HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-32 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 01-32
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE
DRC2001-00024, A REQUEST TO INCREASE THE WALL HEIGHT TO 12
FEET ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY OF LOTS 21-24 OF TRACT 16051
WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS A MAXIMUM WALL
HEIGHT OF 6 FEET IN THE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
(4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY
PLAN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD
AND ROCHESTER AVENUE - AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF, APN: 1089-031-24
A. Recitals.
1. Richmond American Homes filed an application for the issuance of Variance
DCR2001-0024, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Variance request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 28th day of March 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing
on that date.
3. 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 the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on March 28, 2001, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to Tract Map 16051, located on the northeast comer of
Base Line Road and Rochester Avenue, and is presently under construction; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is vacant and currently being utilized by
the City as a maintenance storage yard. Base Line Road bounds the property to the south and
Rochester Avenue to the west. The property to the east is the Southern California Edison Utility
Corridor; and
C. The applicant has submitted a Variance Application requesting an increase in wall
height along the rear of Lots 21, 22, 23 and 24 (adjacent to the Southern California Edison Utility
Corridor) to 12 feet, where the Development Code allows a maximum wall height of 6 feet; and
d. The Variance as specified in the application will not be detrimental to the goals and
objectives of the General Plan or Development Code and will not promote detrimental conditions to
the persons or properties in the immediate vicinity on the subject site for the reasons that follow:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 01-32
VARIANCE DRC2001-00024 — RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES
March 28, 2001
Page 2
i. The natural slope of the site combined with the existing street grades poses a
physical constraint to the grading concept of the site. In order for the lots along the east boundary of
the project site to properly drain onto Westhaven Place, the pad grades cannot be lowered to reduce
the need for a retaining wall. The site's grading design is predicated on the design of the sewer at
minimum grade (0.40 percent) from Rochester Avenue. Although the final reach of the sewer at
Rochester Avenue is greater than minimum, the elevation gained is calculated at 0.91 feet.The site,
if redesigned, could only be lowered less than a foot, which would still result in the need for a
Variance; therefore,without the Variance, an unnecessary physical hardship for the applicant would
be created; and
ii. The site is adjacent to the Southern California Edison Corridor,which poses a
physical constraint that does not generally apply to other properties in the same district; and
iii. The proposed 12-foot wall height is necessary in order to ensure that future
homeowners enjoy the privilege of having a privacy and security wall. Without the Variance, future
homeowners would be deprived of privileges enjoyed by other homeowner within the same district;
and
iv. Because Southern California Edison Corridor does not equally impact most
properties in the same district, the granting of the Variance will not set a precedent; and
e. Granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare, but, conversely, provide a security and privacy wall for the future homeowners.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations
would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of
the Development Code.
b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other
properties in the same district.
C. That 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.
d. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district.
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 findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this
Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below.
1) Variance approval shall expire if building permits are not issued within 5
years from the date of approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 01-32
VARIANCE DRC2001-00024— RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES
March 28, 2001
Page 3
2) The wall shall be constructed with a decorative textured block of a dark
color for the lower retaining portion, with a lighter color decorative block
on top, subject to City Planner approval. In addition, climbing vines are
required along the east face of the wall.
3) If right-of-way is available along the Southern California Edison frontage
to the east of the property, provide landscaping and irrigation or an
in-lieu fee for street trees to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
4) All applicable Conditions of Approval per Resolution 00-42 approving
Tentative Tract Map 16051 shall apply.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2001.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY'
La cNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad , S cret
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 28th day of March 2001, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE