HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/03/11 - Agenda PacketC.~CAA4~
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCA~
PLANNING COMMISSION
1977
~EDNESDAY ~CH 11~ 1992 7:00 P.~.
~e~o eoe~o~ civic
CO~CIL C~ER
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
~CHO CUC~ONGA, C~IFORNIA
I. Pledge of Allegiance
II. Roll Call
Commissioner Chitiea Commissioner Tolstoy
Commissioner McNiel Commissioner Vallette
Commissioner Melcher
III. Announcements
IV. Approval of Minutes
February 12, 1992
V. Consent Calendar
The following Consent Calendar items are expected
to be routine and non-controversial. They will be
acted on by the Commission at one time without
discussion. If anyone has concern over any item,
it should be removed for discussion.
A. TIME EXTENSION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT
13280 - LUSK COMPANY - A request for a time
extension of the design review for building
elevations and detailed site plan for a
recorded tract map consisting of 145 single
family lots on 23.9 acres of land in the Low-
Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units
per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community,
located at the northeast corner of Base Line
Road and Ellena West - APN: 227-081-06.
Related files: Minor Exceptions 89-21 and
90-02. (Continued from January 8, 1992.)
B. VACATION OF A PORTION OF STRANG LANE - GARY
THOMPSON - A request to vacate a portion of
Strang Lane, located east of Carnelian Street,
approximately 30 feet wide and 150 feet long -
APN: 1061-271-05.
VI. 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.
C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92-09 - RANCHO LITTLE
LEAGUE - A request to place two storage bins on
the south side of Salina Street, east of
Malvern Avenue to use as a snack stand and to
store sports equipment used on the adjoining
baseball fields - APN: 209-041-47. (TO BE
CONTINUED TO MARCH 25, 1992.)
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY - A
residential subdivision and design review of
155 condominium units on 12.4 acres of land in
the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling
units per acre) of the Victoria Planned
Community, located at the northeast corner of
Woodruff Place and Kenyon Way - APN:
227-011-26. Staff recommends issuance of a
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY - A
residential subdivision and design review of
189 condominium units on 18 acres of land in
the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling
units per acre) in the Victoria Planned
Community, located on the southeast corner of
Kenyon Way and Milliken Avenue - APN: 227-011-
17. Staff recommends issuance of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 92-02 - JACK MASI -
A. A request to modify the local circulation
pattern within Subarea 7, along Rochester
Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and the
Sports Park, to accommodate a proposed
industrial development at the southwest
corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester
Avenue - APN: 229-011-10, 19, 21, 26, 27,
and 28.
B. A request to add an auto court use,
consisting of automotive services and
related activities, as a conditionally
permitted use to Subarea 7 of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan.
C. A request to expand the list of permitted
and conditionally permitted uses in Subarea
7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan to
include certain retail and service-related
activities.
Staff recommends issuance of a Negative
Declaration.
VII. Commission Business
G. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR TWO
DESIGNATED MULTI-FAMILY PARCELS SOUTH OF BASE
LINE ROAD NEAR VICTORIA PARK LANE
VIII. Public Comments
This is the time and place for the general public
to address the Commission. Items to be discussed
here are those which do not already appear on this
agenda.
IX. 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.
VICINITY MAP
CITY HALL
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
THE LUSK COMPANY
Wdter's Direct Dial Number
March 10, 1992
Plannin~ COmmisSiOn
City of R&noho Cuoamonga
Post Office Box 80f
Ranoh Cuoamonga, California 92729-0807
Dear Commissioners:
First of all, I want to apologize for our representative being totally
unprepared at the last Commission hearing to respond to your concerns
about our development in Victoria. This is not the way The Lusk
Company does things and I hope that this exhibit we can start to
respond to your concerns.
Secondly, as I understand, you are concerned about our street scene.
To help review these oonoerns'I had our architects, GYP, review and
suggest how we might "soften" the street scene. The following is what
they are suggesting:
1. In starting their review, they took a section of our existing
plot plan and took cross sections of a typical street. They
then proceeded to show the actual outlines of these homes so
they could better understand how they were "shaping" the street
scene.
Then they showed in bold outline the single story portion of a
two story home. The measurements on these exhibits indicate the
distance behind the garage or one story section.
They then took Plan 3 and showed how it could be changed to
"soften" its front elevation and therefore the street scene.
Exhibit A - Shows where cross sections were taken.
Exhibit B - Shows bold outline of homes.
17550 Gfi~e~e Ave. · RO. 8ox Cd95~ · 8~ne, CA 92713
(714) 757-6~0 · WAX (714} 757-6399
Plaanin~ Commission
City of Ranoho Cuoamonga
Maroh 10, 1992
Exhibit C - Shows aotual side elevations oross seotions on how
roof lines relate to the street.
Exhibit D - Bold outline shows single story area of a two story
home.
Exhibit E - Shows our Plan ~ a seoond story floor plan before
modifioation to soften.
R~htbit F - 8hOwe our Plan ~ seoond story floor plan after
modifioation to soften.
Exhibit G - Shows our Plan 3 elevation before modifioation to soften.
Exhibit H - Shows our Plan ~ elevation after modifioation to
soften.
Exhibit I - Plan I (h~rshest) shows a rendering of one of our
homes.
R~ht=bit J - Plan ~ (softest) shows a rendering of one of our
homes.
I also had CYP study how big a one story they oould get on a 4800 s.f.
lot .and found that they oould only squeeze a 1800 s.f. home on that
area. Also, I had them review on how to relieve the two story side-
to-side 'oanyon" elfsot and the suggestion that we might add one or
two trees in the front setbaok at or ne&r oommon property line. But
also remember that in Viotoria, we have open spaoes t~t have been
oreated for Just this sort of density ~lloostion.
Finally, though I know we have not answered all your oonoerns, I do
hope that these exhibits will show that we &re responsive and willing
to work to make ou~ oommunity a better pl&oe to live.
Sinoerely,
WILLIAM D. LUSE
Vioe Chairman of the Board
WDL/eme
/-- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 11, 1992
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Steven Ross, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13280 - LUSK
COMPANY - A request for a time extension of the design review
for building elevations and detailed site plan for a recorded
tract map consisting of 145 single family lots on 23.9 acres
of land in the Low Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling
units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at
the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Ellena West - APN:
227-081-06- Related files: Minor Exceptions 89-21 and 90-
02. (Continued from December 17, 1991).
BACKGROUND: On December 5, 1991, the Design Review Committee (McNiel,
Vallette, Coleman) recommended approval of the proposed architectural
modifications. The Committee also suggested that the applicant explore
the possibility of including single story homes in the tract to meet
alternative housing needs and to break up the massing of the
streets cape ·
On December 17, 1991, the Planning Commission continued this item at the
request of the applicant to allow more time to address the Design Review
Committee's question abut a single-story plan.
At their meeting on January 8, '1992, the Commission made the following
comments and voted to continue the time extension request so that the
applicant could discuss the following concerns with the Design Review
Committee:
1. The massing of the two story homes on the lots, plotted at the
minimum setbacks, could create the undesirable appearance of "row
housing-" It was strongly suggested that a single story plan be
introduced to help break up the massing of homes along the
streets- If a single story plan is not feasible, a new two-story
plan should be introduced which will help to break-up the massing
along the streetscape.
2 · The project should be reviewed with respect to the City ' s
architectural policies · If siding is only partially used, it
should be placed logically throughout the elevations.
ITEM A
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TIME EXTENTION TT 13280 - LUSK COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 2
3- The durability of the proposed masonite siding should be reviewed.
At the Design Review Committee (Melcher, Vallette, Coleman) meeting on
February 6, 1992, the applicant was present but did not present any new
information or alternatives for Committee consideration- After some
discussion on whether the applicant should be required to revise, and to
what degree, the project's design, the Con~nittee determined the project
should be returned to the full Planning Commission. However, during
their deliberations, the following comments were made:
1. The overall massing of the homes in relation to the lot size
continues to be the greatest concern of the Committee. They stated
that the homes are out of scale with the lots because they all have
second floors and are generally plotted at the minimum setbacks-
The Committee suggested that smaller floor plans be introduced to
reduce the overall bulk of the homes, resulting in a better
streetscape and quality of life for residents within the
subdivision.
2. The third-car garages should be replaced with bonus rooms on all of
the lots to improve the streetscape by eliminating paving and
garage doors.
3- The front yard setbacks shoula have greater variation to add
interest to the streetscape.
RECO~4ENDATION:
Staff continues to recommend that the Planning Commission approve a one-
year Time Extension for the Design Review for Tract 13280 through
adoption of the attached Resolution. However, should the Planning
Commission determine that the project's current design is inconsistent
with the City's design goals and policie~ staff recommends that the
Planning Commission deny the time extension for the Design Review for
Tract 13280 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Denial-
BB: SR/j s
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Planning Commission Minutes from
January 8, 1992
Exhibit "B" - Staff Report dated January 8, 1992
Resolution of Approval
· Resolution of Denial
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
January 8, 1992
Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council
Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California- Chairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance-
ROLL CAL___ L
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Suzanne Chitlea, Larr~ McNiel, John
Melcher, Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette ~
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineers Brad Buller, City
Planners Dan Coleman, Principal Plannerl Tom Grahn,
Assistant Plannerl Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer~
Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney~ Steve Hayes,
Associate Planner~ Anna-Lisa Hernandez, Assistant
Planner; Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner~ Betty Miller~
Associate Engineer~ Scott Murphy, Associate Planner~
Steve Ross, Assistant Planner~ Gall Sanchez, Planning
Com~ission Secretar~
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Brad Buller, City Planner, reported that the notices had been sent out to
request nominations for the Design Awards program. He stated that staff would
be contacting the Commissioners to establish a date and time for a field trip
to review the potential list.
Mr. Buller announced a Joint City Council/Planning Commission Workshop had
been tentatively set for January 29, 1992.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. TIME EXTw'NSION FOR DESIGN R~VIEW FOR TRACT 13280 - LUSK COMPANY - A
request for a time extension of the design review for building elev&~ions
and detailed site plan for a recorded tract map consisting of 145 single
family lots on 23.9 acres of land in the Low Medium Residential District
(4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located
at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Ellena West - APN:
227-081-06- Related files: Minor Exceptions 89-21 and 90-02. (Continued
from December 17, 1991. )
B. TI~E EXTENSION FOR THE DESIGN REVIEW OF TRACT 10035 - PACIFIC FIRST BANK -
A request for a time extension of the design review of building elevations
and detailed site plan for Lots 1 through 21 of a previously approved
tract consisting of 38 single family lots on 15.7 acres of land in the Low
Residential District (2 - 4 dwelling units per acre), located south and
east of Red Hill Country Club Drive, south of Calls Corazon - APN:
207-631-01 through 11 and 207-641-01 through 10. Related file: Variance
89-12.
Commissioner Melcher requested that both items be pulled for discussion.
A. TIM~ EXTENSION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13280
Commissioner Melcher observed that the elevations had been reviewed by the
Design Review Committee on December 5, 1991. He indicated he was surprised
that some of the houses had only partial siding and commented that he thought
it was policy that siding be required on all sides.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, stated that the developer and the Committee
had agreed there would be siding all around the houses.
Commissioner Vallette stated that at the last Design Review Cousnittee meeting
there had been discussion regarding incorporating single story houses in the
development in order to break up the streetscape.
Chairman MeNial invited public comment.
Anna Suitnet, Lusk Homes, 3741 Marcad Drive, Suite H, Riverside stated that
the Design Review Committee had approved the elevations and asked them to
review the possibility of plotting single-story houses within the tract. She
said their marketing department had determined that single story homes would
not be marketable in the area. She said the average size lots are 4,500
square feet and the proposed homes are a minimum of 2,200 square feet. She
said they wanteat to keep the houses within the required setbacks and a single
story product would appear as too much mass on the pads and would not be cost
efficient. She felt the variety of elevations would provide an attractive
streetscape. She said they had addressed the siding issue. She said they had
indicated on the plot plan those homes which which would be visible from
streets or trails and the siding would be enhanced on all sides of =hose
homes.
Chairman McNiel asked if the project would be returning to Design Review.
Mr. Coleman responded that the Committee had considered the changes minor and
indicated the changes could be approved by the City Planner.
Chairman MeNial closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Vallette stated that par~ of her reason for not requiring that
the siding treatment be carried along the sides of the houses was that most of
the lots are 45 x 95 feet with 5-foot side yard setbacks. She thought'that
Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 8, 1992
with the front yard setbacks, the sides of the houses would not be visible
from the street. She said she had visited the project and the curbing and
driveways are already constructed. She estimated there is an average of only
one car length distance between driveways. She felt that with such large
homes on minimal lots the plan will appear as an endless row of two-story
homes and the introduction of single-story houses would create a better
streetscape. She also pointed out that page 189 of the Victoria Community
Plan indicates that each separate community should have 15 percent affordable
housing. She felt inclusion of a single-story product would provide the
affordable housing. She observed that develoAMnent criteria have changed since
the approval of the tract. She noted that 5-foot side yard setbacks were
appropriate when the project was originally approved, but the current code
requires a combined 15-foot side yard setback between adjoining lots.
Conunissioner Melcher noted that both siding and stucco can be seen at the
second floor level on some of the rear elevations. He commented that second
story rear elevations are often visible fro~ surrounding streets and he asked
if the developer would be providing siding on those rear elevations.
Chairman McNiel thought the developer had indicated a willingness to complete
siding on those houses that are side street adjacent or visible from certain
vantage points. He did not feel they were proposing to do so on mid-block
units.
Mr. Ross indicated that was correct.
Commissioner Melcher said he was not opposed to the design, but he did not
feel it would be fair to require other developers to fully side a house if the
requirement were not imposed on this developer. He said the requirement had
already been imposed on other developers. He thought that if the Commission
were to now approve this deviation from policy, future developers could use
essentially the same arguments.
Mr. Ross remarked that when the design review was originally approved two
years ago, it was not Planning Commission policy to require siding be carried
entirely around the building. He noted that the next project which was
approved was required to have siding all around, so the developers eliminated
the siding and only used stucco. He said that =he Design Review Committee
felt that having the majority of the second story elevations with expanded
siding would be sufficient.
Commissioner Melcher was not sure it would be fair to impose the requirement
of including single-story houses because the Con~nission had originally
approved the project with all two-story houses. He observed that =here are
now many subdivisions composed entirely of two-story houses on relatively
small lots and the result is a cookie-cutter look. He noted that the site
immediately to the east looks very crowded because it is all two-story houses
on small lots. He thought that perhaps the Co~nission may wish to consider
making changes to the Develo~nent Code and the various specific plans to
require more variety in order to provide a feeling of more spaciousness. He
supported the idea that row upon row of two-story houses is rather monotonous.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 8, 1992
Commissioner Chitlea felt that valid points had been raised. She asked what
type of material was proposed for the siding.
Mr. Ross responded it is masonite.
Commissioner Chitiea felt that masonite is not a particularly durable material
over the years. She was not sure adding such a material all around the house
would be to the homeowners' advantage in the future.
Commissioner Tolstoy remarked that 360 degree architecture is not only for
those people viewing the houses from the street but also for the benefit of
neighbors viewing the houses from back yards. He also felt the request for
single story houses was valid. He felt tracts should give a visual spacious
look. However, as the tract had been approved two years ago, he felt it would
now be difficult for the Commission to request changes at this time.
Commissioner Vallette observed that it was her understanding that if the
Development Code or 'standards have changed, that the Commission has the
ability to address those issues at the time of an extension request. She
indicated she was not necessarily asking the developer to revise their entire
site plan, but she felt the introduction of a single story product would be
the easiest way to obtain some variation in light of the fact that the
development standards have changed.
Mr. Ross remarked that the development standards had not changed since the
project was approved for Low Medium development. He said the Design Review
for the tract was approved after the Low Medium standards had been revised to
change the side yard setbacks to a total of 15 feet. He said that standard
had been revised after the tract was approved with a conceptual prototype
calling for a 5-foot side yard setback. He said the tract was then exempted
from the requirement because of the approved conceptual prototype.
Brad Bullet, City Planner, stated the extension action was a discretionary
action. He said the Design Review Committee had forwarded the action to the
full Commission with apparent positive recommendation based on the issue that
the applicant was willing to make some adjustments to the elevations as a
compromise. He said the project had been found consistent and acceptable for
approval two years ago. He remarked that the Commission had the right to deny
the extension if the Commissioners determined that the project is not
consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan.
Commissioner Chitiea thought that Commissioner Vallette's concerns were
extremely valid. She observed that as more projects have been built at those
densities, it is resulting in streetscapes which were not envisioned when
proposed. She thought the small lot concept was originally proposed with
affordable housing in mind. She thought that perhaps the Commission should
currently move in the direction of not'permitting such development and she did
not feel the Commission should repeat past mistakes. She remarked that she
was not convinced that masonite should be used on all four sides of a house,
however, she agreed that the enhanced architectural detailing is for the
benefit of neighbors, not Just the streetscape-
Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 8, 1992
Commissioner Vallette asked if the item could be continued to ask the
applicant to address the concerns.
Mr. Buller commented that the item had already been continued from December
17, 1991, to allow the applicant to return to Design Review to address the
concerns or generate enough justification as to why they could not introduce
single story homes. He did not believe the introduction of a single story
product would necessarily make the houses affordable.
Commissioner Vallette expressed empathy for the applicant~ however, she felt
the Commission should consider what will be built in the community. She
suggested that the applicant try to work with the Commission to address the
concerns regarding streetscape or setbacks- She thought that if the applicant
felt single story would not work, possibly a different product t~pe could be
used to vary the streetscape- She suggested that if the applicant were not
willing to make changes, the Commission may wish to deny the time extension.
Chairman McNiel asked if the applicant would agree to a continuance so that
the matter could be returned to Design Review to address some of the concerns.
Ms. Suttner agreed to a continuance.
Mr. Buller stated the matter would not need to be continued to a specific
date. He suggested that the Conunission may wish to direct that the matter be
deferred back to Design Review and be placed back on a Planning Commission
agenda following completion of that process. He asked if the Commissioners
felt the main issue was the intent to break up the streetscape by introduction
of a single story product or product variety if single-story is not viable.
He asked the Commission's direction on siding materials and 360 degree
architecture-
Commissioner Melcher felt that Commissioner Chitiea's concerns about utilizing
the masonite material on all four sides were worth considering. He observed
that the elevations for both Items A and B included both siding and stucco in
a manner that appeared to make sense. He thought that the original intent of
the policy requiring siding on all sides was probably to avoid placing all of
the emphasis on the front of the house. He felt that a combination of
materials and even changing the materials from one side to another could be
designed appropriately. He did not feel it necessary to require that the
siding be utilized on all four sides so long as the houses are well designed.
Commissioner Chitiea felt an emphasis on the quality of materials is more
important than on the quantity.
Motions Moved by Chitlea, seconded to Vallette to continue Time Extension for
Design Review for Tract 13280. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMI4ISSIONERSx CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE
NOES: COMMISSIONERS = NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ~ NONE -carried
Planning Commission Minutes -5- January 8, 1992
STAFF REPORT ?
DATE: January 8, 1992 !~!i~
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Steve Ross, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR DESIGN. REVIEW FOR TRACT 13280 - LUSK
COMPANY - A request for a time extension of the design review
for building elevations and detailed site plan for a recorded
tract map consisting of 145 single family lots on 23.9 acres
of land in the Low Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling
units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at
the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Ellena West - APN:
227-081-06. Related files: Minor Exceptions 89-21 and
90-02. (Continued from December 17, 1991)
BACKGROUND: On December 5, 1991, the Design Review Committee
recommended approval of the proposed architectural modifications. The
Committee also suggested that the applicant explore the possibility of
including single story homes in the tract to meet alternative housing
needs and to break-up the massing of the streetscape.
On December 17, 1991, the Planning Commission continued this item at the
request of the applicant to allow more time to address Design Review
Committee's question about a single-story plan. The applicant has
reviewed the matter and does not believe that there is a market for a
single-story plan in the tract- However, he will be available to
respond to this issue at the January 8, 1992, meeting. Attached for
your consideration is the staff report and Resolution for the time
extension -
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve a
one-year Time Extension for the Design Review for Tract 13280 through
adoption of the attached Resolution-
Respe ly su ed
ler
City Planner
BB:SR:js
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter Addressing Single Story Issue
Exhibit "B" - Staff Report dated December 11, 1991
Resolution of Approval
:'.' OF i].~rlC~O CUcr~omGA
pt.,ANNtNG DIVI~ :N
Jlt,lO2,'1992.Ht
THE LUSK COMPANY tStgljB outJ45t6
INLAND EMPIRE DIVISION
Writers Direct Dal Number
December 31, 1991
City of Rancho Cuca~nga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Attn: Hr. Steven ~ss
Assistant Planner
Re: Design Revtew for Tr. 13280
Victoria Dons
Dear Steve:
Please consider this letter as a follow up to the Destgn
Review ~ettng scheduled for January 8, 1992.
As the Board requested, our Harketing Department has
t 1an
reviewed the possibility of providing a single s ory p
within the Victoria Oowns proj~t. However, ~t is not
perceived that there is a mar~t for a single story plan in
the tract.
Please be advised on January 8, 1992 we wtll request to
roceed under our current approval from the Oecember 5, 1991
~esi.gn Review meeting.
Thank you for your continued cooperation. If ou have any
questions or c~ments, please feel free to cal~me.
Sincerely, /
Project Coordinator
AS:bh/a:asl
cc: ~b johnson
Ernte Stuckt
CYP
3741 Merced Dr, ,. Suit/~eH~Riverside, CA 92503
(714) 354-7700 · FAX (714) 354<)619
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 11, 1991
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Steven Ross, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13280 - LUSK
COMPANY - A request for a time extension of the design review
for building elevations and detailed site plan for a recorded
tract map consisting of 145 single family lots on 23.9 acres
of land in the Low Medium Residential District. (4-8 dwelling
units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at
the northeast corner of Base Line P~)ad and Ellena West -
APN: 227-081-06. Related Files: Minor Exceptions 89-21 and
90-02.
BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 13280 was approved by the Planning
Commission on December 9, 1987, and has since been recorded- The Design
Review for the Tract was approved on December 13, 1989, for a period of
two years, as allowed by the Development Code. Extensions may be
granted in 12-month increments for up to 36 months from the original
approval date.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: Tract 13280 is located in the Vineyards South portion of
the Victoria Planned Comunity- It consists of 145 lots which
range in size from 4,000 to 9,000 square feet- The average lot
size is 5,165 square 'feet and typical lot dimensions are 45 by 90
feet. Required property line setbacks are 5 feet on the sides, 20
feet in front, and 15 feet in the rear.
The approved design review consists of five floor plans, each
having four different elevations · Additionally, enhanced
elevations will be provided on all of the lots which side-on to a
trail or street- This occurs o~ 25 percent of the lots. The
smallest floor plan size is 2,212 square feet, while the largest is
2,628 square feet, excluding the garages, which are approximately
550 square feet each-
B. Development Standards: The development standards which apply to
this project have not changed since it was approved- Although
current development standards require a combined 15-foct side yard
setback, the design review was approved with 5-foot Sideyards
because the tract, approved prior to the revised standards, was
designed and approved for a unit prototype utilizing 5-foot
setbacks ·
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TE FOR IT 13280 - LUSK COMPANY
December 11, 1991
Page 2
C. Architectural Modifications: The applicant has proposed a number
of architectural modifications to the elevations. The changes will
be reviewed by the Design Review Committee on December 5, 1991.
FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The Commission must make all of the following
findings in order to approve this application:
A. There have been no significant changes in the Land Use Element of
the General Plan, Development Code, or character of the area within
which the project is located that would cause the approved project
to become inconsistent or non-conforming-
B. The granting of an extension would not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve a
one-year time extension for the Design Review for Tract 13280 through
adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval.
Respectf y~
BB:SR/jfs
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Applicant
Exhibit "B" - Location Map
Exhibit "C" - Site Plan
Exhibit "D" - Typical Elevations
Resolution of Approval for Time Extension
i Hj:, LL,~K LU31PAN
INLAND EMPIRE DIVISION
'October 16, 1991
W~ers Dir~t D~I Num~r
(714) 3~-
Mr. Steve Ross, Assistant Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807
RE: Victoria Downs
Case Extensions
Dear Mr. Ross:
Enclosed is Check 430128 in the amount of $685 to extend the
Minor Exception 89-21 and Design Review DR 90-1027 in the
following amounts:
Design Review $549
Minor Exception 136
$685
Per our telephone conversation on September 17, 1991, my
understanding is that you will look into incorporating the Minor
Exception under the Design Review case.
Thank you for your time and cooperation in assisting me with the
Victoria Project.
Sincerely,
THE LUSK COMPANY CITY OF
OCT Z 1 1991
Anna Suttner AM
Project Coordinator
Inland Empire Division ~18191~1H1~/li~18141~i6
AS:cm
Enclosure
c: Rob Johnson w/o'enc.
File: 184-Case Extensions
A240
3N1 Mem~ O~ · Sure H · Rl~i~, CA 92503
g14) 354-77~ · F~ (71~ 3~-0619
CITY OP"RANCHO..-CUCAMONGA ITEM: D~ 1~2~O
PLANNING' DIVISION TrrLF~ ~,r~- P~-~ ,
EXHIBIT' C' I SCALE: -----'
/?/'
C, l'Y OP"' RA:NCH0-'CUCAMONGA ITEM: D ~ 132 ~>0
PLANNING"DIVISION 'rrrLE: 5,TE Pt.^n
EXHIBIT: (~' SCALE:
I'L
EXHIB:[T/~/,'~ PLAN l C, TYI~Ic'AL
EXHIBIT D
EXHI~T D
EXHIBIT
EXHIBIT D~,~/
EXHIBIT S//~ i
EXHIBIT D~~'~I/Pumd ejC TVI, m~^L
EXHIBIT
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION
FOR THE DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13280, LOCATED WITHIN THE
VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
BASE LINE ROAD AND ELLENA WEST IN THE LOW-MEDIUM
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-081-06.
WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the
above-described project, pursuant to Section 17,020,100.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the
above-described Design Review for Tract 13280.
WHEREAS, Minor Exceptions 89-21 and 90-02 will be granted extensions
by the City Planner.
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the
following findings:
A. That prevailing economic conditions have caused a
distressed market climate for development of the
project.
B. That current economic, marketing, and inventory
conditions make it unreasonable to develop the
project at this time.
C. That strict enforcement of the conditions of
approval regarding expirations would not be
consistent with the intent of the Development Code.
D. That the granting of said time extension will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare
or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grants a
time extension for:
Pro~ect Applicant Expiration
Design Review Lusk Company December 13, 1992
for Tract 13280
SECTION 3: The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the
adoption of this Resolution.
pLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TIME EXTENSION TT 13280 - LUSK COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 2
ApPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF MARCH 1992.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the llth day of March 1992, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A TIME EXTENSION
FOR THE DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13280, LOCATED WITHIN THE
VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
BASELINE ROAD AND ELLENA WEST IN THE LOW-MEDIUM
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-081-06.
A. Recital~
(i) The Lusk Company has filed for a time extension for the Design
Review for Tract 13280. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject request
for a time extension is referred to as "the application."
(ii) On December 5, 1991, the Design Review Committee approved minor
revisions to the approved elevations, and also requested that the applicant
explore the possibility of including single story homes in the tract to break
up the massing of homes along the streetscape and to possibly provide
alternative housing.
(iii) On December 18, 1991, the Planning Commission continued the
application to their meeting on January 8, 1992, to allow the applicant
additional time to study the possibility of incorporating a single story floor
plan.
