - �' ���c-��.s. �. �. •�! J � ��4� ® j � 4. r _ ,�:_ _. ���. ��� �o ,.� e i __ '��• _�. a_j� `� ��` _ ^�t �� �1I - �,. w:., .. . . . . —ea�C!�' a .e �.. i"�'� ` ri _: ':', b P. //�\ ..:�:� ■ /1 N. �d � '�' � ? �� �Y � �i tt � t5 .,v ti' w,.f i it Aa�� t:S�•s tee, �i* ii �Orc `o �i if 1yJF:• ice' � Ott° MR MA • �� (� w� t� ���'q Z a �o Lx Y!®r _'�`ti®'� �; 4 ter%...�` ��p■y7R�h`���:�i pJ� '. r a ' G t� ;T �i Q ,I S ' t 'F a i t t S La i t 4p: e r`r M1` 777 �,Iwow aIn 4 e aFROMA CAUT SERMS aow Why VALLEY SW IqCNrA= ®vr•mr Qaw®ar®. ®munm.® . awlma 6Rn�l1®1iIDm�rt RIO.: am.®aalr�wnf0®�.mw Y m�nrsrnaa�ss®ws . oe aw.'a wwm.aaamw �..n o s mwa.®wrwaro. anuw+m aarasrt a■. v muowwmwnwm mawsmruw. wr®anun to rra at snv wnm._e�ar. mwmrvom av®mmrasma "1°a` Wnm ios�wiwanaainm oaw3 - A savim fI�'8'ii ALL s' LM owl RMAM — op ---> 67F AXe1ti't' _ m O!u i9fld; "YO tip%Y!1liVP tA4� :.. elm CCU LJt�%mumMa. EY�41 G-�9ft .. E.,L' /� 4 i e aw t��1r�4n�d�ern�r�rr� ` IFS!!1f�1�rblle�lRtl�le�i�l�s�I1� r����ssa+�inttaot��.�s ego ik3!P=NEW iti rm u3alrgm irk as mmamm.�� !FL'-7!�!l��I�!!!!llil�l�l�■llJ�r��l�i iT111►J!'!� �!! hp�l!!i'! �� Cy � Yk i-I I r1, `y i c�v :T? UN T PLAN y t �- i F�'- L mill) �' ►�' Pill ��IIIi11l111 L1111111�L�. Illlltl � 1.r: r K.alt = w illlllllllllll � i a s e srcb ,z az 4 r � .....�...�.�..� tt ®may-���� Q 1a ,�.., 7�l� •rJ rp1y d T kil" - o All Ti i ®,'�•,,� , �� ter. . Sri • _ .�'°- . ELE VTION - o �r d1►`1�►e o Milk 77 0 � �FK c• v y� � r. 4 ,„.. _ g ■�I:�'`` 'tioxt �fl d E OVA �N ' •� w 3 r bWHI �MI®n i ERA A !Mt'! ,. vs zz �.- v..a� k •� � u � k y. ® Q 4 Alit. �s-tie '•'c x�svat ��� _—. �`A',�� '� w.�,.:_. m''��e,.�>�)11 it � •�, �#,' .. ..arc �I r O I M4 Q s dB�1 k L� A e Ro v '�® 11■III t �- ;;1���� �I�� � � ilwp a •� A� , r � a t �i'r'✓� A Asa`' ;, Of El 4 b.: • � Q q ��yy:b LOT 1 PL yam!i^"�����:tf' 1 �'�IeY 2p�,�-a.��"'�.`+.-t ;'-�---�:..,�;.,�„-? i■` ~ '.,�>�A7w"a 6 M sR�lrit•F ,.., r `tit`n IIiR'; H t. - i t!:'t{�`+t v J _af.}i..:i to +a. ♦ 4'F's .,,t: 1 t w � n IF LOT 3 P AN 1 mug 3 y :w I dt — OO T 4 P to N � r® i w _ ill ■w ! ¢ i� i a` i K -�=■moo �" ® � � I LeT 5 PL 4`t b 9ti<ss ya „i Lam•��� Y{ �� 1�—��a`� `^,' u L �--� u•_ `�,� ill-_ •: �; ems,' IA 4= OO T 7 PLAN Ott a"�' f c uy •. It's i T Y . X a.. t t;y j3 LOT M. ' LAN 1 tl id7 l'F^+ SSS Arr ■e ..11 ,I, M 4 Y: s• - 4 ti tip. frrl ., -� r1 fa. 'irelti. t� Al ix- LO �1 LAN ,E. t. LTn a. +,�1' ,r..`..w'..,,.. 4 ..'.r, \ �� ; � .a u..�..�1 N.:..�w4._ ._f•.- �s r u — h�} 3 1 L `iff■ld k,�..r�� ddta�ir r �lr!!��..�Hrii[' ;�rlii� s�Y�X e�" K ri'\�ftG b , F4. � ►• s;t„a a fw.'i y�� N } �z z, y �,,.,,,,�di� fit il -a T Jr i� r �.■�1 �■sr��,!711R.,n� '.'yam 4 '-'�-^�Mf ����«� a�� �' w+s�' —'. ��� alp■, .N LOT i5 ' LAN 2 MWA, IT j. .YYYY���,� •A '�! yW( ^lJ I f. , LOT 17 PLAN 1 - � rr■ ■ r�f' .ey y _ tits f � .® '. ■ .i � :,ail ' .'`— y LOT 1 ' PL_A 2 �a •- i .lilt!■■`r�L;��I o�,3� �II._�,�. t° �1 ��11 RMITM PLAN � ' 3 1'1�171fr P h2 Ts. w, i- c f — •.ram+ � � :� p °t I SIR I HA9 !9 SEC'nO 1 UF+ T i SEC'6[IO ' ljw aim 'IBM FT ti nAL c SECTION UNrr 3 mr� E wed aft CY44N3 1 t. Mtll.4AlG g46{6i•�LSi VARiANC(E.JUSTIascATYON The Arbors an Redhill is a very real attesipt to desi%Ja hillside adaptable housing;-utSli=ing 'standard,;plans plotted as 'thooljh each lot were to: receive a m custom hoey Indeed, much.:ot the adapti*re dasign ieatorrges are! taken .tram the voeai ilary of custom homes; and"are rarely found`, in production housing The attached project description.,and, plans"disan�o ani illusrrate' the extreme variety of site condition$ found_ :among Tot'Ae ,2i. 19ts., Most critical to:,all site "£!utures 3s,the very steep' dr s Sr. ••`Sevation in the 25' !rant.safi?�c(e exg,erieneed:by half,the loth.' .-In tat;ee cases;, a 50%, slope aonditiUriexlate'which'makea,St;Siapoasib"le to :meat both setback and height restrictions. our analysis- indicate•' he following late require `variances in order to be properly,devalopedi Lot 2: Reduce front setback to allow side"entry garage. t Lot 3: Permit exception to height limit. Allow 10't'front setback. Lots 4. 5, 6,' 9. 24 & 25: Permit exstaption to: height limit. Allow 5' y front setback. Lots T a S., Allow 5' front setback. 7 These lots are xn•,,af the 11 that exhibit the atoep drop''off from the, street. In addition, several of those lots have 'narrow frontage (Lota '2 through '7), which forces the -house further ,back on thm lot which exacerbates the zheight,'problem. Several of theffic°;,lots (2,;'3 and 24) also exhibit sever: cross slope conditions which; aluo intensifies the height' . _iroblems. Every effort has Seen made to. adapt the architecture to the hillside each of theme lots. .The, miniaum split from garage to entry level is 5'," the maximum 11891. ,,4 On Lot 2, a detached side entry,garage has employed. to employe to ,:further reduce the street impact of gmragem and,place the residence an the most appropriate portion 'of the lot. Even when a 5' setback is requested, the residence is,much further bade and drops down the h27; .from 5' to rt. The.Qlty Engineer has expr,jsse0 support >for the 5+ seback as opposed to a 10' setback which is felts would encourage'apron parking with the fiesulting blockage,of the: public- sidewalk. Only an,Lot 3 have we used a 101 aetbuck. There the;severe' cross elope requires,'a`minimum of 1Q' to tarp the driveway 'apron. , At•a 20' setback, the florr of the garage,would .be 251 out ot-grads,.,;.,Tha lo' setback is necessary'.to alleviate the impacts of the cross elope;and the *xtreaelyy ateep;downslope (69s in the setback,area). I CITY OF. 14G �L���MC�RIGA_- T .,M: �R i���s a V* $s=.CA 1a. V� P z l Placing .he garagRs and residences-26' back (or, more with a`51 variation In setback) will result in either_'a'mrch greater, split from garage to II entry which will, cake the domes unmarketable or they ,will. rise much further out of grasde at the rear:.with the reaniting, skirt walla becoming. ob�.acticnable. ` SUMMARY The severity of the downhill e� conditions on the ,aubjes, .'lots, combined with 'different 1 lot geaketiies; (froatogaa vary from 62'^ to ec,) and cross slope conditiiona I a11' 'create th6t required findings iEor the' granting of a vnriancllt., None of ',the resulting. plottinds will be objectionable, none 'will- create. a nuisance and al"a, will 'bm compatible with 'both other lots in this Ocvelopment as will aa, 'with, adjacent properties. ` Without the grar.ring of the varitdnces;, theve lots; beome virtually undevelopabla. ` CITY O� R.� tCI � iCL�GAMONGA t'fEM: ®� ���zs';�..V>4 S -�a �i i'I'A.IVi�tI�TG'1DIVISIOIV 11,,/I :' � >, GN�G'.Jt�S'l FXHIBIn ;11 SCALE:. -- , Jr ,_ \ . THE ARBORS 09 REDnILL 'J PROJECT DESCAXVTIOH { i TEZ,SITE f. The site is a series of 21 lots of rlco'rd zoned OIL- CLOW Residential ° District) with a minimum lot.area',d. 1400 0'.fo and a maximum density of 4 du/ac. There ar-;no corner lots,; flag Iota or ,other Iastr_cted access lot eonfiguraCtons. The 21 lots !area ,C12 hil?.side lots 3n ,a, downhill setting with`extrAordinary ;of$aite; view eaptur9'p64sib111t1es. The 21 late rare part of, a!'largar vls lot IaubdiNision 'which has bean ;partially developed by7variousr other:}1entites., 'The remaining :17 'lots 'are.,all uphill late on the north side 'Of :Camino Predera and are not a pact, of i this deve.lopwenr ro oral. a p E The site is is � araerally south fa-ing slope of,Redhill stret6ing for 1.600' along the south side of Camino Predera. All 2i 'lots front"Camino Predera and are contiguoss to one another. Lot 1 is the,:highest=and most ,3 westerly at elevation 3.365 with"lot 21 being the,' lowest:-and :most easterly,at elevat#on 1,274« Perhaps the most noteworthy,`foaturs of the e3te #e the"extreme var`gtion in inZiv3dual lot char,ictoristiea,' In order. tc