HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011/01/12 - Agenda Packet • THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
•ky PLANNING COMMISSION
,Lt AGENDA
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA JANUARY 12, 2011 - 7:00 PM
Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center
Council Chambers
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California
I.. CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call
Chairman Munoz_ Vice Chairman Howdyshell
Fletcher_ Wimberly_ Oaxaca _
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
December 8, 2010
M. PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their
opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and
address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shall be
limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking.
A. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18626 - HP ENGINEERING FOR
JAIME CAMPOS - A proposal to subdivide a parcel of about 0.63 acre at
the southeast corner of Lemon Avenue and Daylily Court into three (3)
parcels in the Low(L) Residential District located at 9923 Lemon Avenue;
APN: 0201-902-16. The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 Minor Land Divisions.
B. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION DRC2010-00318 - RYLAND
HOMES - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan
for 70 single-family lots on 30.93 acres of land in the Low Residential
District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan,
located on the north side of Day Creek Boulevard, east of the Southern
•
1 of 4
ti PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
JANUARY 12, 2011
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
California Edison Corridor-APN: 1087-121-24 through 30; 1087-141-43
through 52, 57; 1087-171-44 through 51; 1087-351-01 through 05, 12
through 18, 45 and 46; 1087-361-0lthrough.30. Related files: Tentative
Tract Map SUBTT16227-2. Staff has found the project to be within the
scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report
(State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City
Council on August 1, 2001) and does not raise or create new
environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental
Impact Report.
IV. NEW BUSINESS
C. TRAIL PRIORITIES ANNUAL REVIEW DRC2010-00412
I • V.. PUBLIC COMMENTS I
This is the time and place for the general public to address the commission. Items to be •
discussed here are those that do not already appear on this agenda.
VI. COMMISSION BUSINESS/COMMENTS I
VII. ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m.
adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent
of the Commission.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL ADJOURN TO A
WORKSHOP IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING TO DISCUSS PRE-
APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2010-00935 - PACIFIC
COMMUNITIES BUILDER, INC.
I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was
posted on January 6, 2011, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code
Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga.
•
2 of 4
• Ssvr PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Lysol JANUARY 12, 2011
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
t 41/. A
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting,
ev. please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48
hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC
TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all
persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If
others have already expressed your position,you may simply indicate that you agree with
a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire
• group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should
refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience.
The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the
Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the
staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After
speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is
important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to.
Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual.
If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under"Public
Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the
agenda.
Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission
Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners.
All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing.
The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. Tuesday, one week prior to the
meeting. The Planning Commission Secretary receives all such items.
AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the
offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive,
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public
inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m., except for legal City holidays.
• •
3 of 4
S
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
JANUARY 12, 2011
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
APPEALS
Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may
appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any
appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a
fee of$2,164 for maps and$2,273 for all other decisions of the Commission. (Fees are
established and governed by the City Council).
Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session.
Copies of the Planning Commission agendas and minutes can be found at
http://www.ci.rancho-cucamonga.ca.us
•
•
•
4 of 4
• Vicinity Map
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12 , 2011
A B
i.-_i i I — i
rte..4____44_, _..4127-H. I_I rnj
ii m d E a o c
VT
i h Y
j = U I i
I. lipir co
•
;:! � �� Base Line
r;
Church ■■ !
■■�`�il S i Church
oothill ` , Foothill
i !
Arrow c m f f c :Arrow
Jersey L 3 8th i_.._. > E a!W wi d _ _ .> _ _ _.O t7 6th s € 11111111
d Y i i 6th N
I
ati, -- _.----»- math
0
• Item C is Citywide * Meeting Location:
City Hall
10500 Civic Center Drive
•
• STAFF REPORT I d
PLANNING DEPARTMENT I
Date: January 12, 2011 LRANC O
To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA
From: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director
By: Mike Smith, Associate Planner
Subject: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18626 - HP ENGINEERING FOR JAIME CAMPOS - A
request to subdivide a parcel of approximately 0.63 acre at the southeast corner of
Lemon Avenue and Daylily Court into three (3) parcels in the Low (L) Residential District,
located at 9923 Lemon Avenue - APN: 0201-902-16. The project qualifies as a Class 15
exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 Minor Land Divisions.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Single-Family Residence; Low (L) Residential District
South - Single-Family Residences; Low (L) Residential District
East - Single-Family Residences; Low (L) Residential District
• West - Single-Family Residences; Low (L) Residential District
B. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Low Residential
North - Low Residential
South - Low Residential
East - Low Residential
West - Low Residential
C. Site Characteristics: The project site is a parcel of approximately 27,400 square feet (0.63 acre)
with dimensions of approximately 210 feet (north to south) by approximately 130 feet (east to west).
Located generally at the center of the project site is the applicant's single-family residence. At the
southeast corner of the site, is a metal shed. There are numerous trees throughout the site. There
are single-family residences in all directions around the property. The zoning of the property and
all surrounding properties is Low (L) Residential District. The subject property slopes north to
south. The elevation at the north side is approximately 1,576 feet. At the south side, the elevation
is generally approximately 1,573 feet.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into three (3) lots for single-family
residential development (Exhibit D). The applicant's residence will remain in-place on Parcel 2. At
this time, the applicant has not determined whether he will construct homes on Parcels 1 and 3 or
sell one or both to others. All lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this
• zoning district as described in the Development Code. Individual lot areas will be 9,635 square
feet, 9,105 square feet, and 8,455 square feet for Parcels 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The proposed
lot areas will be in excess of the required minimum 7,200 square feet and required minimum
Item A
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
SUBTPM18626 - HP ENGINEERING FOR JAIME CAMPOS
January 12, 2011
Page 2 •
average of 8,000 square feet. The depth of each lot will be approximately 130 feet, which will
exceed the required minimum depth of 100 feet: The width of each lot will be 70 feet, 65 feet, and
60 feet for Parcels 1, 2, and 3, respectively. These dimensions will comply with the required
minimum average of 65 feet (Exhibit H). All of the lots will be conventional in design and will mirror
the lots of the subdivision directly across the street (Tract 16431) and to the east (Tract 15726).
The most unusual characteristic of the new subdivision will be its relationship with the properties to
the south — specifically, the property located at 6339 Daylily Court (Lot 15 of Tract 16431).
Because of technical considerations such as drainage, grading, and street design at the time that
Tract 16431 was developed between 2003 and 2005, that property is approximately 6 feet lower
than the project site. Also, there is a screen wall of approximately 6 feet in height at the common
property line and a retaining wall approximately 5 feet in height, parallel to it. Both the grade
difference and the retaining wall will remain unchanged (Exhibit E). Access for all three lots will be
via Daylily Court. The existing drive approach at Lemon Avenue and the corresponding driveway
for the existing house will be removed. The existing garage door on the north side of the garage for
the existing house will be relocated to the south side of the garage (Exhibit F), and a new driveway •
and drive approach at Daylily Court will be constructed. The metal shed will be removed. Most of
the street improvements along both Daylily Court and Lemon Avenue are already in place with the
exception of street trees and street lights. The installation of these improvements will be required
by the Engineering Department as conditions of approval.
B. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted on October 19, 2010, at
Lions Center West on 9161 Base Line Road. All property owners within 660 feet of the project site •
were invited; four individuals attended this meeting. None of the four individuals had any specific
objections to the project. There were some questions regarding the timeline for construction and
the design of the houses. Staff stated to the attendees that the applicant's proposal does not
include house product; activity on-site would be limited to rough grading (if any) and there would be
no construction activity associated with this application. Staff indicated to those in attendance that
any house product would be required to comply with the design and technical standards
established by the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission and that, at a minimum,
the proposed houses would require review and action by the Design Review Committee.
C. Grading and Technical Review Committees: The Grading and Technical Review Committees
reviewed the application on November 16, 2010. The Committees accepted the proposal and
recommends approval. Their conditions have been incorporated into the Resolution of Approval.
Design Review Committees: The Design Review Committee (Munoz, Wimberly, and Granger)
reviewed the application on November 16, 2010 (Exhibit G). The Committee accepted the proposal
noting that the overall design of the subdivision was typical, and nearly identical, to the subdivision
across the street. The Committee recommends approval to the Planning Commission. Their
conditions have been incorporated into the Resolution of Approval.
D. Environmental Assessment: The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is
categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15315 — Minor Land Divisions - as the project is a division of residential zoned
property into four or less parcels, is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning designations, •
no variances or exceptions are required, all services and access to the proposed parcels to local
standards are available, the parcel was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the
A-2
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
SUBTPM18626 - HP ENGINEERING FOR JAIME CAMPOS
January 12, 2011
• Page 3
previous 2 years, and the parcel does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent. There is
no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot
radius of the project site. No comments have been received.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18626 by adoption
of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame . Troyer, AICP
Plann g Director
JRT:MS/ge
. Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Aerial Photo
• Exhibit C - Site Utilization Map
Exhibit D - Site Plan/Tentative Tract Map SUBTPM18626
Exhibit E - Grading Plan and Sections
Exhibit F - Elevations of the Existing Residence (showing relocated garage door)
Exhibit G - Design Review Committee Action Comments (November 16, 2010)
• Exhibit H - Table 17.08.040-B Basic Development Standards
Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18626
•
•
A-3
. .
• ; I ,,
•
,
1 i
i \
I2 ]
ur 114Thb H '''.rnA 7
t
.1. LAI_ i. .
, b ,.. i , -,_§, 1 ,
-K=H-=', ,1 : - - H 1 _ . - ..„)-(. \ I.; -, . - .0)--, if----re .1 \
a :`,,L1 i. , mug .: _It . w -- Illps1 ' 4 • ' ""43"'---.."''''''' -i 4 ,‹ c: § it:,
•
- ..
---- --------- ---'-----j.1—. - , A.,/ i - ■.-,,7'\ I
5 1 .. • ---....._ ---.._.
1 -
,, 12 Firn,.. 21.I4 AR 2
A.- • r- , SHERWOOD DR
POWAY Cr '2 la' d' /,--17 4 W : -•VI "WEI- h_ — '4 - f.,cit 4,,,,,.. "------.2--
:‘,-)I-7,- Asktoo 51Fawernr>
A E ,2,
ts ` 4 If et----"&;-fio 1
CHERRY LN
als11-94-- 7 tall -rell • ' ' j-kI-Sl. 2 2. I ilz I i , ‘, I,
ma il i 'Stns.]
$0" VAILI/10'MM = I °
‘A I 5 HILLSIDE R ,,,_,1
. ' „ Ei 11 Ea i k41,fgl 0,,,,,,0. g ,1 h-g-r _
.t. HILLS101 RD
Ais ;
ig.i. i .1 7----
E \
RANCHO , prAcH7lw e i. . s
.11 I & 5 slit.,.... .t .iti --;
' - i ' t .' •
:EECHWOOD DR =.4k
' 15411V PROJECT SITE r : I._ i g
WILSON AVE 'MARIO'ql
_
,_-„,1 •:,??.;, ,,52.7:-7,.,,:tr,,,.‘:1..,,,,,T087.,&---, .,
L. , ..„,,,r. , _1.. 7,1[.. i'-ric 0 e: ;.-.. -1 : 4-..9,. "-i-i- ---,/ .:52..)ct9.ff,f1r-A. ,.....k-:,i,
,
IA LoR ! N.&-;1"--'.;;;ICM"-.. W.)::kdoilliEGE14(-: :fAm.-0P11.V
-- ,„..„;.1-4,7/2J.,.,
1 4„, T ==.= .' . 2' .1 , r . A — --1.1
C--- lij
II ..-_-±'! , /11,4flitzjl'AViiStiftrcra".filiFI -z12-1t°7
i ,
4-I :
L
_. . „s, :., :. , 111.1 Ili:
ra,tir'...)-...t-,Ft‘.er..;-,-; ;-.;-,„, A .
7i,Ndokipcs,wrs(,kth...it,,,e.„,, ; Stan;
Li,_ii r..rialtill L . .rik. ri _ .
N____ Icu... al\.
moo
7 I ? 1 : . . _:-...KIT .1E11 IMI. DI
Qty t -;' j .1 .Lip
1. ,e 1 lof a ILOALC i '' ..!......rt_} .- dit -7 I .r.:
M'„ ,_ 11,7""7',,../...■ - i , .. ,
,....L.___,..ir ..... ..-x. .; ., . it ... i
lif
„,,,,A,,p-E „ 1
Dm la 6;iU:1A
r 5 .
r '
!minium i _
hii.. . . ,h - "'" ■1111Alls--__.. .. . n .‘n . -/ ; . ,
::1:;:.:41BERwmcri,..,,,-.44 . . .,s. ww:_ ---.-------- _v._ , . ,/..),--7/ fit.-
_a_ ,..m..n , __,
„„„„„ . ,. . ..
, 0 ,t
,„„..., ;Fr :rilint, , syl i, ., lifoi:jr,
- -
LA -
..__. - NB— :rz--r ,i.,_1. ,,,,..J • i • _,J- ..1;_a- '-- ,''-14,01P 2.1'- '-1
—..-----, __--
:j, .1 luen. .rn
_ -1 -. ,-7-• -Fur • .. : ], - I - i , qk IS
sp . - • -
' EARXX*214:I'I '=. - 1 ■ i_r_4,iI I
!6..ap -fli -E-4,1-... -. . -,..-: . . - litH__-_L . . MN 74-.;--3.•S1 ,, 1 rIII . ..,a3,i I -.:. , ., ,j....in
a
,__ _,-19-7.9., Joiti-s-i:: .1 !1 -. _ t: acia.ir.,..=.• . ,
,.
1ICOM
c,i.
1 E,LOMA I
.e i •''
i
c'i sit
e 'se li-Eal citallff,....4.4;11 a
ahtjEitaq* .. o - . i vea.: >
=
i I V .` , 3..".•'37.34,4i.o33.3....2-1 ,,, .0• — ^ .0 o
x
r-11 4 ' ' ' V‘: ”. ..../4. Z'''NCialHallig•
t: /.11-' P.:. .•-.17. 3.A372-• 1 !`:. '•"'''' . ct
.". ),,, 4
13/; irl- : INE .%. : Dr' i _d_ _ ,..„ w tEVMI --,.
. _. .
.
r.44.;:r-, j. .7- i ' •" -E-- -1r'An
. ■
- ' lmi..".1 boriiir:f MINIM I " II4 A.-
--2", ,?, • --11-i-,; ,_ in, ' ,<,/ , icaNz,,,,,,,, , LIIMilli-4' '-1-1-1.('IM-lj
..,...dAfcfiluri-i.., i 1 , F.-qi : -: - 1 - g'7 'I r.ifiTafi
I
g `g pri:.:..-4.=:.M. 1 v.,,- AA 1, -, ;. -,-..„.z - - i.il :i 1 ‘ , . gi i =Er
E
) i
".• .._ ,.. 1 n 92;;1.1
1 LTZIZE`A:I it,r‘1"; ril t,/ _a-ii 1, 1
SPIIIICE -3% ; cseN
VISTA 4 \• ---,..'
.,\0411, :0 r . ..—Liw.3 . E i•-,,,:,-,:f,,,-,„,, /
j tni_
• .'° * ' .:
',.\ip . .. _, c r ,...— r I .... .1 F.I I‘0,7 - . I -1-
r I IFLZ ..d
•
7 IQH___±--.-4
,, 3
‘ awn' _"), itt. s'i •,-.'''' SRN 1 ST --w 111, i
RAISNI.i
11 EV. i Y- !,11. ' j Hil - Irra -. 1r a 1 .-"I'li "..47' ' ..• ,. / AI,.
111 --- -,
- - jr ' ..... il ; _ .,„„,„ i .t....TERRA WISTA
- - ....1:41- t i i
ael
station 2- WO
fl c — 1 [..(r0,,lill.,.. ::!..: .„.1
: HISTORIC i
EXHIBIT A FOOTHILL BL -EMI
i-4 -
; 66 s-_
. ,nor: . „...„ ( HcoogsRET
• =;17L49-=ALY---E—ruL,'-_A
.gi.; t 11711 illini 5-!1[7.
...ILL[ il . cm,
..... .
thra , I "
$` l .� VY. .� YY o y W'7 n i• aYs'mm F
ti 'it'.. .y1° ..� .� F .,7.�ed' m {n 11 u.x,.Y^r '^1Ni ,,v ,y- r 4�'k-
} tip ..c i a .v 4 9 +.f.tra y " " LE Ir `-,u-v N ..t
i + tea' r u e , rya fi w }x "..c
'4 C -. . ._: ,e 1� 't'i' 'k. A' 3 a'L-> uY Alit 1 r °' inxp'"r...r R^d° sal r rk:`- '. x'ri
'l S 5 (' 1 # i`r T ,it•4h->x NW w''t r. " a 4.1.2".42.'4"
,A;.SEC! 1�•, -! ,rb y ti< .L.
bw.n.e t t .. '�`r el. l 'Ci," Rx,.kw„.,'iw'' c 4 d° rd1. �3t! e_y ' -Si '3.
r>v t ,
ys v r n ..n P - it, `M^,a?5'", l9,6, 'm k 7i w' r 'z:..
.1* li. 'J.-0'e Y. V'4#C�.q N 1" AY �`f 'qY 4,•„, � • �TIYI"' !pp^ ""! P '
3 74aikea k r s.r...t '' {yWI,F' V. ttiLn*T gi ' a. ": s: `"' a. my ms!J L
E .""_ y }�rAG." IA - i yt v.1 ul t•
,(£ "6 'stn 3:4* n �^ J .F kr� SL# Y °is4k • 'Pa7p "..'T t = _..- ' Y E-r
ix„q .^*. u, t nF y .m 1. 2;40 -EP I. l.Q.7;V,•.e<.-9,;:g.'141.41--__ 2E. _ P -7 S ' :>�r'�y00'I *11� dp a it.,4/..t.*.....• .°A 1{ S 4,`a '.'1:?).µ:•
"r2i t: a � we _ 'F g. �". 3b. a9' r £�. ', F- 1 Y t'7 k l� t �'4 N "^ti I l y'?uy: •
,u t£ `<` y L : Y!'. ° 5 w.1 5 S t.S% '�'. 4'v '%S 4 7 24.,,y:, `°f�i-
'' 4 r 81 ,G Y^ Y i n ie ; >;R .i �”ir t yi' �4�r
L �y ( ✓^
;.m . 'Ses-‘,.1.5%.„..,,,-,,-47.�. '1.rC<. 'i .J.0 2,r� Me\ r` l: fi ,a" i1�+ .�'`,„..4
....a _ Y'6tshgxwXaaa.�.y f� r_;p^' "ea it;.1 `3Wia crsY n; . ^:�r7
l t , .1 .a: } r 4--i,4=' t IFS-t: v..:: s _q sc u'+ i w ,;Fis �Tt t . Fr'� Y1.'�rrr 44 ."4,..„ ' 5'a' �s r::..4.. )
4, F I 5t S ` m + r���.„K'tis� e 13 t sy igny.-. r ,
r r ?�".' ELVA. is ._ ` � .4g r d Asa. s^• ecsaG a I,r, - sr�n ra _ `' E ,�.