(iv) On January 8, 1992, the Planning Commission continued the item
to an undetermined date to allow the applicant to return to the Design Review
Committee to discuss the introduction of a single story floor plan to affect
overall massing of the homes and the resulting streetscape, the project's
design with respect to the City'e architectural policies, and the durability
of the proposed masonite siding.
(v) At the Design Review Committee meeting on February 6, 1992, the
applicant did not present any new information or alternatives for Committee
consideration. After discussing the project's design, the Committee
determined that the project should be returned to the full Planning Commission
for review.
(vi) On the 8th day of January, and continued to the llth day of
March, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a
duly noticed public meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on
that date.
(vii) 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:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DENIAL OF TIME EXTENSION TT 13280 - LUSK
March 11, 1992
Page 2
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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission,
during the above-referenced public meeting on March 11, 1991, including
written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this
Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property generally located on
the north side of Base Line Road between Ellena East and Ellena West, and is
presently improved with streets, curbs, gutters, and perimeter walls.
b. The application contemplates the development of 145 single
family residences ranging from 2,212 to 2,628 square feet in size , all two-
story, and having two and three car garages, with an average lot size of 5,165
square feet.
c. The application as proposed would be materially and
aesthetically detrimental to the City as well as the residents of the proposed
subdivision for the reasons as follows:
(1) The overall massing of the two-story homes leads to
the creation of an unpleasant, imposing streetscape because the homes are out
of scale with the lots.
(2) The homes are generally plotted at the minimum
setbacks, which is typically only 10 feet apart and as little as 7 or 8 feet,
when chimneys, eaves, and other architectural projections are taken into
account, leading to an unpleasant living environment for future residents.
(3) The number of three car garages and their required
driveways on the narrow 45 foot wide lots allows for very little on-street
parking, leading to a streetscape dominated by the garage and the automobile.
(4) The front yard setback of the homes has very little
variety, which exacerbates the massive appearance of the homes in relation to
each other and the overall streetscape appearance.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced public meeting and upon the specific findings of
facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and
concludes as follows:
a. That the proposed project is not consistent with the
objectives of the General Plan; and
b. That the proposed design is not in accord with the
objectives of the Victoria Community Plan, the Development Code, nor the
purposes of the district in which the site is located.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DENIAL OF TIME EXTENSION TT 13280 - LUSK
March 11, 1992
Page 3
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby denies the application.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF MARCH 1992.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the llth day of March 1992, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 11, 1992
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer
BY: Wil 1 ie Val buena, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: VACATION OF A PORTION OF STRANG LANE - A request to vacate a
portion of Strang Lane, 1 ocated east of Camel fan Street,
approximately 30 feet wide and 150 feet long (APN: 1061-271-05)
BACKfi~OUNE) AND ANALYSIS On May 2, 1990, the City Council adopted Resolution
No. 90-186 designating Strang Lane as a private street and exempting the
abutting properties from the requirement to dedicate public street right-of-
way. On January 28, 1992, the property owners of 8817 Strang Lane, Gary and
Janine Thompson, submitted an appl icatton for vacation of an existing
irrevocable offer of street dedication fronting their property. With the
designation of Strang Lane as a private street under Ordinance 58-C, offers of
street dedication can be vacated and as a result of this, the applicants are
now requesting that the vacation occur. The vacation of the remaining offers
of dedication along the street will be processed in the future when requested
by the adjacent property owners.
The subject irrevocable offer of street dedication is 30 feet wide and 150
feet long and is located on the south side of Strang Lane, east of Carnel tan
Street as shown on Exhibit "B".
RECON~ENE)ATION Staff recommends that the Planning Con~ission make the finding
that the street vacation conforms with the General Plan. This finding will be
forwarded to the City Council for further processing and final approval.
Respectful ly submitted,
Dan james
Senior Civil Engineer
Dj :WV: dl w
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Map
IT]~4 B
· . (~9,,. tl Kin n
~ "~ _ · %,,1, O°'%.i ~' Rancgn Rd
AIS ~ i ' Caballero Drive St, ~ ~l~nd
' ~ O~ HIdden
~ R~ad ct. n Farm Citatl
La Senda L. Rd. Ci
Vlcara Drive ~ Vicara Strana
Ln. ~
Whirlawa Whirlawa' awa
/ St. E St.
" " ~; Camellia Dahler Dr.
Hillside Road
Orchard :hoSt. Rancho
= St.
FLOYD f~
B~chw.
~H
Dr. >
d St. Wits
~ Thoro g ~ ~ __nJ Ave, Manz~ __ Dr,
za ta Golder
~ rltliant Ln, ~
;treet ~ ~ ~ Dr,. : Golder St.
~ Golden
}wer Ave. ~umalo ~r St,
~ Quarterhorse ; _ c
Banyan Street
andarin .... t-
C~ OF ~: ~NG
R~CHO CUC~ONGA' ~,,, VICINITY NAP
~G~~G D~ON ~~~ ~'~
CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 11, 1992
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Rick Gomez, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON REQUEST FROM PRIMO MORALES, CHO LITTLE
LEAGUE, FOR WAIVER OF CITY REQUIREMENT DOOR
STORAGE
On February 5, 1992, the City Council heard Rancho Little League's
request to place two metal cargo containers on Chino Basin
Municipal Water District property adjacent to Cucamonga Elementary
School. At that meeting, the City Council waived the Conditional
Use Permit (CUP) fees and directed staff to guide the Rancho Little
League through the CUP process. In addition, the City Council
requested staff to again contact the Cucamonga School District to
discuss the placement of these containers on school property.
A meeting was scheduled on February 13 with Mr. Phillip Tenpenny,
Acting Superintendent, Cucamonga School District, Mr. Morales, and
myself to discuss the possibility of placing the containers on
Cucamonga Elementary School property. Mr. Tenpenny placed the item
on the March 5, 1992 agenda for Board discussion. Fortunately,
Rancho Little League's request was granted, therefore, they are
withdrawing their Conditional Use Permit application.
If you should have any questions or need any additional
information, please give me a call at any time.
RG/ko
CC: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 11, 1992
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Rick Gomez, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON REQUEST FROM PRIMO MORALES, CHO LITTLE
LEAGUE, FOR WAIVER OF CITY REQUIREMENT TDOOR
STORAGE
On February 5, 1992, the City Council heard Rancho Little League's
request to place two metal cargo containers on Chino Basin
Municipal Water District property adjacent to Cucamonga Elementary
School. At that meeting, the City Council waived the Conditional
Use Permit (CUP) fees and directed staff to guide the Rancho Little
League through the CUP process. In addition, the City Council
requested staff to again contact the Cucamonga School District to
discuss the placement of these containers on school property.
A meeting was scheduled on February 13 with Mr. Phillip Tenpenny,
Acting Superintendent, Cucamonga School District, Mr. Morales, and
myself to discuss the possibility of placing the containers on
Cucamonga Elementary School property. Mr. Tenpenny placed the item
on the March 5, 1992 agenda for Board discussion. Fortunately,
Rancho Little League's request was granted, therefore, they are
withdrawing their Conditional Use Permit application.
If you should have any questions or need any additional
information, please give me a call at any time.
RG/ko
CC: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 11 , 1992
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Tom Grahn, Assistant Planner.
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92-09 - RANCHO LITTLE LEAGUE - A
request to place two storage bins on the south side of Salina
Street, east of Malvern Avenue to use as a snack stand and to
store sports equipment used on the adjoining baseball fields
- APN: 209-041-47.
Rancho Little League has requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit
for the installation of two temporary storage bins on the Chino Basin
Municipal Water District property. As of the writing of this report,
Rancho Little League had not obtained permission from the Water District
for placement of the bins. Therefore, staff recommends that this item
be continued to March 25, 1992.
Res ly submitted,
BB:TG: gs
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~=~:!
STAFF REPORT :
DATE: March 11 · 1992
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planninq Commission
FROM: Brad Bullet, City Planner
BY: 8teven Ross· Ass&stant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTkL ASSESSbtENT AND VESTING TENTATY/E TPjkCT 15354 -
WXLLIthvl LYON COMP/~NY - ~ residential subdivision and desi~
rev&ew of 155 condo~n~um units on 12,4 acres of land &n the
Hedium Residential D~strict (8-14 dwellinq units per acre) of
the V~ctoria Planned Co~nlty, located at the northeast
corner of W~druff Place and Kenyon Way - ~N: 227-01~-26,
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested by Applicant: Approval of the subdivision map,
site plan, grading plan, landscape plan, and building elevations and
issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration.
B. Project DensitX: 12.5 dwelling units per acre.
C- Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Vacant land and Highland Avenue; Community Facility
within the Victoria Planned Community and future Route 30
Freeway
South - Vacant land and park; School and Park sites within the
Victoria Planned Community
East - Greenway and single family residential; Low-Medium
Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) within the
Victoria Planned Community
West - Shopping center; Village Commercial within the Victoria
Planned Community
D. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Medium Residential; Victoria Planned Community
North - Low-Medium Residential; Victoria Planned Community and
Foothill Freeway
South - Low-Medium Residential; Victoria Planned Community
East - Low-Medium Residential; Victoria Planned Community
West - Medium-High Residential; Victoria Planned Community
E- Site Characteristics: The site is currently vacant and void of any
significant land forms or vegetation- Adjacent streets (Highland
Avenue, Kenyon Way, and Woodruff Place) have been constructed with
curb and gutter.
ITEM D
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VTT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON CO.
March 11, 1992
Page 2
F. Parking Calculations: Parking Garage Garage
Number of Number Required Total Req ' d Garage Spaces Spaces
Bedrooms of Units Per Unit Req ' d Spaces/unit Req ' d Provided
Two 100 1.8 180 I 100 145
Three 55 2 - 0 110 2 I 10 110
.25 39 -
Guest __ ~
TOTAL 155 329 220 255
Total Parking Required 329
Total Parking Provided 333
ANALYS I S:
A. General: The proposed tract is consistent with the standards and
guidelines of the Victoria Community Plan. The 155 condominium
units are located within 32 three-, five-, and six-unit buildings-
The nine triplexes are concentrated along the south and east sides
of the site to provide a density transition, while the five- and
six-unit buildings are located farther from the more sensitive
single family residential areas-
Although the project is a Vesting Tentative Tract and is exempt from
the new multiple family development standards, the applicant has
worked closely with staff to make the project comply with the new
requirements- The site is designed to provide numerous greenways
from the buildings to the various amenities, including three
BBQ/pi cnic areas, two tot lots, large open lawn areas, and a
recreation building with a pool and spa · Significant entry
statements have been provided at Kenyon Way and "A" Street by using
decorative pilasters, enhanced paving, and dense landscaping along
the drive aisle which connects these two entries and bisects the
project site- The applicant is also providing laundry hook-ups and
lockable storage space for each of the units.
The Victoria Community Plan requires that 25 percent of all dwelling
units within Medium, Low-Medium, and Low Residential zones be
provided with storage areas for parking Recreational Vehicles ·
Because storage spaces are not provided on the project site, a
condition has been added requiring 39 off-site RV storage spaces (in
addition to those currently available in Victoria Station) prior to
the release of occupancy for the final 25 percent of the units
within the project-
B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (Vallette,
~elcher, Coleman) last reviewed the project on February 6, 1992, and
recommended approval subject to the following conditions of
app rova 1:
pLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VTT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON CO-
March 11, 1992
Page 3
1. The six-unit buildings should have a mix of the two- and three-
gabled rear elevations. Where two six-unit buildings face each
other, care should be taken to vary the elevations.
2- The landscaping around the pool area should be very rich to
provide a unique environment and to help buffer the area from
the adjacent drive aisles. Various finished grade elevations
should be utilized around the pool area to add interest.
3. A special landscaping treatment should be applied between the
two project entries along the central drive aisle. Enhanced
paving should be carried along the length of this special
corridor.
C. Neighborhood Meetings: Two neighborhood meetings were held by the
applicant to get input from surrounding residents- These meetings
were held on September 9 and December 14, 1991. To ensure that
their concerns were addressed, residents were invited to participate
in the design review process and to comment on site design and
architecture- The primary concern expressed related to transition
of the proposed project to surrounding land uses, particularly the
single family tract to the east (Victoria Heights). The project
went through numerous revisions, with the final design before you
tonight- To address the transition concern, the applicant increased
the use of triplex unit types along the easterly tract boundary in
order to blend with the existing two-story single family units
directly to the east-
D- Technical Review and Grading Committees: The Committees recommended
approval of the project as conditioned by the Resolutions of
Approval.
E- Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been
completed by the applicant. In completing Part II of the
Environmental Checklist, staff required an acoustical analysis to
determine the noise impact of the future Route 30 Freeway. The
analysis recommended a 6-foot high sound wall on Highland Avenue and
8-foot high sound attenuation barriers on the north side of the
private open space for the four northerly buildings- A sketch of
the required barrier is shown on the site plan (Exhibit "D"). The
incorporation of the barriers into the project design will mitigate
the sound created by the future freeway to a less than significant
level. Therefore, staff has determined that the project will not
have a significant impact on the environment.
FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The project is consistent with the Victoria
Community Plan an~ the General Plan- The project will not be
detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant environmental
impacts- In addition, the proposed use, together with the recommended
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VTT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON CO.
March 11, 1992
Page 4
conditions of approval, is in compliance with the applicable provisions
of the Victoria Planned Community, the Development Code, and City
Standards ·
CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in
the Inland Valley Dail~ Bulletin newspaper, the property has been
posted, and notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of
the project site- The developer conducted two neighborhood meetings-
Staff has received a letter of opposition to the project which is
included for your review (Exhibit "A" )-
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Vesting Tentative Tract 15354, and the design review thereof, through
adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval and issuance of a
mitigated Negative Declaration-
Res lly sub ' ,
BB: SR/j fs
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter of Opposition
Exhibit "B" - Location Map
Exhibit "C" - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit "D" - Detailed Site Plan
Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Landscape Plan
Exhibit "F" - Conceptual Grading Plan
Exhibit "G" - Details
Exhibit "H" - Entry Renderings
Exhibit "I" - Elevations
Exhibit "J" - Floor Plans
Resolution of Approval for V~E 15354
Resolution of Approval for V~T 15354 DR
25311 clemson dr
Planning Commission
City of Rancho Cucamonga ~ Rancho Cucamonga CA 91701
P O Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 Oct 04,1991
Dear Commissioners,
We moved to Victoria Height on July 1989, we came here in
the hope that we would find a better living environment.
We would like to express our sincere worriness over the two
tentative projected residential tract #15354 and tract #15289.
These two projects will directly affect our beautiful and nice community
that we did our best to keep it nice.
The followings are our major reason about such concerns:
1. Potential decrease in our home/property value
2. E~cessive traffic and parking problems in our neighborhood
3. Additional over crowding in our already crowded schools
4.. Probability of increased crime due to the number of units and
projected low sales prices not in accordance with the purchase
prices in the surrounding neighborhoods
Please be aware of our concerns on the above and we
are absolutely against these types of projects. Due to our
inconvenient job locations, we cannot promptly participate all
the meetings in this regard. Therefore, we have to write you this letter
to express our deep concerns over this matter.
Sincerely yours,
' ~'~V~e Liang ,~/
""~ ,EX'/t/~'/7 "z~ -/"
' '
;: ; .............../ .;/i! :; "'; ";:~ :*' '/': ,-~'* ''* '* * '; "
:: i ; ' ;"i.!.. ~ -- ~'~ ~.'/"--"{""~ ".;~!c!~i ~ ':""",r- *:J,- Y' .
" ' ~ i ~ ~ ~ i ~,
:.. \~-;_..=~.~'i~E
:::: :(L~, ~' ' t~'
', ', ~ e,,, :
:::: , .... <~ ?___.....--,,, ,.. i
::
::
:: ' ~ ] .' / X/'
::.~ ...........:::::::::::::::::::::::: ....~.:,~...._ ~
::~ -
,?' .,..}.."
· ,:',:"~""""-.. ,-"" ~,, i i i i i_. ;~
:::::::::::::::::::::;""- ,, ,,::;:"--
,,--_----:
.i ' '--,::. -/...-~ .~...~:.,.,..... ..
,- -.. _ --. ,:,' ,.;:::.-., ',~-.
.-, , ~., .... ,.
,. ' ~ ~.: ,/2 ,, ,' ," . · ' % ' '~::::
~ ! _,,,,' - ,,,, · ,,,,,~ - :,.. ,;,' . ,;,,,, ~ -
[i " ' -"' ""', ', '~:' ' "J ,,';" ';' ""'~- - "! ""' ' -
.... ,.- ., '-~. ~ % .',' ,2' -.- ;;
,. -..',,J .,,% '-,, -'.:::. ,',,-. ,- '-.. ,, ,. .,'
;" ,. ,-' -7 ',,, --, ,? '.. v ,' ,, .'
i[ ', -~' ', "'. "'--.' " -"':: ,',' ,','
,, . -~.:.. > . '.,\ _, .~ - .. ,, ,, ,, ·
..... , ... .;, -. . , , , .
.' ~ ',,'~ ~ '-~:::~: ~,, '...- '.:. ,,, ,,..'
:',
,. ,. .-,, ~, ,,,. ,, ,. -..- . , ., .-
,,,. x.. -~.,,. , t~ . , ,,, ,,
:i ,'- - -"' ,"-- ,"' ~-, .:"/~
,.~ ".,-.... !
..:
,,.. ,
:: ::', /
',",~ ~
',', ::' ' r,
: ::: _ ~ ~
i ~. ///
.,:.
; . - - - .............. . ."-::.':
, .. , ,,,, ~
::," ,.'.,' ....--' ':,7
s .....-,,,,,,...-.:.. ---:~-.. ...... ......--..,.:/~
~ "' '- ," ," ~'~'t,, ~ ""'::"'" ': ,: """"' ':,""'i ""
...... ...: ~,,,,,, ,_.--,, ,.':.~.. / / /' --'~ ~ q~
i: i " " '~..~ ~, ': ~:,.',','-,: ....."/' ' ~' 'Z
i!::: .....""""""""- ....::"' ,..:::"/.."'.."',- ~. ;> ~
"" ~, ": '/ / ;""~X~tl ~ T' "F I
., ,,,, /, .,' ,.'
'ONI S:=!IlNt'tVII/IOO'NOA"I
"ONI S:alJ, INfiMIMiO0 NOA"I
'ONI I.LINtIINIMO0 NOJ~'I
"ONI ~I.LINI"tlRIIRIOO NOA"I
'ONI S:all NOA"I
'ONI IN NOA"!
'ONI $~!.1. 0 NO~"I
H,I.I:ION SOlaV,ANIA
· :::)HI ,LINGWHO::) NO~'I
z
· ONI $a!,,LINrlIRilRIOO NOA"!
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE pLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO- 15354, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
KENYON WAY AND WOODRUFF PLACE IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE VICTORIA
pLANNED COMMUNITY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
- APN: 227-011-26
A. Becitals.
(i) The William Lyon Company has filed an application for the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15354 as described in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract
Map request is referred to as "the application-"
(ii) On the llth day of March 1992, 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.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
B. Resolutio_.__ n.
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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced public hearing on March 11, 1992, including
written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this
Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) The application applies to property located at the
northeast corner of Kenyon Way and Woodruff Place and is presently unimproved;
and
(b) The property to the north of the subject site is the future
Foothill Freeway (Route 30), the property to the south of the site consists of
a park and elementary school site, the property to the east is single family
residential, and the property to the west is a shopping center.
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:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON CO.
March 11, 1992
Page 2
(a) The vesting tentative tract is consistent with the General
Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; and
(b) The design or improvements of the vesting tentative tract
is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plane; and
(c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed; and
(d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife
or their habitat; and
(e) The vesting tentative tract is not likely to cause serious
public health problems; and
(f) The design. of the vesting tentative tract will not conflict
with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access
through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision.
4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has
been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues a mitigated
Negative Declaration.
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.
Planninq Division
1) To mitigate significant adverse noise impacts
from the future Route 30 Freeway, the applicant
shall construct a 6-foot sound attenuation
barrier along Highland Avenue and an 8-foot
sound attenuation barrier along the north patio
walls of the northerly units in the four
buildings adjacent to Highland Avenue. The
patio sound attenuation barriers may be waived
if an agreement is reached between Caltrans,
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the
developer, that adequate sound attenuation
barriers will be installed near the freeway
travel lanes. A final acoustical report shall
be submitted for review and approval by the
City Planner prior to the issuance of building
permits- The report shall identify mitigation
measures which shall be incorporated into the
final construction documents-
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON CO.
March 11, 1992
Page 3
2) Prior to the release of occupancy for the final
25 percent of the units within this project, a
minimum of 39 recreational vehicle storage
spaces shall be provided at a facility within
the Victoria Planned Community, in addition to
any existing spaces within the Victoria Station
I.
3) Pursuant to provisions of California Public
Resources Code Section 21089(b), this
application shall not be operative, vested or
final, nor will building permits be issued or a
map recorded, until (1) the Notice of
Determination (NOD) regarding the associated
environmental action is filed and posted with
the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Bernardino; and (2) any and all
required filing fees assessed pursuant to
California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4,
together with any required handling charges,
are paid to the County Clerk of the County of
San Bernardino- The applicant shall provide
the Planning Department with a stamped and
conformed copy of the NOD together with a
receipt showing that all fees have been paid.
In the event this application is determined
exempt from such filing fees pursuant to the
provisions of the California Fish and Game
Code, or the guidelines promulgated thereunder,
except for payment of any required handling
charge for filing a Certificate of Fee
Exemption, this condition shall be deemed null
and void.
Enqineerinq Division
1) Pedestrian crossings of project driveways shall
be concrete ~ith landscaped medians and pavers
terminating behind the pedestrian crossing.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution-
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS llTH DAY OF MARCH 1992.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON CO.
March 11, 1992
Page 4
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Bullet, 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 llth day of March 1992, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS-
PROJECT #: VE-,~ r/iv(- 7"b~,7'~77v~ 7,~6r 15 ~"':~
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT: A/ILL./p/r7
LOCATION:
Those items checked are Conditions of Approval.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (714) 989-1861, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. Time Limits
t/~1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are / /
not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval.
2. Development/Design Review shall be approved prior to ! / , .J /
3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted subject to the approval of / / ..-
4. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, / /
participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of
a fire station to serve the develo~T~nt. The station shall be iocatecI, designed, and built to
all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the
District's property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the Distdct in
accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all
applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be forTned by the District and the developer
by the time recordaticn ol the final map occurs.
I//' 5. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes /
first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Melio-Roos
Community Facilities District lor the construction and maintenance of necessary school
facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community
Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the
project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the final map
or the issuance ol building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school
district has not formed a Melio-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from
the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance
of Irxjilding permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void.
SC - 2/9! ~1 of 12
CornpleUon
~is ~ion sha{{ ~ wa~ ~ lhe ~ ~eceives noli~ thai the appl~anl and a{{ alleged
~{ disffi~s have enie~ imo an ag~ee~ to pdvais{y a~m~date any a~ al[ sc~ool
impa~s as a re~ of this pmj~.
~ 6. Pr~r to retardation of the final m~ or pr~r to issua~e of ~ildi~ ~s when ~ map is / /
involved, w~en ceffif~at~ from the affe~ water di~ that adequate sewer and water
facil~ies are or will ~ avail~le to sere the pro~s~ project shall ~ submi~ed to the
Depanme~ of Com~n~y Deve~pmem. Such le~er must have been issued by the water
distr~ within 90 days prior to final m~ a~mval in the ~se of su~is~n or prior to issua~e
of ~s in the case of all other res~emial pmj~s.
B. SIte Deve~ent
~ 1. ~e s~e shall ~ develo~ a~ maintain~ in a~ffia~e with the ~mved plans wh~h / /
i~lude site plans, arch~e~ural elevat~ns, e~edor rotedais a~ ~m, la~ing, s~n
prOram, a~ gradi~ on file in the Planni~ D~is~n, the ~nd~ns ~main~ herein,
Deve~pment Code regulat~, a~
S~c~ Plan a~
Planned Communi~.
2. Pr~r to any use of the pmj~ s~e or ~sine~ a~i~ bei~ ~m~n~d thereon, all / /
Co~ions of ~roval shall ~ ~mptet~ to the Bti~a~ion of the C~ Planner.
~ 3. ~upa~yofthefacil~yshall~t~m~eu~ilsuchtimasallUn~o~Bui~i~C~ea~ / /
State Fire Ma~hall's r~ulations have ~en ~li~ w~h. P~r to ~pa~y. plans shall
~ subm~ to the Ra~ Cu~m~a Fire Pmt~n Dist~ a~ t~ Buildi~ a~ Safety
D~is~n to show ~mplian~. The ~i~i~ shall ~ ins~ for m~lia~e pdor to
~upa~y.
~ 4. Revis~ s~e plans a~ ~ildi~ elevat~ i~rati~ all ~ns of ~val shall be / /__
subm~ed for Ci~ Planner review a~ ~roval pmr to issuan~ of bui~i~ ~its.
/ 5. All s~e, grading, la~, i~at~n, a~ street i~vemem plans shall be ~rdinat~ lor / /
~nsiste~y pdorto issua~e of any pe~s (~ as gradi~. tree remval, e~roachmem
~i~i~, etc.), or prior to final m~ ~val in t~ ~e of a ~stom ~t su~is~n, or
~mved use has ~m~d, whoever ~ms li~.
/ 6. A~mval of this re~e~ shall ~t wa~e ~~ w~h all s~ of the Deve~pmnt / /
~e. all other a~abl C~ ~dina~s. a~ a~i ~mmn~ Plans or S~cffic
Plans in effe~ at the tim of Bui~i~ Pe~ ~a~.
~ 7. A detail~ on-s~e I~Mi~ ~n shall ~ rev~w~ a~ ~ved by t~ C~y P~nner a~ / /
She~'s Department (989~11 ) pdor to t~ is~a~ of ~i~i~ pe~s. Such plan shall
i~ate ~e. illuminat~n, ~n, ~igffi. a~ mt~ of shildi~ ~ a ~t to a~ersely
affe~ adjacem prodhies.
/8. If ~ cemral~ trash re~a~es are ~vid~, all trash ~-up shall be for i~i~al un~s /
w~h all r~e~acles shie~ from ~ view.
9. Trash r~e~acle(s) are r~uir~ a~ shall ~et C~ ~a~a~. ~e final ~s~n, ~t~ns / /
a~ the num~r of trash re~ac~s s~ll ~ su~ to C~ Pin~r rev~ a~ ~roval
p~r to issuan~ of ~i~i~ ~s.
~ 10. All gmu~-mum~ util~ a~nena~es s~h as tran~o~m. AC ~n~ense~, etc., shall /
~ ~t~ out of publ~ view a~ adffiuate~ ~reen~ through the use of a ~m~nation of
~rete or ma~n~ walls, ~i~, an~or la~i~ to the satisfa~n of the C~y
Planner.
~ - 2/91 2 or 12 ~~
/ 11. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with / J
the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map.
12, All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, ---/
including proper illumination.
13. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and
weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for City
Planner review and approval priorto approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map ano prior
to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct
all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements.
14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping of equine ---J
animals where zoning requirements forthe keeping ot said animals have been met. Individual
lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity
of appealing to boards of directors or homeowners' associations for amendments to the
CC&Rs.
i/' 15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation o! the / / .
Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or
prior to the issuance of building permits. whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be
provided to the City Engineer·
1/"" 16. Allparkways, openareas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained bytheproperty /
owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof ol this
landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits.
17. Solar access easements shall be dedicated lor the purpose of assuming that each lot or ----/--J--
dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of
a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions tot
the subdivision which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation ot the final map or
issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting ol
shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, except lor utility wires and
similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.060-G-2.
18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shall be developed and / -/ -
maintained in accordance with the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No.
· Any further modifications to the site including. but not limited to, exterior alterations and/or
intedor alterations which affect the exterior of the buildings or structures, removal of landmark
trees, demolition, reiocation, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or changes to the site,
shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic
Preservation Commission review and approval.
C, Building Design
v/ 1. An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units ---/J'-
and lor heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are
demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the
time of initial development shall be supplemented with solar heating. Details shall be
included in the building plans and shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval
prior to the issuance of building permits.
2. All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural
treatment, detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to City Planner
review and approval pdor to issuance of building permits.
SC - 2/91 3 of 12 ~Z~ /
Co~e~o~
l,'/''' 3. Statelard patio ~vSr plafis ~or use by 1~ Hom~fiers' Associal~n s~tll be subm~ed ~or /
~ Plantier a~ Bui~i~ ~ial revitW i~ a~provtl p~r lo issUt~ o[ ~i~i~ ~s.
4. All r~f ~udena~es, indudi~ air ~R~nem a~ other r~f mum~ equip~nt a~lor / J
proje~ns, shall ~ shie~ trom view a~ the sound ~ffer~ from adjacent properties a~
streets as rffiuir~ by the Planni~ Divis~n. Such screening shall ~ amhite~urally
imegrat~ w~h the ~i~i~ des~n a~ ~nst~ to the smisfa~n of the C~y Planner.
Details shall ~ includ~ in ~ildi~ plans.
D. Pa~lng a~ Veh~ulr Ac~ (in~i~e details on ~ulting plans)
1.All ~ffii~ ~t la~ isla~s shall have a mini~m outs~e dimens~n of 6 leet a~ shall /
comain a 12-i~h walk adja~m to the pa~i~ stall (i~di~ ~).
/2. Te~ur~ ~estrian pm~ays a~ te~ur~ Byemere across cir~lat~n aisles shall be J /
prov~ed thmug~ut the developmere to ~nn~ ~e Ili~un~i~i~s with o~n space~
plaza~recreal~nal uses.
/ 3. All pa~ing ~aces shall ~ ~uble stdp~ ~r C~y sta~a~s a~ all drNeway aisles, /J~
emra~es, a~ ex~s shall ~ ~d~ ~r C~ ~a~ards.
/4. All un~s shall ~ pmv~ed w~h garage ~r o~ners ~ driveways are less than 18 leet in / /
depth lrom ba~ ot s~ewalk.
/5. ~e Covenanls, Co~itions a~ Rest~ns shall restd~ the storage of r~reat~nal veh~les / /
on this s~e unless they are t~ pd~iBI ~ur~ ot tran~n tor the owner a~ prohib~
pa~i~ on inter~r cir~lat~n aisles olher than in des~nat~ vis~or ~ing areas.
/6. Plans for any se~r~y gates shall ~ subm~ tor I~ C~y Planner, CiW E~i~er, a~ / /
Ra~ Cu~m~a Fire Prol~n Dist~ reviw a~ a~mval ~orto is~a~e ol ~ildi~
~s.
E. ~n~plng (tor publlc~ malmain~ i~ffi ari, mir Io ~lon N.)
1. A delail~ la~a~ and i~al~n plan, i~ing s~ plami~ a~ ~el ~me la~sc~ J J
i~ in the ~se ot res~emial deve~p~m, s~ll ~ Fepar~ by a I~n~d la~
arch~ and sub~ tor C~ Ran~r rev~ a~ a~val ~rto t~ is~an~ ol ~ildi~
~s or p~r final m~ ~val in I~ ~se ol a ~om ~t su~Nision.
2. Existi~ trees ~ir~ to ~ ~ese~ in p~ s~ll ~ ~tffied w~h a ~nst~n ~mer . J /
in a~ ~a~ w~h I~ Mu n~l ~ ~n 19. ~. 110, a~ ~ ~t~ on t~ gradi~ plans,
~e ~at~n ot those trees to ~ ~ese~ in pla~ a~ n~ ~t~ns for transplam~ trees
shall ~ s~n on t~ detai~ la~s~ pins. ~ ~m shall follow all ol the a~rist's
r~m~at~ns r~affii~ pre~wat~n, tran~lami~ a~ tdmmi~ metes.
~ 3. Aminimumof ~ lrees~rgmssacm,~ds~olffielol~wi~s~es, shall~Pmvid~ J /
w~hin the proj~: ~ % - ~- i~h ~x or la~er, J0 % - 3~ in~ ~x or la~er,
( o % - 24- i~h ~x or ~r, ~O % - 15~al~n, a~ ~ % - S galen.
/ 4. A miniram ot ~O % ol trees plam~ within the Fo~ shall ~ ~imn s~e trees- J /
24-in~ ~x or la~er.
~ 5. ~lhin paffii~ Iols, trees shall ~ plam~ at a rate ot one 15~al~n tree for eveW three / /_
pa~i~ stalls, sufficiem to shade 50% ol lhe ~i~ area at ~lar ~n on August 21.
6. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one
tree per 30 linear feet of building. / "' j
I//' 7. Aiiprivate slope banks 5 leet or less in vertical height andof5:l orgreaterslope,but lessthan /./-----
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.
I// 8. Aiiprivate slopes in excess of 5 feet, but lessthan8 feet invertical height andof2:l orgreater //
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 eq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger
size shrub per each 100 eq. It. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope
banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and of 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.
9. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continu- / /
ously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit
is sold and occupied by the buyer. Priorto releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection
shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory
I/.'/ 10. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are respen- / /
sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site. as well as contiguous
planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from
weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive
regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or
decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage.
11. Front yard landscaping shall be required per the Development Code and/or / J .
· This requirement shall be in addition to the required
street trees and slope planting.
v/' 12. The final design ol the pedmoter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be J ·
included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and
approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be
required by the Engineering Division.
13. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meander- ---/ /
ing sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping. is required along
J,// 14. 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.
I,'/'' 15. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, / /
the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
16. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for City Planner review and J /
approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteda shall encourage the natural
growth characteristics of the selected tree species.
v/" 17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of -/
Xedscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code.
5C-2/91 5of12
F. SIgns
~ 1. ~e signs i~ated on the subm~ plans are ~eptual only and ~t a pan of this ~roval. /
Any s~ns pm~sed for this deve~p~nt shall ~ly with the S~n Ordinate a~ shall
require ~rate ~lication a~ ~proval by the Planni~ Divis~ n pr~r to installat~n of any
s~ns.
2. A Un~orm S~n Pr~ram for this deve~pmem shall ~ subm~ for Ci~ Planner review a~
~roval pdor to issua~e of bui~i~ ~s.
~ 3. Dire~o~ mnumem s~n(s) shall ~ prov~ for ~anmm, ~ominium, or town~s ./ J
pr~r to ~upa~y a~ shall rffiuim separate a~l~at~n a~ ~mval by the Planni~
D~is~n pdor to issua~e of ~i~i~ ~s.
G. Envlmnmental
/ 1. ~e deve~r shall prov~e ea~ pms~ive ~yer w~en ~t~e of the FouMh Street Ro~ / /
C~sher pmj~ in a sta~ard fo~at as detemn~ by the C~y Planner, p~r to a~epti~ a
cash de~s~ on any pmpe~.
2. ~e develo~r shall provide ea~ pms~e ~yer w~en ~t~e ot the C~y A~pt~ ~ /
S~ial SWdies Zone for the Red Hill Fauff, in a ~a~affi fo~at as dete~in~ by the C~y
Planner, p~r to a~e~i~ a ~sh de~sff on any pro~.
/ 3. ~e develo~r shall prov~e each pms~ive buyer w~en ~t~e of the Foothill Freeway / /
pmje~ in a standard fo~at as dete~i~ by t~ C~ P~nner, pdor to a~epti~ a cash
de~sR on any pro~ny.
~ 4. A final a~u~al repoM shall ~ subm~ed for C~ Planner review a~ ~wval prior to the / / -
issua~e of ~i~ing ~s. The final ream shall dis~ss the level ol ime~r ~ise
aMenuat~n to be~w 45 CNEL, the ~i~i~ materials a~ ~n~w~ion t~hn~ues pmv~,
a~ ~ ~mpdate, ver~y the ad~ua~ of the mff~at~n masures. T~ bui~i~ plans will ~
cM~ for ~o~e with the ~ation masures ~main~ in the linal reaM.
H. ~her Agencl~
/1. E~e~ ~a~ ~ shall be pmv~ in a~ffia~ wffh Ra~ Cu~m~a Fire /
Prote~n Di~ ~a~affis.
/ 2. E~e~a~essshall~pmv~.maime~etreea~clear, a mini~mof261eetw~e ~ /
at all times dud~ ~nst~n in a~ffia~ wffh Ra~ Cu~m~a Fire Pmte~n
Dist~ rffiuim~nts.
/ 3. Pr~r to is~a~e of ~i~i~ ~s for ~stible ~nstw~n, e~de~e s~ll ~ / / ...
subm~ to the Ra~ Cu~m~a Rm P~Wn Dist~ th~ te~ra~ water ~ly for
fire pmt~n is avail~, ~i~ ~it~n of r~uir~ lire ~ot~n s~tem.
/ 4. ~e ~l~m shall ~m~ the U. S. Po~al Sew~ to ~te~i~ t~ ~mpdate ty~ a~ /~ --
~at~n of mail ~xes. Muffi-tamily res~e~ial ~ve~ms s~ll pwv~ a ~1~ ovemead
st~ure lor rail ~xes wffh adequ~e I~ffii~. ~e final ~t~n of the rail ~xes and the
des~n of the ovemead ~w~re shall ~ subj~ to C~ Pin~r review a~ a~roval pr~r
to the issua~e of ~i~ing ~Ms.
5. For projects using septic tank facilities, written certification of acceptability, including all ---JJ-
supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Department of
Environmental Health arwd submitted to the Building Otlicial prior to the issuance of Septic
Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits.
?~-2/91 6of12 ~~7/
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (714) 989-1863, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
I. SIte Development
/ 1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechani- /
cal Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please
contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and
applicable handouts.
t//'' 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition / -/ .
to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees
may include, but are not limited to: City Beautffication Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems
Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees.
3. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or / /
addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development tees at the
established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee
Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees.
/ 4. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits.
J, Existing Structure~
1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances / /
considering use, area, and fire*resistiveness of existing buildings.
2. Existing buildings shall be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations for / J "-
the intended use or the building shall be demolished.
3. Existing sewage disposal fadlities shall be removed, filled and/or capped to cornply with the ----/ /
Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Building Code.
4. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans submitted for ---/ /
building permit application.
K, Grading
r/ 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City J----J
Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in
substantial conformance with the approvad grading plan.
v"" 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of Calitomia to J----J--
perform such work.
k//3. The development is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a Soil Disturtmnce / -/ -
Permit is required. Please contact San Bemardino County Department of Agriculture at (714)
387-2111 for permit application. Documentation of such permit shall be submitted to the City
prior to the issuance of rough grading permit.
4. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitti~cl at / "/-
the time of application for grading plan check.
k"' 5. The final grading plans shall be completed and aPPmvad Prt°rt° issuance °f building permits' /
~ -2/91 7or ~2~
6. AS a custom-hot sul:x:livis~n, the following reclulrements snail be met:
a. Surety snail be I:x:~stecl and an agreement executed guarameelng cormlotion ot all on-s~e /
ctrainage facilities necessary lot clewalenng all parcels to me satisfaclion of me Building
and Salety Div4sion Dnorto final mad al:~roval and Dr~rtO the ,ssuance of grading permits.
D, Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water that are condue-led onto --J.
or over adjacent parcots, are to De delineated and recorded to the satisfact~n of the
Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of grading and building permits.
c. On-site drainage improvements, necessary lot dewatenng and protecting the suiodivided
properties, are to De installed prior to issuance of building permits tor constnJction upon
any parcel that may De subiect to drainage flows entenng, leaving, or within a parcot
relatWe to which a building permit is re<quested.
d. Final grading plans for each i:mrcel are to be sul:}mitted to the Building and Safety / /
Division for a,c~roval priorto issuance of building and grading permits. (This may De on an
incremental or ceml:~site Dasis.) .,
e. All slope banks in excess of 5 feet in vertical heig~ shall be seeded with native grasses ----/ /'
or planted wire ground cover for erosion control upon comC~etion of grading or some other
altematWe mathod of erosion control Shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Building
Official. In addition a permanent irrigation system Shall be I:rovicled. This requirement
does not release me al~icant/deveioper .from cornSlance with the slope planting
requirements of Section 17.08.040 1 of the Development Code.
PPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DNISION, {714)9e~-1862, FOR COMPLIANCE
IITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Dedication end Vehk::uLmr
j/1. Rigms-of-way and easements srlall be dedicated to the CRy for al! _. I_ _ I _ L_ II, ./~ .
comrnun~ trails, pulelie paseos, public tanclicape area, street trees, and public drainage
facilities as shown on the 1:)4an$ and/or tentalve map. Prtvme easements for norH:~jIDlic
facilities (cross-lot drainage, local INder rails, et¢.) sttal tam reseP~cl as shown on the plans
and/or tentatNe maD.
2. Dedication shall be mkaclt ot the folowing rlgfit=-ot-way on tht perimeter streets / /
(measured from street
total let on
total feet on
~ total feet on ,
3.An iff~vocal~ offer of dedicalion for -!o~l e telONly elllmlnl sl~all be made
for all ;nvale streets or
~ 5. ReciOtocal a~ess easerr~nts Shall be provided ert~Jrtr~ icClsS to Ill I;)arclts t)lt CC&R s
or I~f ¢lleds ar~ sl~ll be recoiled ooncurr~ntly wel~ the rrt~ or 13r~or to tr~ ~ssuanc~ of
building I:~rmfls, wr~re no m&o ~ snvoived. "~
·2/9l 8o('
_6. pnvatedra~nageeasem'- .~forcross-k3tclra,nagesnallbeprov~e~ at...~alIDe CenneateC ___
' or noted on me final maD.
7. The final map shall clearly delineate a 1 O-foot minimum t3uik:iing restr~:tK}n area on the
"""' neignDonng lot acljo~mng trte zero tot line wall and c~ma~n the Ioik3wing tanguage:
'I/We hereOy declicate to the City of Ranclio Cucarnor~a tl~e ngnt to f~rof~iOtt the
construct;on of (res~enfial) Ouiidir~s (or other structures) wttt~Zn tl',ose areas clesignatecl
o1~ the ma~ as Ou~tding restric'l;on areas.'
A maintenance agreement Shall also De granted lrom each lot to the adjacent k:3t through the
CC&R's.
8. All existing easements lying within future rigffis-of-way st"41l De quitclaimed or delineatecl on · /
the final maD.
/ 9. Easements for pUbliC sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the l;~ul~lic r~gfft-ot-way __J J .
shall be dedicated to the City wherever they encroacrt onto private pro~en'y.
10. Additional street rigfit-of-way shall be dedicated along dght rum lanes, to provide a minimum .../ /
of 7 feet measured from the face ot cures. If curo adjacent sidewalk is used atong the rig~
turn lane. a Darallel street tree maintenance easement shall be ;toyideal.
11. The develoDer shall make a good faith effort to accluire the required off-site I;3roperty interests _..J /
necessary to construcI the rEKluired I:xJ~ic improvements, anti it he/she sr~ouicl lall to do
tl~e develol~r shall. at least 120 days lYior to sul~'ntlal ot the final rna) for al~roval, enter
into an agreement to complete the irnl:~ovements pursuant to Government Code Section
66462 at such time aS the City accluires the proQerty interests recluired for tl~ imlyo~ements.
Such agreement sr~all provide for 1:3ayment by trte develolxr o! all costs incurred by the City
to ac~luire the off-site lyofarty interests required in conneclion wiffi the sul3:livis~on. SecurTry
for a portion of these costs Srklll IX in the form of a Call1 defx)st in the amount given in an
al3yaisal reWort oOtained by the dENelOfXr, al develofxfl cost. The al)lxaiser srtall have
been a,optoved by the City i:tior to commencement ol tl~ a,oQraisal.
M. Street Improvere/nil
1. All pul~ic irrlyovernent$ (il~/llllS, drainag/laciltel, community trails, paseos, ---J
'landscalxcl area, etc.) sitown on U'8 ~ and/or tentaiv~ rna~ srtail Ix constn,tcled to
City Stanclarcls. ' . ' .
2. A minirrtjm ol 26- loot ~ f)lvemlnt, wittin · 40 4oot ~ cledlc, aed rlgrl..ol-way sl~all be J ../__
3. Constn,~ tr~e folowing Ixflmeter street irnl:~vemef~ irtci~r~, ~ not lirrdtecI to:
S't'prk"'T NNV~ CUI~ & A.C. Si;DC DltlVZl ~'z~v.4,-, a~fe4, r COMM. ~I~D
Ol. rz zr..,~INM"r WALK ~ MC}I'fil 'T1ff_ff~ 111AIL,
C/
~ - 2/9t g ol' t2 ~ 4 ?
Notes: (a) Meclian isla, .,~lucles lar'~sca,o:ng ancl irrigation on mete. (t~) pavement
reconstruction anti overlays will De cleterm~necl clunng plan check. (c) If so marxeel, s~e-
walk shall De curvilinear per STD. 304. (c:i) If so mar'r, ed. an in-lieu of construction fee snarl
be iDrovided for this item.
4. Improvement 'plans and construction:
a. Street improvement plans including street trees and street lights, prel~ared t3y a regis- --.J
tered Civil Engineer. shall be suPraffled to and aleroved I~y the City Engineer. Secunty
shall De poeled and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and
the City A~tomey guaranteeing completion ol the IxIl~ic ancl/or l)fivate street imDrove-
roems, pnor to final map al:~roval or the issuance of building permits. whichever occurs
firSt.
b. Prior to any work being pedormed in pulDlic fight-of. way, fees shall be paid and a / /
construeion permit snail De oiotained from the City Engineers Office in actclition to any
otl~er permits recruited.
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic, street name signing, and interconnect conduit / /
shall be installed to the satisfaction of me City Engineer.
d. Signa~conc~uitwith~:~u~b~xessha~ein~ta~ed~nanyrtewcortstruc~ion~rrec~nstruction --.J /
of major, secondary or collector streets whicrt intersect with otl'~r major, secondary or
colleclor streets for future traffic sigrtais. Pull boxes shall t~ placed on both sides of the
street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR or any offief locations appmved by the City' Engineer.
Notes: J
( 1 ) All pull I~xes ~all I:~ No. 6 unles~ othePNise sl:lec~tecl by the CIty Engineer.
(2) Conduit eftall N 3-incrt galvanizKl sleel will1
,/ /
e. Wheel c, fiair r'amOs shall be Installed on al four {offleft of inlefteclions per City
Standan:is or as ctirecled by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads recluinng ¢onst~x:lton =111 ~ ~ to trifle al all times with / /
aclecluale cletouft during ¢onl~rucljo~. A I~ cioluft lilrwtl may M ft¢luirld. A
c:le~sit shall be pa~viclecl tO covet ttte coat Of graCMng and paving. whtcn sitall be
refunded ulaon coml:jetion of the corm~n to me stallaction ol the CIty Engineer.
g. ConcenITated clrajnlOe flowl Ittlll not croll sideffal~. Uriclit liclewlk drajnl Shall ~ / /
insta~ed to City Sanclams, excxqX for s~ngle farnay lots.
4,
ft. Handicll) lix:lsl rlrn~ desigrl sl'kll be Is sDecilled ll}y till C, ly Erlgillelr. / /
i. ,.Streetnlmeslhll!:le~bytheCItYPtannerPrlortostJl~Ve, lltor~rstPtlnched~.
5. Street '.,TCrovemenl-I~ns per CIty Startcla~ for al I:=ttate streets shall be pmvk~cl for /
review and &opmval Oy the Clly Engineer. Prtor to any w~m ~ perlormed on me ~*.
vale streets, fees sl~lll be pad and ¢onstn~iort permU still be ol~mned fmrn the
Engineers Office in aclclition to any other Dlrrllill rlcluil'lcI.
J 6. Street trees. a minimum of 1S..galton size or lar~er. srtall be instaaed per C~y Standares in _
a_cr~__rclanc4 witrt the City's street tree I:rogram.
5C: - 2/gt ~0 o1' t2 '~ Z---/~
L/~7. Intersection line of s~te cles,gns snail be reviewed by the Crty Er'<j~neer .or conforman~
a~pteO ~ticy.
a. On ~ll~or or larger ~reets. lines of s~ s~all N Dio~ for all Droi~ intersec~lons.
inctudi~ OrNeways. Walls. signs. a~ s~Des s~all De l~at~ outside the lines of s~nt.
La~api~ ~ other oOstm~ions w~nin me lines of sight snail ~ approvea Oy the C~y
Engineer.
o. L~al res~emial ~reet ime~ns s~all have their ~t~eaDil~y improved. u~ally
moving the 2 +/- c~sest street trees on eac~ s~e away lrom me street a~ place~ in a street
tree ease~nl.
9. All ~blic improvemares on me fol~wi~ streets s~ll ~ o~fat~!~ ~mptete pdor to the
issua~e of Oui~i~ ~mts:
N. Pubtic Maintartaric· Altml
j//'/'l. A separate set of landscaPe and irrigation plans Per Engineering Public Works Standards / /
shall be suDmitted to the City Engineer for review and a4~mval prior to final rT~p approval
or issuance of I~jilding Permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscaPe parkways,
medians, paseos, easements, trails, or other areas are recluirs<l to be annexed into the
J
2. A skgned consam and waiver form to join ancl/orform the ap;toprtate Lanclscape and Ligt'ning --J .7
Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map al}proval or finance of building
Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall !~ I:}orne by the developer.
t// 3. AiIrequiredpul~liclandscapingandirrk~ltionlYslems $hNibecontlnuouslymainlainedIDYthe -.---/
developer until accepted by the City.
/ 4. Parkway landscaping on the tollowing street(S) shill cimtorm to the results of the respective --.J .J
Be utilica1' n Masmr Plan:
O, OrNMge ancl FTOocl Control
1. The project (Of portionl tI'WeOI) i$ kt,,,ated within a FIoM Hlzan:l Zone; therefore, flood / / --
protection mlllgrll ~ IX IXOvidld al cartilled by · regiltertcl Civi En~rtelf ar~
2. It shah IX till developers rlsl~nlibillty tO have the CUfTertt FIRM Zone
designation menDveil from the pmNect IreS. The developers engineer Shill prepare all
necessa~/reports. plaits. and hy(Im~lic caJculltk)nl. A Coil:Ilk:raN LItter
of MaD Revision (CLOMR) shall be ol}taired from FEMA I:xtor to final map alXxcrvsI or
issuance of tNildinO germits wf~J'tever occurs fist. A Letter el Me Revision (LOMRI shark
N issue<::l by FEMA prior to~;pancy or improve·hi acceptance. whichever Occurs first
3. A final drainage study shaft IX sutynitlKi to and aDCH'OvKI by the City Er. gineer I:}riorlo fina,
mad a4X)mval or the issuance of l:)uiidir'~ perr~ts. whichever occurs first. All drain·{:j·
facilities shaft t:)e installed as required t:}y the City Ef-.;neer.
5c - 2/91 tt ol' t:l~
4. A permit from trte Coun,. Fiood Control Distnct is required for work wrtnm ns rlgnt-ol-way
/
~ 5. Trees are i;:}ronil:)ded witrtin 5 feet of tlne outside c~iameter of any puDlic storm Clrain
measured from me outer edge of a mature tree trunk.
6. PuDlic storm dra, in easements snail De graded to convey overflows in the everrt of a --.J
I~loc~age in a sumD catcln basin on the I:xjDlic street.
P. Utilities
I/ 1. Provide soDarate utility services to each Darnel including sanitary sewerage system, water. _--/ /
gas. electrK: I;xawer, telel~hone, and caOle 'I'V (all underground) in accordance w~tn tl~e Utility
Standards. Easements shall De provided as required.
L///' 2. The developer snail De resl:x:nsiDle for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. J /
i/'/3. Water and sewer Olans snarl be designed and constructed to meet trio requirements ot the ,/ /
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District,
and the Environmernal Healtlq Del~artment of the County of San Bernardino. A let'let ot
comOliance from tlqe CCWD is required I~'ior to final map alaOroval or issuance ol permits,
whict~ever occurs first,
Q. General Requirements and Approve11
! /__
1. The seOarate i~arcels contained within the project bouncl~hes sha41 be legally coralDined into
one parcel I:N'ior tO issuance of I:xjiiding permits. - '.
2. An easement for a joint use ddveway sl~ll be provided I:tior to fir~l map a,ol:;coval or / /
issuance of building permits, whichever _oc~_jrs first, for:
/ / ...
3. Prior to al~roval of the final rna,O a deposit sl'~ll be posted with the City covering the
estimatKI cost of a,oponioning the assessments under AMes~rnent Distrtct
among the newh/created I~rcels.
4. EtMancl~San Serethe Aml Regional Mainline, Seconci~ ReOionll. Incl Mater Ptan / /
Draina~g~ Fees srtail be I:)licl Ixior to fimll map ag:H'ovll or Ixior to Ic3uik:llng plrmlt issuance if
no mad is involved.
, .5. Permits shall I:;e oOtained troffl the following Igencies for wo~ within their right-of-way: / /
6.Asignedconll~landwllvefformtoJoinlncVorformNLawEnforcementC°mrrtanitY --J
Facilities Olertcl el'ill lie filed with the City Engineer Ianx to final raN} alXxoval or the
issuance of ilullcling perure, whichever occurs tim. Forminion colts ~ t}e ~3eme lay the
DevekH:~r.
7. Prior to finalizltjon of Irry deveioCment I:)rtl~, $ufficie~ inXxov~menl pllnl sl'llll I:)e corn ..../ --' --
DtetKt I:lyoncl the i~rklse tXzundlr'ies to asure seconcllry iccesl in6 clrlinlge I:xotlction to
the s~tWlction ol the CIty Enginefir. Phae 13ounclriel shll Con'M4~ncl to fot lines Shown
on the li)provecI tentitlve triO.
SC - 2/gt 12o1'12 "~""(~)
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE pLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE DESIGN
REVIEW FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15354 LOCATED AT
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF KENYON WAY AND WOODRUFF PLACE IN
THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE) OF THE VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-011-26
A. Recitals.
(i) The William Lyon Company has filed an application for the Design
Review of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 15354 as described in the title of this
Resolution- Hereinafter, the subject Design Review request is referred to as
"the application-"
(ii) On the llth day of March 1992, the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga held a meeting to consider the application-
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
B. Resolutio_.___ n.
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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced meeting on March 11, 1992, including written and
oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives
of the General Plan; and
(b) That the proposed design is in accord with the objectives
of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is
located; and
(c) That the proposed design is in compliance with each of the
applicable provisions of the Development Code; and
(d) That the proposed design, 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-
3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1 and 2 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-
PLP~NNING COFa4ISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR VTT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON CO.
March 11, 1992
Page 2
Planninq Division
1) To mitigate significant adverse noise impacts
from the future Route 30 Freeway, the applicant
shall construct a 6-foot sound attenuation
barrier along Highland Avenue and an 8-foot
sound attenuation barrier along the north patio
walls of the northerly units in the four
buildings adjacent to Highland Avenue. The
patio sound attenuation barriers may be waived
if an agreement is reached between Caltrans,
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the
developer, that adequate sound attenuation
barriers will be installed near the freeway
travel lanes. A final acoustical report shall
be submitted for review and approval by the
City Planner prior to the issuance of building
permits. The report shall identify mitigation
measures which shall be incorporated into the
final construction documents.
2) Prior to the release of occupancy for the final
25 percent of the units within this project, a
minimum of 39 recreational vehicle storage
spaces shall be provided at a facility within
the Victoria Planned Community, in addition to
any existing spaces within the Victoria Station
I.
3) All visitor parking shall be clearly delineated
through proper signage per Section 17.08.040-K
of the Development Code.
4) Each dwelling unit shall be provided with a
minimum of 125 cubic feet of lockable exterior
storage space, per Section 17.08.040-R of the
Development Code.
5) Each unit shall be provided with hook-ups for a
clothes washing machine and dryer per Section
17.08.040-R of the Development Code.
6) The six-unit buildings shall have a mix of the
two- and three-gabled rear elevations. Where
two six-unit buildings face each other, care
shall be taken to vary the elevations to the
satisfaction of the City Planner.
pLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR VTT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON CO.
March 11, 1992
Page 3
7) The landscaping around the pool area shall be
lush and provide a unique environment to help
buffer the area from the adjacent drive
aisles. Various finished grade elevations
shall be utilized around the pool area.
8) An enhanced paving and landscaping treatment
shall connect the two project entries to the
satisfaction of the City Planner.
9) This project shall comply with all development
standards in place at the time of adoption of
this resolution, including but not limited to,
building separations-
10) Pursuant to provisions of California Public
Resources Code Section 21089(b), this
application shall not be operative, vested or
final, nor will building permits be issued or a
map recorded, until (1) 'the Notice of
Determination (NOD) regarding the associated
environmental action is filed and posted with
the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Bernardino; and (2) any and all
required filing fees assessed pursuant to
California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4,
together with any required handling charges,
are paid to the County Clerk of the County of
San Bernardino- The applicant shall provide
the Planning Department with a stamped and
conformed copy of the NOD together with a
receipt showing that all fees have been paid.
In the event this application is determined
exempt from such filing fees pursuant to the
provisions of the California Fish and Game
Code, or the guidelines promulgated thereunder,
except for payment of any required handling
charge for filing a Certificate of Fee
Exemption, this condition shall be deemed null
and void.
Enqineerinq Division
1) pedestrian crossings of project driveways shall
be concrete with landscaped.medians and pavers
terminating behind the pedestrian crossing.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR VTT 15354 - WILLIAM LYON CO.
March 11, 1992
Page 4
4. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS llTH DAY OF MARCH 1992.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the llth day of March 1992, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS-
PROJECT #: ~~/f_.. T,~.A~T /~
SUSJECT:
AP~ICA~: ~IL~~~ ~ P~
I
LOCATION: O~TtE ~ F ~ ~F t~ ~Y
~ose items che~ m ~~ of ~va.
APPUCANT SHA~ CONTACT ~E P~NING DNIS~N, ~14) t1~1, F~ ~PUANCE
WI~ ~E FO~OWlNG COND~NS:
A. ~me
~. ~val shall exam. uni~ e~e~ W t~ Pinnl~ ~mmm~n, ff ~ildi~ ~ts are
mt mu~ or ~v~ u~ ~ mt ~~ w~ 24 ~s ~m t~ le of ~mval.
2. ~vem~s~n Re~ sM~ ~ ~v~ ~ ~ I I -
3. ~vl of Te~Ne T~ ~. ~ giN~ ~ ~ tN ~val ~ J J ....
~ 4. ~edeve~ersMe~~,~n~ein,~m~~eor~e~M~~' J /
~~ in, or ~m~, a Mi~bs ~~ Fa~ D~ (CFD) for the
R~ C~m~ FWe P~n D~ to ~m m~n ~ mimeM~ of
a tim staten to ~we tM dee~. ~ ~ ~1M rote, i~, aM ~ilt to
D~s ~q ~ m~n. h ~u~ ~ M ~ ~ me D~t~ in
~m dh es ~- In ~ ~ ~ a imP, tM Nve~r i ~ ~th all
~~ I~ aM ~m. h CFD sMI N ~ ~ tM D~ ~ the d~e~r
/ 5. Pmr to r~ffim~n of ~ ~i ~ or tM isum d ~t~ Hm, ~ever ~ms J / .
tim, the ~Qm sMB mmm to, or ~dle m, N ~~m d a M~R~s
~mmn~ F~ilR~ D~ for tM ~m~n aM ~me~ ~ ~~ ~1
f~ilRies. ~wever, ~ a~ ~1 d~ h~ W~us~ ~~ ~ a ~mmnRy
FadIRis Dist~. tM ~m s~, in tM ~~, ~N l tM mxat~ of t~
~je~ s~e imo tM te~oW ~ ~h ex~i~ D~ ~r to tM r~~n ~ t~ final m~
or t~ i~a~ ol ~i~i~ ~, ~Nver m~ tim. Fu~r, ~ tN ~ ~1
d~ has ~t fo~ a Mel~R~s Co~n~ F~tls Dim~ w~n ~eNe mm~ from
t~ ~te of ~mval of tM ~ aM ~r to t~ r~m of t~ fiMI m~ or ~sua~e
of ~i~i~ ~m~ for ~ ~, thl ~MR~n SMII N ~ roll a~ vo~.
This condition shell be waived if the City receives notice that the ap!:}licant and all affected
school districts have entered into an agreement to pdvate~/accommodate any and all scr.3ol
impacts as a result of this project.
I/"' 6. Prior to recorclation of the final map or prior to issuance of building permits when no map is / /
involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water
facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shell be' submitted to the
Department of Comrnunify Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water
district within 90 clays prior to finn map approval in the case of subclivislon or prior to issuance
of permits in the case of all other residential projects.
B. SHe Development
I,//' 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approvecl plans which / /
include site plans. architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping. sign
program. and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein
Development Code regulations, and
Specific Plan and
Planned Community.
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all / /
Conditions of Approval shell be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
j/ 3. OccupancyofthefacilityshallnotcommenceuntllsuchtimeasallUniformBuildingCocleand / ' /
State Fire Marshairs regulations heve been cornplied with. Prior to ~ncy. plans shell
be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety
Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to
/ 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Apl:xoval shall be ./ /
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
i-,'''/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 sulxlivision, or
approvecl use has commenced. whichever comes first.
l-'/'' 6. Approval of this request shall not waive cofTl}aarte with all secltons of the Development / /
Code. all other applical}4e CIty Ordinances. and N:~ Cornmurray Plans or Specific
Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit Issuance.
k/' 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan shall be reviewed and alNxoved by the C~/Planner and --/ /
Sheriffs Department (989-6611 ) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall
indicate style, illumination, location, height. and method of shiek~ so as not to adversely
8. If no centralized trash recel:Xactes am provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units · /
with all receptacles shielded from pulolc view.
9. Trash receptacie(s) are required and shall meet City starKlards. The final design, locations, ----/ /
and the number of trash receptacles shall be sut}iect to City Planner review and aplxoval
prior to issuance of building permits.
V/'' 10. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as translormere. AC condensers, etc.. Shall / .J--
be icceted out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of
concrete or masonry walls, bermingjnd/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City
. Planner. ~ ~ ~
/ 11. Sireel ~s shall ~ ~Um~ lor G~y Planner review a~ approval in a~a~e w~h t~ a~ ~reeI Na~ PoI~ p~r Io ~mval of me final m~.
/12. ~1 ~i~i~ ~ ~ i~iv~ual unRs s~all ~ ~enlffi~ in a dear a~ ~ise manner,
i~ludi~ ~r illumin~n.
13. A detailed ~an ind~ti~ trail w~t~, ~i~m s~pes, phys~i ~ns, fend~, a~ ~
we~ ~mml, in a~ffia~ wRh C~ Mamer Trail dmin~, ~all ~ ~mffi~ for C~y
Planner m~ew a~ a~val p~rto royal a~ m~m~n of t~ Final Tra~ Map a~
to royal of mreet improvemere a~ gr~i~ ~ns. Deve~r s~ll u~r~ a~ ~nmm~
all trails, i~ding fe~i~ and dmi~ ~v~s, in ~n~n w~h mreet impmvemems.
14. The ~venams, ~~ a~ Remains (C~Rs) s~ll ~t ~h~ t~ ke~ of li~ ~
animls where zoni~ r~uimmms fort~ keep~ of ~ animl have b~n met. I~i~al
~t o~em in ~~ ~1 have t~ ~n of k~ ~ ani~ w~ t~ ~essRy
of ~aling to ~affis of dir~ors or ~m~wnem' as~~ for amndmm to the
CC&Rs.
/ 15. ~e ~ve~ms, ~ns. a~ Remains (CC&Rs) aM ~es of I~rm~n of the
~wne~' As~im~n am su~ to t~ ;vl of tN Pinni~ a~ E~ined~
D~is~ns and t~ C~ A~o~y. They shall N r~ ~mly wRh t~ Rnal M~ or
p~r to t~ ~sua~ of ~i~i~ ~s, whoever ~m tim. A r~ ~Y shall
~v~ed to the C~ Engi~r.
~ 16. NIB~ays, o~nam~,a~i~P~sMM N~m~mimain~ ~t~ope~
ow~r, ~~m' a~n, or ot~r m~ a~ll to tM C~. ~f of this
land~ maimena~ sMII N m~ for C~ Pin~r a~ C~ E~i~r mviw a~
~mval ~r to issua~ of ~i~i~ ~Rs.
17. ~lar ross ease~ms s~ll ~ ~~ for t~ ~ of a~ t~ e~h ~t or
~elli~ unit shall Mve ~e ~N to r~Ne ~nl~M ~m. a~m ~ts or un~ for use of
a ~lar ene~ symem. ~e easerams my M ~m~ ~ a ~im~n of Remains for
t~ su~ivis~n wh~h sll N ~ffi~ ~em~ ~ m r~~n of t~ final ~ or
is~m of ~s, wh~Nver ~s f~. h erarams ~ag ~h~ the ruing of
s~s ~ v~m~n, ~ures, from or a~ omr ~, ex~ for m~ wires
simimr ~s, ~mm ~ ~vemm ~ ~n 17.~.~2.
18. The ~ ~mai~ a ~~ Hi~o~ ~~ h see ~1 M ~--~
mimai~ in ~m~ dh tM Himo~ LaMm~ Memln Pe~ ~.
. Any fun~r ~mm to tN see ~~, ~ ~ ~M to, e~e~ ~erme~ a~or
ime~r a~era~ ~ ~ tM e~e~ of tM ~i~i; or m~um, mmv~ ol i~ma~
trees, ~mlR~n, m~, r~m~n of ~i~i~ or raNmr., or cM~s to t~ sRe,
shall r~im a ~~n ~ m H~o~ ~mm ~erm~n Pe~ ~b~ ~ H~tor~
Pmsew~n ~m~n re~ a~ ~i-
C. Building ilgn
1. An a~emt~e e~ symem ~ ~i~ to ~i ~~ ~t wmer for all ~elli~ un~s
a~ for ~mi~ a~ ~~ ~ ~ ~, uniM ~Mr ateme e~ syme~ are
dem~rm~ ~ N d li~Im ~ ~ eff~. NI ~~ ~i imal~ m me
tim of in~il devemm sMII N ~mm~ wffi ~W MiniS. ~tails sMII
i~d~ in tM ~i~i~ ~a~ a~ sMII N ~m~ for CRy Ran~r r~ a~ ~mval
p~r to tM issua~ of ~i~i~ ~Rs.
2. All ~elli~s s~ll have t~ from, s~ a~ mar e~vm~ns u~r~ w~h amhit~tural
tramram, detaili~ a~ i~reas~ ~li~m~n of ~d~ tramram ~ to C~ Planner
~ - 2/91
I/3. Standard patio ~ve~ ~ass ~o~ ~se ~ ~e ~~e~'
~je~ns, s~ll ~ shie~ from vi~ a~ t~ ~nd Mer~ from adjacent pm~ffies a~
~reets as r~uir~ by ~ Ptnni~ Div~n. S~h ~reening shall .~ amh~urally
im~rat~ w~h the ~i~i~ des~n a~ ~~~ to t~ sii~n of ~e C~ Plan~r.
Details s~ll ~ i~ in ~i~i~ pla~.
D. Paffilng a~ Veh~/r Aca (Indite dmli ~ ~lMlng
1. Ail~ffii~t~~ila~ss~ll~eamini~m~sldimens~nof6feeta~all / ,J
~main a 12-i~ wak ~m to t~ ~ all (~i~ ~m).
/2. Te~ur~ ~~n ~ays a~ te~r~ ~vem~ ~m. ~~n aisis s~ll ~ / / ..
pmvld th~g~ t~ ~ve~m to ~n~ NHi~Nun~i~i~ w~ ~n s~
~a~r~reat~l uses.
/ 3. All ~i~ ~s shall ~ ~ba ~ ~r C~ ~a~ a~ a~ d~ay a~les, / /
emra~es, a~ exes s~ll ~ ~ ~r C~ ~a~a~.
~4. All un~s shall ~ ~v~d w~h gar~ ~r o~ ~ d~ays are ~ t~ 18 feet in / /
de;h from ~ of smalk.
/5. ~eCovenams,~it~a~Re~~s~~mesto~of~m~nalveh~is ~ /
on this ere unMss t~y are t~ ~m~ ~ d tmn~n for ~ omr a~ ~hb~
~i~ on intent ~~n ~es ot~r than in dH~m~ ~or H~ areas.
~. P~ for any s~ ~es s~ll ~ ~~ for t~ C~ P~ner, C~ E~mr, a~ /
Ra~ C~m~ Fire Pmt~n D~ ~ a~ ~i ~ri imm of ~i~i~
~es.
E. ~nd~pi~ (f~ publlc~ mlall i~ as, air to Im N.)
1. A ~tai~ la~ a~ i~In ~, i~ s~
i~ in t~ ~se d mslal deve~, s~ M
a~R~ a~ ~b~N ~r C~ Rmr ~ ~ ~1 ~to t~ ~~ of ~i~i~
~Rs or pmr fill ~ ~ in t~ ~ d a tom ~ ~~n.
2. ~isti~tme~toMmwN~s~M~Hia~~nH~r / /
in ~~~ i~~ ~ 19.N.110, ~ ~ mNontMF~a~.
~e ~in d ~ N to ~ ~N in m ~ nN ~m f~ ~am~ tree
s~ll ~ s~n on tM ~ I~ ~. h ~m ~d f~ d of ~ am~t's
r~mm~i~ ~~ mHwm~n, ~n~mm~ a~ td~ ~~.
~ 3. Aminimm~ ~ trmWgmHm,~~~fol~sbH, s~H~Pm~
w~hint~mj~: ~ %-~-imh~xorl~r, 10 %-3&~xori~er,
( 0 % - 24- i~ ~x ~ i~r, ~ % - 15~a~, ~ ~ % - 5 ~lin.
/ 4. A ~nimm of ~ % ol Ires ~mN ~in ~e ~ mall ~ ~n s~e ~es- ~ /
24-i~ ~x or i~r.
/ 5. ~dhin Bffii~ ~ts, trees s~ll ~ ~amN ~ a rme of one 1 ~lln tre for ew~ ~hree / ../
paffii~ malls, su~mm to ~ 5~. of t~ ~mi~ area at ~ ~n on ~m 21.
P~i=, ~o.VlT I~s~'p~-
_ 6. Trees shall ~ plam~ in areas of publ~ ~ew adjace~ to a~ a~ng stm~ures at a rate ol one
tree ~r 30 linear feet of ~i~i~, /
~ 7. Nl~mes~~Sf~tor~ssinved~l~hta~of5:l orgmaters~,~tle~than / J
2:1 s~, s~ll ~, a ~nimm, i~m~ a~ land~ w~h ~pdme gmu~ ~ver for
emsbn ~ol. ~o~ plami~ rffiuir~ W this s~n shall i~lude a pe~nem i~m~n
symem to ~ inmal~ by the deve~r ~r to ~n~.
/ 8. Aiip~mes~sinex~ssof5feet,~tlessthan8 feet inved~lhe~M~of2:l orgremer
s~ shall be la~md a~ i~m~ for ems~n ~mml a~ to ~en t~ir a~ara~ as
fol~ws: one 15~al~n or la~er s~e tr~ ~r each 150 ~. ~. of s~ area, 1 ~al~n or ~er
s~e shrub ~r e~h 1 ~ ~. ~. of s~ area, a~ ~m~e gm~ ~ver. In a~Rion, s~
~nks in ex~ss of 8 feet in venal helm a~ of 2:1 or grem~ s~ s~l a~ i~ude one
5~al~n or la~er s~e tree ~r each 250
plam~ in ~a~emd c~mem to ~ffen
s~ion sh~l i~lude a ~anem i~mbn sy~em to ~ inmali~ ~ t~ ~ve~r ~r to
~my.
9. For si~ fa~ ms~emial deve~pmm, all s~ ~mi~ a~ i~bn s~ll ~ ~mim- J /
~s~ mimain~ in a ~aRhy a~ thdvi~ ~Rbn by ~ ~ve~r umil e~h i~i~al unR
is ~ a~ ~~ by t~ ~yer. P~r to miB~ ~pa~ for ~ un~s, an i~bn
shall ~ ~~ by t~ Ranning DNimn to ~te~ t~ t~y m in smid~o~
~ 10. For mR~fami~ restemil a~ ~n-res~ent~l ~vemm, pm~ ~m are res~m / /
s~le for t~ ~ntinual ~me~e of ~1 ~~ areas on-s~e,. web as ~m~ous
plam~ areas w~hin ~e ~ ~f-way. NI la~ am~ s~ ~ k~ fr~ from
we~s a~ ~s a~ mimai~ in a hea~ a~ ~i~ ~n, a~ s~l r~e~e
r~lar ~ni~, fenil~i~, ~i~, a~ ~mmi~. ~y ~~, ~, da~, or
d~yi~ plm retell sh~l
11. Front yaffi la~ng shall ~ r~ir~ Hr t~ ~ve~mm ~ ~/or J / .
. ~is r~im~m s~H N in ~n to t~ r~uir~
mmet trees a~ s~ ~ami~.
/ 12. ~e fill ~s~n of t~ ~dmter ~ays, wal~, ~~~, a~ s~ s~il ~ / /
im~ in ~ r~i~
~val aM ~i~N for ~e~ ~h a~ ~ay
r~i~ by tM E~i~q DN~n.
13. S~ml m~m fea~rH
i~ s~wa~ (~ ~N cM~e), a~
J,""' 14. Landscaping and iffigatton systems required to be installed within the public right-ol-way on /___./
the perimeter ol this project area shall be continuously maintained by the deve.k~per.
v/" 15. All walls slqall be provldedwithdecorativetrealrnenL ffiocated mpublic maintenance areas,- / /
the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
16. Tree maintenance criteria shah be developed and submitted for City Planner review and · ./
approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural
growth characteristics of the selected tree species.
v"'/17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of / /
Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucarnonga Municipal Code.
SC - 2/91 5of 12
F. SIgns
v"' 1. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a pan of this approval. / /~
Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall
require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any
signs.
2. A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted for City Planner review and / /
approval pdor to issuance of building permits.
//" 3. Directon/monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condorninium, or townhomes J /
prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning
Division prior to issuance of building permits.
G. EnvlmnmentN
V/ 1. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock / /~
Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a
cash deposit on any property.
2. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted / /
Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City
Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposi/on any property.
1//' 3. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway / /
project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash
deposit on any property.
p-""' 4. A final acoustical report shall be submiMed for City Planner review and approval prior to the / /__
issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise
attenuation to bee 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided,
and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigmion measures. The building plans will be
checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report.
H. Other Agencies
t/"""l. ErnergencysecondaryaccessshallbeprovidedinaccordancewithRanchoCucamongaFire / /
Protection District Standards.
///' 2. Emergencyaccessshallbelxovlded, malntenancelreeandclear, a mtntrnumo426feetwide / /
at all times during construction in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
District requirements.
i/"' 3. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be / /
submiMed to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District that temporary water suppy for
fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection system.
J//' 4. The applicant shall contact the U. S. Postal Service to determine the ap~ate type and --J / '-
location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overtwad
structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location o4 the mall boxes and the
design of the overhead structure shall be subject to CIty Planner review and argroval prior
to the issuance of building permits.
5. For prOjectS using septic tank facilities, written certification of acceptability, including all · /-
supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bemardino County Department of
Environmental Health and submiMed to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic
Tank Permits, and prior to issuance :f ' ' ' ·
C,~ ~ ~C~ ~ O~rb~}~~
/ 1. ~e~ms~ll~yw~ht~te~~Un~i~~,Unffo~M~hani' /
cal ~e, Unffo~ P~mbi~ ~, Nm~nal E~ ~e, a~ all ot~r a~i~m ~s,
o~ina~es, a~ r~lat~ns in eff~ m ~ ~ of ~m of re~Ne ~s, Piece
~ma~ the Bui~i~ a~ Safe~ D~is~n for ~es of ~ ~e ~n Offiiname a~
~1~ han~s.
~ 2. P~r to ~sua~ of ~i~i~ ~m for a n~ r~i~l ~elli~ un~(s) or
to existi~ unR(s), t~ ~m ~all pay ~vemmfm m t~ ~li~ me. ~ fees
may i~e, ~ am ~t lim~to: C~ ~t~n F~, Pm F~, Dm~ Fee, Symems
Deve~mm Fee, Pe~ ~ Pin C~i~ F~, ~ ~1 F~.
3. P~r ~ ima~ of ~i~i~ ~ for a w m~ ~ i~dl ~vemm or
a~n to an ex~i~ ~ve~mm, t~ mm ~R ~ ~mm l~s m t~
eml/~ rme. ~h fees my im~e, ~ ~e m I~ ~: Syme~ ~mnt Fee
Drain~ FH, ~1 Fees, Pe~ a~ Pin Ch~ F~.
/ 4. Street a~rems s~ll ~ pm~ by t~ ~i~i~ ~, ~er t~i ~ r~mat~n a~ ~r to imams of ~i~i~ ~.
J; ~l~lng ~um
1. Pmvl ~liame w~h t~ Unffo~ ~ti~
~id~ use, ma, ~ ~m~iiNe~ d ex~ ~i~
2. ~i~ ~i~i~ ell ~ ~e to ~ w~ ~ ~t~ ~ z~ ~u~i~ for / /
t~ ime~ use ~ t~ ~i~i~ s~ M
3. ~imi~sN~di~salfadlls~m~,f~a~or~tom~ffithe J / '
UnHo~ P~i~ ~ a~ Un~ ~i~
4. U~mu~ om~e ~l~ m to N ~
K. G~I~
1. Gr~i~olt~~~silM~~e~U~~~,C~ / /
Peru · r~. P~ ~ ~ ~~ ~of ~~m m (7~ 4)
~7-2 111 lot Hm m~n. ~m~ ot ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ to t~ C~
~r ~ t~ ~m ol ~ ~ H~.
J /
t~ tim of ~l~n for gr~i~ ~an
a~ Salety Div~s~n P~r to final m~ ~val a~ p~r to t~e ~ssua~e of graai~ permits.
D. ~propnate easemems for safe dis~sal of drainage water ~at are ~u~ onto ~ /
or over adjacem Dameis, are to N delineat~ a~ r~m~ to the $atisfa~n of the
Bui~i~ a~ SafeW Divis~n. p~r to ima~ of gr~i~ a~ ~i~i~ points.
c. On-site drainage improvemores, n~essa~ for dNatenng a~ ~ot~i~ the su~iv~
pm~nies, are to N install~ Dnor to isma~ of ~iti~ N~M for ~nstm~n u~n
any ~mel mat may N suOi~ to drai~e fes emen~, lavi~, or wRnin a ~arcet
rotroWe to which a ~i~i~ ~R ~ r~em~.
d. Fill gmdi~ ~ans for egh ~mel are m N ~U~e to me ~i~ ~ Safe~ ~ /
D~is=n for imval p~r to ~a~e of ~i~i~ ~ gri~ ~. {~is ~y De on an
i~remmal or ~mte t~.)
e. All s~N NnkS in excess of 5 feet in ve~ ~ sl M M~ dh ni~ grasses / /'
or plm~ we~ gmu~ ~ver for ems~n ~m~ u~n ~te ~ gQ~ or ~m offier
aRemiNe ~t~ of ems=n ~mml ~ ~ ~t~ ~ ~e m~in of ~e ~i~i~
~ml. In ~R~n a N~aMm i~=n sy~em m~ ~ ~, Ns ~iremem
r~im~ms of S~ion 17.~.~ I ol tN ~~ ~.
,-
'P~CA~ ~ALL CO~A~ ~E ENGINEBraG DNIS~ ~14) ~11 F~ ~iL~NCE
A~ ~E FO~O~NG COND~NS:
i~n ~ V~mr ~
a~or tenruNe ~.
2. ~ten s~l N ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~14f~ ~ N ~e lm ~ J "
t~ f~ ~
or ~ ~ a~ sMH N re~ ~~m~ weft ~ ~ or ~ m ~ =~a~ of
8ort
.
6. piNate drainage easere,. ., for cross-~t c~ramnage snail be prov~eC ar ~all .~e Oeuneate':
or noted on the final map.
.7. The final maC} shall clearly delineate a 10-foot minimum buildir~ restnchon area on me
neiglql:)onng lot adjoining the zero lot line wall and conlash the following language:
'l/We ttereDy dedicate to tl~e City of Rancho Cucarnor~a the n~Tnt to prol~tOit tl~e
consrnJctton of (res~leniial) t3uildir~s (or ott~er structures) w;tnin those areas designated
on the ma~ as Ouddin~ restrictton areas.'
A maintenance agreement srtall also IDe granted Irom each tot to the adjac;nt lot tnrougrt tr~e
CC&R's.
8. All existing easements lying within future ngnts-ol-way srtail be quitclaimed or delineated on ·
tl'te final ma,o.
9. Easeme'his for I:MjI31ic sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the 13Jl:lic rk31~-ot-waY ../
Shall be dedicated to the City wherever they encroach onto I~Wate property.
10. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to I:H'ovide a minimum / /
of 7 feet measured from the face of curl~. If cur'o acllacent Sk:lewRIk is usOcl along the ngnt
turn lane. a i~raJlet street tree maintenance easement shall be provk:J~l.
11. The develol~r shall make a good faith effort to ac~luire the required off-see property interests · ' /
necessary to construct ~e re, cluired pul:dic improvements, aM I ha/she shouk$ tail to ~o
the cleveioCer sr~all, at least 120 clays prior to sul;mittal of the final map for atOM'oval, enter
into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Gove, nmenl Code Section
66462 at such time as the City acquires the proCorly flora roquitecl for the imCtoQements.
Such agreement Shall provide for payrnenl I}y the (Mvofoplr of aN ~ incurred I:W the City
to acquire the off-site property interests roquirecl in _cennectlon with the m,d:division. S4cumy
for a portion of them costs S1'~11 I~ in the form 04 · ClIA ~ in the m'r~4jrtt given in an
a,ojxaisal repod olXained by the cMvok::~:wr, st clovetopers colt. The II:)praism' srtall have
been a,OJ:N'OvKI I:W the City prior to commeft,,ernent 04 the appraisal.
M. Street Improvomentl
1. All puliic iml:wovements (illilllil, dm~ facillllet, comingrally trailt I:~seos, ---/ 1
.' laruiscapmd area, etc.) shown on me plmu 8ncl/or tentlive mm ~ I~0 cortstmctKI to
C~ Stam:lar~. '
3. Construct the Iolowif~ perimeter tareel iml~vefnems includif~ i:ut riot imlte:l to: _.J /
STREET NAMI: CURl · A.C. all)i; DRIVt s"r!l:tr COMIL OTHER
/
C/
/,."'/"'"""""'
:--.:--, VTT
:.._..: :""-
Notes: (a) Median islaj. .,'x:ludes landsca,o,ng and irrxjation on metb, (b} pavement
reCOnStrUction and overtaye will De cleterm~ned dunng plan check.. (c3 If so marXed. SK:le-
walk Shall be curvilinear per STD. 304. (d) if so marked. an in-lieu ol constructson tee snail
be providecl for this item.
4. Improvement plans and construction:
a. Street improvement plans including street trees and street liglqts, prepared I~ a regis-
tered Civil Engineer. shall be suOmetled tO ancl aDI}mved by the City Engineer. Secunty
shall be posted and an agreement executKI to the satisfaction of the City Engineer arx~
the City Attomey guaranteeing corr~etton of ~e pulMic artS/or private street improve-
ments, prior to final map approval or the issuance of txaik:ling permits. whichever occurs
first.
~. Prior to any work being performed in pul~lic fight-of-way, fees shill be pii~l and a / I
construction permit snail be olmainKI from the City Engineers Office in a¢Klltion to any
other permits required.
c.Pavement striping, marking, traffic, street name signing, ~ interconnect cort¢luit __/ f
srtaJl be installed to the satisfaction of the City ~r.
d. Signal conduit witlq pull boxes shall be instNled on lny new censtNclk3n or reconstruction /
of major, secondary or Collector streets ~ intersect with other mNor, secondary or
Collector streets for future traffic signals. Pull 13oxes Shil IX paced on ~ side of the
street at 3 feet 0utsk:le of BC R, EC R or any Olhef lociliens Ipprov~l by the C it~ Engineer.
Note: --J /
(1) NI pull IXxes s~all IX No. 6 unless oll'mrwiM s4xcli~ by the Cly Engineer.
(2) Conclue snail IX 3-inctt galvanize sial wire pulmpe.
e. When cMk' rarnlx srtall IX installed on al four comes ot ieefsecere per City--'//
StanUams ~r as eh'ected by the ely Enginee.
f. Existing City reads reg, siring censtmctimt shall fewsin elan t~ trelfic al al times with/t
oe~ositsr,~IX~ toc~vefmcoaofgrulngaf~l~
S. Street .~' IMaM I~w Cly ~ ~o~ el IMWste strees sail M IM~ecl fo~ ~ .'
vine s~eeu,
EngSMe's Off~e ~ a~lit~ to a,y omef I:emds
2/91 ZOo/
7. Intersect~n line of sate designs snail
a~pted ~1~,
a. On ~ll~or or larger mreets, lines of i~ludi~ d~eways. Walls, signs. a~
La~i~ q~ other oOstm~ns wRhin me lines of s~gnt snail ~ approved Oy the C~y
Enganeer.
O. L~al res~emial ·reef ime~ns s~all have their ~t~e~il~y imDrpved, u~ally ~y
moving me 2 +I- c~sest street trees on each s~e away from the ·reef a~ placed ~n a street
tree ease~nt.
9. All ~Diic i~mvemmS on t~l fol~wi~ $trHt$ S~g ~ o~rat~W ~tt pdor to the
assuage of Dui~i~
N. PulHIc Mmlnten~nce Arlll
J///1. A self·rate set of land·caiN and irrigation I~ans per Engineertrig Public Works Standards ----/ /
shall N suDmitled to the City Engineer for review and approval pnor to final map akof~'oval
or issuance of Ic~jilding permits, whichever occurs first. The following I~t~lsc,3pe parkways,
medians, I~aseos, easementS, trails, or other area are requir~l to M annexed into the
L a~ D~c~.~ ..
2. A signed consent and waiverform to join ancl/orform the m:~'op~te I. amlsc~¢~ and Ligrning · /
Districts srtill I~e fil~l with the City Engineer prior tO finll n'to II31;I~CNa Or issuance of I~jilding
permits whatever occum first. Form·ion cos· sI'Wl t~ I~ome by the developer.
e
I// 3. Aii rKIuired pu134ic~nClSC&Oing llXl irrig~ltiOn lYlleml II, llll~loorlrt30usly mlinlijneclby the -/ / .
developer until accel~ed by m City.
y 4. Parkway I~~ on the follewing mr~t($) tl'tll c~'Iorm tO the mm, dll of the respective ---./----./ .-
#
O, Drainage 8n~l Fk:m~l C4}ntml
1. The project (er Ix~kins them~ is k)cltl~l within · FIoM ~ Zone; ther~re, l~ooa--. --
roysol I=y the ely Engmeer.
2. ~t slsan Ix the devemper't mtl~ to have the current FIRM Zone .' --
designation re··veal from the pcoWcl oral. The cleve~l ~ iI'lll ptll:}are
necessary reperm. Imam. and l~ic calm·tam. A Co·mona· Leer
of Map RaySen (Or·MR) snaa be ·me·nat from FEMA IXtor Io final map alX}mvat or
issuance el Imjildkl IXrmilS. wedchever occurs firm. A Letter el Map Revimon (tOMIll
N issued by FEMA prior to occuCancy or ·1}rove·ant acceptance. whichever occurs first
__ 3. A final drainage study shall be summed to and a.oF~ed by the City Er4meer prior1·
map a.axovat or t~e ,ssuance ol I~jilding pertorts. whichever mrs lirst. All dr··age
tac,l~tes srsall Ix installed as re<tuirscl t~y the C~, Eng:ner.
--__----- 4. A pen'nit from me Count.-. Flood Control Distrsc'l is re~lulred for wo~ w~n:n ~S right-el-way
__/__
5. Trees are proniiD~ted within 5 feet of me outside diameter el any puiDlic storm drain pilDe
measured from the outer edge ot a mature tree trunk. /
6.PuiDlic ston'n dra, in easements snarl I:>e graded to convey overflows in the event o!
blocxage in a sump catch IDasin on the puIDlic street,
P. Utilities
I/ 1. Provide se;arate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system. water. _-J /
gas. electrK: power. telepr~ne. and caDle 'IV (all underground) in accordance w6h the Lltitity
Startdams. Easements shall N provided as required.
L///' 2. The developer Shall De responsible for the relocatlon of existing utilities as necessary. .J /
r/3. Water and sewer plans shall be ~esigned and ¢onslructed to meet the rN3uirements of me / /
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWO), Ranc!~ Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
and tha Environmental Health Oel~artment of the County of San Bernarclino. A letter of
comDllance lrom the CCWD is recluired I~tor to final rrelo ak0~DrovN or isluanca of permitS.
whichever occurs first.
Q. General Requirements arid Irefall
1. The sel:)arate I~rcels contained witrdn the I:woiect t:x)ul'H:lades shil tie ilklily confined into 'J /
One parcel ;Nior to issuance of t:~ilding permits. - '.
2. An easement for a joint use driveway sl~lJl be prOvM prIOr to fir~ mild N)I;Rwll or --J /
issuance of bejilding permits, wfficnever occurs tim, lot:.
/__j .
3. Prior to a;proval of the firtal rMl) a degosit sl'tll IDe posted wtffi the CIty covering tyro
estimmecl cost 0t agg~rtloning trm assesinures uncle Aelesmltefil Dlsu~
among the newly created pitCeLt
4. Etiwlnda/San Slyline Alia Reglonll MlJrdirte. Sloindlflt RegioGli. Illd MIster Ptln / /--
0rainageFeessMIbel:klidpeiottofinalmaPagPmvalotPrtortotNidif~PeffNtissuance il
, .5. Permitsshalll:~eol3tinedfmmthelolowtngagemtelorwod~wetintheftgrit'4t~aY: /----/
6. Asigned clltll11111td wllvltl~m t~kMn lrd/N'lem Wtl LIN EItir~mllll C4M11r~NlYJ---'/
Facilitiel i IRIII Ill film will'l the CIy Enginer ~ t8 filtll i II;llle~i ot tm
issuance ~lNte~l;emll=.~~¢urS tim. F~m~ea~em ~tml t~e I:ene W ire
7. Prior to ~nllizltion C4 Iny deve~nl phlse. sufflciefl ~ pllnl ihlll t:e corn- --~ '
Diete:i ~yond the lease IxNraSafes e asure seee~y N:ceM are etieee 1:~4ection to
trie satilfaction of the CIy Erl0ineer. Phlse 13ou/IANI {:)NTllpOfld l0 lot ~ ShOwn
on me a;Cxoved tenfallve mID.
5C - 2/9 t t2 o1' 12 '~:~ ~
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 11, 1992
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Anna-Lisa Hernandez, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15289 - WILLIAM
LYON COMPANY - A residential subdivision and design review of 189
condominium units on 18 acres of land in the Medium Residential
District ( 8-14 dwelling units per acre ) in the Victoria Planned
Community, located on the southeast corner of Kenyon Way and Milliken
Avenue - APN: 227-011-17- Staff recommends issuance of a mitigated
Negative Declaration-
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested by Applicant: Approval of subdivision map, site plan,
conceptual grading plan, conceptual landscape plan, and building elevations
for the development of 189 condominiums and issuance of a mitigated Negative
De c larati on ·
B. Pro~ect Density: 10.5 dwelling units per acre.
C- Surroundin~ Land Use and Zoning:
North - Existing Vineyards Marketplace Shopping Center; Village Commercial
South - Existing single family residential; Low-Medium Residential ( 4-8
dwelling units per acre) Victoria Community Plan
East - Existing single family residential and park; Low-Medium
Residential ( 4-8 dwelling units per acre ) and park Victoria
Community Plan
West - Existing single family residential; Low-Medium Residential ( 4-8
dwelling units per acre) Victoria Community Plan
D. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per
acre )
North - Neighborhood Commercial
South - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
East - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
West - Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre)
E. Site Characteristics: The site is currently vacant with no significant land
or historic features on-site.
ITEM E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 2
F. Parkin~ Calculations:
Parking Garage Garage
Number of Number Required . Total Req ' d Garage Spaces Spaces
Bedrooms of Units Per Unit Re~'d Spaces/unit Req'd Provided
Three 189 2.0 378 2 378 378
Guest 0.25 47 __
TOTAL 189 2.25 425 378 378
Total Parking Required 425
Total Parking Required 433
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant is proposing 189 condominium units with units
ranging in size from 1,225 square feet to 1,600 square feet- The units are
arranged in three different building types, duplex, tri-plex and four-plex,
with stucco wall finishes and concrete tile roofing. Parking is provided
within enclosed garages and open stalls- On-site amenities include a
recreation building, tot lot, pool, spa, and four barbeque/picnic areas.
B. Discussion: The proposed project is a Vesting Tentative Tract and is exempt
from the new m~lti-family development standards. However, the applicant
actively participated in the ne~lti-family standards workshops and public
hearings and has incorporated these standards into the project. In general,
staff has found the proposed project to be in substantial conformance with
the new multi-family standards, except for a few instances of building-to-
curb separation. These instances are not significant in the project's
overall conformance with the multi-family standards.
C. Neighborhood Meetings:. Two neighborhood meetings were held by the applicant
to get input from surrounding residents- These meetings were held on
September 9, and December 14, 1991.
The primary concern expressed related to transition of the proposed project
to surrounding land uses- The project went through numerous revisions with
the final design before you tonight. To address the transition concern, the
applicant has changed the Milliken Avenue streetscape with the increase of
duplex unit types and the variation of rear and side-on conditions in order
to blend with the existing two-story single family units directly to the
west. A similar treatment has been applied to the southeast area of the
project for proper transitioning with the single family units to the east
(see Exhibit "B"). This has helped to balance the scale and massing of the
project with the surrounding area- To ensure that their concerns were
addressed, residents were also invited to participate in the Design Review
process and to comment on site design and architecture.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11 , 1992
Page 3
D. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee reviewed the project on
three separate occasions: October 3, 1991 (Vallette, Melcher, Buller);
January 2, 1992 (Vallette, Tolstoy, Buller ); and February 6, 1992 (Vallette,
Melcher, Coleman ) - At their final meeting, the Committee recommended that
the following revisions be reviewed by staff and then scheduled for Planning
Commission review (the conditions referenced are contained in the Design
Review Resolution ):
Architecture
1. The window wrought iron detailing (on the tri-plex building type)
should be incorporated into the other buildings-
Staff Response: See Planning Division Condition No. 6-
2. All rough-sawn wood posts at the unit entries should be stuccoed
and painted to match the building.
Staff Response: See Planning Division Condition No- 7.
3 · The external guttering on the recreation building should be
redesigned so as not to be completely visible to public view,
especially along the front elevation.
Staff Response: See Planning Division Condition No. 8.
Site Plan
1. All units with side-on conditions along Milliken Avenue should be
a minimum of 10 feet away from the perimeter wall (i.e., Units 17,
25, 26, 52, and 64).
Staff Response: Plans revised as recommended (see Exhibit "B").
2. All units with rear-on conditions adjacent to Milliken Avenue
should be a minimum of 15 feet from the perimeter wall (i.e.,
Units 65, 68, 69, 70, 71, and 72 ) ·
Staff Response: Plans revised as recommended (see Exhibit "B").
3- A trail link between Units 44 and 59 within Lot H should be added
to facilitate pedestrian access to the primary recreation area.
Staff Response: Plans revised as recommended (see Exhibit "B").
4. The two parking stalls perpendicular to the Kenyon Way entry
should be eliminated.
Staff Response: Plans revised as recommended (see Exhibit "B-2" ).
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 4
5. The Kenyon Way entry should be redesigned to provide a "focal
point", with significant open space at the end of the drive aisle,
similar to the entrance at Victoria Park Lane. Prior to the
issuance of building permits, the Design Review Committee should
review and approve the design of the Kenyon Way entry.
Staff Response: Plans revised as recommended (see
Exhibit "B-2"). See Planning Division Condition No. 9.
6. The retaining wall located south of Buildings 48 and 49 should
receive a cap and stucco treatment to match the building
architecture-
Staff Response: Plans revised as recommended-
7. The pedestrian trails between Buildings 29, 21, 22, and 19 should
be eliminated to provide the 10-foot minimum setback between the
perimeter wall and the unit adjacent to Milliken Avenue.
Staff Response: Plans revised as recommended (see Exhibit "B-3")-
8- The open space area between Buildings 8 and 9 should be
eliminated. Instead this open space should be concentrated along
the main spine.
Staff Response: Plans revised as recommended (see Exhibit "B-2").
Recreation Area
1. The recreation area. should be redesigned to provide a usable open
play area. The Committee suggested that the pool be located
parallel to the main spine road. In addition, the Committee
suggested that the applicant utilize grading techniques to create
different levels within the recreation area for the amenities-
Staff Response: The applicant has redesigned the recreation area
(see Exhibit "B" & "E"). See Planning Division Condition No. 10.
E- Technical Review Committee: The Committee has reviewed the project and
determined that, except for the provision of RV parking, with the
recommended special conditions and attached standard conditions of approval,
the project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances. The
Victoria Community Plan requires that RV parking facilities be provided for
a minimum of 25 percent of the units within the project. No RV parking
facilities have been provided on-site. Staff will ensure that adequate
facilities exist within an RV storage site within Victoria, prior to final
occupancy release of the site- (See Condition No. 2 in the Vesting
Tentative Tract Conditions.)
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 5
F. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by
the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Checklist
and found no significant impacts on the environment as a result of this
project. It is important to note that during the project's review, staff
determined that there may be potential noise impacts along Milliken
Avenue- The acoustical study, submitted by the applicant, indicates that
noise generated along Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane can be
mitigated by barriers. These have been addressed within the plans and in
the attached standard conditions.
FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the Victoria Community Plan
and the General Plan and will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause
significant adverse impacts. The proposed use, building design, and subdivision,
together with all recommended conditions of approval, are in compliance with
applicable regulations of the Development Code and the Victoria Community Plan.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in the Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices were
sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. Neighborhood
meetings were conducted by the developer.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Vesting
Tentative Tract 15289 and Design Review ~hereof, subject to the conditions of
approval, through adoption of the attached Resolutions and issue a mitigated
Negative Declaration-
Respect y submitt
er
BB: ALH: mlg
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Tentative Subdivision Map
Exhibit "D" - Conceptual Grading
Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Landscaping
Exhibit "F" - Building Elevations
Exhibit "G" - Recreation Building
Resolution of Approval Vesting Tentative Tract 15289
Resolution of Approval Vesting Tentative Tract 15289
Design Review .
· - ' -J I I~mTm~
..... ' "'~liI .j I I
. ,, ,
~'~ " ~1 I ~: I I
a~ a~ I I;;~
I ~ I I
~ 2 ~ ~: I I
~ I ~ I I
I ~ I I
~ I ~ I I
~ ~ I I I
/~ ..... ~ I I
~, -- ~ I
~ '- .,' ~ I I I
~ I I
i~ I
I I
i~1
I I
I I
'~1
I I
~ I I I
~ '~ I I I
~ t I I I
I
I
i
2 I
I
I
I I1~
~ I
I
I I
I
1,9 I
/
,'
zil
'ONI SWI.LINflVII/IO0 NOA'!
A Vd
H.I.i!ON SGIIqrABNIA ~,.
'0 ~_ NlllllitlO0 NOA"! ~
- 0x ~
_:u
.jO
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ApPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 15289, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
KENYON WAY AND MILLIKEN AVENUE IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT OF THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-011-17,
A. Recitals.
(i) The William Lyon Company has filed an application for the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15289 as described in the title of
this Resolution- Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Vesting
Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application."
(ii) On the llth day of March 1992, 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.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred-
B. Resolution-
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced public hearing on March 11, 1992, including
written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this
Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) The application applies to property located at the
southeast corner of Kenyon Way and Milliken Avenue with a street frontage of
1100.90 feet and lot depth of 582.40 feet and is presently vacant; and
(b) The property to the north of the subject site is the
existing Vineyards Marketplace Shopping Center, the property to the south of
that site consists of existing single family residences, the property to the
east is existing single family residences and park, and the property to the
west is existing single family residences; and
(c) The gross density of 8.64 and net density of 10.5 dwelling
units per acre is consistent with the General Plan and the Victoria Planned
Community; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 2
(d) The project is consistent with the applicable development
standards within the Development Code and the Victoria Planned Community.
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 Vesting Tentative Tract is consistent with the General
Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; and
(b) The design or improvements of the Vesting Tentative Tract
is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; and
(c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed; and
(d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife
or their habitat; and
(e) The Vesting Tentative Tract is not likely to cause serious
public health problems; and
(f) The design of the Vesting Tentative Tract will not conflict
with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access
through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision-
4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has
been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues a mitigated
Negative Declaration-
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 attached Standard
Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference-
Planninq Division
1) To mitigate significant adverse noise impacts
from Milliken Avenue, the applicant shall
construct sound attenuation barriers consistent
with the recommendations of the preliminary
acoustical report. A final acoustical report
shall be submitted for review and approval by
the City Planner prior to the issuance of
building permits. The report shall identify
mitigation measures which shall be incorporated
into the final construction documents-
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 3
2) Prior to the release of occupancy for the final
25 percent of the un'its within this project, a
minimum of 47 recreational vehicle storage
spaces shall be provided at a facility within
the Victoria Planned Community, in addition to
any existing spaces within the Victoria
Station I.
3) All visitor parking shall be clearly delineated
through proper signage per Section 17.08.040-K
of the Development Code.
4) Each dwelling unit shall be provided with a
minimum of 125 cubic feet of exterior lockable
storage space, per Section 17.08,040-R of the
Development Code.
5) Each unit shall be provided with hook-ups for a
clothes washing machine and dryer per Section
17.08,040-R of the Development Code.
6) pursuant to provisions of California Public
Resources Code Section 21089(b), this
application shall not be operative, vested or
final, nor will building permits be issued or a
map recorded, until (1) the Notice of
Determination (NOD) regarding the associated
environmental action is filed and posted with
the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Bernardino; and (2) any and all
required filing fees assessed pursuant to
California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4,
together with any required handling charges,
are paid to the County Clerk of the County of
San Bernardino- The applicant shall provide
the Planning Department with a stamped and
conformed copy of the NOD together with a
receipt showing that all fees have been paid.
In the event this application is determined
exempt from such filing fees pursuant to the
provisions of the California Fish and Game
Code, or the guidelines promulgated thereunder,
except for payment of any required handling
charge for filing a Certificate of Fee
Exemption, this condition shall be deemed null
and void.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 4
Enqineerinq Division
1) Lot "I" shall be dedicated to the City for
Community Trail purposes. The boundary of Lot
"I" shall follow the perimeter wall on the east
side of the project.
2) The Milliken Avenue and Kenyon Way parkways and
the proposed slope adjacent to Victoria Park
Lane north of the rock swale (Lots A, B, and C)
shall be privately maintained by a Homeowners'
Association.
3) The project requires landscaping to be
installed adjacent to existing public landscape
improvements- Prior to commencing any
construction, a representative of the
contractor shall meet with the City inspector
and a representative from the maintenance
section to perform a mutual field review and
documentation of existing conditions- In the
event that the water or electrical connections
to existing landscape are to be disrupted for
any reason, arrangements shall be made in
advance for the developer's contractor to
assume equivalent maintenance for six months to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer-
4) Install a traffic signal at the intersection of
Victoria Park Lane and Milliken Avenue. The
developer shall receive credit against, and
reimbursement of costs in excess of, the
Transportation Development Fee in conformance
with Ordinance No. 445.
5) The Victoria Park Lane driveway landscaped
median shall extend into the public right-of-
way, terminating north of the trail
crossings~ Median landscaping shall be
maintained by the Homeowners' Association- The
existing trails shall be reconstructed to cross
the driveway as near to the Victoria Park Lane
curb as possible- pedestrian crossings shall
be concrete, with pavers terminating behind the
pedestrian crossing-
6) perimeter walls along Kenyon Way shall not
encroach on the driveway lines of sight.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 5
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution-
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS llTH DAY OF MARCH 1992.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the llth day of March 1992, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #:
SUBJECT: ] :T__': ~
APPLICANT: ~ '
~ items c~ ~e ~R~ of ~v~.
APPUCANT SHALL CONTACT ~E ~NNING DNISION, ~14) ~1~1, FOR COMPLIANCE
~ ~E FO~OWING CONDfflONS:
A. ~me LImRs
/ 1. ~val s~ll exam, un~ e~e~ ~ t~ Pinni~ ~mmts~n, ff ~i~i~ pe~s are
~t ~su~ or ~pmv~ u~ ~ mt m~~ ~hffi 24 m~s ~m t~ ~e of ~mval.
2. ~em~s~n Re~ s~ ~ ~v~ ~r ~ ~ J J
3. ~val of Temm~e T~ ~. ~ gmm~ ~ m t~ ~val of
',;/ 4. ~e~ve~rs~mm~,~d~ein,~mm~eor~useto~~~'
' ~~ in, or ~~, a MeI~R~ ~~ Fadl~is Di~ (CFD) for t~
R~ C~m~ Fire p~n ~ to ~ ~m~n ~or mime~n~ of
a~m mt~n to ~we t~ d~emm. ~ ~in s~l M mt~, ~s~, a~ ~iR to
all ~~i~ ~ t~ ~ C~~ ~ Pmt~ D~, ~ ~all ~m the
~8 ~ u~n m~n. h ~u~ s~ ~ se~ ~ ~e D~td~ in
~~ ~h ~s ~. In ~ ~ of a ~, t~ ~ve~r sll ~ with all
~/I~ a~ m~s. ~ CFD s~ ~ ~ ~ t~ D~ ~ the deve~r
/
~ 5. P~r to r~ffim~n of ~ fi~ ~ or t~ ~sua~ ~ ~ ~, ~ever ~s J
tim, the ~m sMII ~m~ to, or ~d~e ~, ~e ~llhmm d a Mel~R~s
~mn~ F~ilRis D~ !or ~ ~m~n aM imeM~ of ~m~ ~1
f~lRies. H~ever, ff any ~1 di~ has ~e~us~ e~is~ m~ a Commn~y
FadlRies Dmt~, tM ~m sMB, in t~ ~e~Ne, mmem m tN ~xm~n of t~
mjed s~e imo t~ te~oW of ~h ex~i~ D~ ~r to tN ~~n of t~ finl m~
or m i~a~ of ~i~i~ ~, ~Nver ~ tim. Fu~r, ~ tM ~ ~1
d~ has mt fo~ a MeI~R~s ~n~ F~IRis Dim~ dhin ~eNe mm~ from
t~ ~te of ~mval of t~ ~ aM ~r to tN r~~n of m fi~ m~ or ~sua~e
of ~i~i~ pemm for ~ ~, thl ~MR~n sMII N ~ roll a~ voW.
~ or ~2
This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected
school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school
impacts as a result of this project.
~/ 6. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to issuance of building permits when no map is /
involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water
facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the
Department of Community Developmere. Such letter must have been issued by the water
district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or priorto issuance
of permits in the case of all other residential projects.
B. Site Developm®m
/ / /
v/ 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 Division, the conditions contained herein,
Development Code regulations, and
Specific Plan and t/t c "t"'C>l~ IA
Planned Community.
2. Prior to any use of the projed site or business activity being commenced thereon, all / /
Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
/ '3. Occupancyofthefadlityshallnotcommenceuntilsuchtirneasal!UnfformBuiidingC°deand J""/
State Fire Marshall's regulations have been cornplied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall
be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety
Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance pdor to
occupancy.
v/' 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be J / .
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
V/'/5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for ---/---J
consistency priorto issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree ramoval, encroachment,
building, etc.), or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lit 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 Plans or Specific
Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance.
v/// 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan shall be revlewad and approved by the City Planner and / J
SherifFs Department (989-6611 ) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall
indicate style, ifluminatlin, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely
affect adjacent properties.
8. If no centralized trash receptacles am provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units __/
with all receptacles shielded from public view.
9. Trash receptacle(s) am required and shall meat City standacds. The final design, locations, ----/ J
and the number of trash receptacles shall be sul:~ect to City Planner review and approval
prior to issuance of building permits.
10. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall --J---J-
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 City
Planner. ~--~__/__/[
SC - 2/9]
v/ 11. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with / ·
the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map.
12. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, / /
including proper illumination.
13. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and ../ ·
weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for City
Planner review and approval priorto approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior
to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct
all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements.
14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shell not prohibit the keeping of equine / J
animals where zoning requirements forthe keeping of said animals have been met. Individual
lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option ol keeping said animals without the necessity
of appealing to boards of directors or homeowners' associations lor amendments to the
V//// CC&Rs.
15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the _---/ /
Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Pinning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or
prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be
provided to the City Engineer.
V/" 16. Nlparkways, openareas, 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 City Planner and City Engineer review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits.
17. Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or ----J
dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of
a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions for
the subdivision which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map or
issuart.,e of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of
shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, except for utility wires and
similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.080-G-2.
18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shall be developed and J
maintained in accordance with the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No.
· Any further modilications to the site including, but not limited to exterior alterations and/oi
interior alterations which affect the exterior ot the buildings or sts~{~tures, removal of landmark
trees, demolition, relocation, reconstruction of buildings or stsuctures, or changes to the site,
shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Histodc
Preservation Cornmission review and approval.
C. Building Design
1. An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units ----/----/-
and for heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are
demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the
time of initial development shall be supplemented with solar heating. Details shall be
included in the building plans and shall be submitted for City Ranner review and approval
prior to the issuance of building permits.
2. All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural /----J--
treatment, detailing and increased delineation of sudace treatment su~ect to City Planner
review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
5C-2/91 3Of12 ' ~ ~'~""
V/'3. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners' Association shall be submitted for / /
City Planner and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
4. All roof appurtenances, including air conditionere and other rool mounted equipment and/or
projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent propedies and
streets as required by the Planning Division, Such screening shall be architecturally
integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
Details shall be included in building plans.
O. Parking and Vehicular AcceSS (Indicate dills on building plans)
V/1. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall / /---
contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb).
V/ 2. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be / ·
provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/
plazas/recreational uses.
V//' 3. All parking spaces shall he double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, J .J
entrances, and exits shall he striped per City standards.
V 4. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in ----/---J
depth from back of sidewalk.
5. The Covenants, Conditions and Restdctbns shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles J /"'-
on this site unless they are the principal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit
parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas.
6. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and --j
Ranche Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and al:q3mval priorto issuance of building
permits.
E. Landscaping (for publicly maintained landscape arm, reler to Section N.)
V/' 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscap- ---/----/
I
ing in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed andscape
architect and submitted lot City Ranner review and approval prlorto the issuance of building
permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision.
2. Existing tre~s required t~ be preserved ~n place sha~~ be pr~tected with a construction barrler "'/"J
in accordance with the Mu nicipal 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 arbodsrs
recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting and trimming methods.
3. Aminimumof ~.E~ treespergrossacre,cornprisedofthefollowingsizes, shall be Provided ---J /
within the project: O % - 48- inch box or larger, /(:::) % - 36- inch box or larger,
/0 % - 24- inch box or larger, E~C) % - 15-gallon, and O % - 5 gallon.
V/ 4. A minimum of ~ % of trees planted within the project shall be spedmen size trees - ---/---J -
24-inch box or larger.
5. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for eve~ three __J J-
parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21.
SC - 2/g I 4 of 12
6. Treesshallbeplantedinareasofpublicviewadjacenttoandalongstructuresatarate°f°ne / /
., tree per 30 linear feet of building.
/
~/; 7. Aiiprivatesiopebanks5feetorlessinverticalheightandof5:l orgreaterslope,butlessthan / /
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.
v//' 8. Aii private siopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet inverticalheightandof2:l orgreater / /
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 of 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 shell include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to
9. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shell be continu- / /
ously 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 u nits. an inspection
shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satistactory
/ 10. For multi-lamily residential and non-residential development, property owners are respan- ---J~
sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site. as well as contiguous
planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shell be kept free from
weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive
regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, deed, diseased, or
decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of darnage.
11. Front yard landscaping shell be required per the Development Code and Ior. · /
. This requirement shell be in addition to the required
street trees and slope plaming.
V'/ 12. The final design of the pedrneter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shell be / /~
included in the required lardscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and
approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be
required by the Engineering Division.
13. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meander- / ·
ing sidewalks (with rizontal e), and intensified landscaping, is required along
14. Landscaping and irrigation systems required Io be instiled within the public right-of-way on / /
the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
15. All walls shell be provided wlth clecorative treatment. fflocated in publlc malntenance amas, /---J '-
the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
16. Tree maintenance criteria shell be developed and submitted for City Planner review and ---./ /
approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteria shell encourage the natural
growth characteristics of the selected tree species.
V//17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of / /
Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code.
SC - 2/9 1 5 of 12
v-rn
F. Signs
1. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are concePtual onlY and not a Part of thisapproval. / /
Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall
require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any
signS.
2. A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted for City Planner review and ---/ J
approval pdor to issuance of building permits.
'V/3. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condorninium, or townhomes --J-----J
prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning
Division prior to issuance of building permits.
G, Environmental
V~I. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer wrfilen notice of the Fourth Street Rock / /
Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a
cash deposit on any property,
2. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice ot the City Adopted ---/ /
Spedal Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City
Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property.
3. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway / /
project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash
deposit on any property.
4. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the /__.J
issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise
attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building matedais and construction techniques provided,
and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be
checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report.
H. Other Agenclel
V/'/1. EmergencysecondaryaccessshallbeProvidedinaccordancewithRanch°Ca'mam°ngaFire 'J""'J
Protection District Standards.
V//2. Ernergency access shall be provlded, rnaintenance free and clear, a minirnumof26feetwide ---/ J--
at all times during construction in accordance with Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection
District requirements.
3. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be ---/ /""-
submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District that temporary water supply for
fire protection is available, pending cornl;>letion of required fire protection system.
~/4. The al:q:Icant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and --J J
iocmion of mail boxes. Muiti-farnily resldentiai developments shall provide a solid overhead
structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the
design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior
to the issuance of building permits.
5. For projects us.ing septic tank facilities, written cortitication of acceptability, including all --J-J
supfx>rtive information, shall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Department of
Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic
Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits.
SC-2/9] 6ofl2 ~ r ~-'
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (714) 989-1863, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
I. Site I~velopment
V// 1. The applicant shall cornply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechani- --J----J--
cal Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please
contact the Building and Safety Division for copies ol the Code Adoption Ordinance and
applicable handouts.
~/'2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition ---/----/
to existing u nit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees
may include, but am not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems
Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees.
3. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or / / '-
addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development lees at the
established rate. Such lees may include, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee,
Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checkjng Fees.
~//4. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, aftertract/parcel map recordation
and prior to issuance of building permits.
J. Existing Structures
1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances / ./
considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings.
2. Existing buildings shall be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations for ----/ · -
the intended use or the building shall be demolished.
3. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be removed, tilied and/or capped to comply with the ---/ ../
Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Building Code.
4. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans sul~mitted for ---/----/
K. Grading
V//1. Grading of the subtect property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City ---/ /
Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in
substantial corfformance with the approved grading plan.
~ 2. A soils ref}ort shall be prepared by a clualifed enginer licensed by the State of California to ---/----/
perform such work.
3. The development is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a Soil Distufoance /----/ '-
Permit is required. Please contact San Bemardino County Del}amnent of Agriculture at (714)
387-2111 for penTit application. Documentation of such permit shall be submitted to the City
prior to the issuance of rough grading permit.
4. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at · J~
the time of application for grading plan check.
5. The~rta~gradingp~anssha~~becompletedand~ppr~vedpri~rt~issuanceofbuildingpermifs. J""J'
~ -
::~;:.,._.~- :,,_-
6. AS a custom-lot suPdivision, the folio, wing requirements shall be met:
a. Surety snail be posted and an agreement executed guarameeing corr~letion of all on-site --Y "--
drainage facilities necessary for alewatering all parcels to the satisfactiOn of the Building
and Satety Division priorto final map apOroval and pnorto the issuance of grading permits.
b. A,opropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water that are conducted onto / /
or over adjacent parcels, are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of the
Building and SafeW DivisiOn prior to issuance of grading and Duilding permits.
c. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for alewatering and protecting the subdivided / / "
properties, are to be installed prior to issuance of building permits for constnjction upon
any parcel mat may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel
relative to which a building permit is requested.
d. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to me Building and Safety / 'J
DivisiOn for approval priOrto issuance of building and grading permits. (This my be on an
incrememal or cornCx}site I:}asis.)
e. All slope tanks in excess of 5 feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native grasses ---J J
or planted with ground cover for erosion control upon completion ol grading or some other
alternalive method of erosion control shall be completed to the siLsfaction of the Building
Official. In addition a permanent irrigation system shall be provided, This requirement
does not release the applicant/develoPer from compliance with the slope planting
requirements of Section 17.08.040 1 of the Development Code.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DNISION, (714) lei-1862, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
L. Dedication end Vehicular Accede
1. Rights-of*way and easements Shall be dedicated Io thl City for all interlor-~,
community trails, puOlic piesos, public landscape aria, street tries, and put}tic drainage
facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentiM map. Prlvll eramerits for non-public
facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) ~ be reserved ss shown on the plans
and/or tentlive map.
2.Dedication shall be made of the folowir~ rights-of-way on the
(measured from street Clntldint):
totll feet On
total test On
total feet On
,. total feet On
3. An irrevocm~ offer Of dedication for -loot wide roadway easement sl~all be made
for all private streets or drives.
V/ 4. Non-vehicular access shall be dedicated to the CIty for the tollowin~
5. Recq:xocal access easements shall be provided ensunng access to
or t:W deeds and shall be retort:led concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance o
_ =orl: ,
J/___.._ 6. Private clrainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be prov,:lecl anc~ snail De dehne ateG or noted on the final map.
7. The final map shall clearly delineate a 10-foot minimum building restr~'t~on area on the
neighbonng lot adjoining the zero lot line wall and comain me lOllowing language:
'l/We hereDy dedicate to tt~e City of Rancho Cucarnonga tl~e right to prol~iDit the
construction of (residential) Duildings (or other structures) within those areas c/es~gnated
on the mal~ as Duitding restriction areas.'
A maintenance agreement shall also De granted lrom each lot to the adjacent lot through the
CC&R's.
V/' 8. All existing easements lying within future rightS-of-way shall be cluitclaimed or delineated on -.-J --/--
the final map.
V"" 9. Easements for pul~lic sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-ot-way _-J
shall be dedicated to the City wherever they encroach onto private property.
~ ot provide a minimum ._,.J /
10. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along
of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curo acljacent sidewalk is used along the ~
~__ta~a,~, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be IN'ovld,
11. The develol;er shall make a good taith effort to ao:luire the required off-site prof)erty interests / ' /
necessary to constru¢~ the reduired pu~ic improvements, and if he/she should fail to do so,
the develol~er shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map tot ap0roval, enter
into an agreement to complete the irnCN~vernents pursuant to Government Code Section
66462 atsuchtimeaslheCilyaccluirestheProPertYinterestsrecluiredt°rtheirnl;r°vements'
Such agreement shall provide tot payment by tt~ develo~r of all costs incurred by the City
to accluire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Secunt'y
for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash defx~$it in the amount given in an
aDIxaisal retort ot:;lained by the develol:~r, at develo~r'$ cost. The aplxaiser sl~all have
been apptoved by the City I:Nior to commencement ol ttte a,o~rais~l.
M, SirIll Improvtfftlntl
V/' 1. All I;~Jblic iml:N'ovement$ (L, ..... J! ....J._L .._,, .........community trails, i)aseos, . J / .
landscal:~:l areas, etc.) shown on ttte plans ar~l/or tenlaliv~ map ~ be constructed to
City Standan:Is. Interior street imlxovernenl$ i include, 13ut at not limited to, ¢uro and
Outer, AC pavement, etve al~roacrt~, si:lewalks, street ligrl$, aml street trees.
2, A minimum of 26- foot wile I~v~rtenl, wlhirt 1 40 4ool wide {:ledicaed rigrl-ol-way Sitall be _..J ·
constructed lot all hall-II¢li~ streets.
3. Construct ~e tollowing laeffneter slreet irnlxovemems including, 13ut not limited to: __/ ./
5(::-2191 9oft2
Notes: (a) Median island inciucles landsca43eng and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement
reconstruction ancl overlays will be cleterminecl clunng plan cnecl<. (c) If so marked, SK:le-
walk Shall be curvilinear per STD. 304. (d) If so marked. an in-lieu of construction fee snail
be I:}.rovtcled for this item; ~
I
4. Improvement plans and construction: .
a. Street improvement plans including street trees and street lights, prepared by a regis- J /
tered Civil Engineer. shall be suDmitted to and apC~roved by the City Engineer. Secunty
shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and
the City Attorney guaranteeing completion ol the public and/or private street improve-
ments, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
first.
b. Prior to any work being perlormed in public fight-of-way. fees shall be paid and a J-----/--
construction permit shall be oOtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any
other permits required.
c. Pavement striping. marking, traffic, street name signing. and interconnect conduit --J /
shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed on any new construction or reconstruction J--.J
of major, secondan/or collector streets which intersect with other major. secondan/or
collector streets for future traffic signals. 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.
J__.J_
Notes:
( 1 ) All pull boxes Shall be No. 6 unlesS otherwise specil~ by the City Engineer.
(2) Conduit Shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pullrope.
,.J J__
e. Wheel chair ramps shaft be installed on all four corners of intersections per City
Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. .Existing City roads requiring construction shal refitsin open to traffic at all times with J /
adequate detours during construction. A street closure petrol may be required. A ~h
deposit Shall be provided to cover the cost of grecllng and paving, which shall be
refunded upon corrg}ilion of the cormnJction to the litill{liOn OI the CIty Engineer.
g. Concentrated drlinlge flows Shill not troll sidewllr,3. Undlr sidewik drains shall be J .J
instaUKI to City Slam. except for single larnily lots.
It. Handicap ~cx::esS ramp design shall be as specified by the CRy Engineer. J / .....
i. Street nlrnes shall be li:g}mved bytheCityPlannerpriort°sul3mlllltOr~rstplancheck' "/ /
5. Street irJqprovemant plans per CRy Standards ford privile streets shill be pmvided for /__,m
review a~:l approval I:W the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the pri-
vate streets, fees shall be paid and cortstnjction parmils shall be oldlined from the City
Engineers Office in addition to any other parmils required.
V'/. 6. Street trees. a minirrum of 15-galicn size or larger. shall be installed per CRy Standards in _
accordance with the City's street tree program.
~/_____._7. Intersection line of site des,gns shall be reviewed by the C~ty Enganeer for contormance w~n ·
adopted policy.
/
a. On collector or larger streets, lines of s,gnt shall be plotled for all projet1 intersections.
including driveways. Walls, signs, and slopes snail be located outside the lines of s,:Jht.
Landscaping and other obstructions within the lines of sight snail De approved by the Ckty
Engineer.
ID. Local residential street imersections shall have their noticeability imDroved. usually t:}y · ·
moving the 2 .,-/- closest street trees on each side away from the street and placed in a street
tree easement.
8. A permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any work within the lollowing ngtqt-of-way: ----/---J
9. All public improvements on the following streets shall be operationally complete pdor to the ---J /
issuance of building permits:
N. Public Maintenance Areit
V/ 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards ---/ /-
snarl be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map approval
or issuance of Ic}uilding permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscape parkways,
medians, paseos, easements, trails, or other areas are required to be annexed into the
Landscape Maintenance District: L__~T ~ :~,.e
2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/orform the apfxopriate Landscape and Lig~ing ---/ /
Districts shall pe filed with the City Engineer priorto final rail) alX~roval or issuance of building
permits whid~ever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer.
3. All required public landscaDing and irrigition sYstemS srlllbe continuously maintained bY the ---/
developer until acceCXed by the City.
4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) Shill cordotto to the results of the respective / · ...
Beautification Master Ran:
O. Drainage and Flood Control
1. The project (or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, flood --j-- /
protection measures shall be provided as cartiliad by a re, stared Civil Engineer and
al:~mved I:W me City ~r.
2. It shall be the developers responsibility to hive the current FIRM Zone
designation removKI from the pmje~ area. The clevtloper's engineer shill prepare all
necessa~/reports, plans. and hydrologt. mydraulic cllculitions. A Conditional Letter
of MaD Revision (CLOMR) shall be oOtained from FEMA prtor to finll mad approval or
issuance of building permits. whichever occurs first. A Letter of MID Revision (LOMR) Shall
3. A final drainage study Shall de summed to and a,oproved by the City Enginee~r?or to fkna,
map approval or the issuance of building perTrots, whiChever oo~rs tirSt. All drainag~&j~
facilities shall de installed as reo~jired IDy the City Engineero-HI. ~,u~!cJ~C)~'t-~
5C - 2/9t
4. A permit from the County Flood Control Distnct ~s required for work wrtnin rts r,gnt-ot-way. /
5. Trees are prohilDitecl within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any puDlic storm drain pipe
measured from tt~e outer edge of a mature tree trunk. --"
6. PuDlic storm drain easements sl~all be graded to convey overllows in me event of a / "--
bloct<age in a sump catch Oasin on tl~e puDlic street,
P. Utilities
1, Provide separate utility services to eact~ parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, __-/ /
gas, electric power, telephone, and caDle 'I'V (all underground) in accordance with trte Utility
Standards. Easements shall be provided as required.
V/ 2. The developer shall De responsiDle for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary.
I///3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the reoMirements ot the / /--
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), 'Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection DistrY-l,
and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernamino. A letter of
compliance lrom the CCWD is required prior to final mad approval or issuance of permits,
whichever occurs first.
Q. General ReqUIrements and Approvals
.__/ /
1. The separate parcels contained within the project boundaries shall be legally combined into
one parcel prior to issuance of building permits.
2. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or / /
issuance of Imjilding pernits, whichever occurS first, for:
/_.._/
3. Prior to a,c~roval of the final m&o a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the
estimated cost of apCx~rtioning the assessments under Assessment District
among the newly created parcels.
4. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional MNnline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan ---J /
Drainage Fees shall be paid INior to final map al::q3mval or piior to building permit issuance ff
no map is involved,
5. Permits shall be ol:Xainecl from the loftowing agencies for work within their right-of-way: / /
6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or torm the Law Enlomemant ComnIjnity
Facilities District shall be filed with the City Engineer priori' tO final map N:qxoval or the
issuance of building permits, whichever _o~',_jrs fnt. Formation costs Shall be borne by the
Devek:~er.
7. Prior to finalization of any developTeN phase, ,sufficient improvement pins shall be corn-
pieted I~eyond the I:dqase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer Phase bounaarWs shall conespond to lot lines shown
2/9 1 12 of 12 ~/~'~ /
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW
FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15289, LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF KENYON WAY AND MILLIKEN AVENUE IN
THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (4-14 DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN:
227-011-17.
A. Recital___ s.
(i) The William Lyon Company has filed an application for the Design
Review of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 15289 as described in the title of this
Resolution- Hereinafter, the subject Design Review request is referred to as
"the application-"
(ii) On March 11, 1992, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga held a meeting to consider the application-
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of th~s Resolution
have occurred-
B. Resolutio_.___ n.
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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced meeting on March 11, 1992, including written and
oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) That the proposed project is consistent with the
objectives of the General Plan; and
(b) That the proposed design is in accordance with the
objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which
the site is located; and
(c) That the proposed design is in compliance with each of the
applicable provisions of the Development Code; and
(d) That the proposed design, 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-
3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each
and every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference-
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 2
Planninq Division
1) To mitigate significant adverse noise impacts
from Milliken Avenue, the applicant shall
construct sound attenuation barriers
consistent with the recommendations of the
preliminary acoustical report. A final
acoustical report shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City Planner prior
to the issuance of building permits. The
report shall identify mitigation measures
which shall be incorporated into the final
construction documents.
2) Prior to the release of occupancy. for the
final 25 percent of the units within this
project, a minimum of 47 recreational vehicle
storage spaces shall be provided at a facility
within the Victoria Planned Community, in
addition to any existing spaces within the
Victoria Station I.
3) All visitor parking shall be clearly
delineated through proper signage per Section
17.08.040-K of the Development Code.
4) Each dwelling unit shall be provided with a
minimum of 125 cubic feet of exterior lockable
storage space, per Section 17.08.040-R of the
Development Code.
5) Each unit shall be provided with hook-ups for
a clothes washing machine and dryer per
Section 17.08.040-R of the Development Code.
6) The additional wrought iron detailing to the
building elevations shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Planner prior to the
issuance of building permits.
7) All posts at the unit entries shall be
stuccoed and painted to match the building.
8) The final design and location of the guttering
on the recreation building shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Planner prior to the
issuance of building permits.
9) The design of the Kenyon Way entry shall be
reviewed and approved by the Design Review
Committee prior to the issuance of building
permits.
pLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 3
10) The final design of the recreation area shall
be reviewed and approved by the City Planner
prior to the issuance of building permits.
11) Bus shelter details' shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City Planner prior
to the issuance of building permits.
12) Landscaping shall be provided within all
private patios along the easterly project
boundary to the satisfaction of the City
Planner.
13) Pursuant to provisions of California Public
Resources Code Section 21089(b), this
application shall not be operative, vested or
final, nor will building permits be issued or
a map recorded, until (1) the Notice of
Determination (NOD) regarding the associated
environmental action is filed and posted with
the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Bernardino; and (2) any and all
required filing fees assessed pursuant to
California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4,
together with any required handling charges,
are paid to the County Clerk of the County of
San Bernardino. The applicant shall provide
the Planning Department with a stamped and
conformed copy of the NOD together with a
receipt showing that all fees have been paid.
In the event this application is determined
exempt from such filing fees pursuant to the
provisions of the California Fish and Game
Code, or the guidelines promulgated
thereunder, except for payment of any required
handling charge for filing a Certificate of
Fee Exemption, this condition shall be deemed
null and void.
Enqineerin~ Division
1) All pertinent conditions of Vesting Tentative
Tract 15289 shall apply.
4. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of
this Resolution-.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR FOR VTT 15289 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
March 11, 1992
Page 4
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF MARCH 1992.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the llth day of March 1992, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #: J~Z2L(~~-:~ZLII~
SUBJECT: ~ ~[ ~
APPLICANT: ~ ~ *
LOCATION: b ~
~ose items c~ are ~~ of ~val.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT ~E ~NNING DNISION, ~14) ~1~1, FOR COMPLIANCE
I~ ~E FO~OWING COND~IONS:
A. ~me LimRI
/ 1. ~mval shall exam, un~ e~e~ ~ t~ Pinni~ ~mmls~n, ~ ~ildi~ ~ts are
~t ~u~ or ~v~ u~ ~ mt m~~ H~ 24 m~s from t~ date of ~mval.
2. ~ve~~s~n Re~ s~ll ~ ~v~ ~ ~ / / ~ ~~ '
3. ~val of Te~e Tr~ ~. ~ g~m~ ~ ~ t~ ~val of ~ / -
~ 4. ~e~ve~pers~mm~,~d~mein,~~~eor~useto~~~
~~ in, or ~um~, a MeI~R~s ~n~ Fadl~is D~ (CFD) for the
R~ C~m~ Fire p~n D~ to fi~ ~m~n ~or maime~n~ of
D~s ~ u~n ~~n. ~ ~u~ s~ ~ se~ by the Dttd~ in
~~ ~h ~s ~. In ~y ~i~ of a ~m~n, t~ ~ve~r s~l ~ w~h all
~m Im a~ ~~s. ~ CFD s~ll ~ ~ ~ t~ D~ a~ the deve~r
~mt~ ~~dt~fi~~m'
/ 5. P~r to r~m~n of m ~MI ~ or t~ ~sua~ ~ ~i~ ~, ~ever ~ms J J~
tim, the ~m s~l ~mm to, or ~~e ~, the ~imm of a Mel~R~s
~mmn~ F~tlRis D~ lot ~ ~mt~In aM ~mena~ of ~mW
f~ilRies. H~ever, ~ any ~1 d~ hE ~ev~us~ ei~is~ m~ a Commn~y
FadlRies Dist~, t~ ~m sMB, in tM ~e~Ne, ~mem to tN a~xat~n of the
~je~ sRe imo t~ te~oW of ~h exi~ D~ ~r to t~ r~~n of t~ final m~
or t~ is~a~ of ~i~i~ ~, ~er m~ tim. Fu~r, ff tN ~ ~1
d~ h~ mt fo~ a MeI~R~s Co~n~ F~IRIs Dim~ dhin ~eNe mm~ from
t~ ~te of ~val of t~ ~ a~ ~r to t~ r~~n of t~ fi~ m~ or ~sua~e
of ~i~i~ pe~s for g~ ~, th~ ~R~n sMil ~ ~ roll a~ vo~.
~/
~ - 2/9t
This condition shall be waned if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected
school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school
impacts as a result of this project.
V/' 6. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to issuance of building permits when rio map is /__J
involved, written cedffication from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water
facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the
Department of Comrnunify Development. 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 issuance
of parrnits in the case of all other residential projects.
B. S~/J)evelopmem
1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which ---/---J
include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign
program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein,
Development Code regulations, and
Specific Plan and
Planned Community.
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 City Planner.
V'/ 3. OccupancyofthefadlityshallnotcommenceuntilsuchtirneasafiUnit°rmBuildingC°deand /"'/ '
State Fire Marshall's regulations have been cornplied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall
be submitted to the Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety
Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance pdor to
~///' 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incoq:)orating all Conditions of Approval shall be / J
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
~. 5. Allsite, grading, landscaPe, irrigatlon, and street irnprovernent plans shall be coordinated f°r / J
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.
V//6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development J J '-
Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community Plans or Specific
Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance.
v/// 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and /
Sherffi's Department (989-6611) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall
indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely
affect adjacem properties.
b///8. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units /
with all receptacles shielded from public view.
9. Trash receptacle(s) am required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, ---/ /
and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval
V// prior to issuance of building permits.
10. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall l---J.
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 City
Planner.
SC - 2/9! 2
I/F"-
.. 11. Street names shal[ be submitted Jot Gity Planner review and approval in accordance with / ./
' / the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to al~roval o~ the final map.
12. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner. ---/---J -
including proper illumination.
13. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and .__/
weed control. in accordance with City Master Trail drawings. shall be submitted for City
Planner review and approval priorto approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior
to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct
all trails, including fencing and drainage devices. in conjunction with street improvements.
14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping of equine ---/
animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual
lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity
of appealing to beards of directors or homeowners' associations for amendments to the
CC&Rs.
V/15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the / ·
Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Pinning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or
prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be
V// provided to the City Engineer.
16. All parkways, open areas, and landscaPing shall be perrnanently malntained by the property ._.-/ J -
owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this
landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits.
17. Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or --J--J
dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of
a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions for
the subdivision which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation ol the linal map or
issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of
shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, except lor utility wires and
similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.060-G-2.
18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shall be developed and ---/---J -
maintained in accordance with the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No.
· Any further modifications to the site including, but not limited to, exterior alterations and/o~
interior alterations wh ich affect the exterior of the buildings or stnjctures, removal of landmark
trees, demolition, relocation, reconstruction of buildings or stNctures, or changes to the site,
shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic
Preservation Commission review and approval.
C. Builtling Design
V'/ 1. An aitemative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units ---/------/~
and tor heating any swimming pool or spa. unless other alternative energy systems are
demonstrated to be of ecluivelent capacity and efficiency. NI swimming pools installed at the
time of initial development shall be supplemented with solar heating. Details shall be
included in the building plans and shall be submitted for City Ranner review and approval
prior to the issuance of building permits.
/
2. All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural
treatment. detailing and increased delineation of sudace treatment subject to City Planner
review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
3. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners' Association shall 13e submitted for / /
City Planner and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
4. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other root mounted equipment and/or .J
projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and
streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally
integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
Details shall be included in building plans.
D. Parking and Vehicular Access (Indicate details on building plans)
V/' 1. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall .. J /
contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb).
2. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be / / ....
provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/
plazas/recreational uses.
// 3. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, /---J
entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards.
4. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are lass than 18 teet in ---J /
depth from back of sidewalk.
L/// 5. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictbns shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles / /
on this site unless they are the principal soume of transportation for the owner and prohibit
parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas.
6. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and /
Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District review and appmvat priorto issuance of building
permits.
E. Land ping (tor publicly maintained landscape areas, refer to Section N.)
~1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscap- -/ / .
ing in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect and submitted lor City Ranner review and approval prlorto the issuance of building
permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision.
2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction pamer /---/ ..
in accordance with the Mu nicipat Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on lhe grading plans.
The localon 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 arbodst's
recomrnendatlons regarding preservation, transplanting and trimming methods.
x~3. Aminimumof ~ treespergrossacre,comprisadofthefoliowingsizes, shall be Pr°vided / 'J
· within the project: O % - 48- inch box or larger, / D % - 36- inch box or larger,
/ (~ %- 24- inch box or larger, ~D %-1S-gallon, and (~ %-S gallon.
4. A minimum of ~) % ol trees planted within the project shall be specimen size trees - / /
24-inch box or larger.
5. Within parking iols, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three J__._J_
parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21.
2/91
6. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one / j~
tree per 30 linear feet of building.