gullr,,underratancs` the planning and:; design �aarameters ";inherent in '.ue. diversity, .of .lot characteristics we Gond'4tt©d several overall as Well as' #ndividti41 site analyses. The results a"re avmm11 aria®d below— A. Individual sites vary,3 frontage width from a minilum 09'82' to;a maximum of 1091., 30 loed exe,appioximately OV wid4 and anothQr, 6 are approx#�natsli �r'.wida. 2 B. Eleven lots drop 121 .or bore within the ±#rat: 25° (W/iich to .4l06 the !I approximate front setback Line) ', „TY.im .represents a' 50%, slops condition on half,the lots. C. 13 lots have more than 70% of'their site ;area in slopes 20% or., greater. Two more lote.mest this criteria—IT —shim—,:lox aroam'near the lowest part of the lot are discounted due to_inacceaieibility from' the street. D. Lots 3, 2', 3, 13 and 14 aloo exhibit moderate to severe cross clops 1, colditions _anginq Trott 9% to 26%, E. pour tote (20, S#, 1. •and.13)� are lmpactcd vp a knoll that`,-was left intact during the-trtct grsd2rg yrocrosa� which rises as muchz,as 9° above curb gra 11 deo utt inside the fPOAt property ,no of the subject lots. Raeese .to each lot will' always be located on the lower sAde of the knoll" but moan •Ziading ie "#navitAble. Te thq extent Possible, the SE"M t of the iftoll will.be loft intact or ra'raded :to appear,natural. 4 CITY OF,I N O �CL.�C�A ONG�3 r r: '�tZ; t 3 s a"U S9-?� PL ION IB SC,4 t:E• i j. k ;4. F. The site In genersk,enjoya art raordinary View-'eapturc. potentiall ry' parti'cularl�. fxom, "the ,upper portion of each-.lot. ;Ta lomrsr an drop;t, an the lots, the clorez one .oats tb -'adver'sR conditions Prose, by:thp� iidjaeent.,,aervice road and railroad.. )tdditionaliy.` adjacent and- an•site,trees block %iew.captura,bn ttie lower portioe ,- of some lots -: atl[±R4APdY The 21 lots exhibit 'extreme diversity, n their o`o'nb nation`'o¢ 'specific attributes:in these catagorlesa ^ - ,i (1) Lot tronrage. (2) Cross slope (3) Extremely ste66J aatbackq ,. M Lot area devoted to 209 or greater slopes (5) Land formdiversity (knalla, ezosa, slopar ,uridulations, plateaus) The result is the necessity °to viaw� .each of as .-`distinct site and locate the home aceordingly; ,i.e., g;ch fat IV caatom designed to'racaiva the house 'designao for it THE PRODUCT Early In the design process several' critical decis ?iris,iver6 mad4 Lased_ upon the site analysis and marketing criterla.- ?irot .three plans,;were dete=lned ta;,meet both market ddmand,and site conditions. Second, the:' unit plans war e :each"specified me. "inverted•plana" with living-areas on "he' uppar level and bedrooms below. This pzQvida ^aaaieii accwss Erase the garage to Irvin levels, assure9 gsnerbus zvoluma:'ce311nga En'x'ivi',on .,' g g areas and naximizis view:capturs'. opportunitieffi ',E7iird, gaz+tige ea living level elevation changes ►were to'be designed tq accomaadete a variety' of, topographic canditiions and not Zo exceed 8�. Plan, .des a: 6 5U';nplit from garage down to the entry: - .Plan 2: has a iletac2tiad garage which can "float" with tope'changes, Plan,3 has^an attac5ed garaQa that has savan split conditions. from ,1.5?,-to,91:� , Sn addition to providing for, topographically,,adagtabla,designs, `'gar ages have been turned '30 degrees,,to.the street where passible which provides minimum v1su$1 impact, adds apron parking area!:" d creates erchiteeturaa va�ietp. Plotting has ,taken place to ,respect the Copography ,by CantinQ`. ths dwelling with respect to the. street and placing it paral3el to the, coAtanrs: .h r. CITY, OF^]Li& L-HOI CUCAP�iONGA, ri�I: DR(o«3S PL�INMK O I"€f5I01�, --- f/ 'TITLE <r EXHIBIT.'�i.=�`'SCALE: / 77 �- �7 of On a number of lots the ltopWe y isl sc steep that. .front setbacks we: i reduce3 to 5°-to keep the garage ;and dwelling s close to.natival grade' as possible. There are coadltions -wherr'Athe 'dwelling the. ;'elta at grade "on uphill side and' is spv'eral'feet aut'of grade at•the'ramr or downhl11 side. Variances are required for this' reduction in.'Pront setbaeks'•;and requests for such accompany this application: Lot :3 aafiibits such a severe combination of cross slope and very steep doiVnalcpe conditions that a 10� setback has been utilized'.' Height limits are also challenged by ;the'steepeat lots)where eves with a 5' setback the,garage cannot be.:constracted Without violating the'35� limit. For'.these lots avariance-is also,'requeased. UNIT ASSIGNS The three unit plans are. :all "designed P'or the.aove-up4'r}arketof mature Families who can make use. of well_ coned interior spade, ample private outdoor 'living area, oversized twa and three 'car' garage®, $ormal 'livate and dining rooms.corapleaelng iited by' large3 Ikitchone`with nooks;'and family,. rooms. Virtually suety living asca oft each home, iacluding.,bedrooms are view oriented. 'a >deaiga'' critaria "which ,resulted in "wid'e.," shallow footprints that stretch across ,each lot pa+a11e1 with: the natural t. contours. PLAN 1 (plotted on 4 lots) : " 3 bajroam, 2 1!2 bath torraal livingldinin�, island kitchen. nook and family room,' 2,548 e,f.':living, area, 759, a.f., decks, ,(mdditionai paitio areas provided an: site eo►�ditiona silos); attached garage (6 .1/2� downhill split). PLilN 2 (PI otted:on 8 lots) ' i' 3 bedroom, bedroom 4/retreat, 3 1/2 bath, sunken living,, r'a4sed .dining,island kitchen, nook and family room. -2891 e.f. living` areae, 752 g;f. decks, (additional:. decks/patios .as alto Bond tions',allow) - detached garage. PLAN 3 (plotted an 4 lots) : 4 bedroom, 3 1/2 .bath, formal.den, raised dininj, 4ormal. 'living room,island kitchen, nook and family, 3,369's.f. living area, 719 a:fi decks and screen porch, front court at entrylden.' attached i garage e a lits gxoa 1 1/2, to 91). g g p CITY O�'RA�tt O COC'AMONG.4 � A PI, F3I.%TSIONNING ` TfIT.E: l�enein %nn c� In 4 f EXHIETI' CALE: y RESOLUTION NO. 1 X ' A RESC UTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING"CQNh1ISSI0N. APPROVING THE DESIGN REVIEhi•,OP BUILDING ELEVATIONS AND DETAYLED=S1;TE OEM FOR=TRACT NO. 10035,, LOTS 1 THROUGH 21, A. P%!,iIOUS►i:.APPROVED TRAM MAP CONSISTING OF 38 SINGLE F 'ILY 1UTS QN 15 7, ACRES OF LAND. IN THE LOW. RESIDENTI�,L'DISTRICT, LOCATED SOUTH AND EASP�:OF REO,HYLL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, SOUTH OF, CALLE 'CORAZON. ;AND xAkiNG FIMOINGS IM SUP.PORT THEREOF. .:APNr 207=631-01.through 11,, and 207-641-01 through 10`, A. Recitals. i O CALPROP .CORP ORATYON;has filed, an,.applica$ic�n for-,the approval,af the Design Reaiew,of'Tots 1=21 of Tract.-Ho. 10035 as described in the;ti'tie.of this Resolution. Hereinaftew in:this Resolutioh,,;tFae subject Design.,Review,, request is referkd,to.as pthe spplication% ; (ii) On January, 24:, 1990,, the Planning C,ftftsion of tie', City of Rancho Cucamonga-held a meeting to consider the,application. 5 .. (iii) MI legal prerequisites priorrto-. hWe adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE,. Fit. i5' hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the .City of:;Rancho:Cucamonga as,,followse i. This`Co�nission hereby finds,that all Of" 'the, facts set forth in the Recitals, Part,A, of.this Resolutf.a,are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented ide�this Commission during the above-referdnced meeting on,&41uary 24, 1990, including writteq and .orai staff reports,: th,s,Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a) That the proposed project s.Conti stent �with the objectives of. ;the General.Plan;-and . b) That,Lh2 proposed design is'in accordwith the. objective of the Development Code and;the purposes'of,the district,in which the site is, located; and' . c) That the proposed design, is� in compliance with. each of the applicable provisions of the Development,,Code; and d) Than .,the :proposed . design, tagether', rith the FCo' nd�tions applicable thereto, n�i17 ;not`. be..detrimental to the .publ, c health, safeiy, �. or welfare, or ,materially; in3urious 'to properties or improvements in the vicinity u PLANNING COWIS$ION RESOLUTION NO. TR 10036 DR -;�CALPROP January 24, :199"0 Page 2 3 . Sase'd upon the findings anti concl"isions set forth in'paragraphs l and 2"above, this Concision hereby approves`t�e application subject to:each and every <condition set, forth below 1,and' In the attached 'Standard" Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein by this,reference. n Planning Division: !) .- Return-wails and t"ination retaining/block walls " shalt be designed in such a way, as notL to tie, an obtrusive element in , the ov"erail' <conceptual' architectur`ai and landscape design cf the'pm3ect. 2) Ail ,garage elevations facing .: streets shalt ;_'`be upgraded-to. nclude architectu-61 detai3 that. is consistent, with: the ;Iigh, 144 1 of architectural _ dmAiI, presenteG.on the,propose.d',residences. 3) The deck underlay for the, driveway on Lot 2 sha11 incorporate, exterior>e1ene6:ts providdd--on the .Lot 2 residence..? 4) All,. pertinent _conditions froine the previo s tract approval contained in Resotutcon No." 81"34 shall apply, 5) All pertinent .conditions from the 2wa previ.ous design revies approvals, "within Resolution Nos. W46 and 87=11 Shall apply. " 6) Approval :of this Design Review- is contingent upon approval of the related Variance No.. 89t-12." Engineering Division:;" 1) It appears (by scaling) ,that part<of the structure on lot: 2! " encroaches onto the,.City storm.�drain easement. ".The icroiching Portion- of""the structure shall be. eet46ved frot the easement or'"a request to vacate" a portion .of the easement ;shall.44 filed and approved" r�r to they issuance�of a buildin 2) All drivee. y shall be a mix, m of 24 feet wide per City Standard go. 305, 3) Those driveways su3ect to . potential' drainage overflow shall have a.street overflow deflector curb conforming ta-,Cityt.StandaH'N6. Sib as detepmined in, the plan checkprocess. f. y ` 1 PLANNING COW41SSION:RtSOLUttdN N0, TFS 10035 DR - CALPROP "d January,'Z4, 1990 Page 3, t 4. BasQd upon:.the findings and conclusions set or in paragraphs 1; 2:, and 3 above, this:Cosr3nission here6,;anpioves.the application "subaect'Lo each and evet� condition"set forth below4ne in the,.attached Standard Conditions, aV-nhed hereto-and incorporated herein by ►is referencg, 5 The Secretary, to this Commission 'shall: certify to the adoption of this,Resolution. APPROVED'AND. ADOPTED THIS 24TIi DAY OF JANUARY, 1990, PLANNING COhtrIISSION OF THE C.ITY OF`RANCHo CLtCAMONGA , BY: arry. e. , ati:rtndn ATTEST: r Trau Men. McretarY I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the planning Consalssion;af.they City o Rancho Cucamonga,' do hereb 'cert�'fy that the <fo`regong Resolution wras duly and regularly introduced,',<paiso , 'and`<,.:dopted by the.Planning, Comrissibn of the City .of Rancho;Cucamonga, it a regular meetYng of the Planning<Coansission .held ' on the'24th d4y of January 1990, by the .fol7awing vote=i:o-wit:' AYES: co ISSdONERS: NOES: GOMISSiOMERS:. ABSENT: COMISSIONERS: •`4 ` t _ i T o g g .b» g Tps..`ap$�` o fig• � '... ZMI B pmpp4P, w NggyP_..,8 j q-j.*wN- Na A6•$Rypp 7¢@. fa ��,y'Y' '�S•�wO7Swy,�1 4 Gv%IZ) --;V, -i's .� CYV p•+Y��~~'•. s�q.'f�� �4qj4 apPq�N .. -� IL IZU in {i4fL.� tppJ�-4nJ-: Tao�.wp Al,lyw pci�.N�a N N• �a pw„p pg pOA NY]gd @CO 6l'Aa�� *MS. �� Q0.. A�^��a Myt 1� ' 366 1l.M�tl IAL ii rC VW �i qq O y oa ba'Q a Y/Y. ®.W�G�M,^7j{rMAp pAv ` E� ~Y^gpe� YO.q y���B ~ � �.`�0•��� 0�:: hot Ui.' �'� . 00 'a!$. 5.�... +` ay qb1 TTTSSS9JJJ��• ICI. USVG H" L4CCC?�C: �OeN .� 4MP 4 �S.OY'• p.tr' fj GW 00 RE it v11 e 1711ca ® LF • v' � o � s h i Y ap l w~ wa IV IN F. �p i1 -N � :fYN p d = Ma Y y L O oVa. Fs►¢ O ���111 4 4LMeyY ®GyN,�g.R O is YOM6 _$ L0�t� i �4l��ppyy a dE 0 .it 43 LAS O Cot$ owoJZ b^Y C }r N $ f,�y oN o� „ � oo»� "�� avt�'sy� r�1�5� ps �' u_ 3gpxd c t Yp Q; O�C O .CYO± ;tNtS Y Y~ LCO.