- 1` 'rd t = 4 b' QF
.: .':�:ii It 'L 1
'},'e'er 5 Ifi "< M c } ->b-af C"m'S. 1 zy�� ! „" m ° 5-,e-"'-.-' ® ' x 'ter' .e ;t .•
3 m.-i IF� v y a' pc:-.:it v 4"E+,.e �a'•gm { r 'i f”.. � x2Yy;.-^`v3'�f.
e r A e." a i Ss C El�i�Z+t ka t Yb ..l I•, T" ; ^5.Er„ Yi� 'a !tT :' 1$ - (� 1
¢ alb 4 r R iY n :�..d . a FG �y e Kz•
• �•�' 'S'I %f ES {;4S *5^E frtS^®'p ..1. A[Fw .cs 1 ti.....
4 >k L "C '4;;`..4.;F - YY' f °mil i.
• ' t ! , ".4 n "' Protect n-�i`` ,..r.i t-v+e^,� t - �- v .,.,,1
a F yd, Site sjr. ' r �.. w+ _ry#t i- e.}
p k 7 w:�... ( al • l i irAt t`i i�r-I.xy1: 4 l x x '•`sr t s '
i
I µ l h y r i 'c ry s+e i.w',..4- - _.+.°`..1 r r
r J` S r� e' L �'k a'i°�i ..r .. "Ut-u."Y. E z v' 'r _ ,r r.,'
. '- p � 7 ';l a 6*-, $1 , c D`e y a,.. S '!"' r- , r L::74.".7,1/4:1
%'t:S j 2 P7.-SS,' r 1 7' is 1 k r ,, J {i'� W S^"` ''', °A ° 5
1+„'] r ..A4� i f J iTr ¢ y y n.J'ya.
' e{ x z V�' .::$4, �.r m•.y y„ 1,,,11q,:;!;;:,ix .2 G '� � :Y' k A i {i�+. S'e"� �ua
a{ar rt °t. a Et.rq 5 W ., ,, '�GLi } '" "k Xr% t� n +d F.
a l,y :"'i Vie. Yv i V '44 -; if- t ` r .".:.$773'...'''
t r - i ;;; "y.'^.`f f l.A"� `',may - "
p=-v ✓ ACT r ' t--1-3""K;-1".;;9''''f '4r'"h'J 5 K°`n-..:xaa 'fir,:".../4.1:i44,-,r.",,', ,::k�f ry,'•a�, yn: r r l x i l :
Jeer .. i3)a 2*e. f1 r" 1' .4 ",.--7"" ' 2., a.t- ,_..-p .•: :E p ° ucs . R• l5 . r+•a•, %tGj y r sklrp a P F �a' Y+o F.wfx1 117.3
`
r s 'l t.7 L Is s",{!" .s .� to lS p k � , y� L ``
}�^' a c� f i
•`Y ear r i l r >:
z rl k - '' ..di' 5r
Y rx 2 f r ��ee gife. v ' fg&a. epyl l',:f,. t c =rt pr+r, 5 a Y
vC-'3 eyhYok 97M 1 w}"r Aid +.Fi- ,.�J iS �.�1L.is ,., r S u..
A A4
y ' E ,# «r . " Y. F' �.I i S s5 J 1 f 1)` t f",)e'ti.l 1,74,-., < f11'n' e'er' t .: ,
'l r. k v, ,i S i a y i ii" 1 t. !'r,` +ar'.,.t`+ r r l l d' # 152 ,
y p. .w •y:4 412,3 p�}X I�k .� p h r.65 +. ✓' �' r `" j ‘,111.„,„..,•i k Y - t M f4 1� r y E' r 'ui s 6 G' n"�,,. i -e ,.".3'c &'.:." Isv
c 1 J•wu'�'.i r at �. �p hh a�`ur r -c �'x.
@.: ' N J I- erg �:0 d w°'� i" r. •; r t,4 "r z 4 if
». .,., r v'# {�rKI oily . i k 1l#xFyv
z2 R � .
E . ,c •ltr5, a n n ss ,..a...
141/1":,4343,,.....,`A 'tr.'''. i' ` my a{r I;Y " a,in,4i ,
n[ �,f• yn}"p- k. Y .C'!:s NY l fi y R
�,r„s' % ox,�'"� € 6 < l lr {I'3L � W l t.4 ^ J r tics m '
', .+ 5 f°r ]' , 4 'E S° X4JI'� .��,nf a"ter y, j.f ,,v
s 1 l � c n >< s t tkr �1 ' ," rq T'<'r�,{aw. ^7` r ,;.n"a a
I Q °v
arli7
• ill o 0.0`. d4
5 !::g r N,� ae
30 [
n 9 f p1pe
igiiii 6- 154 i is
W
� 03 2 0 S
€1 1
$J !@ 9 G g f 1 I g 1
0S G
s
3QN3V H17OWlvd_
G
1 i,ig N 4! 4t - ' 4
i
` b 1 §0 I 0 0 1 o I 1
0 o 6 0 _ I 4' g 4 ' O' g
Y y di
I OI gg gig g 0 7 4A
0 0 wI OFg
d 01 di 01 gi/ I §t l 1 01 01 1 01
i 1 4g9 1 ��Yg 4Y§ i 4gq
AVM Sd(TIIHd j \ g0 p j \ @0! 50 1 A e3 E
• ii g ii AF g 0i g 0i 9 I /i!1 pi 1 �i @i A�iig I €i1 ,il 01 01 01 WI ' �A
9iF Z
01 a i oil gib §1 F
qq
anN3AV VNOflVk! q 4i' '• 9
g0 E i s ~----.1HnOO AT1 AVO 4t O
506
p Q I / 01
B 9 0 0i9 iig aig gig bt 9ig �ig e 6'
gs Oi di j di di d1 di di di �3i iig
e 0
1O111NOO a9OOId IOWNOO OBOOl_I
4t 4' 0ig 4g Fig 4g ig 10 04g Rig
01 .
c g 0 i g F 01 di
9 i
_p_ orriu Lamva ------ —
i !! i g 41 i g 41 i s ii s g
MI
0 - 01 g 1 0/ .0/ 0I 0I 0 m ° 7 WI cil_ co' i
13! 0 W
UI `s
•
EXHIBIT C A_6 ....,---w
l9 i8 J aY ii.lid I
i a e a ? `e hi llih hilliii154 Vie,
• ' :� r a Ca g55' a lRi er Vl.efe:Yere.'�1�� o! 712 a 5F z > & E k.
! . 6 aria 4 l a
i1 ! f g
f �i� e 8 it Vr �� e1 sg 0 5
19 E ! i f ! • �E 1
F !9° 3 a ri .2 @xiiiii F!Q!Q ! i�l` {8 i !hi Q§ I qq !G �y I� 51
pIaI,R �eRe ld6teQg9a a e l •1i iap i j7 95 5 1j:! - d� d • e
.Of 2 ilgzC Schh/Eli!lal/.:!,12;rail; Sd a g r i d !a 6
_ 4 a
a-
AVM Sdf11IHd Y
Ok �
l r ^34r y l r �! r I C l L__, p'ri''` -i-r r___ 'L k 1 r_j E
C pp 1!
S
• (per a�aj�/ cat I -gas -ii,-. 74 gag f�,l
9a ill
L
Aga
r m
�a I f?
t 6 _ J �pI �.yl ,J C
CC la 1 .rr .rr - A 9� 4P 9 !I g� L__iii ?' i ' OM W q xd A� 3b ki
ai ! ie I I i
c �, ? ��S J I +1S ,
0-0 r=- J L _ _...0 I J I
'r
~ai 4 \\ / S.
Z \\ Iq el I .. _ e ,
HAA 3- )MNm.
' = ianoo All AVO
I
I r - r
ft r__
I a(i(
r a¢ �p -i [B pie L_, r6�3G , g2� t' l
yE I !
• J iL !9 rJ �. !°Y fi� 6w e�
3 gl 37 if 3j �� qj
la.VV fi!!I
Di I J L �
1
EXHIBIT D .2
p p a y .t 5 a Yb' b
8$g
' ;° tai gg r a q d a@ E gP 4�
I � - , 9 �` 3.a tl s t 2 g . ! 6 i 8 p hill 114 E B p (, :m m i e e"� � g gg'g a is : " ;�18 a I@IP49!! !ii 8 1 / Bli 91
• BB �°B $3 ;01 8 tanN erap.:eae:iernd4th1 _4rt g `lEi,,,,.. 144 yy `MM agile;Btipt;8$4 t , g b.
11/ d tl g{ osesseeeeeeeo s L
�' it Y 'IO g i p pa [
pa 4
Iifl g w
: qg qa a , d '\ ! 9`3E►i
i !In ° inZ 11 "Ii a 19 ° g $ i e 1 0 a
c •R yy:@`$ PaiagB{2. ' n pip
i , ;pp 6 � ilid 8$i ii p _t i i yR o� l3da
I 1
re AVM SdmlHd I k
I J t I
r AA 1 p A� Y ry p �� r A
E
N o '1l t g I `-• a .A f is r 4 l.; a 5a
§ it SZ i ai iii g fi
(O p y g a I 5^3 igs fill pp
prp /r' ',.1 II 3a p4 9a fyp ; 1I --fit---' • 19 1k 11 '---� €Ir is 0 ..
e � p� I I
Z € I p
$d or, n a V m o
ugh iR`Sa 1., c � .: �- ... ..
J£g I :7 9,1?-1 ,.-ms s 2 1+ '£__.. I - wl
Ugk 1'o C o $1 `4 t. r 1 J it1 j
/k ' I -h
LLJ 4.4 �ras�ao . I 9 G 4F 1111171 r as , sas
\�'yrI� em Ii ` ° 4r Ilt ri a�.. 1 `s r -° i i”, �r Ntt
s' J 1 llhhrr JI . I • .1 Is 1 . 4,3P b1 0.m1 �j Jilt !„��____.� °r r
aim t �G .a � '- . -. .F%, °.A. ��a, ° -� I�iit,
I—Y� •
1-m£ 1_i Th_j_1 a m. , 1 I I
�— - I<T i 'L�noo TiIn Ava at/ r 1 L r r
I
p / o : I I I
y x Rs p� 8895 1 ��¢$$y AN , �,ya$a Yp 4
It - i a
3� g' iS 3s &4 . 3s I IgYR
EXHIBIT A8 x
a,y"e
CO•
SNP bb_
Ma ; p QFN� i - a
1 a ' &„_,. g rc U as 9
ill b 6 ppax WSi � •
[n{ 5Y aai �r,�%;pit coEb .1.-.
i
G l'E g`g' o'v V vtl'ri el' g t
g� O
0 6 .E 9l ,� ,... i 6 (n�ii + 'g 4a reffai
R Rli 1l'[ ,mow ^0 U 3
F� 14 °E 1 6
4
•
---
e.>( ti ... ur , I4
N ouu �� b_
4:1 vs
x N S4'
4
Do •
2e
tk �+.• ,n
• . . pC Q°-b b.:I .con Vbit >>u — (J°b•g ,` 4 _� §.i.� bpir `ye __
JttkY4LLapVZ�Pk
i • 1.
e9
m;9� =g ,...m...b oO1;,.1
9 3 9 V
5 5 8 •
•
A-9
•
— _ o :�
F 1 1v0000 p a%
vo.,000000 o..
<t ¢ JW aa
A
a'vv g.0 o U em S v 4.
voo¢ SD
oovo =
— O z61 S.2o 9 5
Lai]
scoop Ed' 6 N d g 1 II
z
a
m O
c _ 6A. R y •V N
n
0
El..
1 gill
d g4 d Y Ig
le
.y H.
:-u
I .0„. YII
G e
�� d
Van
i 11117 1' Y.n
2
Y ,d
lul-
-g �
0 - _____ 1 _7 , „.” „."
,EXHIBIT F A.10'II �. ,a
• DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Mike Smith November 16, 2010
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18626 - HP ENGINEERING FOR JAIME CAMPOS -A proposal to
subdivide a parcel of approximately 0.63 acre at the southeast corner of Lemon Avenue and
Daylily Court into three (3) parcels in the Low (L) Residential District, located at 9923 Lemon Avenue -
APN: 0201-902-16. The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15315 Minor Land Divisions.
Design Parameters: The project site is a parcel of approximately 27,400 square feet (0.63 acre) with
dimensions of approximately 210 feet (north to south) by approximately 130 feet (east to west). The
applicants single-family residence is located generally at the center of the project site. At the southeast
comer of the site, is a metal shed. There are numerous trees throughout the site. There are
single-family residences in all directions around the property. The zoning of the property and all
surrounding properties is Low (L) Residential District. The subject property slopes north to south. The
elevation at the north side is approximately 1,576 feet. The elevation is approximately 1,573 feet at the
south side.
The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into three (3) lots for single-family residential
development. The applicant's residence will remain in-place on Parcel 2. The metal shed will be
• removed. The applicant has not determined at this time whether he will construct homes on Parcels 1
and 3 or sell one or both to others. All lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this
zoning district as described in the Development Code. Individual lot areas will be 9,635 square feet,
9,105 square feet, and 8,455 square feet for,Parcels 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The proposed lot areas
will be in excess of the required minimum 7,200 square feet and required minimum average of
8,000 square feet. The depth of each lot will be approximately 130 feet, which will exceed the required
minimum depth of 100 feet. The width of each lot will be 70 feet, 65 feet, and 60 feet for Parcels 1, 2,
and 3, respectively. These dimensions will comply with the required minimum average of 65 feet. All of
the lots will be conventional in design and will mirror the lots of the subdivision directly across the street
(Tract 16431) and to the east (Tract 15726). The most unusual characteristic of the new subdivision will
be its relationship with the properties to the south — specifically, the property located at
6339 Daylily Court (Lot 15 of Tract 16431). Because of technical considerations such as drainage,
grading, and street design at the time that Tract 16431 was developed (between 2003 and 2005), that
property is 6 feet lower than the project site. Also, there is a screen wall of approximately 6 feet at the
common property line and a retaining wall approximately 5 feet in height parallel to it. Both the grade
difference and the retaining wall will remain unchanged. Access for all three lots will be via Daylily Court.
The existing drive approach at Lemon Avenue and the corresponding driveway for the existing house will
be removed. The existing garage door on the north side of the garage for the existing house will be
relocated to the south side of the garage:and a new driveway and drive approach at Daylily Court will be
constructed. Most of the street improvements along both Daylily Court and Lemon Avenue are already in
place with the exception of street trees and street lights. The installation of these improvements will be
required by the Engineering Department as conditions of approval.
Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted on October 19, 2010, at Lions Center
West at 9161 Base Line Road. All property owners within 660 feet of the project site were invited. Four
individuals attended this meeting. None of them had any specific objections to the project. There were
•
some questions regarding the sequence of construction and the design of the houses. Staff stated to the
EXHIBIT G A_11
DRC ACTION AGENDA •
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18626 - HP ENGINEERING FOR JAIME
November 16, 2010
Page 2
attendees that the applicant's proposal does not include house product; activity on-site would be limited
to rough grading (if any) and there would not be any construction activity associated with this application. ..
Staff indicated to those in attendance that any house product would be required to comply with the
design and technical standards established by the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission
and that, at a minimum, the proposed houses may require review and action by the Design Review
Committee.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project.
None.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
1. The removal of any non-fruit bearing trees on the site is subject to the review and approval of a
Tree Removal Permit.
2. The proposed wall along the north side of Parcel 1 shall be constructed of decorative block. Also, •
this wall shall be placed a minimum of 5 feet from the inside edge of the public sidewalk.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved, with the above items listed
incorporated into the Conditions of Approval, and be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review
and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee reviewed the proposed subdivision and deemed the application acceptable as submitted
The Committee recommends approval to the Planning Commission.
Members Present: Wimberly, Munoz, Granger
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
•
A-12
•
Rancho Cucamonga Development Code 17.08.040
Table 17.08.040-B - Basic Development Standards
• VL awe LM NI MH H
Lot Area: .
Minimum Net Average 22,500 8,000 6,000 3 ac(L) 3 ac(e 3 act)))
Minimum Net 20,000 7,200 5,000 3 acfe 3 acfe 3 acfe
Number of Dwelling UnitsiA)
• (Permitted Per Acre) Up to 2 Up to 4 Up to 6 Up to 11 Up to 19 Up to 27
Minimum Dwelling Unit Size:0/
Single-Family Attached 8 1,000 s uare feet"regardless of district
Detached Dwellings
Multiple Family Dwellingsr'r —
Efficiency/Studio 550 s uare feet regardless of district
One Bedroom 650 s uare feet regardless of district
Two Bedroom 800 s uare feet regardless of district
Three or More Bedrooms 950 s uare feet regardless of district
Lot Dimensions 90 Avg.
Minimum Width Vary+/- Gary+9.5 Vary+/- N/R N/R N/R
(@ Required Front Setback) 10 5
•
.Minimum Corner Lot Width 190 70 50 N/R N/R N/R
Minimum Depth 200 100 90 N/R N/R N/R
Minimum Frontage at Front 50 40 30 • 100 100 100
Property Line
• Minimum Flag Lot Frontage
(@ Front Property Line) 30 20 2p 50 50 50
Setbacks:113n 42 Avg. 37 Avg. 32 Avg.
FrontYardrgrer Vary+/-
g' Vary
+/- 37 Avg. N/R N/R
5 Vary+/_ 5 5 Vary+/-5
Corner Side Yard 27 27 22 27 • N/R N/R
•
Interior Side Yard 10/15 5/10 5/10 10" N/R N/R
Rear Yard 60 20 15 10(D) N/R N/R
At Interior Site Boundary 30/5 20/5 15/5 15/56D' 15/5(D) 15/5rDr •
(Dwelling Unit/Accessory Building)
Residential Building Separations (M/ N/R N/R . Required Per Section 17.08.040-E
Height Limitation(K) 35 35 35 35(F) 40fF/ 55(F)
Lot Coverage
(Maximum %)r4) 25% 40% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Open Space Required 2,000/
Private Open Space •
N/R .000/N/R 300/150 225/150 150/100 150/100
(Ground Floor/Upper Story Unit)
Common Open Spacer r N/R N/R N/R 30% 30% 30%
(Minimum Percent)
Usable Open Space(A) 65% 60% 40% 35% 35% 35%
(Private and Common)
Recreation Area/Facility N/R N/R N/R Required Per Section 17.08.040-H
Landscaping (G) (G) (G) Required Per Section 17.08.040-G
•
17.08-12
EXHIBIT H • A-13.
•
RESOLUTION NO. 11-01
• A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
SUBTT18626,A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A PARCEL OF APPROXIMATELY 0.63
ACRE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LEMON AVENUE AND DAYLILY COURT
INTO THREE (3) PARCELS IN THE LOW (L) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT LOCATED
AT 9923 LEMON AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -
APN: 0201-902-16.
A. Recitals.
1. HP Engineering, on behalf of Jaime Campos, filed an application for the approval of Tentative
Parcel Map SUBTPM18626, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Tentative Parcel Map request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 12th day of January 2011, 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 January 12, 2011, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony,
this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to a parcel of approximately 27,400 square feet (0.63 acre) with •
dimensions of approximately 210 feet(north to south) by approximately 130 feet(east to west), located at the
southeast corner of Lemon Avenue and Daylily Court; and
b. The project site is surrounded in all directions by single-family residences; and
c. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Low(L) Residential District;and
d. The site is partially developed with a single-family residence. Vegetation on-site includes
short grasses, shrubs and trees; and
e. The application contemplates the subdivision of the subject parcel into three (3) lots for
single-family residential development. The applicant does not intend to construct the homes at this time; and
f. The existing single-family residence will remain in-place on Parcel 2. The existing garage
door on the north side of the garage will be relocated to the south side of the garage. A corresponding
driveway and drive approach will be constructed to provide vehicle access to Daylily Court. The existing
"'driveway, drive approach and the metal shed will be removed; and
A-14
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-01
SUBTPM18626 — HP ENGINEERING FOR JAIME CAMPOS •
January 12, 2011
Page 2
•
g. Individual lot areas will be 9,635 square feet, 9,105 square feet, and 8,455 square feet for
Parcels 1, 2, and 3, respectively(these dimensions exceed the minimum of 7,200 square feet with a minimum
average of 8,000 square feet), the depth of each lot will be at least 100 feet, and the width of each lot will be
at least 65 feet; and
h. As the applicant has not submitted any applications to develop the site, any proposals for
construction of residential structures on these parcels will be subject to review and action by the Design
Review Committee and, if necessary, the Planning Commission at a later date. These parcels will remain
vacant until then; and
i. All lots will have access to a public right-of-way. Access to the project site will be via
Daylily Court. The street was constructed with Tract 16431 and all public right-of-way improvements including
pavement, sidewalk, curb, and gutter on the east side of the street are present.
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. The proposed subdivision is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the
Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposed project is to
subdivide the property into three parcels and is consistent with the development district of the project site.
b. The proposed subdivision, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the •
vicinity. The proposed project is to subdivide the property into three parcels—no development of the site is
proposed.
c. The proposed subdivision complies with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code. The proposed subdivision meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and
the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City.
4. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption
under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 — Minor Land Divisions - as the proposal is to subdivide the
property into four parcels or less. Development of the site by the applicant is not proposed. In addition,there
is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning
Commission has reviewed the Planning Department's determination of exemption, and based on its own
independent judgment, concurs in the staffs determination of exemption.
Planning Department
1) Approval is for the subdivision of a parcel of approximately 27,400 square feet
(0.63 acre), with dimensions of approximately 210 feet (north to south) by •
approximately 130 feet (east to west) located at the southeast corner of
•
Lemon Avenue and Daylily Court into three (3) parcels.
2) Development of all lots shall be in accordance with the standards and
requirements applicable to the Low (L) Residential District as described in
Table 17.08.040-Basic Development Standards. •
3) Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the existing metal shed shall be
demolished and removed from the project site.
•
A-15
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-01
SUBTPM18626 — HP ENGINEERING FOR JAIME CAMPOS
January 12, 2011
Page 3
•
4) Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the garage door on the north side of the
existing garage of the existing single-family residence shall be relocated to the
south side of the garage.
5) Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a new driveway shall be constructed to
connect the garage to Daylily Court, a new drive approach at Daylily Court shall
be constructed to the satisfaction of the Engineering Director, and the existing
driveway and drive approach shall be removed.
•
6) Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the metal shed shall be removed.
7) Prior to recordation of the Final Map, all lots shall be rough graded to include
•
building pads and interim improvements (for example, drainage) as deemed
necessary by the City.
8) Prior to construction, all future homes and associated improvements shall
require the review and approval by the City and the issuance of applicable
building permits by the Building and Safety Department. The site plotting and
architecture of these homes(and accessory structures)shall require the review
and approval by the Design Review Committee prior to Planning Director and/or
Planning Commission action.
9) All setback lines shall be shown on the Final Map.
• 10) Double-wall/fence conditions shall be eliminated,if possible. The applicant shall
coordinate with the property owners to the east any activity relating to new wall
construction along the common property lines.
11) Prior to the removal of any trees on the property, the applicant shall submit a
Tree Removal permit and fee for review and approval by the Planning Director
or Planning Commission.
Engineering Department
1) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing
overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 kV
electrical) on the opposite side of Lemon Ave shall be paid to the City prior to
final map approval. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount
times the length from the center of Daylily Ct to the east project boundary.
2) Install Public Street improvements-drive approach, street trees for Parcel 2 prior
to recordation of final map. Remove drive approach on Lemon (Parcel 1) and
replace with City standard curb and gutter and sidewalk prior to recordation of
final map.
3) Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, fees shall be paid,
and a restoration deposit shall be submitted and a construction permit obtained
• . from the City Engineer's office, in addition to any other permits required.
A-16
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-01
SUBTPM18626 — HP ENGINEERING FOR JAIME CAMPOS
January 12, 2011
Page 4
•
Building and Safety (Grading) Department
1) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines, and prior to
constructing walls along common lot lines, the applicant shall provide a letter
from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property.
•
2) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall provide to the
Building and Safety Services Official a Water Quality Management Plan for
review and approval.
•
3) All slope set backs shall comply with the current adopted California Building
Code.
4) All swales shall be graded per the requirements of the current adopted California
Building Code.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2011.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY: •
Luis Munoz, Jr., Chairman
ATTEST:
James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary
I, James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission
held on the 12th day of January 2011, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
•
A-17
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
44
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT#: SUBTPM18626
SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
APPLICANT: HP ENGINEERING FOR JAIME CAMPOS
LOCATION: 9923 LEMON AVENUE—APN: 0201-902-16
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR .
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
0 General Requirements competfonoate
1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its _/_/_
agents,officers,or employees, because of the issuance of such approval,or in the alternative,to
relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or
employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or
employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole
discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation
shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition.
2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 11-01, Standard / /_
Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The
sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and
are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect.
3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The _/ /
project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to
the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to
the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing:
a) Notice of Exemption -$50 X
•
B. Time Limits .
1. Tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a _/ /_
complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date
of the approval.
•
SC-12-08 1
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res & Stf Rpt\SUBTPM18626StdCond 1-12.doc
A-18
Project No.SUBTPM18626
Completion Date
C. Site Development
1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include / / •
site plans, architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and
grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the
Development Code regulations.
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions _/_/_
of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and _/ /_
State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be
submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety
Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to
occupancy.
4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _/_/_
submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for _/_/_
consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment,
building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved
•
use has commenced, whichever comes first.
6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all _/_/_
other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the
time of building permit issuance.
7. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall _/_/_
condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining •
property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail,all contiguous property
owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's
perimeter.
8. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. The _/ /_
5-foot wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the
required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Director review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The parkway landscaping .
including trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner.
The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance
requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Director, prior to accepting a
cash deposit on any property.
D. Landscaping
1. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in / /
accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110,and so noted on the grading plans. The
•
location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be
shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's
recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods.
2. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 / /_
slope,shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion
control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be
installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
2 •
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res &Stf Rpt\SUBTPM18626StdCond 1-12.doc
A-19
Project No.SUBTPM18626
Completion Date
3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater _/_/_
slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as
• follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq.ft.of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size
shrub per each 100 sq.ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks
in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or
larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in
staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall
include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
4. - For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously /_/
maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold
and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be
conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition.
5. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development _/_/_
Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting.
6. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the _/_/
perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
7. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas,the _/_/
design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department.
E. Other Agencies
1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location /_/_
of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for
mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the
overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance
of building permits.
PLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710,
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S)
F. General Requirements
1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: / /_
a. Site/Plot Plan;
b. Foundation Plan;
c. Floor Plan;
d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan;
e. Electrical Plans(2 sets,detached)including the size of the main switch, number and size
of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams;
f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams,water and waste
diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air
conditioning; and
g. Planning Department Project Number (i.e., SUBTPM18626) clearly identified on the
outside of all plans.
•
• 3
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res & Stf Rpt\SUBTPM18626StdCond 1-12.doc
A-20
•
Project No.SUBTPM18626
Completion Date
2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. _/_/_
Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet"signature are required prior to plan check submittal. •
3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers'Compensation coverage to _/_/_
the City prior to permit issuance.
4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. _/_/_
5. Developers wishing to participate in the Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) can _/ /_
contact the Building and Safety Department staff for information and submittal requirements.
G. Site Development
1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be _/_/_
marked with the project file number(i.e., SUBTPM18626). The applicant shall comply with the
latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in
effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Department for
availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition,the applicant / /_
shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include,but are not limited to:
City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee,Transportation Development Fee, Permit and
Plan Check Fees,Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and fees and School
Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety
Department prior to permit issuance.
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map _/_/_
recordation and prior to issuance of building permits.
4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday /_/ •
through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays.
H. New Structures
1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances _/_/_
considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness.
2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. / /_
3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind"instructions. _/ /_
I. Grading
1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with California Building Code,City Grading / /_
Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial
. conformance with the approved grading plan. .
2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to _/_/_
perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for
review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report.
3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the /_/_
time of application for grading and drainage Plan review.
•
4 •
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res & Stf Rpt\SUBTPM18626StdCond 1-12.doc
A-21 ,
Project No.SUBTPM18626
Completion Date
4. The final grading plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, _/_/_
submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building
• permits.
5. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for _/_/_
existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of
• combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California
registered Civil Engineer.
6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place !_/_
a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
J. Grading Comments (See attached)
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT,(909)477-2740,
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
K. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, _/_/_
community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas,street trees,traffic signal encroachment
and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be
reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
2. Private drainage•easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or _/ /_
noted on the final map.
• 3. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the _/_/_
final map.
L. Street Improvements
1. All public improvements(interior streets,drainage facilities,community trails,paseos,landscaped / /_
areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards.
Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter,AC pavement,
drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees.
2. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source / /_
of energy,fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for
which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and
ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been
completed and accepted by the City.Council, except:that in developments containing more than
one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal
proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of
development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and
maintainable access to the property exists. In no- case shall more than 95 percent of the
buildings, structures, or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and
acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of approval of development.
• 5
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res &Stf Rpt\SUBTPM18626StdCond 1-12.doc
•
A-22
Project No.SUBTPM18626
Completion Date
3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / /_
Curb& AC. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike •
Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other
Daylily Court (g) (g) (g) (h). (g) (g) n/a n/a n/a n/a
Lemon Avenue (g) (g) - (g) remove (g) (g) n/a n/a n/a n/a
Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement
reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk
shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be
provided for this item. (e) modify existing for local street connection (f) maintain existing LMD
area until project is approved/accepted by the City(g) protect in place (h) remove.
4. Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees,street lights,and intersection safety lights /_/_
on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil
•
Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be
posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City
Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements,prior to
final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a / /_
construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in
addition to any other permits required.
c. Pavement striping, marking,traffic signing,street name signing,traffic signal conduit,and _/_/_
interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction /_/
ffi _•
project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and
interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside
of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer
Notes:
•
1) Pull boxes shall be No.6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets,a maximum of 200
feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer.
2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified.
e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City /_/_
Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with _/ /_
adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash
deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving,which shall be refunded
upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
•
g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be _/_/_
installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots.
h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal for first plan /_/_
check.
6 •
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res & Stf Rpt\SUBTPM18626StdCond 1-12.doc
A-23
•
Project No.SUBTPM18626
Completion Date
5. Provide a minimum of 3-inch conduit for future fiber optic use on all streets with connection
through the parkway to each lot or parcel (fiber-to-the curb, FTTC). The size, placement, and
• location of the conduit shall be shown on the Street Improvement Plans and subject to
Engineering Services Department review and approval prior to issuance of building permits or
final map approval, whichever comes first.
6. .Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in _/_/_
accordance with the City's street tree program.
7. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed _/_/
legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street
improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction
• legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on sheet (typically
sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be
per the public landscape improvement plans.
The Engineering Services Department reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field
conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer.
Min.
Grow
Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty.
Lemon Avenue Lagestroemia Pink Crepe Myrtle 3' 20' 24" 4
• Indica'Biloxi' Hybrid O.C. box
Daylily Court Magnolia N.C.N. 3' 20' 15 Gal 7
Grandflora St. Mary O.C.
Construction Notes for Street Trees:
1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans.
2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to
•
the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil
amendments, as determined by the City inspector.
3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services
Department.
4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only.
8. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with _/ /_
adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project
intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or
industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required.
•
M. Public Maintenance Areas
1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting /_/_
Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or
issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the
developer.
N. Drainage and Flood Control
1. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map / !_
approval or the issuance of building permits,whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall
be installed as required by the City Engineer.
2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the _/ /_
property from adjacent areas.
• 7
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res &Stf Rpt\SUBTPM18626StdCond 1-12.doc
A-24
Project No.SUBTPM18626
•
Completion Date
O. Improvement Completion
1. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, / /
an improvement certificate shall be placed upon the final parcel map, stating that they will be
completed upon development.
P. Utilities
1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system,water, gas, _/_/_
electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility
Standards. Easements shall be provided as required.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / /_
3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the /_/_
Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District,and the
Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance-from
the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits,whichever occurs first.
Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval
in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential
projects.
4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. / /_
Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from
•
them.
Q. General Requirements and Approvals
1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City,covering the estimated operating costs for all _/_/ •
new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building
• permit issuance if no map is involved.
2. Prior to the issuance of building permits,a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall _/_/_
be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if
at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from
landfills,and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to
the Engineering Services Department when the first building permit application is submitted to
Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department
within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project.
3. Provide copy of final Water Quality Management Plan with submittal of grading plans to Building _/_/_
and Safety. WQMP and grading plans are subject to review by the Building Official.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION
PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
SEE ATTACHED
•
8 S
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res &Stf Rpt\SUBTPM18626StdCond 1-12.doc
A-25
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
elms.
' District
v
FIRE
Fire Construction Services
STANDARD CONDITIONS
May 24, 2007
(3) SFR lots
SU BTPM 18626
THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT.
FSC-2 Fire Flow
1. The required fire flow,for this project is 1500 gallons per minute at a minimum residual
pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire
Code Appendix III-A, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. For structures in excess
of 3,600 square feet use CFC Table A-III-A-1.
2. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet
• of the proposed project site.
Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits:
1. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is
responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to
Fire Construction Services.
2. Address: Note on the plans that prior to the granting of occupancy, single-family
dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting
background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during periods of
darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street. When building setback from the
public roadway exceeds 100-feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the .
property entry.
•
A-26
City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTPM18626
Building & Safety Department
ligrit, 10500 Civic Center Dr.
• Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
T: (909)477-2710 F: (909)477-2711
GRADING COMMITTEE
PROJECT REPORT&RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
Project No.: SUBTPM18626 Type: Residential Subdivision
Location: Southeast corner of Lemon Street& Day Lily Court
Planning Department: MICHAEL SMITH APN: 201-902-16 14A.—Meeting Date: November 16, 2010 By: Matthew Addington
Acceptable for Planning Commission: Yes: xxx No: i>
If NO, see COMMENTS below:
PRELIMINARY:
GRC: November 16, 2010 By: MattbewS n!ton ///
FINAL:. / r // 'y // O
PC Meeting: q„f �Z 2v •
Note: Building and Safety—Grading will review and co ent o uture submitt:Is for this
project.
A) STANDARD CONDITIONS - Standard Building and Safety - Grading and Planning
Department standard conditions for Grading and Drainage Plans.
• 1) Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted
California Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices.
The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the
approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan.
2) A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of
California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and
drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations
per said report.
3) A geologic report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer or Engineering Geologist
and submitted at the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review.
4) The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction
reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety
Official prior to the issuance of building permits.
5) A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new
construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed
will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and
Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed
Civil Engineer.
6) The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control
Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a
• grading permit.
I:I BUILDING\PERMITS\SUBTPM18626\SUBTPM18626 Grading Committee Project Report,20101116.doc
1
of 4
A-27
ry? City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTPM18626
Building &Safety Department
�, 10500 i ,Cene .
• Rancho Civ Cuccamongat r Dr, CA 91730 •
T: (909)477-2710 F: (909)477-2711
7) If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and
Safety Official for review, that plan shall be a separate plan/permit from Precise
Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit.
8) A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site
drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for
review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading
permit. AU reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record.
9) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage
easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
10) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the
adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall on property line or provide a detail(s)
showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line.
11) The Grading and Drainage Plan shall .Implement City Standards for on-site
construction where possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City
Standard Drawings.
12) All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way or adjacent
private property.
13) Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the, latest •
adopted California Plumbing Code.
14) The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of
100-feet beyond project boundary.
15) The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill
combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The
grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official.
16) This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted
California Building Code.
17) The precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga handout"Information for Grading Plans and Permit".
18) Grading Inspections:
a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor
shall request a pre-grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by
the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the
Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and
preventive measures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24
hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be
subject to suspension by the Building Inspector;
•
I:\BUILDING\PERMITS\SUBTPM1862615UBTPM18626 Grading Committee Project Report.20101116.doc
2 of 4
A-28
•
5,?:1 1,41> City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTPM18626
`` ,,. . Building&Safety Department
fir 10500 Civic Center Dr.
• Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730
• _. T: (909)477-2710 F: (909)477-2711
b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to
request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading
operations:
i) The bottom of the over-excavation
•
ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building
permit;
iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or
owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety
Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to
be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil
Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record;
iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be
reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and
approved prior to the issuance of a building permit.
19) Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the engineer of record shall
certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) best
management.practices (BMP) devices.
• • B) COMMENTS - The following items shall be corrected / completed, submitted to, reviewed
and approved by staff prior to scheduling the project for a Planning Commission hearing.
Copies of required easement/right-of-way documents, including legal descriptions, shall be
submitted for review prior to obtaining final signatures. The review period for the above
will generally be a minimum of two weeks or longer depending upon the adequacy and
complexity of the submittal:
1) Please note that at this conceptual level a review of the accessibility access is not
performed. It is the responsibility of the applicant to meet all accessibility
requirements.
C) SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing
walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent
property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property.
2) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall provide to the Building
and Safety Services Official a Water Quality Management Plan for review and
approval.
•
3) All slope set backs shall comply with the current adopted California Building Code.
4) All swales shall be graded per the requirements of the current adopted California
• Building Code.
I:(BUILDING\PERMITS\SUBTPM18626\SUBTPM18626 Grading Committee Project Report.20101116.doc
3of4
A-29
City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTPM19626
seas: Building &Safety Department
11".,.., 10500 Civic Center Dr.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
10. ' T: (909)477-2710 F: (909)477-2711 •
D) WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
1) A Storm Water Quality Management Plan shall be approved by the Building and
Safety Official prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
•
I:\BUILDINGPERMITS\SUBTPM18626\SUBTPM18626 Grading Committee Project Report.20101116.doc •
4of4
A-30
•
•
STAFF REPORT
• PLANNING DEPARTMENT l J
DATE: January 12, 2011 RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director
BY: Steve Fowler, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION DRC2010-00318 - RYLAND HOMES - The
design review of building elevations and detailed Site Plan for 70 single-family lots on
30.93 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) in the
Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the north side of Day Creek Boulevard, east of
the Southern California Edison Corridor - APN: 1087-121-24 through 30; 1087-141-43
through 52, 57; 1087-171-44 through 51; 1087-351-01 through 05, 12 through 18, 45
and 46; 1087-361-01 through 30. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16227-2.
Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior
Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified
by the City Council on August 1, 2001) and does not raise or create new environmental
impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
• A. Project Density: 2.4 dwelling units per acre
B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Vacant Land - North Etiwanda Preserve— Etiwanda North Specific Plan
South - Single-Family Residential - Etiwanda North Specific Plan
East - Vacant Land - Etiwanda North Specific Plan
West - Southern California Edison Corridor - Etiwanda North Specific Plan
C. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre)
North - North Etiwanda Preserve
South - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre)
East - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre)
West - Utility Corridor\Flood Control •
D. Site Characteristics: The project is situated at the base of the alluvial fan, which is located at
the base of the Eastern San Gabriel Mountain Foothills. This site was originally a portion of
the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development (previously the University Planned
Development). The site is bordered by vacant land to the north, east and west, and by
single-family homes to the south.
ANALYSIS:
General: On July 26, 2006, the Planning Commission approved Development Review
• DRC2006-00098 for the development of 114 homes on a 30.93-acre-site within the 632-unit Master
Planned Community of Rancho Etiwanda Estates. Because of a shifting demand in the housing
market, the applicant, Ryland Homes, is requesting modifications for the previously approved
Development Review. This request is for the remaining 70 homes, which will complete this
Item B
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DRC2010-00318 — RYLAND HOMES
January 12, 2011
Page 2 •
development. The applicant is required to develop within substantial compliance with the
Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP), incorporating the architecture and design details of the
Etiwanda area. Requirements include side-on garages, recessed garages, exterior siding, and
specific architectural styles.
A Development Agreement was approved in 2001, which required the Low Residential standards
for all lots within this tract. The property was rough graded in June of 2004, and infrastructure was
installed. The master developer has installed the main access to the gated community, as well as
the slope landscaping and decorative perimeter walls.
Design Parameters: The project site is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood, which
has its own unique architectural design guidelines per the ENSP. The ENSP requires that a mix of
the following primary architectural styles be used for at least two-thirds of the units: Bungalow,
Ranch, Monterey, or San Juan. Up to one-third of the units may use these styles: Country,
Victorian, or Santa Barbara Revival.
The proposed house product is consistent with the required architectural styles and includes
downsized floor plans that range from 2,627 square feet to 4,010 square feet. The original plans
ranged from 3,614 to 4,780 square feet. The proposed product provides larger yard areas to meet
the demand of the current housing market. A total of 18 (25 percent) of the proposed house
product will be single-story. The two-story plans have been designed with three floor plans and all
the plans have, four architectural styles. The proposed architectural styles are San Juan, •
Santa Barbara, Ranch and Monterey. The San Juan.elevation incorporates wrought iron details,
recessed windows, decorative shutters, and arched patio/entryway. The Santa Barbara
incorporates S-tile concrete roofing, louvered shutters, and recessed windows. The Monterey style
incorporates brick veneer elements, flat tile roof, board and baton siding, and balconies. The
Ranch style incorporates louvered shutters, siding, recessed windows, and stone veneer.
All four sides of all the homes have articulation and incorporate decorative garage doors to match
the architectural style of the home. Each of the four plans feature covered porch entries, which
range in size dependent upon the style.
A. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (Munoz, Wimberley, Granger)
reviewed the elevations on October 5, 2010. At that time the Committee stated that the
project was deficient in meeting the 360 degree architectural requirement. The applicant was
asked to make changes to the design and bring the project back to the Design Review
Committee for review. The applicant addressed the concerns that were detailed in the
Design Review Comments and brought the project back to the Design Review Committee on
November 30, 2010. The Committee reviewed the resubmitted plans and recommended
approval to the Planning Commission. •
B. Technical Review and Grading Committees: The Technical Review and Grading Committees
reviewed the project on October 5, 2010, and recommended approval.
C. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors
certified an Environmental Impact Report in June 1991, a Supplemental Environmental Impact •
Report was certified by the County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors in October 1999,
and an Initial Study Addendum was certified by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in connection
B-2
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DRC2010-00318 — RYLAND HOMES
• January 12, 2011
Page 3
with the approval of Tentative Tract Map 16227. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in
connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial
changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the
environment; (H) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under, which the
project was previously reviewed the indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or
(iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than
previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce
impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts.
Staff has evaluated the development review application and concludes that substantial
changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred, which
would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previously certified EIR.
The proposed development does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already
considered in the Environmental Impact Report for the Tract Map. Staff further finds that the
project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified
EIR, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different
mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of
less-than-significant. The project was developed with a Development Agreement for the
632-lot subdivision. The Site Plan, building elevations, and development conditions for the
proposed project are included in the Development Agreement and are generally consistent
with the Development Code and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Therefore, pursuant to
• CEQA, staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the staff determination
that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration
of the Development Review application.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within
a 660-foot radius of the project site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development
Review DRC2010-00318 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval and Standard
Conditions.
Res ctfully submitted
g Si1;412411
Ja R. Troyer, AICP
Planning Director
JRT:SF\ds
•
Attachments: Exhibit A - Site Utilization Map
Exhibit B - Floor Plans
Exhibit C - Elevation
Exhibit D - Design Review Committee Action Comments Dated October 5, 2010
Exhibit E - Design Review Committee Action Comments Dated November 30, 2010
• Draft Resolution of Approval for DRC2010-00318
B-3
•
• ejNvW <-
rli I._ d A ❑I� IAN^ ¢p
E At cn
.. / .n•Pratmmnme4pp'PS44^®91RY.rR&R ra H I 0 O
cr
in Z
cLZ---.9 r.
aQm
,-- 1\ --..
z
•
...J01-8 M
..._. 33AY L `IWtlMll3 C9
CEWZg
F--
//J
aM1 f
8 V IZ
• CC
o
H i \ U
•
ay: \
ti!
mama
• •
EXHIBIT - A
B-4 ___..
•
•
SNINN'Y1d - 0JA1333t1
mob's [ J30 o Ft'
v `
• rOeowvana GHONVU 3o uio - = o a..
0 "
O o iY.
W
_ '5
}, 1 -- "! Ila Jul N
ra
r `.I _ . utI' y ' I'
'— I
il
y al
y f
, :
.„..,... . ,.
DI L �;, ,i "o
—i--- i o
t.
LA' -4.
. o• `O
0. 15
LL
! e e
i
q 0 I
I,I
_ i
Id
Ch
ato
P`
Oa-
mb l
or,
u �a
N$l
•av
�H
• >4
EXHIBIT - B
B-5
= .
0
I r I
[..-1I 1 10;I 1 1 I,-,-
t..,,,..1
a i i I_ - It _ 1
=•1t>,I_et l';1 :/,L.0 11i.0i,l 1?',i'„,,r.:
F tr
w
, rr: q i 1
....._ r
§ 0, i.
1 • ,r,
1 - - -.
11-I--7 1 -2. . 1 -!, II -e
1
IP
- . I, I - ii I !I
1
I.•.17, ' .
51
,I1 P
11
I'':1 ,.
1'6
JO
12 2 2
e B
a -
a , 0
rri ,
i .
II ;
1
2 2 • sU I 1
. •
• .
1 1 i I .1
• _ • 1 ,
•
. ,
,...
, .
,-;•,---4,!J. 1 •
, 1
' \... • - ...._
1
il II
ii
. ?
li • C4
11.
il•
al. •_____ En awl— •tri
I I *- i le 111. .9
”
i ,-1 1 1 , , 0,
• 1 ' .!i.
.,.
.1 ; 1 1 I 1 1 to r
a)i
-1 _1-
H: i 1 , . , . - .:••;
, r i
11
. .1 1 ...., I u,F
....‘,1
. .
,. . o >... .!
0 ,..-
-LT L :4
' •`..1
rr), o0
,t—
B-6
, on
V) b^, 6J
/•••• E tj t P
t 0
•r• c gi r.1
0 0
v II
<=
,t,,b1
-- 1 1,_
v) i
it
, F > p.
1
-:I
L. ..._-7
Hp RiP
TP°
t dl
il
1,
U
t
1 1 ! r Bill ' i ”
I
tt
- • la' W' ''', ii ,-- r4 Et
1 3'
"r
-,•-•- I 7: . ',
4
,
,
9
_ , r
q
I g 1 ,-
' - -
I ,
y 1
2 -
,
• _
b 6 2
2 R 2
- c
0 - 0
•
•
1
i'
1 t • ,--- 1 .4
1U 1
1 i
ic.
1
0
- .--7 rs----
1
•
•AI -- d 1
a ;
.11--A"
1 r
El••••••1 MEI —
Eit'...■
1
D-1-
/
Thu
ti _
Il —-- 1
I
1
1
I i i 1 'So 4,1L
1 ' cu i
1 i 4 ,
2.2
I i , I !•
0 t'
I- - t
ES
0
-4
t N •21
E
U 0 y.
0 to.
B-7
p k
H E
NI o
E ., •
=Ir Rey
oad
QIO ,..
N_• n
e F. st
i h'
##{{ II 1, , --- ,— -,�--
tt
Y> a , _ \ p
z
z e i
3 8 5
1
i I
. •
IF•_,______,_ , i . _O •
I
Piiii gg •'_II i JJ
n
i 1 ' 1 _,
a
B I v _ _ __ E 0:44.csmai
w €
tfti
O ta
ai6
i
oo t
to
C •
B-8
,0 r t■
I—'E •f:,.3
Er,
•
0
X it
P1 ti
1 I I 1
i•-•' ii
. r „, t ,
I 1 I V),
1 r • li
I I >1 A
1 i I
:1
S : il EMI I
il
ic-171 d , : g ■ .
I : isl ,p
'
•.--, -U q
a1
0
4
I --
g ,
i f
.._
1 '
ri
L -
Pi
11' c
N
a
- I
i 1
I
h
ii _ ,..
i(,:
Ii
IIIT
;F,
PF
rt
I ' il
I .
'4
PT
ii ,'7
/12
r'.1_
9
= 5
Rgii,
.--
it :cR
a 8
I 1 N
•
„ :
1■14381t1 4 , rip 114
* alT,,,i
F is
0 _
,
,...„ ,
,c, -,.-_-___
ig .__
i,
., , 2 az
E
al
-I”-
cp.
-et
CIO
D.
I
-
2:
cil
a;
il I
Fl ....S ' I
'5 t
1 :'
I i
u^
1 i ' I 1
40
n
itf lic , ,
;
24'
,g -7(..-,,
,..__
o
, --g ,
F5
2
t
, . q
o',711
0
oh
=.;
0
B-9
•
I^ E U to •
V O Ni
W CO —
r ■ Q I ;P
N! EF
$ �I `s
=k
•
0
fi
•L
i , ■; E I KE
. _. a � 0 1 ke
o° IDS z 1. ' i I m : E,92 1 -------- 1' t
• rP
r
1 1 I
........
..
_ . -
7 ' ' • i. u °C y b
J oSF •
C
B _o
a .
i
I
n
w
•
• Q
g
P•
n
9 I to CAS
4 I n `. __�y o a'1
1
0ni
01kq
LI n
CD 11
Vi%
Ntld
tot
•
B-10
D o i
en 7
E gg 'F !-'` � u _ g'S
g @{ .,
tl
a,;,yEfl-i 3 i t vec ?L F %rte. .e
41.E7 1 /v I. h.l z
K I �' o r
cm-Kg, ggf,N1
r_: ;s
•
F '
�f
�I\1`` r. 1 i L Z
Ft Z L L �� o_gi
;to •,?./4VNIt ! Q C
�` F f 0 _O C W
_p 1,p a
& w o
A
4 III,
-'-
w
0
4i
1
�'� I
. As(i ■
is
�nfPk;;,. maa
z
lila..
; 7R
o - a Uae
tig
', ii . 'I' WF6
>gF
me
• o e''
0 Fr
t
EXHIBIT - C
B-11
.,.
tn-_ al 0
• E . 0
CD 0 ;4
U
..,
F.^t 11. a
I iii lowl r
- 't •rj,A t'/'-1( I 000 < L
■ r(le.III I— Li
L Jitr'sk Ir., r I:Ai 4 I I /IL r-t, 1 ••••••
i i Nit‘t■°Sig t ::•,(41,141 Itli7:1 > Li
Li
,
t"?..ipV0,7 sii•mtli 'I'
14
1,,,, 1.7 (‘4,-III;Ir FI-trinq (4
3.1 bl c 1 7 1 ;,"'(' ,r4;711144,L, ii7";Wig,
, i pie b
Frp61.
,IE 0.1 1 s le - -1 2442!,4 ri9r1 il
gainl opinsc KA : '11;4,p ,, _r4, V71)411 4r.
fr:et gs f rftIEI 14), trelln.I; i• (c,,e4 „„1, la
.,
.i,,,,,,f,,,•• • ,,,,,,,:, "IlgiAlc",• it
In-061611Hr '' et. IF '' lin.Litg)' .I r• •••• z t
100, 1.12?' it,' *14;7(fr,:21, (La 131 rir
tat,. -- rif„te, I-5,obraresp ! 0 ..
sn, a Ph*, der_rs_ 'fir
-4r5arcr R'Z'aV. Iter e'7.;;II(Ai -f-!
I'Vet Pri:'i Vit,c4817 Ilk M t C
_. }i•
-,
MI. I -41 ,,ir■
1. li 1 1 ; o&nit
UV --
---x A,,,,1.- ,...,,, If r.i •II: '4'.'•'-'
14' iir.4 ru, ,::-•
• ,
4 ■Ei A,, _ Ifill:Try 11 0 6 Lor LI,
f r I gla 0 vrir Li' r >1= 2,
Ta. 0 i'i •
. .
. . . _
0
•
, nrir,F ,z
Auk, E,
. -
:',1,‘41;11111:.1"11.1,1
1;11 Irill:1'114'r'. L'
t V res
t 1! I : 112'T. ci
I ,:
, al It 7
I
4 ; ---- 14
, st
, ..,
!
2
a
T.)._
i,•,. I
I t III
11,1' IIPII
cerrg r ,
e•■,
a R
c-
.r'
a..q
4
A *A ..-3 •
V' r
III,
lel ow z CDO 4
:r.