~ 7. Aiiprivateslopebanks5feetorlessinverticalheightandof5:l orgreaterslope, 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
V~8 system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
· Aii private slopes in excess of 5 feet, butlessthan8 feet in vertical heignt and of 2:l orgreater ..J -/
slope shall be landrod and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as
follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 eq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger
size shrub per each 100 eq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope
banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and of 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
plamed 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
9. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continu-/ /...
ously maintained in a healthy and thdving condition by the developer until each individual unit
is sold and occupied by the buyer. Priorto releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection
shall be conducted by the Ranning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory
v//'l 0. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are respon- / /
sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous
planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from
weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive
regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any darnaged, deed, diseased, or
decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage.
11. Front yard landscaping shall be required per the Development Code and/or /~
· This requirement shall be in addition to the required
street trees and slope planting.
v//' 12. The final design of the ledmeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be / J
inolucled in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and
approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which rnay be
required by the Engineering Division.
13. Special landscape features such as rnounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meander- --J / .....
ing (with *
L/14. Landscaping and irrigation systems mcluired to be installed within the public right-of-way on ___J ·
the ledmeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
L//15. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. ff located in public maintenance areas, / ·
the design Shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
16. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for City Planner review and J---J
approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural
L// growth characteristics of the selected tree species.
17. Landscaping and irrigation Shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of ---/ -/
Xedscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamenga Municipal Code.
F. Signs
J 1. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. / /-
Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall
require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior tp installation of any
signs.
2. A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted for City Planner review and /----J
V/// approval pdor to issuance of building permits.
3. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or townhomes --J---J--
prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning
Division pdor to issuance of building permits.
G, Environmental
V'/1. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock / /
Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a
cash deposit on any property.
2. The developor shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted / J
Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City
Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property.
V/3. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway / / .
project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash
V/// deposit on any property.
4. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval pdor to the / /
issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise
attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building matedals and construction techniques provided,
and ff appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be
checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report.
H. Other Agencies
1. EmergencysecondaryaccessshallbeprovidedinaccordancewithRanchoCucamongaFire / /
Protection District Standards.
~/' 2. Ernergencyaccessshalibeprovlded, maintenance free and ciear, a minimumof261eetwlde / /
at all times dudng construction in accordance with Ranche Cucamenga Fire Protection
District requirements.
~ 3. Prior to issuance ol building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be / /
submitted to the Ranche Cucamenga Fire Protection District that temporary water supply for
// fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection system.
4. The applicant shall contact the U. S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and / /
location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead
structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the
design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior
to the issuance of building permits.
5. For projects usi,ng septic tank facilities, written certification of acceptability, including all / /-
supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Department of
Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic
Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits.
sc- 2/9t 6 /~"~- /
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (714) 989-1863, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
I. Site D~velopment
t/// 1. The applicant shall cornply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechani- ---/
cal Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please
contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and
applicable handouts.
J 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition --J ./
to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay developmentfees at the established rate. Such fees
may include, but am not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems
I::)eveiopment Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees.
3. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or · /
addition to an existing development, the applicant shell pay development lees at the
established rate. Such lees may include, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee
V~4Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees.
4. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, aftertract/parcel map recordation
and prior to issuance of building permits.
J. Existing Structures
1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances / /
considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings.
2. Existing buildings shall be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations for ..-/ /
the intended use or the building shell be demolished.
3. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be removed, filled and/or capped to cornply with the J ·
Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Building Code.
4. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and Shown on building plans submitted for ----/ /
building permit application.
K. Gracllng
L///1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City ---/ J
Grading Stardan:Is, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in
substantial conformance with the appmved grading I:~an.
~2. A soils report shell be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of Califomia to J /
perform such work.
~3. The development is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a Soil Disturt}ance J /
Permit is required. Please contact San Bernardino County Department of Agriculture at (714)
387-2111 for permit application. Documentation of such permit shall be submitted to the City
prior to the issuance ol rough grading permit.
4. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at t
v/~c the time of application for grading plan check.
5. Thefina~gradingplanssha~~becomp~etedandappr~vedpri~rt~issuance~fbuildingpermits. '/"J
March 11, 1992
Commissioner McNiel, Chairman
Commissioner Melcher
Commissioner Tolstoy
Commissioner Chitiea
Commissioner Vallette
Planning Commission
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Rancho Cucamonga, Ca.
Subject: Specific Plan Amendment, Masi Project (CUP 91-24)
Response to Staff Report and Modified Request
Dear Commissioners:
I want to thank the staff for such a complete and thorough analysis
of our requests. Specifically, I would like to comment on each
of the three parts of the Specific Plan Amendment request.
Part A - Circulation
We agree with staff~s analysis and urge the adoption of their
recommendation.
Part B - "Auto Court" Land Use
We are generally in agreement with staff's recommendation with the
following clarifications and modifications:
1) It should be clarified that gas or service stations may
have ancillary car washes and food marts.
2) In Table III-2 of the proposed Planning Commission
Resolution, we propose the following modifications:
Change: "Dense landscaping for screening purposes
should be provided around perimeter of site."
To Read: "Dense landscaping and/or architectural screen
walls should be provided along major and
secondary arterials."
Eliminate: "Service bays shall be oriented to the rear
of all buildings."
Some buildings have doors on both sides. Should such
strict standards apply to local industrial collectors?
Th~ Auto Court needs visibility from somewhere. Further
restrictions should be left to Design Review.
1510 ~versideD~ve · Bu~ank, CAgl506 (818) 846-2070
Specific Plan Amendment - Masi Commerce Center Partners - 3/11/92
Page 2
Part C - Retail and Related Uses
We request the following clarifications and modifications:
1) We request that a master conditional use permit be
allowed for some categories as shown in Exhibit I
attached.
2) We propose a maximum user size of 30,000 s.f. for uses
in both the Specialty Building Supplies/Home Improvements
and the Medical & Hospital Supply Stores/Drugstore
categories. (Staff recommendation is 25,000 sf.) This
is more in line with some leasing requirements.
3) In response to staff's concern about drug stores that may
really be general merchandise stores, we have separated
out Drugstores/Superstores from Medical/Hospital Supply
Stores and propose that a conditional use be required and
that a maximum user size of 30,000 s.f. be imposed.
4) We propose that Auto Supplies be conditionally permitted
under the following conditions:
a) It shall only be allowed in a project with an
approved Auto Court.
b) No other Auto Parts Store exists within 2500 feet.
c) Adequate trash containers be provided.
Staff indicates that this use might be permitted in the
Auto Court and not elsewhere. However, we believe that
an Auto parts Store, relying on street visibility for
business, could not survive in a heavily screened Auto
Court. Restricting its location near or adjacent to an
Auto Court seems more appropriate.
5) In-our February 25, 1992 correspondence with staff, we
requested that a "Home Furnishings and Appliances"
category be added to our request. That request did not
appear in the staff report. That proposed category and
definition with examples appears on both Exhibits I & II.
6) Staff expressed concern over the broad category "Pet
Stores, Pet Care and Recreational Supplies and Services"
We agree. We have divided that category into three
smaller categories entitled "Sporting Goods, Equipment,
Apparel and Accessories", "Pet Sales, Care and Supplies"
and "Recreational Supplies and Services". We suggest
that uses in this last use category be conditionally
permitted (see Exhibit I & II).
Specific Plan Amendment - Masi Commerce Center Partners - 3/11/92
Page 3
7) Finally, we are unclear as to how the "Activity Center"
encompasses our uses. Our proposal for an "Activity
Zone" limited the locations where the above proposed uses
could be located.
I hope the above comments are helpful.
Sincerely,
Michael Scandiffio
cc:' Dan Coleman
Beverly Nissan
Masi Commerce Center Partners (CUP 91-24) - March 11, 1992
Specific Plan Amendment
E__Y~__IBIT I: PERMITTED USES & CONDITIONALLY APPROVED USES
Permitted Uses (Under Master Conditional Use Permit)
Building Supplies & Home Improvements (max. 30,000 s.f. user)
Home Furnishings & Appliances (max. 30,000 s.f. user)
Office Supplies, Furnishings & Equipment
Medical and Hospital Supply Stores
Pet Sales, Care & Supplies
Sporting Goods, Equipment, Apparel & Accessories
Conditionally Permitted
Drugstores/Drug Superstores (max. 30,000 s.f. user)
Recreational Supplies & Services
Auto Parts, Supplies & Accessories (Sale Only)*
,Conditionally allowed only in project that has approved Auto
Court.
Masi Commerce Center Partners (CUP 91-24) - March 11, 1992
Specific Plan Amendment
EXHIBIT II: NEW & REDEFINED CATEGORIES
A) Home Furnishinqs and Appliances Sale of home furnishings
(finished & unfinished), lighting, bedding, rugs and other
accessories; used furniture; home furnishings repair and
reupholstery; sale of home/garden appliances, televisions,
VCR's, car phones, stereo and video equipment, telephones and
other consumer electronics. The maximum size of any user is
limited to 30,000 s.f.
Examples of such users include: Phil & Jim's Appliances, Dansk
Mobil Export (furniture) and McManhon Discount Furniture.
B) Sport~q Goods, Equipment, Apparel and Accessories
C) Pet Sales, Care & Supplies This includes sale of pets, food
and supplies, equestrian supplies and equipment and veterinary
services.
D) Recreational Supplies and Services This includes sale of
photo supplies and services, sale of art and music supplies
and services, musical instrument sales and repair, hobby shops
and sale of sports memOrabilia.
* Categories (B), (C) and (D) replace pervious category entitled
"Pet Stores, Pet Care and Recreational Supplies and Services".
E) Medical & Hospital Supply Stores Sale and rental of
medical/hospital equipment, supplies and prostethic devices.
F) Drug Stores/Superstores Sale of prescription and over-the-
counter drugs, health and beauty supplies and incidental
convenience items.
An example of a "Drug Superstore" would be Drug Emporium
(30,000 s.f.). Thrifty Drugs is not a drug superstore
because of the high volume of general merchandise sold.
, Categories (E) and (F) replace previous category entitled
"Medical & Hospital Supply Stores/Drug Superstores".
CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 11, 1992
TO: ~irman and Members of the Planning Commission
CH 11 , 1992, PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM F:
INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 92-02, PART C - MASI
The attached letter from Mr. Scandiffio (representing the Masi project)
was received too late for inclusion and analysis in the staff report.
It is a request for additional retail-related uses to be allowed under
Part C of the amendment. Staff will be prepared to respond orally at
the meeting if requested.
BB/jfs
Attachment: Letter from Mr. Scandiffio
05-09-:992 ~2=00~N ~ROP! Th~ Scand~{~o Compan9 TO ~?~498~499
THE SCANDIFFIO COMPANY
March 9, 1992
Commissioner McNiel, Chairman
Commissioner Melcher
Commissioner Tolstoy
Commissioner Chitiea
Commissioner Vallette
Planning Commission
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Rancho Cucamonga, Ca.
Subject: Specific Plan Amendment, Mask Project (CUP 91-24)
Proposed Permitted and Not Permitted Service Retail Uses
Dear Commissioners:
We would like to clarify further our request for a Specific Plan
Amendment to Subarea 7 oT ~he Industrial Speci[ic Plan which would
allow certain service retail uses.
In particular, we would like to outline both those uses that we
believe should be permitted and those that should not be permitted.
The uses have been largely grouped into conventional retail use
categories.
ACTIVITY 20N2
We propose that an "Activity Zone"b · created at Foothill Boulevard
and Rochester Avenue extending 1000 feet along Foothill Boulevard
and having a depth extending 700 feet South of the centerline of
Foothill Boulevard.
Within this "Activity Zone" we are proposing that a maximum of
110,000 s.f. of "service retail" uses be permitted. Furthermore,
we are proposing th%t the maximum size of any such user be limited
to 50,000 s.f. (this is consistent with the 50,000 s.f. limit for
light whole businesses already allowed in subarea 7).
It should benoted that the proposedMasS project has approximately
110,000 s.f. of potential service retail space (exclusive of a
restaurant and fast food establishments) within this proposed
"Activity Zone". The total building pad area designated for
potential service retail uses is approximately 10.5 acres.
1510 Riversid~ Driv~ · Burbank CA 91506 (818) 846-2070
03-09-1992 ll:00AM FROM The Scandi~o Com~an~ TEl 171a9876499 P.03
Planning Commission/Scandiffio - Masi Project - March 9, 1992
Rage 2
P~Pa!ITT]D U8]8
We propose the following service retail uses to be allowed within
the "Foothill Activity Zone":
1) Specialty Building SupplieS.&._Home ImUrovements
This would include stores specializing in the sale, and
possibly installation, of paint, wallpaper, floor
coverings, draperies and curtains, doors and windows,
building materials, hardware, plumbing and electrical
supplies, bath and kitchen fixtures and supplies,
lighting, swimmin~ pools and supplies and garden
furnishxngs, materxals and supplies.
Many of these users would sell to the trade (at
contractor prices) as well as to the general public.
It should ~e emphasized that these are specialty
businesses, not general merchandise stores like
Builder's Emporium or Home Depot.
We are working with Dunn Edwards Paints (10,000 s.f.),
Wallpaper To Go (5,000 s.f.) and Color Tile (5,000
s.f.).
2) Home...FurniS~ingS and Appliances
This would include furniture and accessories, household
appliances, stereo, television and other electronics.
This would include such users as Dansk Mobil Export
(furniture), Antique Emporia, Phil and Jim's Appliances
and Silo.
3) 9ffice SUDDlieS. _Furnishings and Service
This would include blueprint and photocopy services,
office 'supplies and furnishings, messenger/wire
services, business machines and computer equipment and
supplies ~nd postal/mail receiving and packaging.
we are working with Bismarck Inc., a ~5,000 to 30,000
s.f. computer and office supply superstore, seriously
looking to enter the Southern California market.
¢~-89-~9~2 Zl~O~H F~Obl Tf-,~ Scsnd~o Comp~ng TG 17149875499 P.04
Planning CommtssionlScandiffio - MaSi Project - Hatch 9, 1992
Page 3
4) Auto Su_r~plles
This would be limited to parts sales only - no service,
repair or installation.
This compliments the Auto Court use category- We plan
to have Chief Auto Parts in Building #4.
5) Medical & Hespital S. UDDi~ Stores and _Medical/ Drua
S~erstores
This would include the sale and rental of medical and
hospital equipment and supplies and large medical/drug
stores.
We belleve this is an excellent service retail use
category for the Masl property given the close location
of the new North San Antonio Medical Center.
We are currently working with Drug Emporium (25,000
s.f.).
6) Pet Stores, Pet Care__and Recreational_ISupplies and
Service~
This would include pet supplies, pet stores, riding tack
and supplies, riding and western wear, sporting goods
and athletic supplies, bicycles, hobbies, sports
memorabilia, veterinary clinics, art galleries, photo
labs, and music, art and photo studios, supplies and
instruments.
we belleve this use category is quite compatible with
the adjacent Sports Center.
We are working with Elliot's Pet Emporium (30,000 s.f.),
a pet supply super~tore.
It should be noted that Convenience Retail Uses, including some
Personal Service Uses, are already conditionally permitted in
Subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific Plan.
03-0~-19~ ll:O1AM FRQM The Scandi{~io Company T6 17149~76499 ~.05
Planning Commission/Scandiffio - Masi Project - March 9, 1992
Page 4
NOT pSRNXTTID USES
We believe that the proposed service retail uses categorized above
would not compete with the regional mall and would compliment, not
compete, with other nearby regional and community centers.
Conversely, retail uses that we believe are not appropriate are
categorized below.
General Merchandise: Department Stores, Discount
Stores, Variety Stores and other
General Merchandise.
Food Stores: Supermarkets, Convenience Markets,
Meat and Fish Markets and other
Specialty Foods.
Apparel Group: Clothing and Accessories, Shoe
Stores and other Specialty Apparel
Specialty Retail: Certain Specialty Retail Uses such
as Jewelers, Toy Stores and Gifts.
I hope the above notes further clarifies our application.
Sincerely,
Michael Sca~diffio
Dan Coleman
Beverly Nissan
TOTAL P.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 11, 1992 ~i:!'i
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Beverly Nissen, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT 92-02 - JACK MASI
A. A request to modify the local circulation pattern within
Subarea 7, along Rochester Avenue between Foothill
Boulevard and the Sports Park, to accommodate a proposed
industrial development at the southwest corner of
Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-011-
10, 19, 21, 26, 27, and 28.
B. A request to add an auto court use, consisting of
automotive services and related activities, as a
conditionally permitted use to Subarea 7 of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan.
C. A request to expand the list of permitted and
conditionally permitted uses in Subarea 7 of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan to include certain retail
and service-related activities.
Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration.
ABSTRACT: This application involves a three-part amendment to the
Industrial Area Specific Plan (ISP). Part A is a proposal for a change
in the local circulation, Part B is a request for an "Auto Court" use,
and Part C is a request to allow certain retail activities in portions
of Subarea 7.
The amendments are related to a 27-acre development project (Conditional
Use Permit 91-24), proposed for the southwest corner of Foothill
Boulevard and Rochester Avenue. Approval of all three parts of this
amendment is required if the project is to be approved as currently
proposed.
Staff supports the approval of Parts A and B of this application, with
minor modifications, as this is consistent with the intent of the ISP.
However, Part C, the addition of retail activities into this area, is a
matter of policy requiring specific direction by the Planning
Commission- Staff could support some, but not all, of the additional
retail uses as currently proposed.
This report reviews each of the three requests in separate sections--A,
B, and C--with separate Resolutions of Approval available for Items A
and B. Staff intends to prepare a resolution for Part C as directed by
the Commission-
ITEM F
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ISPA 92-02 - JACK MASI
March ll, 1992
Page 2
A. CIRCULATION: Request to Modify the Local Circulation Element Within
Subarea 7 Along Rochester Avenue.
The applicant has requested access locations along Rochester Avenue
which conflict with the access points designated in the ISP, shown
as arrows south of Foothill Boulevard on Figure IV-9 of the ISP
(Exhibit "A")-
The designated access point locations along Rochester Avenue were
based on the Engineering Division's Street Design Policy, which
specifies 660-foot intersection spacing on Secondary Arterials-
This coincides with property line spacing on the east side of
Rochester Avenue and promotes the development of a local industrial
street network with dedication shared equitably among the affected
property owners (Exhibit "B").
Normally, under the Engineering Division's Driveway Policy,
intermediate access would be allowed at 300-foot intervals. As the
applicant has pointed out, the right turn lane for the first
driveway south of Foothill Boulevard must be lengthened to
accommodate a bus bay. This will force several subsequent driveways
to be shifted southerly as well, off property lines. Shifting the
access points would allow the parcels on the east side to develop
independently with one driveway each. The two northernmost large
parcels have the same owner which could result in a single
development on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and
Rochester Avenue with access being more or less a "mirror image" of
the applicant's proposed project (CUP 91-24) on the southwest corner
'(Exhibit "C")-
Engineering staff feels the proposed access point locations are
equivalent to those currently shown in the ISP and thus does not
object to the applicant's request- We recommend that the ISP's
Circulation Element be amended by eliminating the arrows on Figure
IV-9 (Exhibit "A") which allows the flexibility of the applicant's
request as well as other options if the applicant's plan does not
proceed.
B. "AUTO COURT" LAND USE: Request to Add an "Auto Court Use" as a
Conditionally permitted Use in Subarea 7.
1. ~: The applicant is requesting the addition of an
"Auto Court" category as a conditionally permitted use in
Subarea 7. The applicant has requested that the "Auto Court"
be specifically defined as follows:
a. The "Auto Court" must be anchored by a gas or service
station.
b- Maximum Size: 4 acres.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ISPA 92-02 - JACK MASI
March 11, 1992
Page 3
c. Cannot extend or "front" along a major or secondary
arterial more than 300 feet.
d. No access permitted directly off major arterial.
e. Garage doors and service areas must be screened from all
major and secondary arterials-
f. permitted Uses: Gas stations; service stations;
automotive service and repair including mufflers, shocks,
alignments, brakes, oil change, lubrications, tune-ups,
smog checks, tire repair and replacement, transmissions,
and general auto repair; installation of air conditioning,
car phones, stereos, windshields and upholstery; and
windshield tinting and other related services. Also
general sale of auto parts.
g. Gas or service stations may have ancillary car washes and
food marts.
h. "Auto Courts" are not permitted in "Activity Zones." (See
the "Activity Zone" Concept section of this report.)
The applicant contends that the need for a separate "Auto
Court" category is the result of the current market trend
towards the elimination of the traditional "service station"
with auto repair capabilities- Traditional service stations
are currently defined as follows in the ISP:
Automotive Service Station: Activities typically include,
but are not limited to: the sale from the premises of
goods and the provision of service normally required in
the day-to-day operation of motor vehicles, including the
principal sale of petroleum products, the incidental sale
of tires, batteries, replacement items, and lubricating
services, and the performance of minor repairs, such as
tune-up, tire change, and brake work. (Note that this is
a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 7.)
The applicant has indicated that they feel these types of
facilities are rarely built anymore and that the current trend
is toward more specialized auto uses such as separate lube and
tune, muffler, and tire shops.
2. Staf~ Comments: The uses which the applicant is proposing seem
generally appropriate and compatible with the uses currently
established within Subarea 7 (Industrial Park). In fact, the
following proposed uses are already included in the definition
of an Automotive Service Station:
, General sale of auto parts.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ISPA 92-02 - JACK MASI
March 11, 1992
Page 4
* Service and repair of brakes, oil change, lubrication, and
tune-ups, and tire repair and replacements.
The more intensive uses requested include repair of mufflers
and shocks, wheel alignments, smog checks, and transmission
repairs. These types of uses would typically fall in the
category of Automotive and Light Truck Repair - Minor and
Major. Neither of these uses are permitted within Subarea 7.
The proposed uses, however, could be compatible with the
inclusion of the added design guidelines that the applicant has
proposed, such as screening of garage doors and service areas
from major and secondary arterials and the prohibition of
access from major arterials- Staff would also recommend that
the buildings be sited so that service bays are oriented
towards the rear of the building.
The guidelines proposed--(1) maximum 4-acre project size, (2)
required service station anchor, and (3) a 300-foot limitation
on frontage--would help to guard against proliferation of such
facilities within Subarea 7. The Commission may also wish to
consider requiring dense landscaping surrounding all sides of
the project for screening-
3. Recommendation: The Planning Commission should allow the
category of .,Automotive Service Court" as a conditional use as
defined in Section B1. However, Item h should be deleted since
the "Activity Zone" concept is not recommended (see Part C,
below). Also, the following design criteria should be added to
the definition:
a. Service bays should be oriented to the rear of all
buildings-
b. Dense landscaping should be provided around the perimeter
of the project site for screening purposes.
c. Outdoor storage of inoperative vehicles, parts, or
equipment is prohibited-
d. All work shall be conducted indoors.
e. All signage shall be limited to signs approved under a
Uniform Sign program.
C. RETAIL AND RELATED LAND USES: Request to Expand the List of
permitted and Conditionally permitted Uses in Subarea 7.
1. ~: Subarea 7 of the ISP stretches along the south
side of Foothill Boulevard from Day Creek to Deer Creek, a
distance of approximately two miles. Although it is designated
-Industrial Park" in the ISP, land use activities currently
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ISPA 92-02 - JACK MASI
March 11, 1992
Page 5
permitted include not only traditional light manufacturing, but
also a full range of office, administrative, business support,
and other business and personal related services, including
convenience retail, entertainment, and automotive services. A
list of permitted and conditionally uses can be found in
Exhibit "D."
This very broad mix of uses is intentional- It was devised to
provide a viable transition between the industrial and
employment areas to the south and the residential/retail
developments to the north. It also recognizes that Foothill
Boulevard, as the major east-west artery connecting to the 1-15
Freeway, will eventually attract high volume services needed in
the community but not appropriately located within either the
industrial area to the south or the residential/retail areas to
the north.
At the same time, the current regulations stop short of
allowing a full range of unrestricted retail activities in
Subarea 7. The City ' s current land use plan for Foothill
Boulevard recognizes that the community cannot support
retail/commercial establishments along the entire 6-1/2 mile
corridor without a negative impact on existing retail centers
in the older part of the community or already planned
commercial centers elsewhere-
The intention is to strike a balance; ideally, an ample amount
of commercial zoning should be available to accommodate needed
retail services without creating such an overabundance of
commercially zoned land that it cannot be developed to its
potential, resulting in marginal or temporary land uses.
2. Applicant's request: Given this background, it should be noted
that the applicant is NOT requesting a zone change or a General
Plan amendment.' Rather, the request is to expand the range of
permitted and conditionallY permitted uses to include certain
retail activities- This was done in an effort to be consistent
with the intent of the ISP.
The applicant' s request and justification is detailed in
Exhibit "E," attached- The specific uses requested, their
definitions, and staff comments are summarized below:
a. Specialty Buildinq Supplies & Home Improvements-
This would include stores specializing in the sale and
possibly installation of paint, wallpaper, floor
coverings, draperies and curtains, doors and windows,
building materials, hardware, plumbing and electrical
supplies, bath and kitchen fixtures and supplies,
1 ight ing, swimming pool s and suppl lee, and garden
furnishings, materials and supplies-
PLA/qNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ISPA 92-02 - JACK MASI
March 11, 1992
Page 6
Many of these users would sell to the trade (at wholesale
prices) as well as to the general public. It should be
emphasized that these are specialty businesses, not
general merchandise stores like Builder's Emporium or Home
Depot.
Staff C~mments: There are no similar uses to this
currently found within the ISP other than those indicated
in Development Agreement 87-01 (Foothill Commercial Design
Center) on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between
Spruce and Elm Avenues. The intent of this Development
Agreement, however, was to limit the uses to sales only to
designers, interior decorators, builders, etc., and not to
the general public. This application would permit retail
sales to the general public as well.
As indicated previously, "Light Wholesale, Storage &
Distribution" is permitted in Subarea 7. Related retail
uses are permitted in conjunction with a Conditional Use
Permit. The reasoning could be made that the applicant's
request is merely an extension of the broader definition
of "Light Wholesale, Storage & Distribution." The
Commission should also take into consideration whether or
not they feel there is adequate land in the City zoned for
such uses without adding additional retail uses that would
create an imbalance. Staff would recommend that a size
limitation of 25,000 square feet be placed on this use
category-
Recommendation: This use should be defined as the
applicant has requested. The 25,000 square foot size
limitation should be added to the definition. The use
should be limited to buildings or projects adjacent to
Foothill Boulevard Activity Centers (on Foothill Boulevard
and Rochester Avenue and Foothill Boulevard and Milliken
Avenue).
b. Office Supplies, Furnishinqs and Service:
This would include blueprint and photocopy services,
office supplies and furnishings, messenger/wire services,
business machines and computer equipment and supplies, and
postal/mail receiving and packaging.
Staff Comments: The uses as proposed are very similar to
those in the category of "Business Supply Retail and
Services" and "Business Support Services" both of which
are permitted uses within Subarea 7. This type of use
would be quite compatible with the intent of Subarea 7.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ISPA 92-02 - JACK MASI
March 11, 1992
Page 7
Recommendation: This use, as defined, is compatible with
other uses in Subarea 7 and may be added as a permitted
use.
c. Auto SUpDlieS:
This would be limited to parts sales only--no services,
repair, or installation.
Staff Comments and Recommendation: This is a strictly
retail use and would not be appropriate throughout the
entirety of Subarea 7. It may be appropriate only in
conjunction with the "Auto Court" concept which has been
discussed elsewhere in this report.
d. Medical & Hospital Supply Stores and Medical/Druq
This would include the sale and rental of medical and
hospital equipment and supplies and large medical/drug
stores.