�I-E3 �".�Co" Eli N d �yq Olpq eYNr `u =Z C y Y~B8OC N4�'�O dCgpN +�H pN'��Ms�N «'O8Y9's YN4q'ei�..�L�QP�. '.�V x4q Ldd +¢�j il ffiY q� .._"Ol y,;ji '-,g'.O... � 01 MONYd. ® E1 a de ^ " ;�� i' 3 yL 4'.YN L9 �G� Laapu�u '«O$�1���l.av t�4m� GG BCN CY �YL� �y ✓p:,{O� M1t� ,yr� ooO yqqy� >> �QfY�wO� OYQL�L.�iM U C i ^ N ^ A a N Y1:r a .*.�1s��a a.aaa0 d e $5e''Y �. ia$�acoY� ia`.3—$i. Y$vQ A. YlC 6 _VVD �; n 2— tj Na�«� g� jarr tl y a 1� N M -4 3 i lost 95 Y Os goo IS Lai` �ENS g �� ,�a�Q:��m �ar t�� V, So qp q® Sol .�^' AX HIM V_ a t `M �.O 4e �¢tl O Oy aU O�CODm��. b'4M w �i �i bF L O �6M0 O• wSOWN. is —12 �YY p Ye yn C pL p,�C ro� Y Ot`Ny ~ 8 sp Y �q: wp �L.O�►�u�cr Vd �qqqo.C MY ^ppb:ppG N sC L:'�Qwa'~1y�. '►�O`L"�'q Ypr Nep�1WY ��L^ a 3.2q8 $ YLv 1YNYV. Z►« + ':�y6tl pNpLp^pm2$N N �OV` 9.CON ��. y^q�q �j. �Ynp .N(:M C1 Aw ^dC Aypy���' CV ON�GL CI'.gY Y d0 1�p Y �.0�►► N.�a � w0�`�•' 5. .,NG«V«i it y�1 «+Y� MTp �Y�r y dp^q L +y N Y b Ob►O pL<3 Q LC L O.S NL{pp•CL W�pCYy:« 3L My 'a C1Y NFL n`f¢q'f/ O^1rY q'a6t`Ol tlpyti /Of «Mq pq x..+r./��j1�N.L6 G� � Ym � � CI1 Y O.1r he N ` 7► y Ml p Y y'F p R 4 4 p0 L�"geC Nq�O yi'O N C iw I G 6YTIC6 � MYL I�oN pI ��.� �"q-:. atIL1 a1$N .B o. b -ii�► 10 1« p4 O.aw N.L♦grwagg .L�IK� Y L �1r y5ra. ^«•.1 .Y•5� �j,111 g�34=,� ^O1 .eau+oa �r �'g$«. `weer a.. C" : .:... w .Y+ ....�L�L/�.vygqCL�p�.y�yyyY'.. p'Ra7 .� 4l QLiw.. Nw MON <M. �@.M r= Y :S.i i1pK 30 <eb 6 1►S10N... Ni <NY�w o c p C b 9.•b.©`a. — CT pp O�O� `9p+pa�L Y C M.e ►g999M �O �� 0 6 2.2 pratS �CZ bP■� ,...: gj•.ay�•YO CCp. w�ggV c.s p N 8L' .1$ N 0 =$ ►y vr�•- TL M.® es QvQ L pvp � &Mw�N Y o6 g �n ppap`P. 0.� .�� Vee ! � N�6.:bp p.�$+ �9 i, bi� �b �. p►L Ow 9''�.� Mil 1 �` �9T Ol`r 1� � �F��� Y gig get. 54 ScSte SA Ig p S e Y' S Qa ® ®6 f is :i s+ otl���i � �:Y�y p � °I� ��® epi.��� Wa!®7 �+gd•it�� ��«�n 11«aq1 M i� ►.Y�q L G 13Zp�� SOT a«9.Y lo YT� _ Y P\I Yy � jSSSa W.l.td, ,L1pYei•� 'f T Bill! � s \, 02 Y2 g 4 14�I.. ++ YiG'WM yY.61Q. s�M M1i �+f �t�g/di LT 4�O q la + �i •mow p` wZ � a.,, fie. ' Hui 1.2 v `SSM4gQ $• t Q4 All yypy yygib ..g.. y«r't{tY �u SQ.0 C�7jpQ$�� AAQ~I3G wa A�}C�( >a�.eC.V i`Qib ��y.CA � � wr Or�lw� �y`y y� al RtYh � w111p���17 Mn RL .LY 41wne u --'A s tl. b `. yy Y` ayhgta# iqayaLLL��tlert M.ai yOy Y �+iQp1.PY 4pi�M'O� 7}¢y My4 y.Fg ygi a��. �YQ^/ a Iy.yC;y +;I�•' .9R4Y a]i1#4.`!R� �.9 � �N WY, fYY� L��i YI tl5M01i.4 N at AMA 4 � S°L red His 2s was .v ;ag �y� +� y Ise 3-8 p S Beast E 9 F� a!(.". } .� IS a N Is aE 'tr�4f w,R; Cis 4 u lei e► w Si 222 Imp Iasi is I V, all Q . _ 44 FA a go s it .. r rAI fit ;P X-C sfill $ Auk 16 an .Y $ Big :i"1=11 `yam MO us Ilk N.p 9 . aL��L�►. 'o•..•� �� a �`"' W.L� �n ' �^g w V m ` V " y p W C¢ ■." o ^ + Cy.f E0J 3` a Z V A iV1(y� q y4QZV M" ^iwV 01 w r.^ V« a b MEN Vji L� C r.�aa ILiA G^� 6 5 q�.. _ I pp +fib E^ i p RpC e4 O Q«+p L 6 ® p �r LMw- O C GM p O rCl ` q ^a Q�e bCC SIB ! OVOan `�q1`®� 3^�� t'��45 - ZC er GC O ®.iY•pIV �'I ® N+=�• 33 06 i tl i M V � Rlt�m Sw® � ■qa � MW. P9 W AI W V t oVG pY SOS. �5C Y f! U C N C �4 C t NSp (, Ol•` �e ii >M�U s _rC y Y p Si ./ V= i3 J O. �E`O1^ r�C$eCg $ QaAi ta �ppyp� .3 g` i 1-5 �pY p*YQ �y� aY■Y■ 0 '., rp u��oQQ.. oN {Va} U� � �E� L2. _ 'd M.++ LL[,Vy.-pL eY .�N OYy S O� L �V�- Y ` ` GV C 41 pia $ wo OM ypa 9 a �u RLM - ,..r:.� >�= .C�ip �L ,LL ri9aaV Y�,,®�® s$ Rd$ •_�S C�C Y.:.' +�C6, '�On ycy�C Ypa V N `� 'V ip O' wOfiL qwi ��6WY Vd 6cL/ ` "ra m 0.Q qiq. .CCyq M� yq Yp Y �6y1 taY®' Cz YiS N L> O M^ N N wa'- L 31N 'Vy6,p p� %q6 1 6 w Q G L V Y L O® w." 9 C ^L Y i V V p•� B �oSS� Iwo` �aJtmYYnL£u YYL Kma L�. V Yp �V aO �Y q�� q�egyyitl� pV � �a �r `f 2 a E q� '4' pp $ �yyff Epp$•` �'$I soil 1Y1 1 _a tlg qw• I@p. �s Iaa_s� 'P sus S. Z cal pa„_ �. W w r $ems N o> Q ot • m 21o� �df i C „,12 $T _ OYO O>'� O r d 1 r Y � C s� > p p , d C.8 gL� l:�M C CAS 00 a O L"LYC Y�� H YO Y Y K.. Y� at gg 9 via V g� gO�Og g~4 Mat Ai ILI �Op� � q ;EIL M If Z 4 isg� V tl2 0 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF-THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING'VARIANCE N01 $9-12, A REQUEST TO ALLOW-REDUCED FRONT YARD- SETBACKS ON 8 LOTS, ;A REDUCED MINIMUM AVERAGE. FRONT YARD_ SETBACK FOR ALL LOTS, HEIGHT .EXTENSIONS;ABOVE 35 °.FEET ON 3, LOTS, AND A REDUCED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, ' SETBACK•ON LOT 2, FOR A PREVIOUSLY :APPROVED TRACT MAP CONSISTING OF 38 SINGLE FAMILY'LOTS' ON_'15,.7 ACRES OF-LAND IN THE LGW REtiIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED,,SOOTH AND EAST OF RED HILT: COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, SOUTH 01, CALLE CORAZON, AND MAKING <FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF:;; APN 207-631=u1 ''through:- 23" and 207-641-01''through` 15. yt'1 A. Recitals. CAL CI'I' Pn4AT10N has filed an application for the issuance of the Variance No 89 j7 as''desc-,ibed in the t?*le of 'this Resolution. Hereinafter in, this Resolu'Ei;vn, the"subject Variance r,equest`is. referred to as "the application". ' 00 On January 24, 1990, the .Planning;'Commission of^the City of ' Rancho. Cucamonga conducted .a duly, noticed public hearing on the appl,icat'on and concluded said hearing on that date.. (iii) All legal prerequisites prior, 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 the facts set forth in the Recitals,; Part A of this Resolution are true and.correct. 2. Based, upon substanti3O o idence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on January 24,r1990;`, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony; this Commission hereby specifically finds.as follows; (a) The application applies to property located south and east of Red Hill Country Club Drive, Iouth of Palle Corazon with a street frontage of 1585.91 feet and lot depths ranging from 11,7.51 feet to 305.84 feet'and' is presently improved with curb, gutter and sidewalk; and (b) The property to the north of :the subject site is single family residential, the property to the ,south.of that'site,consists of vacant- commercial land; the property to the east is, a, railroad and vacant, and" +the" property to the-west is multi-family residentiat;"and PLANNING COMMISSION' RESOLUTION,No. VA:89-12 - CALPROP' January 24, 1990 Page`2 , (c) Reduced front .yard setbacks would provide, a more- aesthetically pleasing atmosphere than. extended stem, walls on the �eaY elevation of houses, facing,foothili Boulevard; and (d) Due to the excessive slope on the front portion of many == lots, driveway construction with 'a slope of mare than twenty"por percent for extended distances would exist if the �Puses were constructed at or tehind, the required front property lines; and t (e). ,:The property hast the following unusual topooyaphic characteristics: ; (i) Eleven lots dr6p�12 feet or more within-the first 25 feet'(which is also the approximate front setback line) which, represents a'50 percent slope gradient; and �\ ~ `(2) Thirteen lots have more than 70,'percenti of their site area in slopes;with a 20 percent or steePer gradient; and (3) five o��' the tots exhibit crost slope conditions ranging from 9 percent to 25_perces't. 3. Based<.upon.the substantial evidence presented�to this'Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings, of v facts set forth in paragraphs land 2 above, this Commission hereby fin ds ;and concludes as follows: (a` That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of- the specified regulations would result in 'practical 'difficul.ty or unnecessary physicaY hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code: (bl That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions app'.. cable_to the property_ involved or to the intended use of the property that do`not apply generall; to other properties in the sane district. (c) That the ,strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. v (d) That the granting of the Variance will - 'not constitute a grant for special privilege inconsistent with the limitations' on other properties classified in the same zone. (e) That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare,' or materially , injurious to properties or improvements'in the vicinity. 4. Based, upon! the flhd i ngs and conclusions set forth in 'paragraphs 1, 2, ;and 3 above. -this, Commission hereby approves thelapplication. �r PLANNING, COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0:` ' VA 89-12 CALPROP January 24,, 1990� Page 3 5. The Secretary to this Commission :shall certify to the: adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AMP ADOPTED THIS 24111 DAY OF JANUARY, 1990. = 1 \l PLANNING COMMISSIOAr THE'CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry;T. McNel, Chairman ' ATTEST• Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary; of the Planning Commission of the "City of Rancho v Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the; foregoing Resolution. was' duly and regularly introouced, passed, and adopted by,, Planning Cbmmissipn,af the City of Rancho Cucamonga. at a regular meeting of the 'Planning Commission held on the 24th day.of January, 1990, by the following vote-to-twit: c AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS— ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS:, r,1 f t�1 ah �"O� Ck CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT "t-f DATE: January 24, 1990 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Alan`'darren Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT'- AND GENERAL FLAN AMENDMENT NO. - FU INC. - A -request, to amen e General an Lana use _ p rom Office to Medium Density Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) for 3.556 acres of land, located at the southeast corner, of Archibald Avenue and Church Street APN: _1077-32-26. ENVIRONMENTAL. AS,3SNENT AND r4^DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - - MUM LWAQ- reques. amen a eve opmen s r c _'IIFIp from "OP" (Office/Professional) to "N" (tRedium—,Density, 8-i4 dvel1Tng units pe- aiire) for 3.556 acres of land, located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue arA Church Street. - APN: 1077-332 a: On November 8, 1989, the Planrer'ng commission continued review of these applications to the first General Plan Amendment cycle of 1990 at the requerl of the applicant, Kent Justice of Future Estates. Since that time,: = Justice has not been able to complete agreements necessary for the purchase and development of the parcel in question and, as a result, he requests that the subject applications 'be withdrawn from City consideration. Therefore, any further consideration of the land use issues for the subject site, if so desired by,the Commission, should be done under separate City initia'.rd applications. ReJ y su d, Br Cir' BB AY:mlg �Attachments: Letter from Kent Justice, January 9, 1990 I?'Eii 3 FUTUREESTATIR% INC MTV Sovt!►t4ftfts*Aw w9,Sulu szo CrIVOF �'GD�SlCflhtOtat3+ iC�,t ad.Un* ° 7as atiu�1lR,t°;snc ttr 2f3t 649.2511 714 891-8 & ,�a.�ss FAXVI JAra �9�Jt3 S January 9= 1Q90 Mr. Alan'Warren City of Rancho Cucamonga 9,230"C Base'Lind Road, Post',office' box 807 Rancho Cucamonga; California 91129 , Ref; Property Located att SE Corner of Archibald Avenue and church;Street. � ^ Rancho Cucamonga Parcel Number 1077-332-026 Dear Mr. Karren, Adft Please consider this letter as. aiithorixa tion to withdraw our',application for the above referenced property. Should you require any additional �.ntormation please contact our office-� Thank you. Si ccrely;. I FUTU E� STXTt^sS\`A@ED S?SVELt�i'MEIiT a Ken ti Presiders, /dl CC: Cris DiRuggiero