-- I ,41 t•, C 15 Iig
8 i 'r I 0r r-
I.1,10
I oil,1g= CI tt
I; ftro
..r...1 1=
0'
• •LC=
0 it
t t
t■ 0
B-1 2
o F4
N' 43 ode
• r E :gg
.660 '^ �L III
v' ��
I W O ez
=
IF
x �i,, 404 '' W 1•
1i r �'{rw4: u { N eE
'� Tri x4 i� ,.11'4.r xl r i it 1{P 91
. �'v 5 w� { ll i a
__ _sip 1 'i4V',) e ,t hn 4c III Il"'s'� s
e a I r i I� 1
p , 1 e
�.j : 1t S.1 4 1; s n iflit')1,I,r4' II:� 111 &
% Ei F.F. Ill t-`i"lllh " ly>Drsl� � sE
Iq. Fg.� a i i 111,igl fix ` 9 °r 'At ++ 6z
ga={i = syicppit AIN�i1I II,lr Q I Iln 13r1l ihs i f' } 4�'I
z S.YP: xei Fg° :04*. TIP: �1 ,, EIY'eats". � 1 f It
y(`l`Ni ri fI+ranlfi�.� •1.111 3•y,g. sifIII r e'I. 11 4 1Y. , II 1klj+l of io s�e
- rl !t1[ k
li 11 4 I1I1 Ilet ter >` %.
r 1'r iy. 1 �{ Y 4- 5 �. .5
yaf��yr, l,�ii�y11�1! 1�l'��I °',II it
�� !1'111 1`•
r� 111 6r' 11,1 L . '[ 9q .or,
.7a1� ilyl 1 {�� �� 1 �,r'1
4 ilif ell 1111 i - Vey l"�
�i,01„.l;l '111 l�fd 41 \i z
la rtI r �� y 1
x^ r,tti j714, tillfl z ° a
r 1 rt. t Ii tit 1 O `�u �
• S N AA w i 1 }IIy 1Yk� E� C O Q W
kid,a4 ram
d al c
'T till -. . °u
i I il ±-1.
i
_J ii"
s.--. Y Y ' it '4I a
r f �ft�4dlr,'H i
d 4 1 1 { {�iplr Ofi
®y\� t0i'ri C 1k
• u { 1 1l.In ==e
A - t n Ahrl Oz€
'a I iiii9 ® 61x5
a Y Q O.°°
gil"Mil
Oi
• oak
G
B-13
0 e
= o , -
■ � _ cvif S
c °V W o
r k fit
i
.- 5Y . t µ YI yI fir' H Q1 j
it milk, _i s a I is',
i Leh i. 1® �f ;'15 i t ♦+t E��f��� pki
.4E 4 t ' rei3`x -_ _ I e
£ E l
:k1
8 i $ f° ,c i�� is
.1 i. a ff. f1lmal ' I- r. Qf
14 4
-114 D
iFg
H.
0
lit-F.1 1 h
f I II 4-4� Iw
e IC ,,-„Ai t 4 �t \ , „
y -,g t I I; BS; ,_ 1 pp
1 II I It!"jam 4it i ,itY'fl�}I A+Far�a i._ F; F _
." $ t L:11- 11 ! Z
Tn.Y �{ 3 i\\,, WI [1 \5 O0
r A•E L a o B Q
d ':t r f1'"411 + l,rdfa — — �o='
'" n4°may 7„yY `o -
„; [ 4 m
it erga IF^WTI 3 vm U
1.1 !a
• - :m
---- `
I
E
,, n
\I � I' �'yhl�
lti� a
- pG
b n AS y9als I =9F
1 5 - ?a7
1 o t:} at?.
z 5" 1 c -
� 6 ? Ofs
4 " o: a
g ;L w NFl-V
I tan w .P
H a)0.
0.
I
pnF
•
3„e
C
B-14
0 91
F ' E e ay
1
= 2 "
• ) .. o &
s.52 F
Pv '
D 4 W o °-R
e 14 ti j
�uEn y � •e- Y' s^ _ .4 tae
•5 1 Sg ?let; l j r r r ✓ r`�3v I %1 t3;
fe 5} 1€I a an* j 4 1a-,L1 xen'ci,4, ,r ws4-1 v RMI t tt
➢e d e£ 6 r 0. I t �I W !'f'YV�Y:f I 5 a
8 t: c 3. N, Ic ( I :Zil n �, €U
i5€:;➢E 2 p1 4li 1 a I II Fir ® n
=e[St :=7a.J`++,.Z is �� y�$19 '�1- t — 1
il
.7u,y1'2sP�i I T I i�^ t `a*ii{ , & 6 9 s
!, ` 1 vf II 1 w
Pia snx^,I ,Ii Isla 1` -.1. 2;.
1 V1 �" �k\ II P fh
.mi a 1\ II I
,,8 ; \ I ` pr-
3 k
�t.►{ Al
S al
sr ,)
sl s1 t r
r"
1
Icy. S IMF 1 o J. ru = o
• ^m',+ It-r*y,l+` h"Sfi w
it .itn F g w
1 , r 1 ZY {.rvn C a E w
• lore e: ' i i 1 ' o
tr, { 1 'li*I 1 I Z U
s'
7::1 _.
11 1
�f
PSI° l! si—. lfi'''
o :m.
4 I 11 P
fl
C !C Sl. '^'
i m j '-`f Cf
V
k•• ••
-a o 5 = �£a
;5:19'.'1 . 1
g a Uge
12-i
iiJ
O•'
G-
B 1 5
Q EE
F i W n 98
t:
8
.L u
E
•��y ;'.2 r9 W o o g y +hy I it
L f Fr �''• gTtt I �I¢E ?8 - V): n1
•£ r � i i ' bF
� a
•.-e .r �fij r� R' E i II lire • pS•
aml ® a , s�
I�III, ,: 1 .i, fe II II` ' t ' ® t ,, Fs mod }af ���f 7 Iw�s'�3 -`� 4 \ ..: `Q
NFill 1 ,i rltl��i11r • I �3 :�'q , FA•
e¢ �'lllll It 1 trVo'�'i i,F3< ' (Thl• • x'7li;.�i1' P
N tell Il2 �an� I,� 11 � '`r . 1<4°yFrin i 2g
f Sl 1 YI l i Ie,
pp
III r �I11 tiL , ,iNnir ' 411-4wia L g3
Ili+ "fi �'PIH.y- •iG�1 " a_
III (�F 'olIP041:111+??
I X11 Il0101opt, it
I 1 �41°Si c,,"
r
� '
7r w pp I,,
l�I• 3I I' I I!i „ I G'ii,..: 1 ge>
JJ i i.
i r , �B I fl I
VII t --.
.. O.. 1
_ . 1,1:4•;..I I t •r- I '-WA,iltiI O 1 li'Sk.�� 0 .,,, c_
Iii HP1:'
�' .i x r ✓ w Ip 111�xi� dw
w 1 r hi 6118�' O v•g,w
"'=4(' yf, t
1:1::?,i9., p a �e
11 w
=xi .
1 , i ir'�F
F /, 1
I 8 -. I
t1 /., I .iL
L o I I�W�./x�� 8
1
• N 111 11 I I f WQ
b - Y ;� IIII I7,, Cag
S y f �— Os"e
p.` �.
tycA
nt
IiiiII
Z 0
g O ��u•
o yg
4
T>-
N kc
•
B-16
o Pi
F cu r
p
L ` '
Ua , s1
W. o °P;
uMe
t 5
a 'b
•
y !R �y 6 (II
'd E �J �"'5^ � E I /IIAf' i'+I 4
i III 412111111 '
8 s F 4c,,;,-S,-11..,,, 4 ��� Y r65 1 vAl l�6 11 g$
f p F AIiiIIIt 4ila{�IiPJl� 1a n4 �4 - I (,I�il0��irl PY
r pp i�y
.� st 8 E to n I �! °�ms ������11�u�wl 4 , ,,,,,,1,, I.� kl
il
�4 W ad'1,IS l�!'. "(HMI r� {,� f , i!lill,
I.$P s fl;, i8 rel.=i� l���i �V yn ! INq T� i1F E�-imlry 1 f�i����i,�l I� H ..
IF
F�� e ss�. i� 'a , u �` I�In
A " � E£F S:y.'r$' `I ill. p 4y+4 i eJe` 41'1;71 III I0p I s { 1 III I� kCC om ,� `-�I��i
L-:�l ,71i F
rb , 4 , @�. F ],'� F i 111 H o ti$
i ,i+ r i�iRili ry l�^ ece ` , II'�5 I �t > P;yy
‘S'1;4' P2 ' �'� Ig1111111 ��I,1;1:11-1' I Iw ig,
\ ,
,'mo14t`v.
I
h 6 i
ra Me 4 r v I
1
yil II O��I 4 � I N1 „ . , L o PF*k m I � I � II f; E ;� ; .2 m L z P h ,
I u l� RI} _lii l a �, I , {�4��I1`i o' �I,a,rj y
-
jil 114 tflF/Ill
iiiailli 0 ® r 11 } aJ 4
Fr
t , , P1 , v4
b.
it/l` i1 air
J 43
IIL® �, o �._� mad
z °ne
id,5 \111334
� e
o i ;'1.. J wpb
I
'7 g
I
#
.42:i°
wa
Ta"v
• OH
061
3rr.::
L :
8-17
o ri
N v ;51 q
x ° a 0
IL "S,
Sst ♦ I W Iy •
C
T`Y H ., ' 1 " I 0p6
ti e 4'. rL :d ;Lt
xs
call .
B S t e j .� ^t 3y! 1 i{.1,1 .1i )l(
gaF i6E r9rt y� ♦ yi,,l.11, f"�'U' 1a! [� 1� it....,
oae° S ,,fi�rr 94 V
tt,. .VIII 1 I ..� ''' '''��� pF
r r 4
a glib , f 1 !z s-
r ! A t„:4{N E{y o C
r r I` r , NE i �W W
U JI
Li_ ti
fi it1 P 19,711
F
cif 11 ti , ; ,I
vv _ va r 1 act. 'Jilt ry
� i 1
'Z mil f I _rit !
r
su z
Y� a„ 0 11 h' ' pg
a �k1 a 1• 1 { 3 0$
r . ry� as v w 1 �'n= c 2 •
:i ' - a
ii
Mir II, 1."6prkir ;14,z: , — 1
ess ,r,
a
e;
ILL 6,4
1 ! 1= 6'?
jt u',
a^;
a) .
of.. •
r
G
8-18
. .
0 r!
•
— c 011
1 Aii ilt ow LU 0 -
J11,9 1 Ira 1 435,9
La
< h
..;•,4'1,-
Ittr,Z1 ta i 131?_ii Illi&I ';:.i• ill
fry,LA; MS {11,..n '..Ti ton• II
.--4,,:— I
t '(.:,' d-e z 1 I
uci 23N t.4 0 ti,te-- .
A I_ ,.._ :z
, _:, ,,,,..._....,._ ,, _i____.:.,__, ,--,
5. :> a, I.
--- Ltoj -- Le. ..
_,
IL, 92 t; La j.LE .2
6 i
;t
ii
I 1
hi
.
K,e
I
SR 4.dkillal =
.
1 :11
i.i. • 1
I'I.?! 11"2:15 r.,1 1211 a . ! 1,..r.70,---61:
"
II; ,' u
0 , z d ,
0 1, 1, , 12
, >
.:,., ,.. , ,„ ,,, , LL, l'Zc _Lid n7 'ci
— ita - Q g La
o F;
O 0 - 1116 ill
'2
- a
•
. ;■,,"2 11 al
i 5,I 1 7:, •
i ;at id - cri: 1 i I
.T.,,p. rA, .
. . g LajLij
0 - •-
TO a
11 EkFil. 1 I:ii.L'ill,;i1 z :TT t
T., S
_
;a,
Ppqr: . 2 ,, -, — I. 'Lirdli in: I.• ID
z
i=1 •. ::,,,....Amt c p.,- .::.-j74 tc.' p
1 GI > El: L..._ t _ '.
•±,'
2 LP_
e .
1 _,
LL,
)..-,
r
I
,L4. 1 ill'
S-,-;: ::•• .:,..-II,
,,.:,■1 :tilt, :wisp
....f.i. IIEM MN i.fil:, MS
1.4 i•Jill
!--41 Ill
. .
.---74'
U 7;
C....
It!i., c,4 fan ,
.:1[1",;:! IN
;,1:c.,
D -
o
lan; 1-14 12 ,p, g (:, 6.49, ', z
10 c..05
"A TIT 1-c ' It —= ‘-., _L., ,__.Tri_
,> 12
1,11 11;
E i b If, ;T:' LI LH
0
9
241
I 41)¥4
Q 0 0)i z cp z .. •i;
II >▪.
..,a
H 0
g 1°
t9-8. rt.,
19,
mr 0 -Lri
e,
›.,
&'uj'Ot-
t B, 3 it
, .
. 1
B19
N r, .
S E .p
ssz . - N
L FS
V o ¢
•
c x
e$
W -0 °
/„ ,- /. •0
an e'l ek 4 1• rr� •9 e C > } rfY = Y, n�"' � xia, 11 :Th
t%
a k n& 11E t E T�fipi.)% I/! f .pi: E C lF t A e; Fi E g - / s Pvvnc l I FP
�3t Y�b Ba$• ' l�
ftr/ R e 5 � ' it I I 7ev1 ', l �
g" b$EY S Pt y � la
Y r a ft.
Fg C' y+a��f1 14 ti<i tV -
Sr ';'I g Ip
gm ari
371-5;)k , ��,1i I-:, a Ir ""at ri .., k§
J�,v.,,,l I{{F �I1 .ions I g
Pi
:j� i
44 " ih
i,'i 1 o
c.: � ' -+ s a w l t� ri w
+ -• F € ri
m
e xiSKas • . �v° s o
I I _., .bf ` W
1.
a
1
1 .pit °Y:
-'I - _ r- ii c
R •
tam
G d
G 10
riAl d,a_ 'F r o
Z 11 C. z0 7 I B
AltkiNla
P t,,.?t
s O
N$
•5
O°+
op
B-20
L
oil
.osz N'N 15•
= E • ,i
• �p o
V t •
P • ;
0ozgg :
,g dt$ _ -k
- k ��I il 4 bG
in I tie
ry'rr �m 4 y �t s3,[err 1 1 >'" 1 411 ii I
Ili,1 ; 1 fer,4211YI�l1sl . --� Foam. .. .�`+
SS"-2 sf € �. . 4ptill� rl� Ilk �'�I '�s] L 1e��—�� I I� @
tR a�l�lllroll v.s } q>1 St
It 111 1 li l "1.‘it J' y, Y"
p.y � 11 �l 101 €—� C tir u5 9i t;$l �.��tu
1 ' 1 Pod.c9 CY ,r M e z e3
51'" �t'! flyl< 'I 1r kt vt.r ERI O i.
fi
k� mfr
,it 50 I1 11 ,ft r r.,n`� {a_141 1' I z 1 W k.
inr r '1 44'.1 K x>.;s ° h
1 ^"&&^t1 l's "t, '-'77."--“..7
rtil�`lF e ae,.11 .. Nrii
`}k�rlhl '6171. y "Rau
A 011 II °V 77ul� ��I U _
1Yl
At', Yil�lil �� yd � kf„,
bl'1e4�`,IJo�yl�rl. 1 I *yl{Y I, 'es€
"lyrst �I1Y1 t `
LI! I A 4 ;{ I�Iki1°:� May . O
p.r. till r I e-r a n,'. -. m Q
0
u
• K' a`el T-a i; yyyy��J�))'''' W { �7N„ / �"T�j u w ..
F O
¢{� " 1! i"a. o r if'Iy r a e E
t y[,,, z,.. „,t�11
Tfi S N I ^ 0
r� ':I'" i a u
1 ..r.. + W
! 1 ` i4" B
E
1II 1°i
' � tb
1111 �l);•.G,VA
�_ f'P _ r - d
- ----� 1 N ` d �1,, Cew
�" I L 19w' , ail
7 s tkyzli � o?E
0 kf i jets
pe
ti 1 `
ooD9J.
E-
•N
• C o r5
B-21
p„(
N m 0p
c c,
O o_ :
1r J ■ 1$ r, - ta—; b$sg
Y{ �' ,,°$11.$$L e ' �I' N I 4
jG fp s. 1 wire rs I fi i y �1 1
et { a` a "q r f' f f*k`r.: i 11#v r 9i
kIa�§p[S E I ( ' f
IIt Y'll...`1' SI y� 1— �� �Ipl1 �ij 1� aJG!(,r�J 4
YI :' ill y'.FF� IIPy'�j1� O qn&
1111 fig#f1Pr'f��,f.41AYh-a, IIJ�{;i � CAI a k
Y119L ; ySc l,Inc W SF
JAL a
li
tivl
I IA ' i G ■Ii L..� .I 4 L.
cr'II f.. p 7.,-.i.4.4... z rr o
In11 '.\ [� �,f,1M.Uw t } ;t 4 I Il0,11td f'.'�"
`r z.,i z,G 7 J I � I 1 °o w
�fE 1 1 � o
o
Irk
1,-)7_71i i. mr e,II���nl$, o
.t hi liclit ;I I>
1 q_ �,,t a :,'ti' iig
II
II
"1r i a
_e
1 ,
7--; Y--' i_ - - To1'CS(
h, ; > �j1
64 t 'z
0 1 1 {ie
v V {{ Cji
w G 1` a \,11] �P�fJ le e+ H
1.es w
CD!g
o:'
`o
w•
G •
B-22
°O
N v P Sp
/
tlI
1 W'Io °F
Z 3
Is
0 3 F�fiF'., ' •
iv
gs
ap5 11102� if � bplY Es
ir g1I 1 ,, geltl Lg
1 akl f b. Pi 1xriI' I F
�w zg� YY E� / Orr A, u foal � 8i
", off ` fit' ® ..I r
T MnF r 1� i _� 95
r - y@H'I t, z 5
I` lit
Lt p.-4111-, ` ./Y w I
pi
i , :rx tj, i w .i'
"r.
r or
o4 Eli Y' tjJ
ja y
zi O
} r'�vf O
q limp
In an
W
ry co.
l�W I n'iY 'i IN
6w 'j1 .y rir �•. �1� 1 U g.
i w
F IS'
,I
6
CI
7 I i_ En Y
1r
II
I B
Jr
ol
v
ro n o iI I■m o e
i o '
° i__ j 5 j t o ups egil a
1 ir
is 2:i
Dia
IDN
tlr.
341
•
G
B-23
en its ;11
--- •1 2 •!,
11:1111 a I 2;iii a FiFil, 0 I 1
21-1,71 il 0 z2 11
AA 0
it'icci , :
..:41P4 -41 • 1 illt,,,ra 1,,,.. ; i ,,,., 1-1 , 4, 0
F.,,afa a , . t..; al
4 N.
wy I :irl:., -;
:11: II i2 \c.4,,7,; -, 12 0' fli
!.•-z
1 5 I?,
VI I° it
I.1. i 1. it
_ _
2 -;I'
111.1 i n--. , ig 1 - -
5
2 5
it'
II
1.1
.__ __._. If
.
:,,..-.., ___ 1 ,,,, ,
fr „,...
i . - ,
„.!„.. „Ai, __, ...: ,,,
,„„,., ,,..
I!! it
141 11 V
It-
iiiiii.;,E ;.,!./..,--: 1-0 ,•.: 3 1
gi
lit nifi.T
:;',..41. ' .11 ' ' u ii,•141 ;:';(11 - 1 u .:11, IHQ '1 ' '-' (:1';iii(::1.16.-SLF-101°
1..,,p• , ' , z 11..51 M., z -,:::, ii" 21 : z 1:1:,, I • -: !&-:
' 1 • 0 A:: : 0 u::',..• '44-
,i;::::!.; i , := Al l:':• (.I = 1:11:;:': \ , •= ii tr<, 12
0
1•;,E.gi I.- ,}', ;11i.11" 4 ,-, 14,1, '" i Li> 1'2111;1 \ 1.1c
2 „
'c
._
. _
z •
1 - o
97., • 2
5411Lii, ,,-. ... . 2 3 .
-1, , .. lit-11 [Pon.- N
-1 1— '
:,.. - / ,sr.-- '10211,1n
.,,,, , : .
-4.:,Lr,; 1- 1--4.1 1
4.41,,,H II 1 . It r. ,,. 11P P'' 2 21 ..
r4
i
!:,m mit " 2 Lu.
lif4 ih, h,hw , .
4,,,,a•, ..., •..,1,• ...
,,or. .
,•
, o
! J., ,... •i:3 ,t,,,,,,fft ,,Fm !,., a,
, , * •, a 1° c
.U1 A • j.IA:E'ii @atio a it ,g . :
R3,.. ?.) ves.,-n,-- IA 1
121, - .
„ ,.:7 — 1 1:.'14:14 fr 1
10
..,..,- .• z iil:i.
.S {,S;f4 En
0 •
.J.IFY , § 1,;:..1 • 11. '<- t:4.1, = i+14 . .- •
04,, r•4 _ ra., .; :..,.,.,. , il ,1 .,,,,.1
2° 5
. . .-
r----- ..,
§
a . '■, .11 in
tli; I ,ft.it ar„ -In 1 El in ! re: 1114,-; ;tai:
:
• 4..A1:1a.•:!•,..1::1;:;ji)::,\r-,a-t,i*-::.::1 l.t!iui''..,':.i!'"''."'::',..-.- 1 i I I 1
1n1
131. o r•c-kL,E„,.:i:'-m:.'}zr:,,
I
11: — 0 .
,*. , .t ;!•
pacEo i.a P°A iE
l L-...
a .,j
a ,0 b 5 or
E 1-4:4
c,7 P,- Iva
8 -g mat
00
Co , •,...
'4z 2 •=c.) 9'i 2,2 • pt.,"
>6 >r <0 (te 0 or
A5',0 II •
Ilq LC i ai< etx
2 o °-
2 al rg t.._ S
B-24
. -
N N o it
F—' E • gn
• = L n
V D ' ft
X i i5
i wf�,etr t it
as al
pe1 I >^ > a
4 i W-•&k !'j I AI [q
€6 �} � ir_-C�. AY- it a} 6w
f)iyys}}� t IiF k'� a -Q y�
E%Ftar{�it� �� , s
t q:
13 }E E. t .i �1 (I al i ER t
!@ $sib i3a ,„ ,, -- , tr ••
t7 5' 17,\\, i I I { o na
( t + f } ' w Ht
A� I Lk4. A•i Iw sy
III I �J �Iiriti O Af
•
.4, \. u :I :1 'w'," I
', r y1
!: Q Q .
• 4H. 9Y '• 2 II :a. a m N
y�,� V •
._.•...., !.t.,.,'tb i o
• m •
1
`I 1
e ,1 ,t t II I o
h
C
_l pa c °>r
_[
Da
gB■
IL P:1
>-t
>4
NX--.
• of
3 di
G
B-25
o
I - o • Sk
.V L P1.g
W ' •
O 24'
ion ii,
ii
4 r d € 2 �M w• ■ 11
to y fry ; I I it It In el
'{.t$ hell in i�iE�i s' e�` ,, 7"r`w; (��tf(„ ' -.s.0/.3,f IC IEEEE'fail 4111(11 I, IL I' i ll,w^. i a ,l i
lib/moiliE 4j, ni 11 n,. i,a1 4"�' r,,lz E%
X11
.1...1 il EE'�. - t ,� iripli�. ,!4rc 11j�1lt�l ®I 3r
v �I +i 11�• Ir AI''111f jl llf;E ' .irk'511 - 1!
'il Ii"'I;iI` LIih ( "I yr I.j
I {L
E1 114,',„,;,' '' ?� f�jUS��i y Et
0
j 11'i` �11, H `Sy'i ,,y &R-
S,! I r �,��
:1 r LEI
1�1 i"rljl, :'��� ji���� 1
111 ' ' .0 ; 44,, ,i4 ..•
�I�i 1+I t S ,I iii r N�i�
N1J;l..,, f ?I I1 I f l bat/rcy � Z
I r I i i 1 .. -kg ,QS'rd1\
'R S,J w .}., O o,2,
t of o •
q i ,�?Aga o ' tom, reel T2FR' D °E 0
N eJ 7 1 = 741q��1 'WF'."' O. m
FyY
,.�� .Ir a, i o it.
c, 2 I 4SlI"JII'I1 ice` �- U
1 , Iw 1<
ii h 6
t 3 Is
t I,I 11 i `,1 F
�I : • P
r.
0-
C -
t is
I hR
13 a
s Is `=P$
' //i• ii,C wig
y_•s.
2
>k5
cp:tl
•p R�Rl'
•
B-26
O
• I^ O •if
9.1t' -23 V L N(
LU o o E i Si
Y I 99
.A 4 ti
I tor,•
rd�'� n r I u 6r
tls
�x 55 js a -. yrz d' i°"a wA ill ti
I i� [ti
!F 8 PE - li'lir tn' . �Yrw � [/!11;�'�1/n tll f, 8I.
it
S,i I 9-V [ ���5`'lll'1 i rt �, yY `I�lit�t�l��l
:Jill I r ( l l'rvEri
�C.eF{ szd $�. �J�!(t�t I�t> di', �!� ' c
iIN y� I
Aid Il�tr l � s �ppI t e - I�
1I I",il EE y ' y� �, C�J' 11•'i'! ' it i� 11 x. An.. 1 ' II 1m' - Iz n�IR
11,1 , @, In — I� 4
p ('
•
Illsl,t,l,lr I,rl f9��.7'r8 SrIP!'�sl.'I ',l'y S4x €t
I,IIt� p ;�'u u I,t sLl� t oi rtgm�r Gu I Ei
o
f 'III 'ii '4���IP IIOi4�,if �i� [ � Ilfillj kt
l d1"r �I It�4��a l�'11$91 I��/_Jy ' 1 I�I�i�{� a' J7�
41:11,11? t' l6}i'�i i� I pr7,41{�'7 II Z
V rl�,l , 'Iti I n Nl.mn 1R
�4'in, is F 4L 5 n �' l w ii tint\.VII - o w
U
z9=} j➢': XIF ��xl 1111. i��' 2 -O
• r yh fi•e"">.``' yr lt.5�lrv'�of14 .� ~Ij li'Ii 1� EL m a,
<- ;IC it a "r r �f' MbMJ 4 0
W
I
�� fit,
Nna i l p •II t t l /� y
atg
Dot
iz 4 I IC
< N
11 1 1111 =-.
1 z �Ylli���n D it
d P( i C 51i?
9q
�'— °o 1 t. I•tr.�VlWi...•sawl ! w W?�
I Il lT�i�+l.... v'
i L a
i v U
G7
S
Ora
•
G
B-27
E •q ,
.9.8!'. 2 L r e( •
v D it•O
�"�r' '*.."'$!✓k tf� 11 3��"' Htl
F s ..e��-� Re! an' 1 gg > vV i.
d ;8 fl t i q '
.119 33 / )a. i
C.
0 ' — •
! I
_
Z11.1 lal
. . )L.- .111:1 :1
1 4 14
1. 1:JIE 1 ■.0 iii 41 1."1:11.. 4 -
1"-7- :LI, :1-1:11y M 9 lag -.
r iii v) 0
-..tii - , ).„ ., _ 4 r — ,1
,
Cr , 1 1.,.. n• • IS
iiii:::; _••••„.
F
g • rf-• •••' ''
11•• •-• 0 0
I,= 3 >
:- n
0
gl
ci. i g
• ,.. > :> b
ug
t s
r.2
2 2 12 PA
it
P t
1 ;
_ ; Ge
Irk
rrt
7 I' '' r!4'10 ,,i -
Tr to,
10
•,/
ii-,. I
PH.) GA
r-r-Prr•Crr WI'I.; rtt‘,.. '.'"'N ' 'Gt.§ r dr?' .
:ff
tbir.r;
1.:4441ZA 14 ' : GS";P911] I G',
iiNjI8 1. P4 tt:4:j-tr, 3-..—I Y
LI,
1 , g. ,
,
11.
l<
icl
I g 2 3 5
t2
.. ...
rip.]: • ..
,
Ord 1.', i ;
1 IMIET ri
L..r.., •
e :
• 2 0-- I,
c 0 .
a° I I . 1
0
:1,._ :, i
;:,..i.i, 1,4,r , ,_,•„,„In>,E•.'l I 0 `0 ,,
1 1
r 1 :7CP'
:„,11:; MAA; I rI•71.1 'rrf
HriPt 'It iril I i•:GqIG G ' '' . .—...
:GPI. 41111 1.11M1 10 ' .1 9 z
1 .n
:Z
111'1;111111114 1.2 'Z., '• 9 2 pd. i6
< _ (.1_,,,____-_, _ 1,.. _ _____,„ :0
=
:i.i.,„.1..i ;14'1'l'•11,-I' '; gill j:: > - 1,t ;``
rit ;L,
a 0 5 1-
-T—
f.,1,; .-.
i
,:: :
, _76 ' lip tin
i// .. i u'i
•;to; ,:,..t
:•:!.. H.- ,...i il
\ .•,0 fill
;,'4'MN
,,,, __
0, 1 , ,
. : a
1-1 ,
,
,
E.,
,
,
2 pi;. ' o . 2;1
mu
r 6
I' 11 P-z „cr..'r ,n-n ,3° _. 11;1 IL._; •,'-' ,>6 '
W!
,p) r r < iir[ti4 HIP ,, og.
59 1"- 1- I LI: Luij it 11> utiq
Lig t (DPI
ti
ilb
coa:
>41
rra 4 z ID r a
2 ■
-O ' •ti.
z i z z 0
o I:
0 r.
.9 8
cii si <1.
3 a
c.4, >u
t't,t2r ,
0 L18
OP
2 et ot_,
-al<
-to
?.'II ot a
2 4.; w GI
•Fig t-
B-29
ACTION AGENDA
• DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY OCTOBER 5, 2010 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Lou Munoz Ray Wimberly James Troyer Donald Granger
Alternates: Frances Howdyshell Richard Fletcher Francisco Oaxaca
CONSENT CALENDAR
NO ITEMS SUBMITTED
• PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS
This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding
their development application. The following items do not legally require any pub lic testimony, although
the Committee may open the meeting for public input.
7:00 p.m.
• (Tabe/Tasha) Conditional Use Permit DRC2009-00762 - T-MOBILE WEST CORPORATION - A
request to increase the height of a free standing cross tower in order to add a second
wireless communication facility (collocate) for a site located adjacent to an existing
church at the northwest corner of 19th Street and Beryl Street in the Medium (M)
Residential District, located at 9090 19th Street - APN: 0201-221-08. Planning
Department staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as
a Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15303) exemption which covers the installation
of small new equipment and facilities in small structures.
7:20 p.m.
(Steve/Betty) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2010=00259 - K HOVNANIAN - The design review of
building elevations and detailed site plan for 79 single-family lots on 34.1 acres of
land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) in the Etiwanda North
Specific Plan, located on the north side of Day Creek Boulevard, west of the
Southern California Edison Corridor. APN: 1087-101-01 thru -55, 1087-111-01 thru -
02, 1087-111-14 thru 1087-111-19, 1087-111-21, and 1087-111-27 thru 1087-111-
36. Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226-1. Staff has found the project to
be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report
(State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City Council on
August 1, 2001) and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already
considered in that Environmental Impact Report.
7:40 p.m.
(Steve/Betty) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION DRC2010-00318 - RYLAND HOMES -
• The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 70 single-family
lots on 30.93 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre)
in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the north side of
EXHIBIT - D
B30
•
DRC ACTION AGENDA
October 5, 2010
Page 2 •
Day Creek Boulevard, east of the Southern California Edison Corridor. Related file: •
Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16227-2. Staff has found the project to be within the
scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report (State
Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City Council on August 1,
2001) and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already
considered in that Environmental Impact Report.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
•
•
B-31
• DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Steve Fowler October 5, 2010
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION DRC2010-00318 - RYLAND HOMES - The design review of
building elevations and detailed site plan for 70 single-family lots on 30.93 acres of and in the Low
Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the north
side of Day Creek Boulevard, east of the Southern California Edison Corridor. Related file: Tentative
Tract Map SUBTT16227-2. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a
prior Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City
Council on August 1, 2001) and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already
considered in that Environmental Impact Report.
Background: On July 26, 2006, the Planning Commission approved Development Review DRC2006-
00098 for the development of 114 homes on a 30.93-acre site within the 632-unit Master Planned
Community of Rancho Etiwanda Estates. Because of a shifting demand in the housing market, the
applicant, Ryland Homes, is requesting modifications of the previously approved Development Review in
which 44 of those homes were built. This request is incorporating a single-story plan into the remaining
70 lots left to complete this development. The applicant is required to develop within substantial
compliance with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP), incorporating the architecture and design
details of the Etiwanda area. Requirements include side-on garages, recessed garages, exterior siding,
• and specific architectural styles.
A Development Agreement was approved in 2001 which required the Low Residential standards for all
lots within this tract. The property was rough graded in June of 2004. The area was mass graded and
• infrastructure was installed. The master developer has installed the main access of the gated
community, as well as the slope landscaping and decorative perimeter walls. These walls will be
consistent throughout the entire master planned community. The site is bordered by the utility corridor to
the north; by single-family homes to the west and south; and by vacant land to the east.
Desiqn Parameters: The project site is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood, which has its
own unique architectural design guidelines per the ENSP. The ENSP requires that a mix of the following
primary architectural styles be used for at least two-thirds of the units: Bungalow, Ranch, Monterey, or
San Juan. Up to one-third of the units may use these styles: Country, Victorian, or Santa Barbara
Revival.
The proposed modifications are consistent with the required architectural styles and include down-sized
floor plans that range from a 3,244 square foot plan to a 4,709 square foot plan. The original plans
ranged from 3,614 to 4,780 square feet. These new plans provide a large yard area to meet the demand
of the current housing market. A total of 14 (20 percent) of the proposed house product will be
single-story. The two-story plans have been designed with three floor plans and all the plans have four
architectural styles. The proposed architectural styles are San Juan, Santa Barbara, Monterey, and
Ranch. The San Juan elevation incorporates recessed windows, decorative shutters, S concrete tile
roofing, and arched patio/entryway. The Santa Barbara incorporates S tile concrete roofing on low
pitched hip roof forms, stucco finish, shutters, and recessed windows. The Monterey style incorporates
brick veneer elements, flat tile roof, board and baton elements under windows, and balconies. The
•Ranch style incorporates louvered shutters, recessed windows, accents of siding and stone veneer.
B-32
•
DRC ACTION AGENDA •
DRC2010-00318 — RYLAND HOMES
October 5, 2010
Page 2
Some of the plans incorporate a modest amount of wall plane articulation, and all plans incorporate
decorative garage doors to match the architectural style of the home. Each of the four plans feature
covered porch entries that range in size dependent upon the style. Plans 2 and 4 both have side-on
storage areas that can be used as garages but do not meet the minimum interior dimension of 10 feet by
20 feet to qualify as a garage. With these floor plans and the Plan 1 garages recessed back
approximately 2 feet, the development meets the 30 percent requirement for side-on or recessed
garages. -
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project:
•
1. The proposed design of the houses does not meet the design regulations under RCMC
17.08.090.D-2-a (i.e. 360 degree architecture to all elevations). The front elevations include some
elements that either disappear or are sparse on the sides and rear elevations, and some elements
from the front, such as stone veneer and siding, disappear as it moves to the rear elevations.
Materials, such as siding, stone veneer, wrought iron and the use of faux shutters should be utilized
on all elevations and in greater amounts to achieve 360 degree architecture. Long wall planes of
stucco do not achieve this requirement and should be avoided. Architectural elements should be
added to create visual interest, yet be authentic to the stated architectural theme. The applicant
has added some elements to the housing product, but the design still requires more elements on
walls to break-up long areas of stucco. Additionally, some of the front elevations need further
embellishment, especially with the goal of accurately representing the selected architectural style.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the •
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. None at this time.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
•
1. Boulders from the project site shall be utilized and integrated as part of the front yard Landscape
Plan, per the Master Plan Resolution of Approval.
2. The driveways shall be colored and scored in a diagonal pattern for additional entryway detail.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee review the proposed
design and provide additional feedback and input as necessary. Staff further recommends that the
applicant work with staff and substantially revise the elevations to meet the 360 degree architectural
requirement that meets the City's architectural expectations. Following review of the revisions by staff,
the project will be scheduled for review and consideration by the Design Review Committee.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee members reviewed the project and brought up several deficiencies in the design of the •
project. The Committee stated that the applicant needs to increase the percentage of side-on or
B•33
DRC ACTION AGENDA
• DRC2010-00318 — RYLAND HOMES
October 5, 2010
Page 3
recessed garages to meet the 30 percent minimum requirement, and that the plans with the side-on
garage need to be two-car garages to qualify for this requirement. The Committee also requested that
the applicant increase the percentage of single-story residences from 20 percent to 30 percent.
The Committee also felt that the architectural design and plotting did not meet the Etiwanda North
Specific Plan requirements. Specifically, the plotting of the homes were not staggered enough to create
a variety of frontages as indicated in the Design Guidelines. Additionally, the architectural elements of
each style were understated. The Committee felt that the elements that were used were sparse and did
not demonstrate a true representation of the architectural style that was trying to be conveyed. Another
concern was that the architectural style was sparse as it moved from the front elevations to the sides and
rear. The Committee felt that the elements used on the front elevations should be utilized more on the
side and rear elevations.
•
The Committee asked that the applicant work with staff on the issues and return to Design Review
Committee at a later date.
Members Present: Munoz:Wimberly, Granger
Staff Planner: Steve Fowler
•
•
• .
•
B-34
•
• DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Steve Fowler November 30, 2010
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION DRC2010-00318 - RYLAND HOMES - The design review of
building elevations and detailed site plan for. 70 single-family lots on 30.93 acres of land in the Low
Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the north
side of Day Creek Boulevard, east of the Southern California Edison Corridor. APN: 1087-121-24 through
30; 1087-141-43 through 52, 57; 1087-171-44 through 51 ; 1087-351-0lthrough 05, 12 through 18, 45 and
46; 1087-361-0lthrough 30. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16227-2. Staff has found the
project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report (State
Clearinghouse No. 88082915 and No. 98121091 certified by the City Council on August 1, 2001) and does
not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report.
Background: At the Design Review Committee meeting on October 5, 2010, the Committee raised
several deficiencies in the design of the house product. The applicant was asked to make changes and
bring the project back to the Design Review Committee for review. The applicant is required to develop
within. substantial compliance with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP), incorporating the.
architecture and design details of the Etiwanda area. Requirements include side-on garages, recessed
garages, exterior siding, and specific architectural styles. The project also has to conform to the
Development Agreement that was approved in 2001, which requires the Low Residential standards for all
lots within this tract.
',Design Parameters: The project site is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood, which has its
own unique architectural design guidelines per the ENSP. The ENSP requires that a mix of the following
primary architectural styles be used for at least two-thirds of the units: Bungalow, Ranch, Monterey, or
San Juan. Up to one-third of the units may use these styles: Country, Victorian, or Santa Barbara
Revival.
Design Changes: One of the items that the Committee requested to be revised was 30 percent of the
housing mix to have side-on garages. The applicant has plotted 25 percent of the homes with two-car
side on garages and another 25 percent with one-car side-on garages. Plans 2 and 4 also have front-on
two-car garages that are recessed at least 10 feet because of the other garages being plotted to the front
and side of the other garages.
The applicant has also increased the architectural elements on the homes by adding elements to all
elevations. The applicant has also increased the amount of stone veneer on the architectural styles that
have incorporated stone as an element. The Monterey style has board and batten as an element
incorporated on all of the floor plans. The San Juan style has a stucco trim banding incorporated on all
the floor plans. The Ranch style has additional siding and stone veneer incorporated into the plan. The
Santa Barbara style has added a two tone paint scheme, and more stucco trim banding. All of the styles
have coach lights, additional shutters, faux shutters, and windows incorporated to elevations that were
lacking these elements in the previous review.
The applicant has staggered the plotting of the homes to create a variety of frontages as indicated in the
design guidelines. These homes are now staggered at the street frontage starting at a 10'-0" setback to
30'-0" front yard setback. The staggering typically changes in intervals of 2'-0" but can change
rastically when the two-car side-on garages are plotted.
EXHIBIT - E
B-36
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2010-00318 — RYLAND HOMES •
November 30, 2010
Page 2
•
The proposed modifications are consistent with the required architectural styles and include downsized
floor plans that range from a 2,627 square foot plan to a 4,010 square foot plan. The original plans
range from 3,614 to 4,780 square feet. These new plans provide a larger yard area to meet the demand
of the current housing market. A total of 18 (25 percent) of the proposed house product will be single-
story. The two-story plans have been designed with three floor plans, and all plans have four
architectural styles. The proposed architectural styles are San Juan, Santa Barbara, Monterey, and
Ranch. The San Juan elevation incorporates recessed windows, .decorative shutters, S concrete tile
roofing, and an arched patio/entryway. The Santa Barbara incorporates S tile concrete roofing on low
pitched hip roof forms, stucco finish, shutters, and recessed windows. The Monterey style incorporates
brick veneer elements, flat tile roof, board and baton elements, and balconies. The Ranch style
incorporates louvered shutters, recessed windows, accents of siding and stone veneer.
All plans incorporate decorative garage doors to match the architectural style of the home. Each of the
four plans feature covered porch entries which range in size dependent upon the style. Plans 2 and 4
both have side on garages to accommodate the 30 percent side on garage requirement.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project: •
1. The applicant has provided 18 two-car garages as side-on design and another 17 one-car side-on
garages to satisfy the 30 percent of the garages required per the ENSP. Technically, the
requirement of 30 percent of the garages being side-on or recessed has been met, but the intent of
.the code may not have been addressed by not having the full 30 percent of the garages plotted as
two-car side-on. The housing tract with both the one-car and two-car side-on car garages will
occupy over 50 percent of the project or 35 of the 70 houses plotted. Of the remaining 35 homes, •
. 30 of those have the option of being converted to another two-car garage. They also have the
option for the one-car garage to be a guest suite.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
•
1. None at this time.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Boulders from the project site shall be utilized and integrated as part of the front yard Landscape
Plan, per the Master Plan Resolution of Approval.
•
2. Driveways shall be colored and scored in a diagonal pattern for additional entryway detail.
•
•
B37 .
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2010-00318 — RYLAND HOMES
• November 30, 2010
Page 3
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of
the project to Planning Commission.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee members reviewed the project and asked that the applicant add carriage lights to the
rear of the elevations and change Lots 12, 17, and 114 to have side-on garages. The applicant was also
required to work with staff to enhance the architecture of the chimneys to better match the styles of each
home. The Committee agreed to recommend the item move to Planning Commission for approval once
all these items were addressed.
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger
Staff Planner: . Steve Fowler
•
•
•
B-38
RESOLUTION NO.11-02
•
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW NO. DRC2010-00318 - A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT
70 DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON 30.93 ACRES, LOCATED ON
THE NORTH SIDE OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD, EAST OF THE
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CORRIDOR IN THE LOW
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF — APN: 1087-121-24 THROUGH 30; 1087-141-43 THROUGH
52,- 57; 1087-171-44 THROUGH 51; 1087-351-01 THROUGH 05, 12
THROUGH 18, 45 and 46; 1087-361-01 THROUGH 30.
A. Recitals.
1. Ryland Homes filed an application for the approval of Development Review
DRC2010-00318, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 12th day of January 2011, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a public hearing on the application and concluded said meeting 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 meeting on January 12, 2011, including written and oral staff reports, this
Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to the property located north of Day Creek Boulevard and
west of Etiwanda Avenue, south of the North Etiwanda Preserve and east of the Southern California
Edison Corridor, and is presently improved with rough grading, curb, gutter, and utilities; and
b.. The property to the north of the subject site is vacant land of the North Etiwanda
Preserve, the property to the south consists of single-family residential, the property to the east is
Etiwanda Avenue and vacant land, and the property to the west is a 240-foot wide Southern
California Edison (SCE) utility corridor; and
c. The project consists of a Development Review of 70 lots, master planned by BCA
Development; and
• d. The sewer, storm drain, detention basin, curb, and gutter improvements are
installed; and
B-39
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-02
DRC2010-00318 — RYLAND HOMES
January 12, 2011
Page 2
•
e. The project conforms to the basic Development Standards of the Etiwanda North
Specific Plan with required architectural elevations,slope requirements, and overall project density.
3. Based upon. the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the
above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan by
providing a variety of housing units that are compatible with the surrounding area; and
b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and
the purposes of the district in which the site is located by adhering to all setback, height and density
regulations that govem the area where these homes are being constructed; and
c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code in that single-family residences are an approved use within the Low Residential
Zoned District; and
d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety,welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements
in the vicinity.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all the •
written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning
Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required
• pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and
approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations:
a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and the City's local
CEQA Guidelines, the County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors certified an Environmental '
Impact Report in June 1991, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report was certified by the
County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors in October 1999, and an Initial Study Addendum
was certified by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in connection with the approval of Tentative Tract
Map 16227. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or
Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same
project unless: (i)substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe
impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under,
which the project was previously reviewed the indicates new or more severe environmental impacts;
or (Hi) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than
previously considered;or(iv)additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or
different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts:
b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with the Development Review
application, that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project
have not occurred, which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the
previously certified EIR. The proposed Development Review contemplates the construction of
70 single-family homes,which was evaluated and within the scope of the prior EIR,SEIR and Initial •
Study Addendum. The proposed development does not raise or create new environmental impacts
not already considered in the Environmental Impact Report for the tract map. Staff further finds that
6-40
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-02
DRC2010-00318 — RYLAND HOMES
January 12, 2011
• Page 3
the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified EIR,
not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation
measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significant.
The proposed Development Review application does not raise or create new environmental impacts
not already considered in the Environmental Impact Report for the Tract Map.
c. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission
concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to
CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of Development Review DRC2010-00318.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth
below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Planning Department
1) Approval is for the development of 70 single-family homes within
Tentative Tract 16227-2.
2) All driveways shall have a maximum grade of 10 percent. If necessary,
driveways shall be lengthened and the garage setbacks increased in
order to achieve a 10 percent grade.
• 3) Boulders from the project site shall be utilized and integrated as part of
the front yard Landscape Plan, per the Master Plan Resolution of
Approval.
4) Driveways shall be scored in a horizontal pattern for additional
entryway detail.
Engineering Department
1) Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract 16227 apply.
2) Pay a $2,635 Traffic Circulation Improvement Fee prior to building
permit issuance for each residence, per developer-to-developer
reimbursement agreement SRA-41.
3) Install all missing public improvements per Drawing 2020, including the
channel access in Lot A at the end of Encino Court.
4) If any drive approaches will be relocated, (for instance lots 34, 55, 57,
58, 91, 97, 102 or 104,) or curb cores added, process a revision to
Drawing 2020.
5) Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and
related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and
• Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at
least 50 percent of all wastes generated during construction and
demolition are diverted from landfills,and appropriate documentation is
provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering
BA1
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-02
DRC2010-00318 — RYLAND HOMES
January 12, 2011
Page 4
•
Services Department when the first building permit application is
submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the
Engineering• Services Department within 60 days following the
completion of the construction and/or demolition project.
Environmental Mitigation
1) The project shall implement all pertinent mitigation measures identified
in the Environmental Impact Report that was prepared and certified by
the County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors in June 1999, the
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report that was certified by the
County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors in October 1999, and
the Initial Study Addendum that was certified by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga in August 2001.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2011.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY: •Luis Munoz Jr., Chairman
ATTEST:
James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary
I, James R. Troyer,AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and
adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission held on the 12th day of January 2011, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
.NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
•
8-42
• COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
r •
L� 7-
DEPARTMENT•
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #: DRC2010-00318 .
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF 70 LOTS
APPLICANT: RYLAND HOMES
LOCATION: NORTH OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD, WEST OF ETIWANDA AVENUE
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
General Requirements Completion Date
•
1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its _/_/_
agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval,or in the alternative,to
relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or
employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or
employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole
discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation
shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition.
2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 11-02, Standard _/ /_
Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The
sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and
are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect.
3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The /_/_
project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to
the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to
the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing:
a) Notice of Exemption - $50 X
•
•
B. Time Limits
1. Development/Design Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved / /_
• use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed.
SC-12-08 1
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res & Stf Rpt\DRC2010-00318 StdCond 1-12.doc
•
B-43
_ Project No.DRC2010-00318 '
•
Completion Date
C. Site Development
1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include /_/ •
site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and
grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, Development Code
regulations, the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and the Master Plan.
2. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and _/_/_
State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be
submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety
Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to
occupancy.
3. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be /_/_
submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
4. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / /_
consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment,
building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved
use has commenced, whichever comes first.
5. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all /_/_
other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the
time of building permit issuance.
6. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be _/_/_
located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete
or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. For
single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults.
7. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, I_/ •
including proper illumination.
8. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property / /_
owner, homeowners'association,or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape
maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department
review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits.
9. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all /_/_
lots for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not
limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community
concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing.
10. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall _/_/_
condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining
property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property
owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's
perimeter.
11. Construct block walls between homes (i.e.,along interior side and rear property lines), rather than / /_
wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency.
12. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood _/_/
gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC.
13. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. _/_/_
2 •
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res & Stf Rpt\DRC2010-00318 StdCond 1-12.doc
B-44
Project No. DRC2010-00318
Completion Date
14. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to _/_/_
maintain an open feeling and enhance views.
• 15. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. The _/_/_
5-foot wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the
required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Director review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The parkway landscaping
including trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner.
The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance
requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Director, prior to accepting a
cash deposit on any property.
•
D. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans)
1. Multiple car garage driveways shall be tapered down to a standard two-car width at street. _/_/
E. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in / /_
the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and
submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or
prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision.
2. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 _/_/_
slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion
control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be •
installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater _/_/
• slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as
follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq.ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size
shrub per each 100 sq.ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks
in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or
larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in
staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall
include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
4. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously / /_
maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold
and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be
conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition.
5. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development / /_
Code and/or the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. This requirement shall be in addition to the
required street trees and slope planting.
6. The final design of the perimeter parkways,walls, landscaping,and sidewalks shall be included in _/_/_
the required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and
coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the
Engineering Services Department.
7. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the / /
design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department.
• 3
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res & Stf Rpt\DRC2010-00318 StdCond 1-12.doc
B-45
Project No. DRC2010-00318
Completion Date
F. Other Agencies
1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location _/ / •
of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for
mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the •
overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance
of building permits.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2710,
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEWS)
G. General Requirements
1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: / /_
a. Site/Plot Plan;
b. Foundation Plan;
•
c. Floor Plan;
•
d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan;
e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size
of service.entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams;
f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams,water and waste
diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air
conditioning; and •
g. Planning Department Project Number (i.e., DRC2010-00318) clearly identified on the
outside of all plans.
2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. /_/_
Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal.
3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers'Compensation coverage to _/_/_
the City prior to permit issuance.
4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. _/ /_
5. Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the _/_/_
Building and Safety Department. •
H. Site Development
1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be _/ /_
marked with the project file number(i.e., DRC2010-00318). The applicant shall comply with the
latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in
effect at the time of permit application. Contact .the Building and Safety Department for
availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. •
• 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant _/_/_
shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to:
City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and
Plan Check Fees, Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and fees and School
4 •
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res & Stf Rpt\DRC2010-00318 StdCond 1-12.doc
B-46
Project No. DRC2010-00318
Completion Date
Fees, Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety
Department prior to permit issuance. •
• 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map /_/_
recordation and prior to issuance of building permits.
4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday /_/_
through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays.
I. New Structures
1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances _/_/_
considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness.
2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. / /_
3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's"high wind" instructions. _/_/_
•
J. Grading
1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with California Building Code,City Grading _/ /_
Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial
conformance with the approved grading plan.
2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to / /_
perform such work.
3. 'A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the /_/_
time of application for grading plan check.
• 4. The final grading plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, _/_/_
submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building
permits.
5. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for / /_
existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of
combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California
registered Civil Engineer.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION
PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
SEE ATTACHED
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
(GRADING) AT, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
SEE ATTACHED
• 5
I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2011 Res & Stf Rpt\DRC2010-00318 StdCond 1-12.doc
B-47
•
" ;'+ ., City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department
1111 Rancho Civic Cucamonga,Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730
s M T: (909)477-2710 F: (909)477-2711
GRADING COMMITTEE
PROJECT REPORT& RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
Project No.: DRC2010-00318 Type: Residential Subdivision
Location: Etiwanda Estates
Planning Department: STEVEN FOWLER APN:
Meeting Date: October 5, 2010 By: Matthew Addington
Acceptable for Planning Commission: Yes: xxx No: //
If NO, see COMMENTS below: ��/
PRELIMINARY: '
GRC: October 5, 2010 By: Matthew Addington
FINAL:
PC Meeting: By:
Note: Building and Safety— Grading will review and comment on future submittals for this
project.
A) STANDARD CONDITIONS - Standard Building and Safety - Grading and Planning
Department standard conditions for Grading and Drainage Plans.
• 1) Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted
California Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices.
The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the
approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan.
2) A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of
California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and
drainage plab submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations
per said report.
3) A geologic report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer or Engineering Geologist
and submitted at the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review.
4) The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction
reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety
Official prior to the issuance of building permits.
5) A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new
construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed
will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and
Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed
Civil Engineer.
6) The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control
Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a
grading permit.
• 1:1BUILDING\PERMITS\DRC2010-00318 Tr16227-2\DRC2010-00318 Grading Committee Project Report,20101005.doc
1 of 4 .
B-48
=r . City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department
10500 Civic Center Dr. •
Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730
T: (909)477-2710 F: (909)477-2711
7) If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and
Safety Official for review,' that plan shall be a separate plan/permit from Precise
Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit.
8) A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site
drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for
review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading
permit. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record.
9) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage
easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
10) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage
acceptance letter(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows
in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the
Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not
exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
11) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the .
. adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall on property line or provide a detail(s)
showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line.
•
12) The Grading and Drainage Plan shall Implement City Standards for on-site •
construction where possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City
Standard Drawings.
13) All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way or adjacent
private property.
14) Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the, latest
adopted California Plumbing Code.
15) The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of
100-feet beyond project boundary.
16) The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill
combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The
grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official.
17) The precise grading and drainage.plan shall follow the format provided in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit".
18) Grading Inspections:
a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor
shall request a pre-grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by
the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the
Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and
preventive measures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 •
I:\BUILOING\PERMITS\DRC2010-00318 1r16227-21ORC2010-00318 Grading Committee Project Report, 20101005.doc
2 of 4
8-49
i,*,, City of Rancho Cucamonga
, 4 `� Building & Safety Department
Rancho o Civic Cucamonga,Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
'::%, , T: (909)477-2710 F: (909) 477-2711
hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be
subject to suspension by the Building Inspector;
b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to
request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading
operations:
i) The bottom of the over-excavation
ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building
permit;
iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or
owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety
Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to _ _
be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil
Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record;
iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be
reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and
approved prior to the issuance of a building permit.
19) Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the engineer of record shall
certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) best
management practices (BMP) devices.
B) COMMENTS - The following items shall be corrected / completed, submitted to, reviewed
and approved by staff prior to scheduling the project for a Planning Commission hearing.
Copies of required easement/right-of-way documents, including legal descriptions, shall be
submitted for review prior to obtaining final signatures. The review period for the above
will generally be a minimum of two weeks or longer depending upon the adequacy and
complexity of the submittal:
1) Please note that at this conceptual level a review of the accessibility access is not
performed. lt is the responsibility of the applicant to meet all accessibility
requirements. .
C) SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1) The precise grading plans shall show the rough grading PMT# (permit number)
above the title block.
2) Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard
lined gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that
flow lines exceed 10 percent.
3) Metropolitan Water District (MWD) shall approve all plans that impact their
easement, including utilities, storm drain, slopes, and street trees and landscaping
I:\BUILDING1PERMITS\DRC2010-00318 Tr16227-2\DRC2010.00318 Grading Committee Project Report,20101005.doc
3 of 4
B-50
City of Rancho Cucamonga• e Building & Safety Department
s 10500 Civic Center Dr.
!� Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
T: (909)477-2710 F: (909)477-2711
prior to issuance of a grading permit. A note shall be included on all pertinent plans
requiring Metropolitan Water District Operations Maintenance Branch to be notified
two working days prior to starting any work in the vicinity of their easement.
4) If more than 5,000 square feet of combined asphalt concrete and PCC parking and
driveway surface area are removed, an updated Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP) will be required for this project. Contact the Building and Safety Services
Department for additional direction/information.
5) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing
walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent
property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property.
D) WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN •
1) A Storm Water Quality Management Plan was approved for this project on June 1,
2006.
0
I:\BUILDING\PERMITS\DRC2010-00318 Tr16227-2\DRC2010-00318 Grading Committee Project Report,20101005.doc •
4 of 4
8.51: . .. .
FWD a�" Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
74. District
FIRE .0:1!:.-44
Fire Construction Services
STANDARD CONDITIONS
August 5,'2010
Ryland Homes
Tract 16226-1
SFR in the VHFHSZ
DRC2010-00318
THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT.
The architectural and landscaping plans for this community must be designed in accordance
with the approved "Final Fire Protection Plan." Reference the plans dated June 7, 2010 by MDS
Consulting.
• FSC-1 Public Water Supply
For single-family residential projects in the designated Hazardous Fire Area, the fire hydrant
design & installation shall be in accordance tg RCFPD Policies & Standard 5-10.
FSC-2 Fire Flow
1. The required fire flow for this project will be determined in gallons per minute at a
minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is based on
the current edition of the California Fire Code, as adopted.by the Fire District Ordinance.
2. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of
the proposed project site.
FSC-4 Requirement for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems
Fire sprinklers in this development must be installed in accordance with the approved Final Fire
Protection Plan and/or current building and fire code regulations.
FSC-7 Hazardous Fire Area
This project is located within the "State Responsibility Area" (SRA), the "Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zone" (VHFHSZ), City of Rancho Cucamonga "Hillside District", and/or within the area
identified on the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Exhibit V-7 as High Probability-High
• Consequence for Fire Risk. These locations have been determined to be within the "Hazardous
Fire Area" as defined by the Fire District. The Hazardous Fire Area is based on maps produced
Page 1 of 2
$52
by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the City of Rancho •
Cucamonga. The applicant shall prepare the architectural plans for the construction of the
buildings in accordance with the approved "Final Fire Protection Plan".
Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS - Please complete the following
prior to the issuance of any building permits:
1. Fire protection plans: Must be recorded with county recorder's office and implemented.
2. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is
responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to
Fire Construction Services.
3. Fire Department access and water supply inspection must be performed and approved.
PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER
The building construction and fuel modification must be substantially completed in accordance
with Fire Construction Services policies.
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following:
1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating
the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho •
Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers".
On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road,
at each hydrant location.
2. Public Fire Hydrants: Must be deemed acceptable by the water and fire districts.
3. Fire Sprinkler System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire
sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services.
4. Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire
access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable
to Fire Construction Services.
The CC&R's, the reciprocal agreement and/or other approved documents shall be
recorded and contain an approved fire access roadway map with provisions that prohibit
parking, specify the method of enforcement and identifies who is responsible for the
required annual inspections and the maintenance of all required fire access roadways.
5. Address: the address must be posted with non-combustibles 4-inch minimum numbers on
a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during
periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street.
6. Fire protection plan: Must be implemented and recorded against each property. A copy of
the recorded documented must be presented to each owner. The landscaped installed must
be in accordance to the approved plans.
•
Page 2 of 2
B-
•
53
r
9
STAFF REPORT b
• PLANNING DEPARTMENT J
DATE: January 12, 2011 RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director
BY: Larry Henderson, AICP, Principal Planner/Trails Coordinator
SUBJECT: TRAIL PRIORITIES ANNUAL REVIEW DRC2010-00412
• BACKGROUND:
A. Trail Priorities: The City's Trails Implementation Plan adopted in 1991 sets forth trail
improvement priorities which are to be reviewed each year to adjust priority based upon
urgency, availability of funding, and revised cost estimates. The Alta Loma Riding Club
(ALRC) has proposed a list of community hiking and riding trail projects which are to be given
funding priority (Exhibit A). In 2008, following receipt of priority comments from the ALRC, the
Engineering Department proposed a multiyear priority list which was approved. Because of
. • favorable construction bidding, many projects have been completed (Exhibit B). Staff concurs
that all locations indicated by the ALRC would provide important linkages by "filing gaps" in
. the existing trail network.
The Trails Advisory Committee (TAC) met on November 10, 2010, and considered the
• recommendations of the Engineering Department (Exhibit C). The TAC unanimously
recommended forwarding the Engineering Department Proposal to the Parks and Recreation
Commission and the Planning Commission. The Parks and Recreation Commission and the
Planning Commission's actions will then be forwarded to the City Council as part of the City
Engineer's Annual Budget recommendations.
B. Funding: Trail projects are generally funded as Capital Improvement Projects.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding the proposed priorities as recommended by
the Engineering Department to the City Council as part of the 2011-2012 budget process.
Respectfully Submitted,
James R. Troyer, AICP
Planning Director
Attachments: Exhibit A—ALRC Recommendations dated September 30, 2010
Exhibit B —Trail Improvements Status List
Exhibit C — Engineering Department Recommendation
•
•
Item C
•
r
•
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
• �o�yidingeio,
0
SEP 2010
'iaK �� Alta Loma Riding Club ge
P. O. Box 8116 RECEIVED -31:p g RC Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 LANNING
September 30, 2010
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Attn: Mark Steuer, City Engineer
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Dear Mr. Steuer:
The Alta Loma Riding Club has completed its annual review of trails in Rancho Cucamonga. The attached
lists include areas that are in need of improvement.
• Trail improvements are beneficial to our community in many ways. They help the City reach the goal of
making riding loops as per the General Plan and Development Code. They also fit in with Healthy R C by
promoting recreation within our communities. Trail improvements improve safety for both drivers and
riders in our communities. Improved trails benefit the visual impact of neighborhoods. These combined
effects result in the increase of property values.
We thank the City of Rancho Cucamonga for its dedication to trails,which are a historical feature of our
community. They are one of the features that make our City unique.
Sincerely,
Gault 1)
Carol Douglass, ALRC City Liaison
cc: Mayor and City Council
Planning Commission
• attachments
EXHIBIT A C2 •
ALRC 2010 TRAIL IMPROVEMENT LIST •
OLD
1. Sapphire-from 5708 Sapphire N.to Hillside& short section from 1 lot S. of Whirlaway
3 lots N. of La Senda. This area continues to be the unimproved trail that causes the most concern
as it poses the highest safety risk. Riders are forced to ride in the street right-of-way,in the
downhill lane of high speed traffic at this location.
2. Banyan—Carnelian to Beryl
3. Banyan-Carnelian to Sapphire
4. Archibald—W. side from hidden farm to trail N. of Norbrook and trail S.of Norbrook
5. Almond—S.side from Sapphire to Carnelian
6. Carnelian—W. side from Wilson to Banyan
7. Banyan—N. side from Amethyst to Hellman
8. Hillside—S. side from Amethyst to 1s`trail E.of Eastwood
9. Banyan—N. side from Carnelian to Beryl •
10. Carnelian—Banyan to Wilson
11. Hermosa—Wilson S.to Banyan Trail
Note: The section from Beryl to Hellman was done except for the unimproved property at the N.W.
corner of Hellman& Beryl. This lot should be flagged for the trail improvement when the property is
improved.
•
C-3
• NEW
1. Banyan—E. from East Ave. almost to Cashew Way
•
2. Etiwanda—E. side of Etiwanda from S. of Water District Property to Banyan & 2 lots below Banyan
3. Hermosa—N.of Vista Grove to Almond
4. Vista Grove—between Hermosa and Haven
5. Haven—N. of Wilson partway to Hillside
6. Haven—from Vivienda to 1 lot below Vivienda
7. Haven—From Carrari N.to Hidden Farm
8. Archibald—a crosswalk&horse crossing sign are needed on Archibald near Hidden Farm
•
In addition to trails that need improving, the ALRC has noted several areas that are adjacent to flood
control channels, where providing access, such as adding a simple step-through of wood bollards,will
add many miles of trail usage for very little work or expense. Opening these areas to use also helps in
creating riding loops. Riding loops provide great recreational opportunities to our communities. They
also help provide safer places for equestrian and pedestrian use by keeping riders and walkers off busy
streets.
1. Turquoise &Jennet—adjacent to the Cucamonga Flood Control Basin
2. Almond & Henry (southwest corner)—at Flood Control Channel
3. Wilson-at Day Creek Channel (need horse step through at west side and bike/pedestrian access on
E. side)
3. Almond & Carriage Road (southwest corner)—at Flood Control Channel
4. Deer Creek Flood Control Channel—at Victoria Loop Trail N. of 10902 Rollins Ct. (north of Pacific
Electric Trail)
• 5. Haven & Deer Creek Channel—Need bollards by gate on Haven &to the W. at connection to the
community trail
C-4
y
•
There are also several locations on trails that have a single post step-through. The Trails Advisory
Committee (TAC) recognized many years ago that a single post step-through is a problem for most
horses, and becomes a safety/liability issue. Tack has been torn or damaged, and both horses and riders
have been injured on step-throughs with single posts. The following areas need to be modified to two
post step-throughs.
1. Almond - near the Kings Ranch entrance, N. of Maloof's, approximately 125 feet east of Carnelian.
2. East side of Sapphire—across the street from 5708 Sapphire
3. North of Confluence Park—behind home at 6275 Indigo Ave. , adjacent to flood control property
4. Hellman, in front of 5434 Hellman,where Hellman dead ends at the Demens Trail
•
•
C-5
TRAIL IMPROVEMENT/ STATUS LIST FROM 2008
• ALRC /ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS:
LOCATION STATUS
Beryl Street N. of Banyan to Wilson Done in 2010
Sapphire from 5708 Sapphire N. to Hillside+ short Not included in 2008
section from 1 lot S. of Whirlaway 3 lots N. of La Engineering Recommendation
Senda.
Banyan - Carnelian to Archibald Partially done (Beryl to
Archibald) 2008-2010
Banyan - Carnelian to Sapphire
Archibald (W. Side) Hidden Farm to Trail N. of
Norbrook + Trail S. of Norbrook.
Almond (S. side) Sapphire to Carnelian.
Wilson (S. side) from Hellman east to lst Trail E. of Done in 2010
Zapata.
Carnelian (W. side) Wilson to Banyan
Hillside (S. Side) Amethyst to I str trail E. of
Eastwood.
Archibald (W. side)—Banyan to Wilson Done 2008
Banyan—Amethyst to Archibald To Hellman Done 2010
Pacific Electric Trail Etiwanda to E. City Limits Done 2008
• Pacific Electric Trail Cucamonga Creek to Amethyst Done 2009
Banyan —Hellman to Amethyst Done 2010
Wilson— Carnelian to existing trail W. of Buckthorn Done 2009
Beryl Street-N of Banyan to Wilson Done 2010
Banyan—Beryl to Hellman Done 2010 (except for Orange
Grove)
Banyan— Carnelian to Beryl 2011/2012?
Carnelian —Banyan to Wilson _ 2011/2012?
Hermosa — Wilson S. to Banyan Trail ' 2010 ?
• I This was not on any list hut seems to he a good opportunity
EXHIBIT B
-6
•
•
STAFF REPORT 4
• ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT .W
RANCHO
Date: November 10, 2010 CUCAM0NGA
To: Trails Advisory Committee Members
From: Mark A. Steuer, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
By: Jerry A. Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer
Subject: TRAIL PRIORITIES ANNUAL REVIEW
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Trails Advisory Committee approve the trail priorities for Fiscal Year
2010/2011 through 2014/2015.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The following trails are budgeted and either complete or will be constructed and completed this
• fiscal year:
•
FY 2009/2010— Past
• 1. Banyan Street from Hellman Avenue to Amethyst Street — Trail on the north side.
Completed December 2009.
2. Pacific Electric Trail Phase IV from Grove Avenue to Amethyst Street — Construction started
back in September 2009 and by early 2010 was substantially complete and open to the
public. Note, the old railroad bridge was removed in July 2010 and this section of the trail
closed. However, the construction of the new pedestrian bridge over Foothill Boulevard
started in October 2010 with completion expected by mid summer 2011.
3. Wilson Avenue from Carnelian to existing trail west of Buckthorn —Completed May 2010,
4. Beryl Street from north of Banyan Street up to Wilson Avenue — Trail on the east side.
Completed May 2010.
5. Banyan Street from Beryl Street to Hellman Avenue — Trail on the north side and
continuation of Trail No. 1 listed above. Completed July 2010.
6. Wilson Avenue from Amethyst Street to Morning Canyon — Trail fencing for the existing trail
on the south side of the street. Completed July 2010.
FY 2010/2011 - Current
7. Hermosa Avenue from south of Oak Grove to Coca Street— Trail on the west side. The trail
would link to Trail No. 6 listed above and the regional trail to the east along the north side of
the flood basins. Should be out to bid in December with construction late winter to early
spring 2011.
The following trails are proposed for the upcoming fiscal years:
•
•
EXHIBIT C
C-7
TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT PAGE 2
Re: Approve the trail priorities for Fiscal Year 2010/2011 through 2014/2015 •
November 10, 2010
FY 2011/2012
8. Banyan Street from Carnelian Street to Beryl Street — Trail on the north side and
continuation of Trail No. 5 and linking to Trail No. 4 listed above and Trail No. 9 below.
Note, the northwest corner is undeveloped and therefore would not be a part. That portion
of the trail would be constructed upon development.
FY 2012/2013
9. Carnelian Street from Banyan Street to Wilson Avenue — Trail on the west side and
continuation of Trail No. 8 above and linking to Trail No. 3 above at Wilson Avenue.
FY 2013/2014
10. Banyan Street from Sapphire Street to Carnelian Street — Trail on the north side and
continuation of Trail No. 8 above and linking to the existing trail from Sapphire Street west.
FY 2014/2015
11, Haven Avenue from Wilson Avenue to Vivienda — Trail on the west side and continuation of
the existing trail on Haven south of Wilson.
All of the above is dependent on available funding.
Respectfully submitted,
(7;Cr
rkA. Steuer
Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
MAS:JAD
Attachment •
•
•
C-8
L-------7 ey
2-
.,!
lir
ri I 1 ill
I
. 1 gP ■ 1, ;;
•
I r, 1 1 ii of;
1 PI
1 i 0
01
0
5 , _. 1-__
-—
2
r i
,.......e. ,:r. i 1 : •r I e .;7--- - r----=
r::1 ,- — -.
. i
I ® :: '
Ig : ----II ....------,1 :==‘, -_-_, ,----_-• ,
1 _-_-, _ „,
, __ !
1 .. -------:=-
t --;.,. Li ___,/, .)
,
; . :
,, ,- ' 1::-----i -------,, 1
__,,
--, :g ' ,L. rp--i N: - ! il II.I3
I - e c. .
....... _
------=. =----7 ! ,.-----c.
I/ - 1
I ,... == =
. _-_--/- „,,
:=.:- r--..
,-----11 .--.' °=-•-•,./ •:-../ I .= _..; ;.
--.._
. ....=:: ;
. v.
I I 1` I .__:( • I I - , ;E : I l' g
/ \
4
.
„..
, ..,___ r .
,J,•
A 1,\N {
: ; tc. .r
g 7 =2
•-=--;:-- ,
, ...\ z=z
I EL --- • h I, _,
, ,___=, r--'
I A . ! 1 F.-- =-■ '! ..-:....... ...nem,-, _—
1 ;--------_:;-__..= —__:,=77_ - -- -7_--•nsgrsooz7„i ,,,..,,... -r— r r - —1,--.=r. --,'
: .\ : --:. ., ._<--r.. .....-=.-:
1 I
.--, - di .___I
, : I .c,----------- : :S % i; N .
• I I ____,
_
3 1 -1 :: 5--- '
, -7,:, ,
1 . .. -.• :7-- ..--__
IL ,--i ,: c-E
, _
,
,, -„,„ t: it ,....„, :,------- :, i.,_,,,_,,
1 -c----- ; \ \
■.,■,. . ,/-- --.. --
-
;
■ //-—: — I —
\\
■..,7.
-:-_:•, =-=- .-= 'r - —- --
, .
'' Th''
I -
-,I - I
i •,--- I , y
p. 7. _____I r-‘
1 ,
, ).: --_,,, r---,, ---, ----:, ,.. , -
, :
1 _:_-_-__ .____.---_----__=ird:_r_rr , t--=i,___‘_r _--- r
- ,..,_.1 =5
c----<:K:5 -----1 t :
---- , ..! \\55 \-`5,-, - -, E E
' 1
! 1 I g
, ,._, ■: I
.7 e
: •--=' E i 1 5
• N' „--/
. .._,...
c..,==....----/-
0
C-9