Staff Comments: This type of use is not noted in the ISP
but could be compatible with the intent of the Industrial
Park designation which is identified in the ISP as a
transitional category from industrial to residential
uses. The use proposed is also compatible with
-Medical/Health Care Services" which is conditionally
permitted in Subarea 7, provided the use is truly a
specialty medical store as opposed to a "drug store" with
general merchandising and a relatively small drug counter.
Recommendation: This use could be added with a
Conditional Use Permit and should have a 25,000 square
foot or less size limitation added to the definition- In
addition, the definition should be revised to permit only
stores with a primary focus on medical-related sales.
e. Pet Stores, Pet Care and Recreational Supplies and
Services:
This would include pet supplies; pet stores; riding tack
and supplies; riding and western wear; sporting goods and
athletic supplies; sports memorabilia; veterinary clinics;
art galleries; photo labs; and music, art, and photo
studios and supplies.
Staff Comment: This category, as proposed, is much too
broad and should be narrowed down somewhat. Art
galleries; photo laboratories; and music, art, and photo
pLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ISPA 92-02 - JACK MASI
March ll, 1992
Page 8
studios and supplies are not at all related to pet
stores- Note, however, that photo studios are already
included in the definition for "personal Services" which
is conditionallY permitted in Subarea 7. Art and music
studios could easily be incorporated into the definition
for "personal Services" and would be compatible-
Recommendation: Art and music studios should be added to
the definition of -personal Services-"
Staff is seeking Commission direction on these land uses.
3. .,Activity Zone" ConcePt: In response to staff concerns that
the entire Subarea 7 would become a potential commercial zone
if the proposed uses were to be added to current regulations,
the applicant is proposing that these new uses be restricted to
only small portions of Subarea 7. As proposed by the
applicant, the new retail uses would be permitted only within
"Foothill Activity Zones." (These are defined by the applicant
in Exhibit "E.")
The applicant is also requesting that the "service retail" uses
proposed be classified as permitted uses within an "activity
zone" which would be approved under a master Conditional Use
Permit-
Staff Comments: Staff concurs that new retail activities, if
permitted, should be limited to specified locations- However,
rather than introducing the new concept of an ,,activity zone,"
we suggest that the new uses be simply restricted to the
immediate vicinity of the already established "activity
centers" as defined by the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, at
Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue and Foothill Boulevard
and Milliken Avenue- Limiting the uses to the already
established "Activity Centers" would be a workable means of
assuring that such uses would not dominate Subarea 7.
The "Activity Zone" concept would not be easily incorporated
into the existing format of the ISP- In addition, an .,Activity
Zone" could easily be confused with the "activity center"
concept already in place within the Foothill Boulevard Specific
Plan. The key points the applicant is proposing regarding the
"Activity Zone" could, however, be easily incorporated into the
definition section of the ISP and/or into the definitions of
the new proposed uses.
Recommendation: Staff feels this section should be deleted
since the "activity zone" concept does not seem workable-
Instead, staff recommends that revised land use definitions and
criteria for the location of proposed conditionally permitted
uses be utilized-
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ISPA 92-02 - JACK MASI
March 11, 1992
Page 9
ENVIRON)~,_NTAL ASSESSMENT: Upon review of Part I of the Initial Study
and completion of Part II, the Environmental Checklist, staff has found
no significant impacts related to an ISP Amendment which 1) modifies the
local circulation pattern within Subarea 7 along Rochester Avenue; 2)
adds an "Auto Court" use consisting of automotive services and related
activities as a conditionally permitted use to Subarea 7; and 3) expands
the list of permitted and conditionally permitted uses in Subarea 7 to
include certain retail and service-related activities-
CORRESPONDENCe: This item has been advertised in the Inland Valle~
Daily Bulletin as a public hearing, the property was posted, and notices
were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of ISP Amendment 92-02, Parts A and B to the City Council
through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval and
recommend issuance of a Negative Declaration- A Resolution of Approval
for Part C, based on specific direction by the Commission, will be
prepared and brought back for Commission action at a future meeting-
Res lly s ted,
er
BB:BN/jfs
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - ISP Figure IV-9
Exhibit "B" - Current Access Spacing
Exhibit "C" - proposed Access Spacing
Exhibit "D" - permitted and Conditional Uses in Subarea 7
Exhibit "E" - Letter from Applicant
Resolution of Approval ISPA 92-02, Part A
Resolution of Approval ISPA 92-02, Part B
U
NIA~
IV -47
C~ OF ~C'~;~'~UC~ONGA
,. :=.. :
P~~NG--D~SION
PLANI~ING-DMSION
PLANNING. DI~'ISION
SUBAREA ?
Land Use Designation Industrial Park
Primary Function Subarea 7 occupies an area directly south of Foothill
Boulevard which represents an important land use edge
between the City' s Industrial Area and community
oriented non-industrial area and is a gateway to the
City. A major industrial, office, and commercial
development on approximately 300 acres is currently
undergoing phased constructi on. Wi thin this area i s a
planned Civic Center w~ich wi|l include San Bernardino
County and City offices.
Permitted Uses Custom Manufacturing
Light Manufacturing
Administrative and Office
Professional/Desi gn Services
Researcl~ Services
Light Wholesale, Storage, Distribution
Bui 1 di ng Maintenance Services
Business Supply Retail Sales and Services
Business Support Servi ces
Communi cati on Services
Eating and Drinking Esta)lishments
Financial, Insurance and Real Estate Services
Hotel/Motel
Administrative Civic Services
F1 ood Control/Uti I i ty Corridor
Condi ti onal Uses Automarl ve Rental/I. easi ng
Automotive Sales
Automotive Service Stati
Convenience Sales and Services
Entertainment
Fast Food Sales
Food and Beverage Sales
Medical/Heal th Care Servtces
Personal Servtces
Recreation Facil i ties
Cul rural
Public Assembly
PuD1 i c Safety and Uti 1 i ty Services
Rel i gi ous Assembly
IV-48
January 22, 1992
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729
Subject: Summary of Requests Submitted for Planning Board Action
Location: Masi Property, Southwest Corner of Foothill Boulevard
& Rochester Avenue
Reference: CUP 91-24
Dear Mr. Coleman:
Please find below a summary of requests for Planning Board action
for the above referenced project. Where applicable, a'narrative
is provided with the applicant's justification or argument in favor
of the proposed Planning Commission action.
A) Tentative Parcel Map
A 32 parcel subdivision, including a public street, is
proposed.
The applicant is Masi Commerce Center Partners, a Limited
Partnership of Masi family interests; Jack Masi is the sole
General Partner of this Limited partnership-
Masi Commerce Center Partners is owner of the land comprising
all the proposed parcels except the approximately 2.5 acre
corner land at Foothill and Rochester, hereinafter referred
to as the "corner property". The "corner property",
comprised of proposed parcels #'s 5, 6 & 7, is owned by the
Sebastian Masi Trust (Jack Masi is Trustee) and Jennie Masi
(Jack Masi is empowered here to act on behalf of Jennie Masi).
Masi Commerce Center Partners is pursuing approvals for both
properties and is representing all concerned in this matter.
The Masi family desires to create an integrated development
of both land holdings.
A total of 268,907 square feet of development is proposed.
An alternate scheme, involving a minor site design change to
the "corner property", would total 267,907 square feet; it is
described in the next section below. The square footage of
development and proposed uses are summarized in an
accompanying exhibit in the submittal package.
115'11'
15]0RiversideD~ve ·Burbank. CAg1506 (818) 846-2070
Coleman/Scandiffio ' Summary of Requests - Masi Property
Page 2
B) Design Approval
Design approval is requested for all buildings except
restaurant parcel #5. We are working with a tenant for that
building although the exact building size and design have not
been clearly established at this time.
Two schemes are presented for the ,'corner property". Scheme
A has three buildings, a 10,000 s.f. restaurant (pad #5) and
two service retail buildings (#6 & #7). In alternate scheme
"B", building #7 has been eliminated so as to provide parking
for a 14,000 s.f. restaurant for pad #5 rather than the 10,000
s. f · restaurant as shown in scheme "A". The design of
building #6 remains the same however,
We request the approval of both design alternatives for the
,,corner property"- If scheme "B" is ultimately selected, we
would combine proposed parcels #5 and #7 into a singie parcel.
C) Conditional Use permit
In addition to the site plan approval as described above,
conditional use permits will also be required for the
following uses:
1) Automotive Service Station (Parcel 2)
The gas station has two gas 'islands, an automated car
wash and a small food mart; this is a typical Texaco
station. The gas station building is approx. 1800
square feet. A conditional use permit may also be
required for the sale of food and beverages from the
ancillary food mart. It is envisioned that the station
will be part of a larger Auto Court (see Specific Plan
Amendment section below)-
2) Fast Food Sale~s (Parcel 3)
A Jack In The Box fast food establishment, approximately
2770 square feet, is proposed for parcel #3.
3) ReliGious Assemblv (Parcel 14)
We propose to relocate Victory Chapel from the existing
,'winery" building on Foothill Boulevard to building 14.
Building 14, approx. 8096 s. f, is a tilt-up industrial
building with 24 parking stalls and a parking ratio of
2.96 cars per thousand square feet.
Coleman/Scandiffio - Summary of requests - Masi Property
Page 3
An area equal to 1950 square feet will be used as an
assembly area; the balance of the space will be used for
offices 2500 s.f.), the baptistery (500 s.f.), storage
(1900 s.f.) and classrooms (1200 s.f.). The assembly
area would not be used at the same time as the other
spaces. The baptistery would not be used at the same
time as the assembly area or the other spaces.
We understand that 35 spaces are needed for each 1000
s.f. of assembly space. Thus 68 spaces are required.
The offices require 10 spaces, the classrooms require 12
spaces and the storage area requires 2 spaces - for a
total of 24 stalls. The baptistery is not like the
assembly area and would not require as many parking
spaces; nevertheless, it would not be used at the same
time as the other spaces.
It is clear that the planned 24 parking s~aces for
building #14 can handle all uses except the assembly
space. An additional 46 stalls are needed, consistent
with the fact that the office, classroom, storage and
baptistery spaces are not used at the same time as the
assembly area. (68 required spaces for assembly less
24 provided on site equals 44 additional spaces needed).
We propose that a reciprocal parking right be allowed
with adjoining parcel #13; parcel #13 has 44 stalls.
Religious assembly occurs on Sunday mornings and thus
will not impact parcel #13, designated for service retail
use. We think this is a good solution to the problem
of church assembly parking requirements.
4) Conditional Use Permit for proposed Auto Court Use and
Service Retail Uses in Activity Zone
See D(2) and D(3) below.
D) Industrial Specific Plan Amendments
1) Remove or Relocate Desiqnated Access Point on Rochester
Avenue.
The Industrial Specific Plan, subarea 7, calls for access
points on shared property lines approximately 610 feet
South of Foothill Boulevard on Rochester Avenue.
We believe that this designated access point no longer
has any strong validity and would be better located if
moved approximately 134 feet South on Rochester Avenue
as shown on our proposed site plan.
Coleman/Scandiffio - Summary of Requests - Masi Property
Page 4
Sheet 41 of the submittal package is a master plan for
the area surrounding the Masi site with the subject
access points on Rochester Avenue moved to the proposed
locations-
The specific justifications for the movement of the
access points are summarized below:
a) City standards dictate that a bus bay with a right
turn stacking lane must have a minimum length of 335
feet. We find this City standard appropriate and
desirable- Since the Masi property is required to
have a bus lane at the corner of Foothill and
Rochester, the first driveway along Rochester must
be located at least 335 feet from the corner of
Foothill and Rochester; our first driveway is almost
exactly at that minimum distance,
This driveway location dictates the next. The
designated driveway in the Specific Plan would fall
within the minimum 300 foot required spacing between
driveway centerlines, as per City standards.
However, the proposed access point (moved approx.
135 feet to the South) is comfortably at a distance
of approx 340 feet (centerline to centerline) from
the upper driveway near the bus bay.
For a site the size of the Masi property (approx.
27 acres), two driveways on Rochester are essential
to handle the proposed intensity of development-
The designated access point in the Specific Plan
precludes the northerly proposed driveway probably
because the Specific Plan did not anticipate the
required bus bay which ultimately affects driveway
locations-
b) The elimination of Pioneer Boulevard via a Specific
Plan amendment so as to facilitate the development
of the Sports Center to the South of the Masi
property also weakens the justification for the
location of the subject access point. Pioneer
Boulevard, once located 660 feet South of the
subject designated access point, was intended to
extend all the way to Miliken Avenue. With the
elimination of this East/West thoroughfare, a
significant load will likely be taken off Rochester
Avenue. The proposed location of the subject
access point approx. 135 feet further South is thus
far less significant due to the elimination of
Pioneer Boulevard. See sheet #41.
Coleman/Scandiffio - Summary of requests - Masi Property
Page 5
c) The proposed access points are superior in terms of
the development of parcels on the East side of
Rochester Avenue opposite the Masi property.
As sheet #41 illustrates, lots 31 and 32 are owned
by the same owner, Gwo-Chau Liao; combined they
total about 12.4 acres. The Specific Plan access
point would put this parcel's access road along its
Southern property line. This clearly would be
undesirable in terms of good site planning because
the rear property line would most likely be the
loading area for buildings in the back half of the
site (see sheet #41). The facades of these
buildings would be better oriented towards Foothill
Boulevard with the main access drive running through
the middle of the site as shown on sheet #41.
Additionally, this property is too small for a
public street and thus there is little logic for
extending the proposed "Masi Drive" through it.
The 7 acre Masi property to the South of the Gwo-
Chau Liao property (lots 31 & 32) works very well
with the location of the proposed "Masi Drive".
This piece would best be developed as small, high-
end industrial buildings with a high parking ratio
as proposed on the subject Masi property (see sheet
#41). Like the Gwo-Chau Liao property, an access
point on the Northern property line of this piece
would run counter to good site planning. We
envision this piece to have a private drive or cul
de sac with adjoining industrial lots on either side
of this access road, thus creating an environment
suitable for a high-end, small industrial building
project. Since we do not envision large industrial
boxes on this site, an access road along its
Northern boundary, as currently shown in the
Industrial Specific Plan, would run counter to good
site planning,
In sum, changes in land uses along this section of
Rochester Avenue (Sports Center), the elimination
of Pioneer Boulevard, the pattern of property
ownership and land development and other special
requirements (bus bay and right turn lane stacking
standards) seriously weaken the justification for
the access points as specified in the Industrial
Specific Plan. We believe our proposed access
points better reflect present and future conditions.
Coleman/Scandiffio ' Summary of Requests - Masi Property
Page 6
2) Auto Court Use Cateqory Added to Subarea 7 As
ConditionallY permitted Use=
The current trend in the marketplace is the elimination
of service stations with auto repair capabilities-
These are being replaced by "gas" stations, that is, no
auto repair services are available- The "gas" stations
usually have food marts and some also have automatic car
washes.
Auto repair is becoming highly specialized, as evidenced
by "Lube and Tune", Smog Pro, Midas, Winston Tires and
various other auto service specialists- The emphasis
of these service specialists is on speed, convenience and
price.
We are proposing the Auto Court use category to reflect
these new realities. Traditional ,'service" stations
are permitted conditionally in subarea 7, but not these
new specialty services. We believe these new "fast and
convenient" services would be quite appropriate if
grouped together into a planned and aesthetically
pleasing "Auto Court" anchored by a gas station.
We are working with Texaco, Jiffy Lube, Midas Muffler,
American Tire, Amco and Zeus Automotive in the planning
and design of our proposed Auto Court.
We propose the addition of an "Auto Court" use
classification to be added as a conditionally permitted
use in subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific Plan.
Specifically, we propose the following:
a) The Auto Court must be anchored by a gas or service
station.
b) Maximum Size: 4 acres.
c) Can not extend or "front" along a major or secondary
arterial more than 300 feet.
d) No access permitted directly off major arterial.
e) Garage doors and service areas must be screened from
all major and secondary arterials.
Coleman/Scandiffio - Summary of Requests - Masi Property
Page 7
f) Permitted Uses:
Gas stations, service stations, automotive service
and repair including mufflers, shocks, alignments,
brakes, oil change, lubrications, tune-ups, smog
checks, tire repair and replacement, transmissions,
general auto repair, installation of air
conditioning, car phones, stereos, windshields and
upholstery, windshield tinting and other related
services. Also general sale of auto parts.
g) Gas or service stations may have ancillary car
washes and food marts.
h) Auto Courts are not permitted in "Activity Zones".
See ,,activity zone" proposal under D(3) below.
We propose that the conditional use permit be granted
for the entire Auto Court, rather than just for
particular parcels or buildings. Permitted uses would
become "as of right" once the conditional use permit for
the auto court is granted.
3) "Foothill Activity Zone" with Service Retail Uses Added
to Subarea 7 As Conditionally Permitted Use Cate~orv,
We propose that a "Foothill Activity Zone" area be added
to subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific Plan. Within
this zone we propose that certain service retail uses be
allowed.
The purpose of the activity zone would be to encourage
pedestrian activity at certain key intersections along
Foothill Boulevard and to provide a better transition
between industrial areas and residential and
neighborhood/communitY retail areas.
The proposed permitted service retail uses are those that
are often found within or at the edges of industrial
areas and border on major thoroughfares. These service
retail uses reflect the new trends in marketing where
there is little or no distinction between discount sales
to the public and wholesale trade. Many of these service
retail businesses may involve retail or discount sale to
the public as well as special wholesale prices for the
,'trades" or retailers.
Coleman/Scandiffio - Summary of Requests - Masi Property
Page 8
These service retail users are usually in the range of
5,000 s.f. to 25,000 s.f. Because of their discount
nature, they can not afford to pay mall prices.
They are usually not considered ,'anchors" because they
are not large enough and due not have the attraction of
a typical anchor like a supermarket or a MarshalIs,
Therefore, they due not get the bargain rents that
typical anchors get in neighborhood and community
centers. Since they are discount in nature, they must
seek cheaper rents and can not afford to pay the rents
paid by smaller "mom and pop" stores. For this reason
such uses tend to locate in transitional zones between
industrial and neighborhood/communitY retail and
residential areas.
The typical discount center, such as Victoria Market and
the Foothill Marketplace, put the emphasize on getting
larger users, 100,000 s.f. and larger to anchor their
centers; the "mom and pop" stores pay high rent and the
anchors pay very little; the profits are made on the "mom
and pop" stores. However, the 5,000 to 25,000 s.f.
service retail user is often left out; often there is
little space available for these mid-size users and, if
space is available, the rent is too high (the anchors
must be subsidized).
For example, Victoria Courtyard will have a 122,000 s.f.
Home Depot and a 113,000 s.f. K-Mart. Except for one
20,000 s.f. building, all the other buildings are geared
towards smaller shops under 5,000 s.f. Clearly one can
see that these mid-size service retail users (5,000 to
25,000 s.f.) are not adequately provided for in these
large discount centers.
We believe the Masi property provides an excellent
location for these destination type, mid-size service
retail users. The "regional" nature of many of these
service retail uses will reinforce the planned Victoria
Gardens shopping mall nearby. They will also be quite
compatible with the adjacent Sports Center and will
provide an excellent transition between the industrial
zone and the nearby regional/communitY retail, hotel and
residential areas.
Coleman/Scandiffio - Summary of Requests - Masi Property
Page 9
It should be noted that "wholesale to retailers of
finished goods and food products" is already permitted
in subarea 7; in fact, "retail sales from the premises
may occur when approved as a conditional use". (See
section III, part (C) on page III-10 of the Industrial
Specific Plan.) Our proposal can be viewed as an
extension of this concept so as to accommodate new
marketing trends that were not clearly established at the
time the Industrial Specific Plan was first written.
Specifically, we propose the following definition of an
"activity zone":
a) Activity Zone Defined
1) An activity zone must abut Foothill Boulevard
and must be in subarea 7; it can not occur
within the Haven Avenue Overlay District.
2) An activity zone must occur at the intersection
of Foothill Boulevard with a major or secondary
arterial.
3) The maximum frontage of the activity zone along
Foothill Boulevard is limited to 1000 feet.
The maximum depth of an activity zone from the
centerline of Foothill Boulevard is 700 feet.
4) The maximum amount of service retail uses
(excluding eating establishments) allowed in
an activity zone is limited to 110,000 square
feet.
5) the maximum size of any retail user is limited
to 50,000 square feet. (This is consistent
with the current 50,000 s.f. size limit for
light wholesale users allowed in subarea 7.)
6) Permitted and conditionally permitted uses in
subarea 7 are still permitted within activity
zones; however, service stations and "Auto
Courts" (see D(2) above) are not allowed in
activity zones.
We propose that the "activity zone" designation be
given as a conditional use and that the permitted
service retail uses become "as of right" within the
conditionally permitted "activity zone". .
Coleman/Scandiffio - Summary of Requests - Masi Property
Page 10
We propose the following service retail uses to be
allowed with4n the ,,Foothill Activity Zone":
1) Specialty Building Supplies & Home Improvements
This would include stores specializing in the
sale, and possibly installation, of paint,
wallpaper, floor coverings, draperies and
curtains, doors and windows, building
materials, hardware, plumbing and electrical
supplies, bath and kitchen fixtures and
supplies, lighting, swimming pools and supplies
and garden furnishings, materials and supplies.
Many of these users would sell to the trade (at
contractor prices) as well as to the general
public. It should be emphasized that these
are specialty businesses, not general
merchandise stgres like Builder's Emporium or
Home Depot.
We are working with Dunn Edwards Paints (10,000
s.f.), Wallpaper To Go (5,000 s.f.) and Color
Tile (5,000 s.f.).
2) Office Supplies, Furnishings and Service
This would include blueprint and photocopy
services, office supplies and furnishings,
messenger/wire services, business machines and
computer equipment and supplies and
postal/mail receiving and packaging.
We are working with Bismarck Inc., a 25,000 to
30,000 s.f. computer and office supply
superstore, seriously looking to enter the
Southern California market.
3) Auto Supplies
This would be limited to parts sales only - no
service, repair or installation-
This compliments the Auto Court use category.
We plan to have Chief Auto Parts. in Building
Coleman/Scandiffio - Summary of Requests - Masi Property
Page 11
4) Medical & Hospital Supply Stores and Medical/
Drug Superstores
This would include the sale and rental of
medical and hospital equipment and supplies
and large medical/drug stores.
We believe this is an excellent service retail
use category for the Masi property given the
close location of the new North San Antonio
Medical Center.
We are currently working with Drug Emporium
(25,000 s.f.).
5) Pet Stores, Pet Care and Recreational'Supplies
and Services
This would include pet supplies, pet stores,
riding tack and supplies, riding and western
wear, sporting goods and athletic supplies,
sports memorabilia, veterinary clinics, art
galleries, photo labs, and music, art and
photo studios and supplies.
We believe this use category is quite
compatible with the adjacent Sports Center.
We are working with Elliot's Pet Emporium
(30,000 s.f.), a pet supply superstore.
I hope the above Summary of Requests addresses all the relevant
areas concerning our application. Please call me if you have any
questions, need any clarification or require more information.
Sincerely,
Mic~l Scandiffio
Owner ' s Representative
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC
PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 92-02, PART A, REQUESTING THE
ELIMINATION OF DESIGNATED ACCESS POINTS ALONG ROCHESTER
AVENUE BETWEEN FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ARROW ROUTE, AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 229-011-10,
19, 21, 26, 27, AND 28.
A. Recitals.
(i) Jack Masi has filed an application for Industrial Area Specific
Plan Amendment No. 92-02, Part A, as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Industrial Area
Specific Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application."
(ii) On March 11, 1992, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part "A," of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced public hearing on March 11, 1992, including
written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this
Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) A development proposal has been received for the southwest
corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue which utilizes access points
different from those shown in the Industrial Area Specific Plan and includes a
master plan for adjacent development compatible with the alternate access
point locations-
(b) The existing parcels on both sides of Rochester Avenue are
sufficiently large enough to allow alternative development schemes consistent
with the City's Street Design and Driveway policies, making the designation of
specific access points in this location unnecessarily restrictive-
(c) The property to the north of Foothill Boulevard is
designated Mixed Use - Commercial, Office, Residential (MOC) in the Terra
Vista Community Plan. The property to the south is designated General
Industrial in the Industrial Area Specific Plan, Subarea 8, and includes the
Sports Complex. To the east is the Day Creek Channel and two Southern
California Edison easements- The areas on either side of Rochester Avenue and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
ISPA 92-02A - JACK MASI
March 11, 1992
Page 2
extending west to Haven Avenue are designated Industrial Park in the
Industrial Area Specific Plan, Subarea 7.
(d) This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies
of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a
manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and
(e) This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan; and
(f) This amendment would not be materially injurious or
detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact
on the environment nor the surrounding properties.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above-referenced public hearings and upon the specific findings of
facts set forth in paragraph I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and
concludes as follows:
(a) The amendment does not conflict with the circulation
policies of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and
(b) The amendment promotes the goals of the Circulation Element
of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and
(c) The amendment is in conformance with the General Plan; and
(d) The amendment would not be materially injurious or
detrimental to the adjacent properties-
4. This Commission hereby finds that the project has been reviewed
and considered for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970 and, further, this Commission hereby recommends issuance of a Negative
Declaration-
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2, 3, and 4 above, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
hereby recommends approval of the Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No.
92-02, Part A, which removes the access point arrows on Rochester Avenue just
south of Foothill Boulevard as shown in the attached Exhibit "A."
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS llTH DAY OF MARCH 1992.
pLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
pLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
ISPA 92-02A - JACK MASI
March 11, 1992
Page 3
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the llth day of March 1992, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 11, 1992
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Steve Hayes, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR TWO DESIGNATED
MULTI-FAMILY PARCELS SOUTH OF BASE LINE ROAD NEAR VICTORIA
PARK LANE
ABSTRACT: On February 26, 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No.
91-060 directing staff to conduct land use reconsideration proceedings
throughout the City. This approval specifically excluded the area
within the Victoria Planned Community south of Base Line Road by
directing that the Planning Commission develop recommendations for
"...the areas north of and adjacent to Base Line Road within the
Victoria Planned Community..."
At the February 26, 1992, Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner
Vallette expressed her interest in reconsidering the zoning and General
Plan designations on the Hueblien (Nabisco) and Diamond properties.
CHRONOLOGY: April 1981 - General Plan adopted with High Residential
District (24-30 dwelling units per acre) land use designation on the
above-referenced parcels-
December 1983 - Development Districts Map adopted with High Residential
District (24-30 dwelling units per acre) designation.
April 1988 - Historic Preservation Commission recommended Landmark
Designation to City Council of the Nabisco plant-
May 1988 - City Council tables Landmark Designation pending staff
discussions with property owner. Staff and the property owner agree to
reconsider Landmark Designation at such a time as exterior modifications
to the buildings are desired.
July 1988 - Both parcels were annexed into the Victoria Community Plan
(Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 88-02). The land use designation
remained High Residential per Ordinance No. 363-
March 1989 - "Victoria Lakes" Village Amendment (Victoria Community Plan
Amendment No. 88-05) retains High Residential designation for Hueblien
(Nabisco) property and changes Diamond property from High Residential to
Medium Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) per Ordinance
No. 393.
ITEM G
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DISCUSSION OF LAND USE DESIGNATION - VICTORIA
March 11, 1992
Page 2
February 1991 - City Council adopts Resolution No. 91-060 for
reconsideration of land uses excluding the Victoria Lakes South Village
area (South of Base Line Road).
BB:SH/jfs
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
c~~ u
C, FY OF ~' "!..".~i:..,,.C,, CANIONGA Lo~_,~-,~/~Ty~
PLANNIN~-. D~SION TrrLE:
.......:-.. ..i i
: EXq{IBIT: ~' SCALE: