No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999/11/10 - Agenda PacketCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 10, 1999 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chamber 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman McNiel __ Vice Chairman Macias __ Com. Mannedno __ Com. Stewart __ Com. Tolstoy ~ II. ANNOUNCEMENTS PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION TO REBECCA VAN BUREN III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 29, 1999, Adjourned Special Meeting October 13, 1999 IV. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items as 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. DISPOSITIONOFCITYOWNEDPROPERTYWITHINTRACT14380 - MASTERCRAFT CUCAMONGA I, LLC - A request to find the quit claiming of Lot A of Tract 14380 in conformance with the General Ran - APN: 225-461-61. V. 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. Aft such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. B. ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENTANDTENTATIVETRACT14759- RANCHO SUMMIT - The proposed subdivision of 132 acres of land into 358 single family lots and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling 18.3 acres in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the east and west sides of Wardman Bullock Road, nodh and south of Summit Avenue - APN: 226-102-17. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. (Continued from October 27, 1999) C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 16001 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES - A proposed subdivision of 10 numbered lots and 4 lettered lots on 23.5 acres of land for condominium pGrposes in the Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre); within the Terra Vista Community Plan generally bounded by Elm and Spruce Avenues, Church Street, and the future La Mission Park - APN: 1077-791-01 through 09 AND 1077-801-01 through 10. Related file: Development Review99-19. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES - The design review of 358 condominium units on 23.5 acres in the Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre); within the Terra Vista Community Plan generally bounded by Elm and Spruce Avenues, Church Street, and the future La Mission Park - APN: 1077-791-01 through 09 AND 1077-801-01 through 10. Related file: Tentative Tract 16001. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-42 - TOMRA PACIFIC, INC. - A request to install a baling press within an existing recycling facility on 2.49 acres of land in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 9910 East 6th Street - APN: 209-21-43. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Vl. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS F. MASI PLAZA - A review of interpretation of Recreational Commercial land uses. Page 2 G. DAY CREEK BOULEVARD SCENIC/RECREATION CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN - A review of the conceptual design of the future Day Creek Boulevard. H. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT ISSUES PERTAINING TO TENTATIVE TRACT 15711 PACIFIC COMMUNITIES Consideration of an alternate sidewalk and tree planting concept for the approved 283 lot subdivision on 80.39 acres of land in the Low- Medium Residential district (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, generally located north of Foothill Boulevard, east of Etiwanda Avenue, south of the Interstate 15 Freeway, and west of East Avenue - APN: 1100-141-01 and 02, 1100-171-01 and 13, 1100-181-01 and 04, and 1100-201-01. VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place forthe general public to address the Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. VIII. COMMISSION BUSINESS I. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROGRESS - Oral report IX. ADJOUI~NMENT The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shafl be heard only with the consent of the Commission. I, Gaff Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on November 4, 1999, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. Page 3 VICINITY MAP CITY HALL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON~A CITY O F DATE: November 10, 1999 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: ~ OF CITY-OWNED PROPERff wrrl-IiN TRACT 14380 - MASTERCRAFTC~I,LLC - A request to find the quit claiming of Lot A of Tract 14380 in conformance with the General Plan - APN: 225~ 461-61 BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Tract 14380 recorded in 1991. Lot A, as shown on Exhibit "B", was dedicated to the City in fee. On June 9. 1999, the Planning Commission approved Development Review 99-03, for phases 3 and 4 of Tract 14380, with a condition which stated, "the paseo currently proposed between Lots 22 and 23 shall be relocated to between Lots 20 and 21." The developer has submitted Lot Line Adjustment 449 to relocate the property lines for lots 21, 22 and A. However, the City must first quit claim the current Lot A dedication, reserving easements for storm drain and water line purposes, then accept the offer of a new Parcel A of LLA 449. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding through minute action that the subject proposed quit claim of Lot A of Tract 14380 is in conformance with the General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for further processing and disposition of excess property. Respectfully submitted, Senior Civil Engineer DJ:BAM:sd Attachments: Vicinity Map (Exhibit "A") Proposed Lot Line Adjustment (Exhibit "B") ITEM A ~"~_,.~~~~~~"'~ I I illi~ CITY OF ITEM: Tract 14380 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: Vicinity Mal~ ENGrNEERINGDIVISION /,~9~ EXHIBIT: "A" EXHIBIT "B" 20 LOTS 21,22 8~ LOT A TRACT 14380 ~'~' f.l~,.~..4-~, I DRIVE I L=14. fi' L -x~. PANEL C " 23 .. LOT A.. I WILSON AVENUE EXIS~NG LOT LINE TO REMAIN __ __ EXISTING ~T LI~ TQ BE N~ ~T LINE ~,, = ~, CITY OF I~M: Lot "A" Tract 14380 ~NCHO CUCAMONGA ~E: Prooosed Lot Line Adi~ent ENG~EE~G DIVISION ff~ EXHIBIT:. "B' THE CITY OF I~ANCIIO CUCAMONCA Su fRepc DATE: November 10, 1999 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT - The proposed subdivision of 132 acres of land into 358 single family lots and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling 18.3 acres in the Low Residential Distdct (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the east and west sides of Wardman Bullock Road, north and south of Summit Avenue - APN: 226-102-17. BACKGROUND: At its October 27, 1999, meeting, the Planning Commission continued the item to allow the applicant and staff time to resolve issues related to how funding would be acquired for long term maintenance of the three proposed public parks within the tract. Currently, staff and the applicant are still working to resolve the matter. A workable solution is expected and will be provided to the Commission at the November 10 meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The applicant has completed Part I of the Initial Study and staff has completed Part II. On October 18 staff received a letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Exhibit "A"). The applicant has provided an adequate response to the letter (Exhibit "B"). Supplemental information provided by the applicant's biologist in response to the claims made by the Department of Fish and Game has been added to the discussion portion of the Initial Study. With implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in the attached Initial Study and Resolution of Approval, all potential impacts associated with the project can be mitigated to a less than significant level. If the Planning Commission concurs, then issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be in order. ITEI4 B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT November 10, 1999 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 14759 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions and issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:BLC\Is Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service received October 18, 1999 Exhibit "B" - Applicant's response letter dated November 1, 1999 Exhibit "C" - Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 27, 1999 Resolution of Approval with conditions and Mitigation Monitoring Plan ~'~~~,7~~ United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad, California 92008 RECEIVED Brad Buller Senior Planner OCT 18 ~ City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive City ol Rancho Cucamong Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ~!~ling Division Re: Raneho Summit Development, Tentative Tract 14759, Raneho Cucamonga, San Bemardino County, California Dear Mr. Butler: On August 25, 1999, we artended a meeting regarding potential impacts to biological resources from the proposed Rancho Summit development, which involves a subdivision of 132 acres of land on the Et!wanda alluvial fan, including 62 acres of coastal sage scrub, into 358 single-family lots. At the meeting, we were informed that protocol surveys of the proposed project site failed to detect any listed species, including the federally endangered San Bemardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriamiparvus, "SBKR"). Survey results suggest that the abundance and distribution of SBKR have declined on the Etiwanda alluvial fan in recent years. We remain concerned that the proposed development may result in the "incidental take" of SBKR because: · Previous surveys have documented the SBKR on and/or adjacent to the proposed project site, and the proposed project site contains suitable habitat for the species that is contiguous with areas known to now support SBKR. The subspecies was captured on, or immediately adjacent to, the proposed development ~ite in 1992 (McKernan 1994; enclosed). Also, SBKR were captured in contiguous habitat_i. tnmediately west of the proposed development site (i.e., lower Etiwanda spreading grounds) during May 1999. · The low densities and patchy distribution of SBKR makes this subspecies difficult to detect during surveys. Furthermore, protocol surveys do not provide complete coverage of an area. Hence, SBKR on the site may not have been detected during the recent surveys. · High frequency fluctuations in abundance of SBKR in response to variations in environmental conditions can lead to rapid, dynamic changes in the spatial distribution of kangaroo rats, with density often varying 5-fold or more from year to year. Also, the high intrinsic reproductive rate and mobility of kangaroo rats enable them to rapidly re-colonize areas of suitable, but now unoccupied, habitat. Hence, SBKR could rapidly expand into suitable habitat on the proposed development site when environmental conditions are favorable and SBKR numbers increase. Brad Buller 2 Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended, prohibits the take of endangered or threatened species, where take means "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct." "Harm" is further defined to include significant habitat modification or degradation that kills or injures listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering. To reiterate, the proposed development may result in the incidental take of SBKR by impairing essential behavior patterns, like dispersal, by impeding the expansion of the population during favorable environmental conditions. Furthermore, the destruction of alluvial fan scrub will further isolate and fragment this population of SBKR. Small, isolated populations have a high probability of extinction because they are susceptible to s~ochastic events such as high variability in age and sex ratios, and catastrophes such as floods, droughts, or disease epidemics. We maintain that a viable population of SBKR on the Etiwanda alluvial fan is essential for the long-ten survival and recovery of this subspecies. In light of the above discussion, we recommend that the proponent of the Rancho Summit development contact us to discuss ways to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate adverse effects to this subspecies during the proposed development. Moreover, because development of the Rancho Summit site may require incidental take authorization, a permit application pursuant to section 10 of the Act may be required. Such applications must be accompanied by a habitat conservation plan (HCP) that specifies the: 1) impacts likely to result from the taking of listed species, 2) measures the applicant will undertake to monitor, minimize, and mitigate such impacts, and the funding that will be available to implement such measures, and 3) alternative actions the applicant considered that would not result in take, and the reasons why such alternatives are not being utilized. If the HCP and the application for the permit meet the issuance criteria, then a permit authorizing incidental take will be issued. We continue to be concerned about the rapid rate of development on the Etiwanda alluvial fan and recommend a meeting between our staffs to discuss the long-term solution for this biologically diverse region. If you have any questions pertaining to these comments, please feel free to call P.J. White of my staff at (760) 431-9440. Sincerely, · A. Bartel Assistant Field Supervisor Enclosure I -6-99-NFTA-9 co: Bill Storm, Rancho Summit, LLC Robin Maloney-Rames, California Department of Fish and Game Randy Scott, County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Deparunent SENSITIVE MAMMAI,q OF THE SAN SEVAINE CRE~K PROJECT Prepared for: Southwestern Field Biologists 8230 East Broadway BIrd., Suite W8 Tucson, Arizona 85710-4002 Prepared by: Robert L. McKernan Biological Science Division San Bernardino County Museum 2024 Orange Tree Lane Redlands, CA 92374 June 1994 INTRODUCTION The primary objective in preparing this report was to provide detailed information on local distribution of seven mammal taxa in the vicinity of the San Savaine Creek Project Crable I). Sufficient information is available through personnel and the mammal collections at the Biological Science Division at San Bemardino County Museum to enable the lead consulting firm, Southwestern Field Biologists to assess potential impacts of the San Savaine Creek Project. METHODS The distribution of the 7 mammal taxa were derivedfrom museum specimens and previous studies. No small mammal trapping was conducted specifically for this project. However, Robert L. McKerean, Supervisor of Biological Collections at San Bernardino County Museum (SBCM) has conducted over 5000 traps nights in the alluvial fan habitats along the cismontane areas of the San Gabriel and San Bemardino Mountains. These specific trapping localions include various habitats and substram types in the vicinity of the San Savaine Creek Project (Figure 1). Along with the trapping dam from R. McKeman additional mammal distribulional data relative to the San Savaine Creek Project area was included from specimens house in the SBCM mammal collections. SENSITIVE MAMMAIS California Mastiff Bat Enmops ~ ,Callfornicus Distribution: The mastiff bat occurs from central California, southward to central Mexico 0Yilliams, 1986). The majority of the California mastiff bat populations are resident in the state, however, some bats are thought to migrate from the colder areas and winter in lowland areas 0hrilliams, 1986). Historically, there are 14 records for Colten, southern San Bemardino County (Vaughan, 1959). Over the last 30 years very few records of this species 1 Table 1. Sensitive Mammal Species of the San Savaine Creek Project Status Species Federal State Observed/Potential Greater mastiff-bat FC2 CSC X Eumops perotis californicus San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit FC2 CSC X Lepus californicus bennettii Los Angeles pocket mouse FC2 CSC X Pero~nathus loncimembris brevinasus San Diego pocket mouse FC2 CSC X chaetodipus fallax fallax San Bernardino kangaroo rat FC2 CSC X Di~odomVs merriami parvus Southern grasshopper mouse FC2 CSC X Onychomys torridus ramona San Diego desert woodrat FC2 CSC X Neotoma lepida intermedia Status Codes~ FE Listed as Endangered by the USFWS FT Listed as Threatened by the USFWS C2 Category 2 candidate for federal listing for which insufficient biological information exists to support listing. FSS Forest Service Sensitive Species CSC CDFG "Species of Special Concern" CFP California Fully Protected 2 have been documented in southern San Bernardino County. (Vaughan, 1959). However, in 1992 a roost site of approximately 70 mastiff bats were located at Summit School, Etiwanda (McKeman, Unpublished dam). Summit School is located on Summit Avenue in the central portion of section 28. In addition, during June 1993, 11 individuals were observed foraging over F~xt Etiwanda Creek (Appendix 1). Habitat: This species appears to favor rugged, rocky areas where suitable crevices are present for roosting and breeding. Mastiff bats have also been observed using buildings for roosting (Willisins, 1986). Along the mountain fronts of the San Gabriel Mountains potential roosting and breeding habitat exist. These areas are characterized by ragged rocky areas usually with large cracks or crevices located along steep canyons, granite walls, and high open cliffs. Within the San Savaine Creek project area steep canyon walls and cliffs are present along the northern portions of section 14, 15, and 16. The mastiff bat also utilizes buildings and mature trees for roosting. Within the San Sevaine Creek Project area their are many eucalyptus tree wind-rows and non-native palms which have been found to provide roosting sites for this species (McKernan, unpublished dam). Status: In southern California incidental information suggest that the mastiff bat populations have declined considerably in recent years. WillisriB (1986) indicates that reasons for the decline of this species axe the extensive loss of habitats due to urbaniT~afion of coastal basins, marsh drainage, and cultivation of major foraging areas. Very little current information exist on population status, threats to the species populations, and roosting/breeding sites in southern San Bernardino County. To better understand the status of this subspecies throughout southern San Bernardino County surveys should be conducted to determine relative densities of populations and location of occupied roosts. This species is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing, a California Species of Special Concern, and a Forest Service Sensitive Species. San Diego Black-tailed Jackrabbit Lepus californicus bennettii Distribution: LeDu~ californicus bennettii ranges from Venmra County south to northwest Baja, California. This subspecies is restricted to coastal valleys of southern California. l~nbitat: The San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit inhabits a variety of open habitats in coastal valleys of southern California, principally coastal sage scrub, alluvial sage scrub, and grasslands. Within the San Savaine Creek Project area this species is found throughout the alluvial sage scrub habitats and non-grasslands habitats south of the mountain fronts (Appendix 2). It has been observed utilizes rural residential areas, although this use is seems infrequent. Status: The San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit which only occurs in coastal southern California is declining due to habitat loss. Based on incidental information this species is now very limited in its distribution in the San Bemardino Valley mainly from urbaniTntjon. The San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit is a Category 2 Candidate for federal listing, a Califontia Species of Special Concern, and a Forest Service Sensitive Species. San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat DinodomVs ~ parvus Distribution: This kangaroo rat is a subspecies of the wide ranging Merriam kangaroo rat of the southern California deserts. The San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR) historically occurred throughout San Bernardino and San Jacinto Valleys on the Pacific slope of southern California in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. The cun~at distribution of this species has been drastically reduced by urba~iTntlon, agricultural land conversion, flood control projects, and mining operations in alluvial wash habitats. Remnant populations exist in portions of southern San Bernardino County, mainly in the Santa Ana River Wash, Lytle Creek Wash, and lower Cajon Wash. There are only four present-day records from Riverside County (lVlcKernan, unpublished). Habitat: This kangaroo rat prefers alluvial wash scrub in association with loose sandy soils. Specific habitat preferences are alluvial scrub within sandy terraces, braided channels, and sandy alluvial deposits. The only known population of SBKR in the San Savaine Creek Project area was located in 1992 adjacent to F~t Etiwanda Creek Channel (McKernan, unpublished} (Appendix 4). This site is located along the eastern border of East Efiwanda Creek. This pop.htinn of SBKR's occupies a narrow sandy wash with California Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum) sparsely distributed in a wash along the eastern border of l:~t Etiwanda Creek (Appendix 4). This remnant population was found disuibuted over and area less than 2 acres. Status: The current status of this remnant population is currently unknown. Although, based on the adjacent land activities, encroachment of non-native grasses and the stabiliT~on of the sandy wash habitat through channeliT~tion makes this small population of SBKR tenuous. During 1992 SBCM trapping surveys indicated that the nature of the adjacent land disturbances and restriction of future fluvial processes within the odupied wash make survival of this population bleak. Historic records, subsmate, and habitats indicate that this species most likely did not extend up F~t E~wanda Creek (McKeman, unpublished). The SBICR is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing, and California Species of Special Concern, and a Forest Service Sensitive Species. Los Angeles Pocket Mouse Pero2nathus iontimembris brevinasus Distribution: The Los Angeles pocket mouse is restricted to lower elevation grassland, alluvial sage scrub, and coastal sage scrub in cismontane southern California. Records extend from Burbank and San Femando in Los Angeles County to the northwest and to the City of San Bcmardino, San Bemardino County. The subspecies extends eastward in the vicinity of the San Gorgordo pass in Riverside County, and possibly to north-central San Diego County. lFIabitat: The habitat of the Los Angeles pocket mouse is lowland grasslands, coastal scrub associations in Los Angeles basin, San Fernando and San Bernardino valleys, to Cabazon and Hemet, Riverside County (Williams, 1986). The preferred habitat for this species in cismontane San Bemardino and Riverside Counties is alluvial sage scrub, and those areas of coastal sage scrub which are found on well drained benches. Historic specimen locations are usually fwm areas which are well drained alluvial sediments. Status: The decline of this species in the cismontane areas of San Bemardino, Riverside, and San Diego Counties is directly related to the loss of coastal sage scrub habitats by land conversion and urbani7~tion. The Biological Science Division of the San Bernardino County Museum has been conducting trapping surveys throughout the San Bemardino Valley. Specific trapping locations include lower Day Canyon Wash, l:~t Efiwanda Creek, Lytle Creek, Cajon Wash, and Santa Aria River Wash. Based on these Upping surveys we have found the highest relative abundance to occur in alluvial scrub habitats composed of compacted sandy soils with perennial scrub cover of approximately 70%. Within the San Sevalne Creek Project area this species has been Upped in the central and southweste/n portion of section 16, the southwest portions of section 15, and a narrow portion of the central portion of section 21 (Appendix 5). These occupied habitats are contain a fine compacted sandy substram. Further Upping in Spring 1993, and Summer 1993 upping surveys conducted by San Bernardino Co. Museum located a high relative abundance of Los Angeles pocket mice in Sections 16 and 17. Additional trapping conducted in Sections 13, 15, 18 19, and 20 indicated this species is potentially widespread in the alluvial sage scrub habitats on fine gravefly soils. Status: This species is currently a Category 2 candidate for federal listing, a California Species of Special Concern, and a Forest Service Sensitive Species. San Diego Pocket Mouse ~ .faHax fallax Distribution: The San Diego pocket mouse (SDPM) ranges from Claremont, Los Angeles County, San Bemardino Valley, and south through coastal southern California to Baja, California. Habitat: Habitat preference for SDPM is coastal sage scrub and arid chaparral. Based on the decline of coastal sage scrub in southern California, this species' present population and status is unknown. During past San Bernardino Co. Museum surveys, individuals were upped primarilO in alluvial fan sage scrub in Sections 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20. Within the alluvial fan sage scrub, this species was encountered with the greatest frequency on loose sandy soils near abraded areas. Status: Similar to the other sensitive small mammals direct impact would be unchecked sand and Favel operations, flood control activities, and development of infrastructure. The current status of this subspecies is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing, a California Species of Special Concern, and a Forest Service Sensitive Species. Southern Grasshopper Mouse ~ torridus ramona Distribution: The Ramona grasshopper mouse is ranges from San Femando, Los Angeles County south to Tecate Valley, Baja California. The mg. ge appears restricted to lowland coastal valleys in southern California. Habitat: The Ramona grasshopper mouse is associated with Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub. The presence of this subspecies appears closely tied to alluvial scrub habitats with Yucca so. in association with other perennial plants. Status: Within the San Bemardino Valley the subspecies appears locally uncommon in the Santa Ana River Wash near Highland, and along the northern flanks of the Badlands near Loma Linda, San Bemardino County. As with other species associated with coastal sage scrub communities, the grasshopper mouse's present status and distribution needs further investigation in coastal southern California. In August 1993 the San Bemardino Co. Museum trapped 3 individuals in Sections 17 (1), and 19 (2) associated with dense areas of alluvial fan ~age scrub (appendix 6). This subspecies of grasshopper mouse is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing, a California Species of Special Concern, and a Forest Service Sensitive Species. San Diego Desert Woodrat Neotoma lepida intermedia Distribution: The San Diego desert woodrat occurs form San Femando, Los Angeles County south to Ensenada, Baja California. In southern California is restricted to cismontane lowland habitats. Habitat: This species reached its maximum abundance in alluvial Sage Scrub and coastal sage scrub habitats in the coastal valleys of southern California. Within the San Bemardino Valley, this rodent is one of the most abundant species encountered during Upping surveys in the alluvial scrub (San Bemardino Co. Museum). Away from the steep mountain front, this rodent can be found in a variety of habitat conditions along alluvial fans and the valley floor. Within the San Savaine Creek Project area it is widely distributed (appendix 7), Status: As with other species occurring in coastal sage scrub habitnt% the desert woodrat's suggested decline is based on loss of habitat. The status for this species is category 2 candidate, a California Species of Special Concern, and a Forest Service Sensitive Species. Hall, E.R. 1981. The mammals of North America, 2nd. ed. John WHey & Sons, New York, 1:1-600, 2:601-1181. Vaughan, T.A. 1959. Functional morphology of the three bats: Eumops, Myotis, Macroms. Univ. ofKanasas Publ., Mus. Nat. Hist., 12:1-153. Wiiliams, D.F. 1986. Mammalian species of special concern in California. Wildlife Manag. Division Administrative Report 86-1. California Department of Fish and Game. APPENDIX DM SION BIOLOGICAL ~. ' SCIENCE - potential occurrence based on habitat and soils DM SION SAN BEP~NARDfNO COL,~'I'Y MUSE~ ................ T San Bernardino Kangaroo Rac (Dlpodomys mevriami parvus} BIOLOGICAL ~ · = museum spec~en and trapping locations SCIENCE ~,~ = potential occurrence based on habitat and soils DIVISION ~ ' ~ ~ : ,-2- ......:'--~ ....... ;~;~.~"' '~'~ -';, ~----y~;~~; ~' ;~ ........;~.?? .......... ~ '~~'~ .....~:~"'~ ~r ~?:. "  San Diego Deser~ ~oodrat (Heo~a~a lepld~ inte~edia) SI~I~L~ ~5 = museum specimen and trapping locations DI~SION ~ ] ~ = potential occurrence based on habitat and soils THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Biological Services 3415 valencia Hill Drive Phone/Fax: 909 686 1141 Riverside, CA 92507 E-mail: kkirtland@aol.com November 1, 1999 Mr. Brent Le Count City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 SUBJECt: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service letter: Response to Comments Dear Mr. Le Count: Karen Kirtland of Kirtland Biological Services and Lisa Kegarice of Tom Dodson Associates, Inc. were contacted by Hogle-Ireland, Inc. to respond to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) comment letter on the Rancho Summit development. Their assistance was requested because they were the biologists present at the August meeting with the US~rFS when some of these issues were raised. Following are the response to conunents for your review. The comments were numbered by Kirtland Biological Services (see attached letter). Comment Number 1. Summary of comment: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) states that the proposed development may result in the "incidental take" of the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriamiparvus), a federally endangered species. Response: Incidental take usually refers to the loss or injury of individuals and the loss, destruction or damage of occupied habitat. The site does not currently support populations of the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR). This finding is based on the results of the protocol trapping work done by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) for the project (LSA 1999). Comment Number 2. Summary of comment: Previous surveys have documented SBKR on and/or adjacent to the project site. In addition, suitable habitat exists on site contiguous with areas containing known populations of SBKR. November 1, 1999 HIR99-107 Mr. Brent Le Count Kirtland Biological Services Page 2 Response: Work done by McKernan has identified SBKR near the project site (McKernan 1997 and 1999). The 1997 report included a population found in 1992 in the northeast quarter of Section 28, Township 1 north, Range 6 west (In his 1999 report, McKernan incorrectly cites this population as occurring in Section 27). The 1999 report found three individuals near the 1992 population, in the northwest quarter of Section 27, Township 1 north, Range 6 west. Both these populations occur in the more active "floodplain area" (spreading basins) of the Etiwanda Channel, in an area dissimilar to the Rancho Summit property. The work by McKernan suggests that SBKR has restricted habitat requirements, with most of the populations being found in pioneer and intermediate stages of Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS). McKernan has also trapped populations in moderately dense RAFSS, but these populations are described as being found in "limited but very suitable habitat [in the form of] a few narrow sandy braided openings in moderately dense AFSS [sic]" (McKernan 1999). McKernan suggests that suitable habitat exists where sandy openings or draws occur in moderately dense scrub cover. Most of the undisturbed RAFSS on the Rancho Summit parcel could be characterized as belonging to the mature stage of RAFSS and forming a moderately to highly dense cover. The disturbed RAFSS has a more open cover, but has undergone disturbance similar to that found in the annual grassland habitat on-site. The soil cover ranges from a gravelly loamy sand to a coarse sandy loam. In addition, the property is currently outside the active floodplain area for Etiwanda Creek, and is no longer subject to scouring from floodwaters. Based on these factors, most, if not all, of the Rancho Sununit properly appears to be unsuitable for the SBKR, even for immediately adjacent populations. It should be noted that McKernan states that only the one population of three individuals were found; no other animals were trapped elsewhere in the 308 acre study area. The study area extended north to the Southern California Edison 500 Kilovolt transmission line, and east and west outside of the mainstem of the drainage (McKernan 1999). Comment Number 3. Summary of comment: The USFWS states that low densities and patchy distribution of SBKR make them difficult to detect, and protocol surveys do not provide complete coverage of an area. The implication is that SBKR actually present on site may have been missed during trapping. Response: Nearly all rare, threatened and endangered species are difficult to detect because of limited available habitat and generally patchy population distributions. Various protocol surveys for listed species were developed in accordance with accepted scientific sampling techniques. The basic tenet of sampling is that properly designed surveys need not cover 100 percent of a given area to adequately identify whether or not a species is present. Based on this tenet and experience with similar species, the protocol survey technique for the SBKR was adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as suitable for the determination of presence or absence of this species. The USFWS has November 1, 1999 HIR99-107 Mr. Brent Le Count Kirfland Biological Services Page 3 recently declined acceptance of the results of survey findings when standard survey protocols were not followed. Based on the trapping work done by LSA in accordance with standard protocol technique required by the USFWS, the SBKR is not present on site. Comment Number 4. Summary of comment: The USFWS notes that the relative density, abundance and regional distribution of SBKR populations are subject to high frequency fluctuations. This can result in rapid changes in spatial distribution and population densities. Also, the relatively rapid reproductive capabilities and mobility of SBKR allow for the potential for rapid expansion into previously unoccupied areas, particularly under favorable environmental conditions. Expansion into suitable habitat areas on the project site therefore could potentially occur. Response: As noted in the Response to Comment Number 2, the on-site habitat appears to be at best marginal for the SBKR. Therefore, unless a major change in the habitat were to occur, it is unlikely that SBKR would move on to the site in the near future. Although the USWFS's interpretation of population dynamics may be accurate, no procedure is provided in the endangered species legislation to encumber private property that may be occupied in the future. Changes in numbers and distribution of wildlife and plant species are relevant issues in land management and preservation practices. Policies addressing these fluctuations are hopefully incorporated into the appropriate documents for future management of the habitat. However, the environmental review process requires a viewpoint fixed in time, at least for the determination of impacts and mitigation requirements. The environmental review process does not attempt to address future changes to existing conditions, except those resulting from the development of the project itself. Therefore, although expansion of a listed species into on-site habitat is always a possibility, such a future event cannot be evaluated except when acknowledging that the loss of any on-site plant community or habitat contributes to the regional loss of that plant community or habitat in the future. The project addresses this loss of habitat by the purchase of mitigation land for preservation in perpetuity. Comment Number 5. Summary of comment: The USFWS cites Section 9 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), which prohibits take. The USFWS believes that the proposed development may result in take by inhibiting or impairing normal behavior patterns. In this case, the primary behavior pattern being affected is dispersal. In addition, the USFWS states that the destruction of alluvial fan scrub will further isolate and fragment this population of SBKR (?undescribed), reiterating their comments about stochastic changes in population numbers and distribution. The USFWS maintains that "a viable population of SBKR on the Etiwanda alluvial fan is essential for the long-term survival and recovery of this subspecies." November 1, 1999 HIR99-107 Mr. Brent Le Count Kirtland Biological Services Page 4 Response: There is no basis at present for assuming that the development of the Rancho Summit project will cause significant habitat modification or degradation that will result in the disruption or impairment of of essential behavioral patterns (Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, Section 9, as modified by Palila vs. the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, et al., and the Sportsmen of Hawaii, et al., 1986), Based on McKernan's 1997 findings, the nearby 1992 location contained occupied habitat that "has an uncertain future" as a result of flood control activities and existing modifications of the fluvial system occurring at the time of the 1997 study. Based on McKernan's 1999 findings, there is only one population near the project site, consisting of only three animals. This population is in a narrowly defined habitat (a sandy opening within moderately dense scrub). Based on LSA's findings, there are no SBKR on the project site. Based on LSA's description of the on-site habitat, the site is at best marginally suitable for the SBKR, portions of it having been disturbed and most of it surrounded by unsuitable habitat (see response to California Department of Fish and Game Comment Numbers 2 and 3). Predicting the potential future movement of the SBKR onto the project site is at best speculative. The population found by McKernan in 1999 is small, probably too small to sustain a viable population without additional animals. The opportunity for a rapid population increase, with subsequent expansion onto the Rancho Summit site, would probably require both additional current populations of SBKR to be present nearby and modification of much of the Rancho Summit property to provide the requisite habitat conditions. The City agrees with the USFWS that the preservation of a viable population of SBKR on the Etiwanda Fan should be of prime consideration in the overall preservation of this subspecies; however, the data are not yet available concerning whether a viable population is indeed present. The City also agrees that other sensitive species and the RAFSS plant community should be preserved where possible. To that end, the City has signed on as a Participating Agency to the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan to Conserve Wildlife and Plant Species of Concern in the San Bernardino Valley. The addition of land to a preserve area, provided by this project as mitigation, will be more beneficial to overall habitat preservation than preservation of this marginally suitable site. Comment Numbor 6. Summary of comment: The USFWS recommends that the project proponent for the Rancho Summit development contact the USFWS to discuss ways to "avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate adverse effects to this subspecies [SBKR] during the proposed development." The USFWS also states that the development of the project site may require application for a permit for incidental take authorization. The remainder of the comment is concerned with the requirements for permit application. Response: The City has complied with the recommendations in this comment. The City, the project proponent and the proponents representatives met with P.J. White of the USFVVS on August 25, 1999, and discussed the Service's concerns with the project. As a result of the meeting, the project November 1, 1999 HIR99-107 Mr. Brent Le Count Kirtland Biological Services Page 5 proponent and the City added a mitigation measure requiring the purchase of 20.0 acres of scrub habitat off-site in an area adjacent to a '175 acre scrub mitigation area. Based on the trapping work done by LSA in accordance with standard protocol technique required by the USFWS, the SBKR is not present on site. Since no take of SBKR is anticipated, there is no need for an incidental take permit. Comment Number 7. Summary of comment: The USFWS restates their concern with the rapid rate of development on the Etiwanda alluvial fan, and recommend a meeting between City staff and USFWS to discuss long-term solutions for preservation of the biological values of this area. Response: The City concurs with the concerns of the USFWS, and is anticipating parlicipation with the USF!,VS and other Participating Agencies in the development of a Habitat Conservation Plan that will address these and other concerns regarding the Etiwanda Fan. Hease feel free to call me at 909 686 1141 if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Karen Kirtland Principal Attachment: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Comment letter, with comments numbered November 1, 1999 HIR99-107 Mr. Brent Le Count Kirfland Biological Services Page 6 References Cited LSA Associates, Inc. 1999. Biological Resources Report for TTM 14759 (Rancho Summit) City of Rancho Cucamonga. Revised July 14, 1999. Prepared for Allard Engineering, Rancho Cucamonga, California. McKernan, ILL., 1997. The Status and Known Distribution of the San Bentardino Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus ): Field surveys conducted between 1987and 1996. Report prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cartsbad Field Office. McKeman, R.L. 1999. Biological Inventory of the Etiwanda Creek Flood Control Project, San Bernardino County. Report prepared for the San Bernardino County Transportation/Flood Control Department, San Bernardino, California. November 1, 1999 HIR99-107 United States Department of the Interior . Fish and Wildlit Service , ' Ecuh~gical Services ~"' earlsbad Fish and Wildlife Otlice "' 2730 l.oker Avenue Wes[ ,.. . %'~'~-~'~' J' ('arlsbad, Califrfl~ia 92008 v ' ' ' RIECE:VED Brad llullcr Scnioi' I'lanncr OCT I 8 'EJ99 City of Rinds) Cucarnonga 105(}1) Civic Center Drive C.;I.,t t,; ;~a~.:no CucamonL Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 . f,',~ Division Re: Ranthe Summit Development. Tentative Tracl 14759, Ranthe Cueamnnga, San Bernarclino Counly, Califnrnia Dear Mr. Bullet: On August 25, 1999, we altcndcd a ha:cling regarding potential impacts to biological resourccs from the proposed Raneho Summit development, which involves a subdivision of I]2 acres of land on the I'~tiwanda alluvial Fan, including 62 acres of coastal sage scruh, into 358 single lhmily lois. At the meeting, we were inlbrm~J Illat protocol surveys of the propnr,~ project site failed to detect any listed species, including the federally cudangered ."im~ Rernardino kangaroo Pat (Dipodamyx merriamt parvu.,', "SBKR"). .";urvcy results suggest that thc abundance aud distribution of SBKR have declined on tbc Etiwanda alluvial I~n in recent years. We remain concerned that the prnpnscd development may result in the "incidental take" of SBKR because' Previous surveys have documented the NBKR on and/or adjacent to the proposed project ~ilc, and the proposed project site contains suflable habitat thr the speems that is contiguous with areas known to now support SBKR. The subspecies was captured on, or immediately adjacent In, Ihe proposed development site in 1992 (MeKeroan 19q4; enclosed) Also, SBKR were captured in conliguoos habitat immcdiatcly west of the proposed devehrpnicut Etiwanda spreading grounds) doting May 1999. - I'he low densities arid patchy distribotim~ of SIIKR makes this subspecies difficult to detect during surveys. Furlhenncrre. prntocol surveys do not provide complete craveragc of an area. lienee, SBKR ¢m Ihe site may not have been deleeted during the recent surveys. High l?cquency fluctuations in abund:u~ce oESBKR in respnnse to variati,ms in cnwronmcnlal cnnditinns call lead to rapid, dynamic t:hmlgcs in the spatial distribution of kangaroo rats, with density often varylug S-thld or more from year to year. Also, the high intrinsic reproductive rile and mobility nf kangaroo rats enable Ihem to rapidly re-eoleniTe area,, of suitable, bul now unoccupied. habitat. Hence, SBK R could rapidly expand into ~uihblc hahitat on the proposed devch~pment site when environmental conditions are favorable arid SRK R numbers increase. Brad Bullcr 2 Secttun 9 uflhc Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act). as amcndcd, prohibds the takc of endangered or threatcued species, where take means "to harass. harm, pursta:, hunt, shoot, wound. kill. trap, capture. ur collect. or to attempt to engage in any such conduct." "!tarre" is Further defined to include sig.i~cant habitat modification or degr'.u:lation that kills or injures listed spccics by signi~canlly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding. Feeding. or sheltering. To relicrate. the proposed dcvclopmcnt may result in the incidental take of SBKR by impairing essential behavior I~tlcms. like dispersal. by impeding the expansion of thc population during Pavorablc cnvironment~l conditiuns. Furthcrmom. the dcstructinn of alluvial fan scrub will l'urther isolatc and fragment this population of SBKR. Small, isolatcd populations h~ve a high probability of extinction because thcy ~'c susceptible to stochastic crests such as high variability in age and ~x ratios. and calastrophes such as droughts. or disease epidemics. We maintain that a viablc population ofSBKR ,m the Etiwanda alluvial fan is essential for the long-term survival and menvery of this subspcc|cs. In light of thc above discussion. wc recommend that the proponent of the I,lanchu Sumrail dcvclopmcnl contact us to discuss ways to avoid. minimize. and/or mitigatc adverse effects to this subspecies during thc proposed development. Moreover, becau~c development of the Rancho gumrail site may rcquire incidental take aulhorizalion. a permit application putstreat to scction 10 ofthc Act may be required. Such applications must be accompani~l by a Imbitat conservali.n plan {FICP) that specifics the: I) impacts likely to result fi'om the taking oflisted species, 2) measures the applicant will undertake In mnnitor. minimize. and mitigate such impacts. and the lending thtt will b~ available to implcmcnt such measures, and 3) altermttive actions the applicant considered that would m}t result in take. and the reasons why such alternatives are not being utilized. !l'lhe HCP and the applicaliun the permit meet the issuance criteria, then a perknit. authorizing incidental take will be issue. We continue to be concerned about the rapid rate of development on the Eliwanda alluvial Fan and recommcnd a meeting bclween our staff..; u~ dlscu..~ the Iong-ternl solution For this biologically diverse region. If you have any questions pertaining to these coalmeats, please ti::el fi-ec to call P J. White of my staff at (760) 431-9440. Sincerely, . _,~'~.'Bartel~ A.t,~istant Field Supervisor Endusure I -6-9~LNFTA-q co: Bill Storm, Ranthe .c;mnmil, I,LC Rubin Maloney-Rames, Lalilbmia DcOartmenl of Fish mid Game Randy Su~tt, ('nunty of Sam Bernardinn Land Use Services r}eparlmcnt ~ANCHO CUCAMONGA SmgRepor DATE: October 27,1999 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT - The proposed subdivision of 132 acres of land into 358 single family lots and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling 18.3 acres in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the east and west sides of Wardman Bullock Road, north and south of Summit Avenue APN: 226-102-17. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission continued the September 29, 1999, meeting on the subject project to allow the applicant time to respond to a letter from the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG). The September 21, 1999, DFG letter (Exhibit "A") made several unsubstantiated claims regarding supposed environmental impacts associated with the project. No actual evidence of impacts was provided. Nevertheless, the applicant's biologist has conducted exhaustive analysis of the issues raised by DFG and provided fact-based responses to the DFG letter. Staff believes the applicant has addressed all pertinent issues. Please refer to the attached applicant's response (Exhibit "B") dated October 14, 1999, for further details. Note that the applicant's response includes excerpts from the DFG letter with responses adjacent to the right. On October 18 staff received an undated letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Exhibit "D"). Staff has read this letter and continues to find the applicant's response adequately addresses all pertinent issues. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The applicant has completed Part I of the Initial Study and staff has completed Part II. Supplemental information provided by the applicant's biologist in response to DFG claims has been added to the discussion portion of the Initial Study. With implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'l'r 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT October 27, 1999 Page 2 the attached Initial Study and Resolution of Approval, all potential impacts associated with the project can be mitigated to a less than significant level. If the Planning Commission concurs, then issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be in order. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 14759 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions and issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:BLC\Is Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Department of Fish and Game dated September 21, 1999 Exhibit "B" - Letter from Applicant dated October 14, 1999 Exhibit "C"- Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 22, 1999 Exhibit "E" - Revised Initial Study Part II Resolution of Approval with conditions and Mitigation Monitodng Plan STATE OF CALIFORNIA - THE RESOURCES AGENCY GRAY DAVIS. Goven/Or DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Eastern Siena o Inland Deserts Region 4775 Bird Farm Road ~ Chino Hills, Califomia 91709 (909) 393-0635 September21, 1999 R E C E I V E D SEP ~ 3 1999 City of Rancho Cucamonga City of Rancho Cucamon~ P~anning Division Planning Division P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attn: Brent LeCount Re: Negative Declaration Tentative Tract 14759 - Rancho Summit Dear Mr. LeCount: The California Department of Fish and Game (Department) thanks you for the opportunity to comment on the Environmental Assessment. The Department has reviewed the Negative Declaration and concluded that the project, as proposed, does pose significant adverse impacts to sensitive biological resources, that a negative declaration is not appropriate and that preparation of an environmental impact report is warranted. The Department is commenting as both a Responsible and a Trustee Agency. The text of this letter documents why the Department believes an environmental impact report (EIR) is warranted. The proposed development consists of the subdivision of 132 acres of land into 358 single family lots and three open space lots. The project site contains 18.8 acres of undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS), 20.36 acres of disturbed RAFSS, and 23.32 acres of buckwheat scrub. The applicant is proposing to provide off-site mitigation on a 1: 1 ratio for the loss of the 18.8 acres of RAFSS. All native plant communities are proposed for removal. Department of Fish and Game Mandate The Fish and Game Code (Code) provides the authority for the Department to operate as a state agency. Section 1801 of Chapter 8 of the Code discusses the Department policies and objectives governing the conservation of wildlife resources. It states: 2 Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Rancho It is hereby declared to be the policy of the state to encourage the preservation, conservation, and maintenance of wildlife resources under the jurisdiction and influence of the state. This policy includes the following objectives: (1) To maintain sufficient populations of all species of wildlife and the habitat necessary to achieve the objectives stated in subdivisions (b), (c), and (d). (2) To provide for the beneficial use and enjoyment of wildlife by all citizens of the state. (3) To perpetuate all species of wildlife for their intrinsic and ecological values, as well as for their direct benefits to all persons. (4) To provide for aesthetic, educational, and non-appropriative uses of the various wildlife species. The Code clearly defines the jurisdiction of the Department of Fish and Game and the role of the Department in the CEQA process, in Section 1802, which states: The Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. The Department, as trustee for fish and wildlife resources, shall consult with lead and responsible aqencies and shall provide, as available, the requisite biolo.qical expertise to review and comment upon environmental documents and impacts arisinq from proiect activities, as those terms are used in the California Environmental Protection Act (Division 13, commencing with Section 21000 of the Public Resources Code) [emphasis added] California Environmental Quality Act Section 15002 of the CEQA guidelines defines the basic purposes of CEQA as follows: (1) Inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed activities, (2) Identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced. (3) Prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible. (4) Disclose to the public the reasons why a govemmental agency Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Rancho approved the project in the manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved, The crux of this legislation is that the Department is a trustee and/or responsible agency under California law and has "...jurisdiction over the conservation, protection and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species." It is clear from the Code that the Department, as a trustee agency, also has an important advisory role in the CEQA process by supplying the biological expertise to review and comment upon environmental documents and project impacts, as stated above. This is our legal jurisdiction mandated in CEQA and forms the basis for our comments. In addition, the Department is a Responsible Agency because the project may involve impacts to streambeds, thereby triggering the necessity for a 1601-1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement. The purpose of this letter is to: 1 ) examine the adequacy of the negative declaration under the information requirements of CEQA, 2) examine how the project identifies way to avoid or substantially reduce adverse impacts on the environment, 3) examine how the project proponent reduces the impacts of the project on the environment through avoidance, alternatives and mitigation measures, and 4) examine the lead agency's rationale for choosing a negative declaration. Informational Content Streambed Alteration A,qreement - The biological report prepared by LSA on July 14, 1999 states: A wetland and jurisdictional delineation for the purpose of determining the limits of any waters subject to jurisdiction by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), under Sections 1601-1603 of the California Fish and Game Code, would be required to determine whether or not at least the two primary drainages crossing the site qualify as jurisdictional waters. Potential impacts to waters of the United States, wetlands or jurisdictional streambeds should be determined during the CEQA process, not following it. If a 1601-1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement is required then the Department becomes a Responsible Agency under CEQA. How can the public or this Department analyze the proposed impacts of a project if the lead agency does not know what those impacts are? Without knowing what impacts the proposed development will have on. jurisdictional streambeds, the Department cannot assess the impacts or recommend alternatives or mitigation measures. Furthermore, how can the lead agency issue a negative declaration for a project which requires further regulatory action when the lead Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Rancho agency does not know what those impacts are or how they will be mitigated for?. If the negative declaration is the end process of CEQA and subsequently the Department does require a Streambed Alteration Agreement, the Department will have no CEQA certified information upon which to base an agreement on. If the Department does not have the information it requires to issue a 1601-1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement through the City's CEQA process, the Department may have no choice but to assert lead agency status. In conclusion, the fact that a Streambed Alteration Agreement or other regulatory compliance may be required does not relieve the lead agency of the responsibility under CEQA for informing the public of what specific impacts the proposed development will have on the environment and including specific mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to a level of insignificance. Other informational gaps are discussed throughout the text of this letter. Habitat Linkaqe - The Initial Study includes the following statement concerning habitat linkages: The site may function to some degree as a habitat linkage but construction of the Route 30 Freeway to the south would prevent future linkage value of the site. Furthermore, the site is surrounded to the south and wast by open space/flood control improvements which could continue to provide a habitat linkage in the area. The impact is not considered significant. The Biological Report prepared by LSA on July 14, 1999 does not include a discussion of habitat linkages. There was no discussion of adjoining habitat areas or the discussion of the value of portions of the site for regional habitat. Neither was there a discussion of the importance of Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub as a very threatened plant community or the usefullness of disturbed RAFSS habitat for wildlife. The biological report does state that the disturbed RAFSS could be utilized by gnatcatchers. However, the biological study did not include the criteria for determining what is undisturbed and what is disturbed RAFSS. The Negative Declaration also did not include a discussion of the relative merits of maintaining habitat on-site versus off- site mitigation. The Department believes that these are all issues which should be addressed in the context of an Environmental Impact Report, not a mitigated negative declaration. Avoidance, Altematives and Miti.qat on Measures Section 2053 of the Fish and Game Code states: 2053. Projects; Threat; Altematives The legislature further finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that 5 Mitigated Negative Dec/aration City of Rancho state agencies should not approve projects as proposed which would jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat essential to the continued existence of those spedes, if there are reasonable and prudent alternatives available consistent with conserving the species or its habitats which would prevent jeopardy. 2054. Project Approvement; Mitigation and Enhancement Measures The Legislature further finds and declares that, in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such alternatives, individual projects may be approved if appropriate mitigation and enhancement measures are provided. The Department maintains that the disclosure and analysis of impacts in the document is inadequate and incomplete, and project-related impacts are not mitigated to below a level of significance. If the project impacts are not adequately identified, then a discussion of avoidance, altematives and mitigation measures is moot. The Initial Study contains a discussion of the importance of this area as potential habitat for endangered or threatened species and even notes that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service suggested a 3:1 ratio for the loss of coastal sage scrub alone. The project site contains 18.8 acres of undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS), 20.36 acres of disturbed RAFSS and 23.32 acres of buckwheat scrub. RAFSS is a rare natural community and is ranked S1.1 (very threatened). RAFSS habitat has local, regional, and state-wide significance. The fact that there are a total of 62.48 acres of coastal sage scrub on the site, including 18.8 acres of undisturbed RAFSS, 20.36 acres of disturbed RAFSS, and 20.36 acres of buckwheat scrub is significant by itself to warrant an EIR. However, the fact that the proposed development would occur over the entire site and eliminate all native habitat argues even more for the preparation of an EIR. An EIR should include the discussion of the local importance of this habitat (RAFSS), a discussion of the cumulative impacts of development in the area on this habitat, a discussion of avoidance measures to preserve on-site habitat, a discussion of project alternatives which would protect RAFSS, and a full discussion of mitigation measures in the event project impacts are unavoidable. The EIR should also include a discussion of the direct and indirect impacts of the proposed development on sensitive biological resources. For instance, there is no assessment of the direct loss of disturbed RAFSS and buckwheat. There is no assessment of the indirect effects of development on adjoining sensitive biological resources. There is no indication that the project includes considerations for buffer zones, the planting of native drought-tolerant plants, the affects of non-native plants nor the affects of domestic animals on the flora and fauna of the project site. Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Rancho Section 21002 of CEQA states in part: The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. (Emphasis added.) Section 21002.1(a) of CEQA describes the purpose of EIRs. It states in part: The purpose of an environmental impact report is to identify the significant effects on the environment of a project, to identify alternatives to the project, and to indicate the manner in which those significant effects can be mitigated or avoided. Section 21002.1 (b) describes the role of the lead agency in mitigating for significant impacts. It states: (b) Each public agency shall mitigate or avoid the significant effects on environment of projects that it carries out or approves whenever it is feasible to do so. CEQA requires that public agencies systematically identify both significant impacts and feasible alternatives or mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen significant effects. The Department believes that this EIR does not comply with Section 21002 of CEQA. In fact, the only mitigation measure for the loss of sensitive biological resources proposed in the negative declaration is that the project applicant will purchase off-site lands to compensate for the loss of 18.8 acres of RAFSS at a 1:1 ratio. The negative declaration provides no specifics or criteria which would enable the Department to assess whether the 1:1 mitigation is of equivalent habitat quality or habitat location. However, even had the lead agency supplied this information, the Department believes preparation of an EIR is still warranted. There are several legal, biological and policy concepts related to the practice of project impact mitigation. The first concept is that mitigation be in-kind, i.e., loss of riparian is mitigated by creation of ripadan. A second concept is that the mitigation be similar in quality and quantity, i.e., there is not a net loss of resource area and that habitat quality and usefulness for impacted wildlife are equivalent. A third concept is that mitigation can be for temporary or permanent impacts and that mitigation for these 7 Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Rancho respective impacts is not interchangeable. In other words, permanent impacts are not mitigated by temporary measures. A fourth concept is that specific mitigation measures be adopted for specific identified impacts. A fifth concept is that lands proposed to mitigate the loss of permanent natural resources be dedicated for conservation in perpetuity, with provisions for maintenance and monitoring. None of these concepts, with the exception of the fifth concept, are utilized in this mitigated negative declaration. Rationale for Miti.qated Ne.qative Declaration Section 15064 of the CEQA guidelines discusses determining the significance of environmental effects caused by a project. It states in part: (a) The decision as to whether a project may have one or more significant effects shall be based on Substantial evidence in the record of the lead agency. (1) If the lead agency determines there is substantial evidence in the record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency shall prepare an EIR (Friends of B Street v. City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal. App. 3d 988). Said another way, if a lead agency is presented with a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency shall prepare an EIR even though it may also be presented with other substantial evidence that the project will not have a significant effect (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal. 3d 68). (Emphasis added) It is the opinion of the Department that the proposed development project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Department bases this opinion on the current amount of development taking place in the Etiwanda Fan area and the amount of pristine and disturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub and coastal sage scrub proposed for removal. Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub is a plant community designated as "very threatened.' For this reason, the Department views adverse impacts to this plant community in this location as significant. NCCP Process In 1997 both the County of San Bemardino and the California Department of Fish and Game signed a 'Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Natural Community Conservation Planning.' The City of Rancho Cucamonga is a signatory to this MOU.. This memorandum of understanding included several tenets. To summarize, these are: 8, Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Rancho (a) The NCCP program is designed to protect habitats for multiple species, including threatened and endangered species, (b) The NCCP process complements and supports the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service multi-species conservation planning program, (c) Up to $1.5 million was appropriated by Congress to support the NCCP program for the preservation of coastal sage scrub and associated natural communities, (d) The County and the NCCP program are committed to effecting regional protection and perpetuation of natural wildlife diversity, while allowing for development, (e) The County and constituent members concur with the goals of the NCCP Act, (f) The signatory agencies agree to work together to prepare and submit a San Bernardino Valley MSHCP by and between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish and Game, the County of San Bernardino, the 15 affected cities and other participating agencies. In 1998 the County of San Bernardino notified the Department that the Memorandum of Understanding was extended to the year 2000 by the County and seven cities. Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, a State-designated very threatened habitat, is a criticel component of any MSHCP or NCCP effort in San Bernardino County because it provides habitat for the federally endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat, the federally listed Coastal California gnatcatcher, and a number of state-listed plants and species of special concem. The Department prefers to operate within the NCCP/MSHCP process because it is designed to protect a wide variety of sensitive species and habitats. In the absence of progress on the NCCP/MSHCP process the Department has no choice but to take each development project on a case by case basis. Particularly impodant in this process is the requirement for environmental impact reports and an emphasis on cumulative impacts, alternatives analyses and avoidance and mitigation measures. These are areas which the Department feels are currently not adequately addressed in the CEQA documentation it is reviewing in this area. However, the environmental documentation which the Department is reviewing indicates that mitigation is being provided solely for endangered species and habitats. Impacts to habitat not spacificelly protected by law and species of special concern are considered non-signfficent and therefore,' mitigation is not being required by the lead agency. The Depadment does not concur with the conclusion that only endangered species require mitigation. · 9, , * Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Rancho CEQA documents are city and county documents. The Department believes that, in this instance, an EIR is warranted. The Department has also held conversations with USFWS concerning the Etiwanda Fan area, the pace of development and the inadequacy of CEQA documents. The fact that both state and federal agencies entrusted with protection of biological resources as well as the local San Bernardino County Museum, which is conducting biological surveys in this area, believe that the Etiwanda Fan area contains critical habitat argues for the preparation of an EIR. For this reason, cumulative impact analyses are very important. The Department also believes that it is not appropriate for the local jurisdictions to defer their responsibilities under CEQA to future resource agency actions. In this case there is no determination of whether there are jurisdictional wetlands on the site. The biological assessment then states that these determinations must be conducted and necessary permits obtained. A key concept of CEQA is that specific project impacts and mitigation will be addressed in a document available to the public. Conclusion The Department recommends that the City of Rancho Cucamonga require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the reasons listed in this letter. Representatives of the Department will be happy to meet with the lead agency and the consultants to discuss what steps the Department believes need to be taken to bring the project into compliance with CEQA.. If you have any questions, please call Robin Maloney-Rames, ES III, Chino Hills, at (714) 817-0585. Sincerely Glenn Black Supervisor Habitat Conservation - South Region 6 cc: Jeff Newman, USFWS T HOGLE-IRELAND A Land Planning B Development Consulting Finn October 14, 1999 Brent LeCount City ofRancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 SUKIECT: TENTATIVE TRACT 13759, RESPONSE TO CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1999 Dear Mr. LeCount: This document has been prepared to respond to the letter from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) dated September 21, 1999 for the subject project. These responses have been prepared with consultation from the following biologists: ~l LSA Associates: Jack Easton and Denise Woodard ~ Kirtland Biological Services: Karen Kirtland I~l Tom Dodson and Associates: Lisa Kegarice In general, the CDFG letter states that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared for the project to address the cumulative impacts of loss of habitat in the region. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project because the impacts identified as potentially adverse can be mitigated so that no significant effect on the environment will occur. Section 15064 (f)(2), of CEQA addresses the preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration: If the lead agency determines there is substantial evidence in the record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment but the lead agency determines that revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environmental would occur and there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment then a mitigated negative declaration shall be prepared. For ease of review, the following addresses each element of the CDFG letter in the format of a "Response to Comments" document with response next to each item raised. 4200 Lathan~ Street, Suite B, Riverside, alifornia 92501 · 909 / 787-9222 · e:~x 909 / 781-6014 · www. hogleire]and.com Eastern Slerr - Inland 0esefls Region 4775 gild Fan~ Road Page Chlno Hills. Ca~fomla 91709 (909) 393-0635 Septembar21, 1999 R E C E I V E D SEP S S 199g ~ ol Rancho Cucamon(; CIty of Rancho Cucamonga panning Division planning Division °J,; mong.,cAg,,2g Nln: Brent LeCount ~ . NegaUve DeclaraUon Tentative Tact 14769 - Rancho Summit ~ Dee Mr. LeCount: 1 "'-- The California Department of Fish end Game (Department) thanks you for the The Department has reviewed the Negative Declaration end concluded that the project, as proposed, does pose significant adverse impacts to sensitive blological resources, that a negative declaration Is not appropriate end that preparation of an environmental Impact report Is wen'anted. The Depadment Is commenting as both a Responsible and · Trustee Agency. The text of this letter documents why the Department bolleves an environmental Impact report (EIR) is warranted. The proposed development consists of the subdivision of 132 ecfes of land into 358 single family lots and three open space lots. The project site contains 18.8 ecfes of undisturbed Riversldlan Nluvlal Fen Sage Scrub (RAFSS), 20.36 ecfes of disturbed RAFSS, end 23.32 aces of buckwheat scrub. The eppficant is proposing to provide off-site mitigation on · 1:1 ratio for the loss of the 18.8 aces of RAFSS. NI native plant communities are proposed for removal. Denartment of FIsh arid Game Mandate The Fish end Game Code (Code) provides the authority for the Department (o operate as · state agency. Section 1801 of Chapter 8 of the Code discusses the Department policies end objectives governing the consewatlon of wildlife resources. It states: · . Response 1'o Comlnenls :Z October 14, 1999 MIUgeled Negative Declaretim1 CRy ot eenc~o Pa~e 3 It Is hereby declared to be the policy of the stale to encourage the preservation, conservation. end maintenance of wildlife resources under the Jurisdiction and influence of the state..This policy Includes the following objectives: (1) To maintain sufficient populations of eft spedes of wildlife end the habitat necessmy to achieve the objectives stated in subdivisions (b). (c). sod (d). (2) To provide for the beneficial use end enjoyment of wildlife by eft citizens of the state. (3) To perpetuate ell apedes of wildlife for their intrinsic end ecological values, as well es for their direct benefits to eft persons. (4) To provide for aesthetic, educaifonst. end non-appropdaUve uses of the various wildlife species. ~v) The Code clearly defines the Judsdlctlon of the Department of Fish end Game end the role of the Department In the CEQA process, In Section 1602, which states: The Department has Judsdlcfion aver the conservation, protection end management of fish, wildlife, native plants, end habitat necessan/for blcioglcolly sustainable populations of those species. Tile Deoa~ment. as trustee for fish prld v,;;~,;;;e ~_-_-..;;;-~,a=. shell consult with lead end responsible eaencies led ;,~,a;; D~,~e. as available. the ~r.~md~lte blo-I-M!r~I exDedlse to review end ,~:,l.,,e.~ LIDOn environmental ~_^,~_.11ents end Im~._nd~ uv;:,;,i,; fTOm ~,~Oie,J, pdivities. as i;u~,~e ie,~ ere used In the Callfeints Env;ft,.,~en~at F~,;~-,.;;anAct (Division 13, commencing with Section 21000 of the Public Resources Code) [emphasis added] California Environmental Oualilv Act Section 15002 of the CEQA guidelines defines the basic purposes of CEOA as follows: (1) Inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed activities, (2) Identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced. (3) Prevent blgnificant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiting changes In projeds through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the gavemmental agency finds the changes to be feasible. (4) Disclose to the public the reasons ~ a governmental agency · . Reap Ic~cl~o Comnlents j -. MIIIllaledNegallvnl)edamllon bar 14, 1999 cl~ d Rane~ Page 4 appmved the project In the manner am agency dxae If llgrd~cmll envlronnmfdal effecb ere Involved. 1he crux of Ode leginlatinn Is I~·t the Depadmerd Is 8 bustee and/or responsible agency under California Iron end has '...lalsdlctlun over the conservation, prolectinn end management of fish. wildlife, seINe plants, and hoblist necessmy for biologically' sustainable populations of those Ipeciee.' II Is dear ffmll the Code thai the Depadmmd, as e bustee agency, ·leo has an Imporient advisory mla In the CE(IA procase by supplying Ihe biological expelrise Io review end ,.,,,i,ent upon environmental documents end project Impacts, es elated above. 'lTds Is oil legal )dmlcllonnmlxlatedlnCEOAendfonnslhebabforourcommanlL In addlUGs, the Depadment Is e ReapGnoMe Agency because the project may Involve Impacts to sheembeds, 6~enlby Mggarlng b necessily far · t601-1803 81marebed Allmetlm~ AmeenmnL 1he Ixepose of this leUar Is !o: 1) oxendoe the adequacy of the negative declareUGh under the Irdonnetlan fequlrarnenls of CEQA, 2) examine how the proloci IdenUfies way ~ Io avoid or eubslentlefiy reduce adverse Impacts an the environment, 3) examine how % the Im'oJect PmFonenl reduces the Impam of the project on the environment through (.~ evaldance, olternallves end ndllgalinn meastaea, lmd4)exandmi lhe lead egencY'l redonolo far choosing · negative dedandlon. . ..j~7~;ireembed AilemllnnAmeemeld_lhablaloglcalrspoftFeparedbyLaAonjullf14, Q I. As follow-up to the statemeat in LSA Assoclales, J,ly 14. 19F) repon feBardl,S weda,d and Judsdictinnal delineation, both the U.S. Army Corps of -.....j1999 salem E,ainears eel Iha Csilf'on~ Dqmlmcol orRsh m~l Gee wee contacted. A elland end Jurisdictional do~neatlon for 1118 pullman of dolesoloing the lielie The Project Team. incindinn Ihe E,61neer, m~d Binfoalsts, act with the U. S of any waterS subject Io Jurisdiction by the U.8. Army Coq3a of Engineers, under /umy Corps orEsSinners (Co;s) onsite to review the site. It was noted tha~ Section 4174 of the Clean Waler Acl, end Cellreels Department of Fish and Ihe historical dralm:ge to the site was diverled in 1969 by the Flood Co,lrol Game (CDFG), under 8ecllons iS0!-16D3 of the CalIFornia Rsh and Game Distdcl levee constructed ,ofth orthe site. Sinco that lime, the two dad,aBe Code. would be required to dotermine whether or sol 8l leesl 6m hao primmy co,rses have been viltuadly dry. !n edditio, to the site visit. a map shown,8 drainsgas cfosling th8 lit8 quall~y 18 J~ walafl. site and Its odatinlaldp to I!te extstl,8 flood Control Improvemeats and Senoral area draJnaSe were Frovided to the Corps. Aseremaltofthesitevisltandlhe potential Impacts to elms of Ihe United 8totes, wetlends or Judsdlcttonal streambeds Inrormatlo, provided. the Corps provided a letter dated Sepiatuber 29, 1999 to shouldbedetennIneddufingtheCEOApmcess,notfo~owlnglL If at601-1603 Mr. Bi~Stona(Exldbit#l)statinJthatthePr°P°sedPf°Jcctwilln°td;schar8e Streambed AllerStlon Agreement Is rsqalred then the Department becomes · dredSe or 611 maledal into e water ol'the Untied States or an adjacent weltmad Respunslble Agency under CEQA. How can Ihe publie or fide Depadment analyze the Therelore, the project Is ·or subScol to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of proposed Impede of e project If the le·d agency does nol know what those Impacts the Clean Water Act and · Sealinn 404 permit is not feq,ired. are? WIIhout Iraowing wh·l Impacts the ixoposed dovelopmerd will have us. . Jufisdlcllonal etrsambeds, the Dopedmeat cennol ·ssesa Um Impacts or recommend · aRemaUves or millgallon measures. Furthermore, how can the lead agency Issue e nagslive declaration lot · ixoJect which requires furlher fag·Inlay ectlon when the lead ~: Respon.~e t o uommenls 4 Oclober 14, 1999 MillSoled Negative Bedimlion ,, Clly of nlncho I Page S agent/does not know what those Impacts ere or how they will be mitigated for? Q Rebecca Jones end Juan Hemendez of the California Department of Fish and ' Game also ~slted the site to determine whether there were streambed or If the neesUre declaration is the end process of GEQA end subsequently the tipalan issues oesite. As a result of that visit, Ms. Jones requested that we Department does require a 9treambed Alteration Agreement, the Department will have identify the specific location of gay mulefat (Baccheris salicifolia) on the site ~eCEQAcefil~edlnformatlonuponwhichtobaseenegreementort- litheDepartment becsusetheJuly14, igggLSAreponindicatedtheplantwaspresentandinher does not have the Iofonnatlon It requires to Issue · t601-1603 Streambed Alteration site visit, she did not see any. On October 6, we conducted a focused survey Agreement lifough the Clly'a CEQA process, the Departmeat my have no choice but to identify the specific location ofmulefat. A single molefat was observed on tO assert lead agency status. the extreme southeast border of the site in u dlsturbcd sandy area at the intersection of two dill roads, Based upon the CDFG site visit end the In conclusion, the loaf that · Streambed Allmellon Agreement or other regulatory information provided in LSA leUer dated October 8, 1999 regarding the focused eompfience may be required does not relieve the lead egency of the responsibility ann, e/, the California Department of Fish end Game provided a letter dated under CEQA for Informing the public of what apedtic Impacts the proposed October 13, 1999 slating thai no Sireembed Aliamilan Agreement is required. developmenl will have on the environment end Including specific mitigation measures (Exibits #2 and #:3.) to reduce those Impeels to e level of Insignificance. Other Infommflonat gaps me discussed throughout the ted of this letter. 2. Habitat linkages provide wildlife a connection from one habitat to another or From one habilal type Io another. The site is bounded on the north by Ihe U.q. hJJjUJtdSj. ge-ThelnI~elSlud,/Includesthefo~owingstatementconcemlnghabltat Q rcsidenlial devclopment and vacant lands. onthesouthbySanSevaine/Eliwanda Creek flood control debris basin and further by Highway 30 (currently under ~oltagss: construelion), on Ihe east by residential development and on the west by the San ~ The site may fundion to some degree as e habitat linkage but construction of the Sevaine/Etiwenda Creek flood control channel. Route 30 Freeway to the south would prevent future linkage value of the site. Exhibit #4 provides a map shawlriB the surroundin8 property characteristics. Ftalhennore, the site Is suffounded to the sou~ end west by open space/flood control Improvements which could centime to provide 8 habitat rinkage In the Wildlife may move from the habitat to the north onto the site and vice verse, area. 1he Impact Is not considered slgrdtlcant This movement is not only conslrictcd by neighborln8 development, but is  ~rther limited by traffic on Summit Avenue that runs through Ihc northeastern h BIological Report prepared by LgA on July 14, 1999 does not Include a discussion ponies of the site. -~dof habitat linkages. There was no discussion of edjolnlng habitat oreas or the iscusslon of the value of ic~'llons of the silo for regional habllaL Wildlife movement from the east is severely liralied because of residential development bolh axislie8 and under construction and from the soulh because oflhedebrisbasinandHighweyconstrnction. Farther soulh beyond Highway 30 construction is also existing residential development. The flood control channel Ihat borden Ihe western portion of the site also serves as a barrier Io wildlira movement onto the silo From open space areas to the west. The flood coatrot channel itself does not provide any value to wildlife because it consists eta rocky channel, dcuuded of any vegetation. Flood control fadlilies, roadways, and development surrounding the site on three (3) sides makes assire habitat the terminus of a "finger" of potential habitat that extends down from the undeveloped land to Ihe north. Thus the site does not link otherwise disjunct habitat patches and therefore does not meet the basic definition eta habitat linkage or con~dor. A linkage or corridor joins two or mote otherwise disjunct patches ofhabltat. All wildlife occupy a particular habitat thai "moves" as part of routine day-to-day foraging and other activities. Such movemenl, in and ofilself, does not mean that a particular site is a habitat linkage or wildlife movement corridor. Thus, impeels Ihat may resull, as Ihey refer the sito's potenlial for usa as a wildlira habilat linkage alconsidered significant. Rcspor Conm~c!tls 14, 1999 I Nellherwas Ihere F Page 6 discussion of the ImportanCe of Rlversldlen Alluvial Fan Sage Scab as a very Q 3. Riversidean sage scrub is identified as a "very rare" plant community in Ihreetened plant communily or Ihe usefullness of disturbed RAFSS habll81 for wildlife. j,California by tile California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). LSA in its ', ,.,y,,.,999 .ape. s,ows ,,e fo,,owi.g p,.., comm..i,y imp.c,s o. Tah,.A I of the report, as follows: I I ennln rig what Is undisturbed end what Is disturbed RAFSS. Table A * Plant Community (Acres) Plant Community Jmeacls Rivcrsidcan Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub 1880 Disturbed Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub 2036 Buckwheat Scrub 23.32 S. bmml 62. 48 Disturbed Annual Grassland with Scatlcrcd Scrub 48.15 Eucalyptus Windro~vs 14.3 Olive Trccs 2 65 Oak Tree 008 Disturbcd 4.34 ~:) pls nwbed Snbtotnl 69. 52 t Grand Total The 132-acre site, prior to human development, may have been completely "~ vegetated by the Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub community. The above ~ table clearly shows that site has several olher plant communilies presenl as a ~ result of both on-site and adjacent off-site dislurbances, totaling 69.52 acres or disturbed non-scab habitat and 43.68 acres ordisturbed scrub habilat on site. On-site disturbances include apparent historic agricultural use. Adjacent off-site disturbances include good control, residential, and roadway development. The largest limiting off-site lador to alluvial fan sage scrub community on site is flood control. Flows to the main.drainage Iocaled on the western portion of the site were cut off as a result of levees built upstream in 1969 (pers. coma. Jufie Gilbert of San Beruardino County Flood Control, September 29, 1999). Alluvial fan sage scrub is a successtonal plant community dependent upon st least S0- to 100-year storm events for survival. The disturbed Rivcrsidcan alluvial fan sage scrub and buckwheat scrub present on site is relatively poor in qualily compared to the undisturbed alluvial fan sage scrub present. The disturbed alluvial fan sage scrub has a lower species diversity as well as lower percent shrub cover lhan Ihe undisturbed areas. The disturbed Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub also has a dominant understory of non-native grassland species. The report also clearly states the difference belween (or criteria for) the undisturbed vs. disturbed alluvial fan sage scab, as follows: "This habital conleans many of the species present in undisturbed Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, but the scrub is sparscr, there ate many more non-nalive plant species present, and the area has been subjected to nmch oflhe trash-dumping and olher disturbances so common in rbe dislurbed annual grassland" Response To Conltnenl October 14, 199' P~ge ' The buckwheat scrub is fairly monotypic in species composition (i .e., it is almost exclusively California buckwheat) and has almost no topographic relief Stands Ihat have only buckwheat scrub are usually the result of prior dislurbance. Therefore, Ibis communily is probably the result oflhe Riversidean sage scrub being cleared, or impacted in some other way, such that only buckwheat, a species that readily colonizes disturbed sites, is nearly the sole species present. This habitat is of poor quality compared to the undisturbed Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub present on site and similar habitat in the region. No federal or State threatened or endangered species were identified on site. LSA conducted focused surveys for the Quino checkerspot butterfly, California gnatcatcher, and San Bernardino kangaroo rat and found none oflhese species to be present on site during the 1999 studies. Although, the July 1999 biological report does state that disturbed Riversideas alluvial fan sage scrub habllat could be ulillzed by gnatcatchers, it is usually utilizedinrbenbsenceofhigherqualilyhabilat. Inaddition, LSAhasconducled California gnatcatcher surveys on approximately 500 acres located immediately northwest of the site in 1999. The results documented in a report titled San Sevai,e/Eliu,aoda Creek CAarmel Mtdti Sl~ecies Surveys, (LSA, August 2. 1999) found the California gnatcatcher Io be absent from the 500-acre sludy area. Therefore, because of on-site and off-site habitat disturbances and the lack of Califomia gnatcatcher sighrings in the immediate project vicinity, it is concluded Ihe habitat on site is orlow value to Ihe California gnatcatcher. The loss of 18.8 acres of undisturbed Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub is considered significant because of its status as a "very rare" plant communily, but is not considered a significant loss of habitat to wildlife in adjacent similar habitat because of the existing surrounding development that isolates it from adjacent habilat. The impacts to other scrub wildlife habilat on site is adverse, but is not considered a significant impact. ri'lm Negauve Declaration also did not Include e discussion ot Ihe relative merits of maintaining habitat an-site versus off- Q 4. The impact of the loss of 188 acres of undisturbed Riversidean alluvial fan sage site millgallon. 'Ills Department believes Ihet these are all Issues which should be . scrub will be mitigaled by the purchase or20 acres Io be added to an open space addressed In Ihe context of an linvlronmanlal Impeel Repod, not · mlllgeled nagalive I ' preserve. Because of the disturbed salute of a majority orlhe habitat on site ' and the lack ofhabilal adjacent to the sile, on sile millgallon is considered to be declamUan. of little or no value. Page Avoidance, Alternatives and Mifiaatlon Measures Section 2053 of the FIsh end Game Code states: 2053. Projects; Threat; Alternatives The legislature I*urther finds and de, lares that It Is the policy of the state that r MIUgated Negative DedamSon CltyofRancho 5. The LSA report dated July 14, 1999 identifies that blotogical surveys were state agencies should not approve projects es proposed which would Jeopardize dQ completed on the she and no Federal or State listed species were present; the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or therefore no consultation with the US. Fish and WildliFe will be required. result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat essential to the continued existence of ihose species, If there ere reasonabta end prudent 6. Although Pjversidcan alluvial fan sage scrub is potential habitat For threatened alternatives available consistent with conserving the species or Its habitats or endangered species, none were identified on the site. The majority of Ihe (~ which w~uld prevent Jeopardy. habitat on site has been disturbed and is disjunct from any adjacent suitable habitat For reasons previously stated. The U.S. Fish and WildliFe Service ~.~ \ 2054. Project Approvemeat; MIIfgaifon and Bnhancement Measures Q (USFWS) suggests a mitigation ratio of 3:1 For the loss of ~ccrtpied coastal ~ The Legislature further finds and declares that, In the event specific economic, sage scrub habitats (i.e., coastal sage scrub occupied by the California gnatcatcher). The USFWS has no regulator/authority over unoccftpiedcoastsl social, or other conditions make litfeasible such alternatives, Individual projeds sage scrub habitat in San Bernardinn Counly. The 3: I rario is usually requested my ha epprovnd If appropriate mitigation end ardlancement measures ere for occupied coastal sage scrub habitat; however, mitigation ratios are provided. negotiable depending on habitat quality and other site specific factors. ~ The Department manta ns that the disclost.us end analysis of Impacts In the dominant As stated previously, the 18.8 acres ofundisturbed Riv~sidean alluvial fan sage "'J iS Inadequate end Incomplete, and project-related Impacts ere not m t gatad to below · present on site is bcln8 mitigalcd through the purchase of 20 acres of level of significance. If the project Impacts are nat adequately Identified, then a comparable oR-site habitat. Impacts Io the other scrub habitats on site are not discussion of avoidance, alternatives and mitigation measures Is mooL The Initial considered significant and Ihus no mitigation is required. Study contains e discussion of the Importance of this area as potenttat habitat for endangered or threatened species and even notas that the United States Fish end 7. Riversidles alluvial fan seBe scrub was identified as an important habitat type VVildlife Service seggestnd · 3:1 ratio for the loss of coastal sage scnjb alone. The and evaluated accordingly in the biological resources report. ]n addition, in project site contains 18.8 sores of undisturbed Rlversidtan Alluvial Fen Sage Scrub response to Commnot Number 3, we have clarified lhc status of Pjversidian (RAFSS) 20.38 a~es of disturbed RAFSS and 23.32 sores of buckwheat scrub. alluvial fan sage scrub as a "very arc" plant community, RAFSS is a rare natural community end Is ranked S1.1 (very tlYestanod). RAFSS habitat has local, regional, end state-wide significance. The cumulative loss of habitat in a given region is an onBoin8 issue. Each proposed development represents a contribution to this loss, and cumulalively '.'".the% ,,e ,o,a, ca. h. alg.i,..,. .owens.. .o .ccep,.b,e a,..d. rd ,ha b.n. provided that would evaluate any one contribution as s~Bnificant, other than For habilats, such as wetland areas, that ere protected by current regulation. ThereFore, each buckwheat scrub s s gnificant by taeIf to wan'ant an EIR. However, the fact that the proposed development would occur over the entire ste and e irataste all native habitat development is acknowledfied as contributing incrementally to habitat. The resolution orsuch reglonwide loss can only he mitigated lhrough argues even more for the preparation of an EIR. An EIR should Include the discussion regional planning efforts to conserve important areas orsuch habitat. AJthough of the ocet Impodance of this habitat (RAFSS), · discussion of the cumulative rapacts of development n the 8roe on ths habitat, a discussion of avoidance measures t~ a regional planning effort is still in its formative stages in the region, reserve on-sita habitat, a d scusslon of project alternatives which would protect expected to ullimslely consist of key presage areas thai are acquired or i~:SS and a full discussion of mitigation measures In the event project Impacts expanded as an nitset for impacts ordevelopment in olher areas. The proposed , mitigation (purchase oF 20 acres o1' habilnt offsite to be added to addillonal unavoidable. habitat preserve) represents appropriate m~tlgation. Response To (jotllttlellh, 'October 14, ,h. . ,;'no ® assessment of the direct loss of disturbed RAFSS end buckwheat. There Is no assessment of the indirect effects of development on adjoining sensitive biological 8. The direct i'mpacts include: Loss of 6248 acres of scrub habitat, composed or resources. There is no indication that the project includes considerations for buffer 18.80 acres of Riversidles alluvial fan sage scrub, 20.36 acres of disturbed zones, the planting of native drought-lolerent plants, the aftads of non-native plants . Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub and 23.32 acres of buckwheat scrub. Other nor the effects of domestic animals on the flora and fauna of the project site. habitat losses include 48.15 acres or disturbed annual grassland with seatiered 6 scrub, 0.08 acres of oak tree and a variety of non native habitale taleling an MlflgatedNegallveDedem~on additiona121.29acres. Otherdirectimpactsincludelhelossofpotentialhabitat CIty of Rancho for a variety of sensitive species, including raplots and plant species. 8action 21002 of CEQA states In part: t Due to the disturbed nature of most of the site, only the loss ofthe 188 acres of Rjversidian alluvial fan sage scrub was considered to be significant. The Legislature finds and dealeras that it Is the policy of the state that public Q Mitigation for Ihis impact is Ihc off-site purchase of 20.0 acres of scrub habilat agendes should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible off-silt, to be added to another habitat preserve area adjacent. alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the The affects of domestic animals on Ihe flora and fauna of the project were not procedures required by lids division am Intended to assist public agencies In evalualed, since the project involves the loss or removal of all native species as systematically Identifying beth the slgnfficant effects of proposed projects and part of the construction phase. the feasible alteroatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or C'~ substantially lessen such significant effects. (Emphasis added.) Indirect impacts include loss of habitat for use by wildlife off-site (including foraging rapiers). 8action 21002.1(e) of CEQA describes the pu~ose of EIRs. It states In part: Due to surrounding land uses, the connection with off-site habitat is constrained The purpose of en environmental Impact report is to Identify the significant and limited primarily to a cannaellen with habitat to the north. Therefore, the loss of potential habitat for sensitive species in off-she habital was not effects on the environment of a project, to Identify altematlves to the project, and considered Io be significant. Io indicate the manner In which those slgnfficant effects can be mitigated or avoided. The remaining measures requested by the CDFG include the use orbuffer areas and the use ofnative drought toleranl planIs. The measures were not evaluated SealIon 21OO2.1(b) describes the role of the lead agency In mitigating for eignfflcent due to the absence of significant impacts Ihat would involve their use. Impacts. It states: 9. The CDFG quoits sections on approval policies related to the evaluation of (b) Each public agency shall mitigate or avoid the significant effects on significant effects, determination of mitigation measures and project alternatives environment of projects Ihal It carries out or approves whetrover It Is to reduce significant effects. The CDFG indicates that, in their opinion, the feasible to do so. Negative Declaration does not address there issues. The CDFG also states Ihat, in their opinion, even had such information been provided, as EIR is "still CEQA requires that public agencies systematically Identify both significant impacts warranted". and feasible alternatives or mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen significant effects. The Department believes that this EIR does not comply with The City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted an evaluation of impacts Io 8et:~on 2113132 of CEQA. biological resources based on the biological report and on discussions with representatives from resource agencies. The determination to prepare a In fact, the only mitigation measure for the loss of sensitive biological resouroes Negative Declarelion was evidently based on the findings of the report and these proposed In the nagsUre dealersties Is that the proleer applicant will purchase off-site discussions, as well as the subsequent mitigation measure (prompted by lands to compensate for the loss of 18.8 acres of RAFSS at · 1:1 ratio. The negative comments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) to acquire suitable scrub declaration provides no spect~c~ or crtteda which would enable the Department Io habitat off site to offset the loss of scrub habitat on site. Additional assess whether Ihe 1: 1 mitigation Is of equivalent habitat quality or habllat location. documentation Is evaluate environmental impact s was not deemed necessary by ':;,," th" ,ofun.a,,no... o.p--..nt be"l '"' To Colllm~ltl! ~ber 14, 199~! There are several legal biological and policy concepts related to the pradlca of project Pagc I[~ Irapad mitigation. The first concepl is that mitigation be in-k rid, .e., oss of ripar an is ~ 0~ mitigated by craatlon of dpadan. A second concept Is Ihat the mitigation be .similar in quality and quantity, i.e., there is not a net loss of resource area and that habitat quality and usefulness for impacted Midlife are equivalent. A third concept is that mitigaUon can be for temporary or permanent impacts and that miUgation for these 7 10. The proposed mitigation for significant impacts on site 08.8 acres ofhabilat MItigated Negative De:lamtlo, offsite) are being utilized For all five miligalion policy concepts presenled. CIty of Rlndm )~ reapedlye Impacts Is not Interchangeable. In other words, permanent Impacts are not ~ These include ( I ) in-kind replacemenl oFimpacted Riversidean alluvial fan sage scab; (2) purchase or20 acres ofhabilat with comparable quahilly and quality; mltlgatedbytemporerymeasures. Afoudhconcepllsthatspecificmifigatlonmeasures (:3) the permanent loss of lg. BacresisbeingmitigetedwithlhepurchaseoF20 be adopted for spedtic Identified impacts. A fifth concept Is thai lands proposed to acres to be preserved in perpetuity with the appropriate bonding for land mitigate the loss of permanent natural resources be dedicated for censerration In management; (4) the specific identified impact of 18.8 acres of Riversidean perpatulty, withprevislonsformglBtenancoendmonltodng. Noneofthesecencepts, alluvial fan sage scmb is being mitigaled with the purchase of2O acres habitat with the exception of the fifth concept, are utilized In this mitigated nagsfive off site; and (5) as pan elan open space preserve the land will be preserved in declaration. perpetuity with provisions for maintenance and monitoring. Ratloft{ale for Matlasted Neaatlve Dedaretlon ~ I I. Section 15064 of the CEQA guidelines continues with the Followin8 discussion: $edion15064 of the CEQA guidelines discusses detennlnlng the significance of (2) If the lead agency determines there is substantial evidence in the environmental effects mused by e project It states in perl: record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment but Ihe lead agency determines that revisions in the (e) The decision as to whether · project may have one 01' more significant project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a effects shall be based on substantial evidence in the record of the lead point where cleady no significant effect on lhe environmental agency. would occur and there is no subslantial evidence in light of the (1) If the lead egency datemllnee there la aubstantlel evldenca in the whole record before the public agency that the project, as (~ record that the project may have a significant effect on the revised, may have a significant effect on the environment then a environment, the lead agency shall prepare an EIR (Friends of B mitigated negative declaration shall be prepared. Street v. City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal. App. 3d 988). Said another way, if e lead agency Is presented with 8 fair argument that Because impacts considered significant ( 18.8 acres of Riversidean alluvial fan · project [Bey have 8 significant effect on the envlranment, the lead sage scrub) are being adequately mitigated and no other signillcant impacts were agency shall prepare an EIR even though It may also be presented identified, the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. with other substantial evidence that the project will not have a significant effect (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cat. 3d 68). (Emphasis added) It Is the opinion of the Department that the proposed development project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Department bases this opinion on the curTent amount of development taking place In the Eliwands Fan area end the amount of pdstlne end disturbed Riveraldlan Alluvial Fan Saga Scrub end coastal sage scnjb proposed for removal. Rlversidian Alluvial Fen Sage Scrub Is a plant community designated as 'very threatened.' For this reason, the Depadment views adverse impacts Io this plant community in this location as slgnificanL P, esponse I o (,.:onlltteltl s October 14, 1999 In 1997 both the County of San Bernardino and the California Depadment of Fish and Game signed a 'Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Natural Community Conservation Planning.' The City of Rancho Cucamonga is a signatory to this MOU.. This memorandum of understanding included several tenets. To summarize, these are: 12. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), signed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, to cooperate in the development of a Multi-Species Habitat 8 Conservation Plan (MSHCP) for the San Bernardlno Valley does establish Mitigated Negative Declaration interim review guidelines for projects proceeding while the MSHCP is under r,~lyofRan~o development. The interim project review guidelines state that the (e) The NCCP program is designed to protect habitats for multiple species, recommendations of the CDFG are advisory; the final decision of whclher to Including threatened and endangered species, approve, modi~, or deny 8 project remains in the hands arthe lead agency (in this case, Ihe City or Rancho Cucamonga) pursuant to existing laws. The ~:~ (b) The NCCP process complements and suppods the U.$. FIsh and Wildlife interim review guidelines state Ihal each lead agency shall determine whelher a Sentice multi-spades conservation planning program, · project shall be reviewed pursuant to the guidelines. Further, the lead agency _.~ retains the discretion to determine that a project within Ihe plan area, because (c) Up to $1.8 million was appmpdafed by Congress to support the NCCP of the project's characteristics, has no impact on the viability of biological program for the presarvatlon of coastal sage acnto and assodafed natural resources and would not preclude long-term preservation planning. communtOes, Because impacts considered significant (18.8 acres of Riversidean alluvial fan (d) The County and the NCCP program am committad fe effectInn regional sage scrub) are being adequately mitigated and no other significant impacts were identified, it is concluded that the recommendslion of an FIR by the CDFG is protection and perpetuation of natural wildlife diversity, while ellawing for not warranled for impacts Io coastal sage scrub on the site. ~ development, (e)The County end consUtuent members concur with the goals of the NCCP Act, (f) The signatory agencies agree Io work logether to prepare end submit e Sen Bernardins Valley MSHCP by and between the U.8. Fish end Wtldlh Service, the Califomta Department of FIsh and Game, the County of 8on Bemardlno, the 15 affected dUes end other padlclpetlng agencies. In 1998 the County of San Bemardino noUfled the Department that the Memorandum of Understanding was extended to the year 2000 by the County end seven titles. I Respd Comments er 14, 1999 Page 12 Rlversldlan Nluvlal Fen Sage Scrub, a Slate-designated very threatened habitat, Is a' (~) critical component of any MSHCP or NCCP effort In Sen Bemardino County because it provides habitat for the federatly endangered San Bemafdtno kangaroo rat, the faderally listed Coastal California gnatcatcher, end · number of state-listed plants and spedas of special c~qcern. The Department prefers to operate within the NCCP/MSHCP precass because it Is deslgnedtoprotectewidevadetyntsensitlvespec~esandhabitats. In the absenco of 13. The CDFa recommends mjtigatlon For habitat nol specifically protecled by law progress on the NCCP/MSHCP precoss the Depadment has no choice but to take each (i.e., habltal not occupied by on threatened/endangered species). The project development project on · case by case basis. padloularly Important In this process Is proposes to provide just such mittgallon. Nowhere does the document suggest the requirement for environmental impact reports and an emphasis on cumulative that mitigation is required only for endangered species. In Fact, mitigation is Impacts, eltematlves analyses end avoidance and mitigation measures. These ere being proposed For habitat not occupied by threatened/endangered species. areas which the Depadment feels ere currently not adequately addressed In the CEQA Therefore, it would appear that the project is in compliance with the CDFG documentation It Is reviewing in this area. However, the environmental documentation recommendations. which the Department Is reviewing Indicates that mitigation is .b. elng provided solely for endangered apedes and habitats. Impacts to hab at n p Y P Y an. s..cl.. nt special co.cam er. considered' \ Is not being required by the lead agency. The Depadment does not concu~ with the conclusion that only endangered spades require mitigation. 9 CT-j Mitigated Negative Dedm!Uoa ' CEQA doctmtents are city and county documents. The Depadment believes that, in this Instance, an EIR Is wananted. The Department has also held conversations with USFWS concoming the Etlwanda Fen erea, the pace nt development end the Inadequacy of CEQA documents. The fed that both state end federal agehales antrested with protection of biological resources as well es the local Sen Bernardleo County Museum, which Is conducting biological sunreys in this area, believe that the Etiwanda Fen area contains critical habitat argues for the preparation nt an EIR. For this reason, cumulative Impact analyses me very Important Response To Commenl. October 14, 199' Page I. The Dape,tme.t a,so .a,lavae ,h.t ,t ,s not app,op..te re. ,~. ,0--, ~..sdl~,~s to~ ) defer their responslblliUes ~der CEQA to ~ ~eso~ aQe~ a~lons. In ~ls ~se ~ere Is no deta~lnaUon ~ ~ether ~em am ~sdl~lonal ~U~ds ~ Ihe silo. ~e blologi~l assessment ~en s~tes ~at ~ese dete~lnaU~s ~ be ~ndu~ed ~d 14. A conclusion has ~n reached, wish concurrence from lh~ CDF~ and She ne~ssa~ petite obtainS. A key ~pt ~ CE~ Is ~8t spe~c ~ impam C~ps, Ihal jurisdidienal wellands are nol prescnl on Ih~ silo. Thus, su~s~qu~nl ~ ~UGaU~ ~11 ~ ~.~ ~ 8 d~ available to ~ ~li~ permillin~ for such issues in hal required ~e Depme~ m~mends ~8t ~e CI~ ~ Redo Cuba re~l~ ~e preparation d m Emlmnmeml I~aa Re~ ~ ~ masons listed In ~ls le~er. RepmseffiaUves a ~e D~ame~ ~11 be ha~ to meet ~ ~e lead age~ end ~e mnsultants to dl~ss ~at steps ~e Dmeffi Nileves ne~ to be taken to b~g ~e p~ I~o ~mplia~ ~ CEQ~ . ~ ~ have ~ ~esU~, please ~11 Robin Melmey~mes, ES III, Chlm Hills, ~ (714) 817~5~. Sl~rely Glem Ble~ Supewlsor Habl~l C~aUon - S~ Rqlm 6 ~ Jeff N~an, USFWS 09/29/99 07:45 FM;. 908 194 78L1 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANP'm ~g: DISTRICT, CORP~ OF ENGINt. r.:~S SEVEN OAKS DAM RESD)ENT OFRCE 323305ANTAANACANYONRD HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA ~34e eY TO AremeN OF: 5epte.mber 29, 3.999 Office of the Chief Regulator7 Branch BiLl Storm, Letma~ Homes c/o: Tom Dockson & Associates 23.50 Noz~ Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardix.to,Calif°mia 92~05-4~02 Gentlemen: Reference is made to your application (No. 199916546-AJ5) dated August 26, 1999 for a Department of the Army Permit to construct the "Rancho Summit" project (TT 14759) near East Etiwanda Creek in Rancho Cucamonga,.San Bemarclino County, California. Based on the information furnished in your application and a site visit by our staff, we have determined that your proposed project does not discharge dredged or fill material into a water of the United States or an adjacent wetland- Therefore, the project is not subject to our jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and a Section 404 permit is not required from our office, The receipt of your application is appreciated- If you have any questions, please contact Aural Szijj of my staff at (909) 794-7704. Sincerely, k/Mark Durham Chief, South Coast Section Regulatory Branch 10/!3/1999 15:58 66i7855~b/ Octrobert3,1999 Ms. Pare Stoic Hogle-lreland Ins.. 4200 Latham Street, Suit B Rivenicl~, CA 92501 Re: Tentative Trnot14759 Dear Ms. Steele: This letan' is roptrdlng~h~ n=~:i for a Slrcanlbtat Altaation Agrs~nt~tt for T~naativ¢ Trst 14759- Rancho S~llusfiL On September 21, 1999, a site visit was mad~ by Juan Hernandez. and me. There were no signs of sediment transport or ripsdan vcg~uttion within the channel areas. Etiwand Creek has becn dive=ted offof the property by San Bemardino County Flood Control thoilities. Two oulverts orossin~ under Sthihidt Ave. just south east of where it intersects wiffi Wilson Ave. were seen, but ones put the on~et no defined banks or 0harmsis were observed. The Department has determined that no Stx~nlbcd Alteration Agreement will be need for this project. The Deparlment reserves the fighl to suspend or cancel ths lener for other rcas~ms. mohding but not limited to, the following: a. The Department determines that the information provided by the Operator in support of the macourate; b The Departnero obtains new information that was not known to it in prepanng the terms and conditions of the agreement; o. The project or projeot aotivities as desoribed in the Noti~cationt'Ag'eenzent have changed; and d. The oonditions of or alleging fish and wildlife resources ohange or the I)epartmen~ dacrmmcs that projem activities will result in an adverse eftcot on the envinmmem October 8, 1999 prtnctp,lh Ms. PamSteele Rob/~d,., Hogle-L,'eland s/,,.,l., m.,d.,. 4200 Latham Street, Suite /.,., C~,d Riverside, CA 92501 s,,.~.,. csr,,,,l,,,/,,Subject: Raneho Summit (Tentative Tract Map 14759) Focused Mulefat Sur- RI,gl'r I I.Jrr~, Vey I. rr.' Kt',n.tg$ Dear Ms. Steele: Q,,,16',,/.,,/,,It LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) conducted a focused survey for mulefat (Baceharis tt,/l .it.re., salicifolia) on the above referenced site. The survey was conducted in response to a n,,/, ~ta: ...... site visit conducted by Ms. Becky Jones of the California Department of Fish and ~,,t, ~,~,,,,,~,,,~,,Game (CDFG) to address the potential for drainage channels present on the site to be .~m,,,~,,,, .~r,,,,,'regulated under Section 1603 of the California Fish and Game Code (Code). Based on u,,.,.,~ n. z,,~., her field evaluation and review of the LSA's Biological Resources Report for TIM 147.59 (Rancho SuraraiO, Rancho Cucamonga, dated July 14, 1999, she requested '~ .....' "' "' further information on the mulefat identified in the LSA biological report. Mulefat is 1.,,,,., ~ ....... a hydrophytie (water-loving) plant species that is usually associated with a water c,,,,,,,,. ~..a .... source, such as a drainage channel, but is often found in association with upland plant Stt'z'c'n ~[: (.,,nklt,l~communities as well. /.,,~'/.',' .... The CDFG is empowered to issue agreements for any alteration of a river, stream, or ~,,/,.,,,i / ,,,~- .....lake where fish or wildlife resources may be adversely affected. Streams (and rivers) /~.,,t. it.,,; ..... are defined by the presence of a channel bed and banks, and at least an intermittent c:/,,,, s,',;/,,,., flow of water. The CDFG generally includes, within the jurisdictional limits of n,.,,,,,, /,,. streams and lakes, any tipman habitat present. Ripman habitat includes willows, /,,/,a,/t ~/.,/. .......mulefat, and other vegetation typically associated with the banks of a stream or lake ~.,/,,,,., .\,-~,,-'.shoreline. No tipman habitat was identified in the July 1999 biological resources b,.,. ~.,.=,.,.c,,, LSA biologist, Denise Woodard, surveyed the subject site on October 6, 1999 to look /,tl ~,l,,,, <rco, ....for mulefat within two drainages present on site and adjacent areas. One drainage is present on the eastern portion of the site and the other in the middle of the site, both run generally north to south. These drainages were defined based on the presence of channel bed and banks. 10/8/99(R:~ALE831\mulefatsurvey.wpd) ............ ": EXHIBIT #3 No mulefat was observed within the two drainages. However, a single mulefat was observed (see attached Figure 2) on the extreme southeast border of the site. This plant was in a disturbed sandy area at the intersection of two dirt roads. This plant was not associated with any drainage channel exhibiting bed and banks. Please do not hesitate to call me at (909) 781-9310 if you have any questions or re- quire further information. Sincerely, LSA ASSOCIATES,~ Denise D. Woodard Project Manager/Biologist 10/g/99(R:~ALE831\rnuiefatsurvey.w1~d) 2 ~" 1 2 Distu~edRivecsidianAlluvialFanSageSctub ' ]' i S Eucalyptus Windrow F'i ~ ";' ::*-:' . 7 r N R~cho Su~it (Tract 14759) ~¢ s. F~ Pl~t Communities and .. ~.. LEGEND SITE UTILIZATION MAP TRACT BOUNDARY TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14759~ ,~, =-~ ,-, EXISTING I..EV~E ,,,,===,,-== ETlWANDA CREEK RANClIO SUMMIT IIC PREPARED BY: ALLARD ENGINEERING ,/~---~'~ ,8,-/~ EXHIBIT #4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: September 22, 1999 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROF' Brad Buller, City Planner BY Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT - The proposed subdivision of 132 acres of land into 358 single family lots and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling 18.3 acres in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the east and west sides of Wardman Bullock Road, north and south of Summit Avenue - APN: 226-102-17. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Proiect Density: The project is proposed to be developed under both the Basic and Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan with an overall density of 2.9 dwelling units per acre. The Basic Development portion is 2.1 dwelling units per acre and the Optional Development portion is 3.4 dwelling units per acre. For the Low Residential District, basic standards allow up to 3 dwelling units per acre and Optional allow up to 4 dwelling units per acre. B. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq: North Single family homes and vacant land; Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre), Etiwanda North Specific Plan South - Flood control basin; Open Space District, Etiwanda Specific Plan East Single family homes; Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) Etiwanda Specific Plan West Vacant land and flood control facilities; Open Space District, Etiwanda Specific Plan C. General Plan Desiqnations: Project Site - Low Residential North - Very Low Residential South - Open Space/Flood Control East Low Residential West Open Space/Flood Control D. Site Characteristics: The site slopes from north to south at approximately 3.5 percent. The site contains a grove of Olive trees required to be preserved per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Two remnant drainage courses traverse the property but very little water flows through them because of past flood control efforts to the northwest of the site. Access will be via an extension of Wardman Bullock Road connecting the current termini at Wilson Avenue and at the southwest area of Tract 13566 and by an extension of Summit Road into the site /7' "C " PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'I'r 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT September 22, 1999 Page 2 connecting with Wardman Bullock Road. A master planned access to the Etiwanda Northeast Park to the west of the site is proposed. The site is surrounded to the north by single family homes across Wilson Avenue, to the east by single family homes, to the west b7 a flood control channel, and to the south by a flood control basin. ANALY'SIS: A. General: The proposal is for subdivision only; home plans will be reviewed with a future Development Review application. The site is proposed to be developed under both the Basic and Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The northeastern portion of the site (93 lots north and east of Wardman Bullock Road) would be developed under Basic Standards with the remaining area south and west of Wardman Bullock Road under Optional Standards (265 lots). B. Open Space: The Etiwanda Specific Plan Optional Development Standards require that 30 percent of the site be set aside for common open space in the Low Residential District. Three public parks are proposed within the project varying in size from 3.7 acres to approximately 8 acres. The parks are proposed to be linked via a trail system following Wardman Bullock Road and Summit Avenue· The applicant is working with Parks Development staff on park designs. C. Park Improvements/Fees: Developers of residential projects are charged Park Impact Fees upon issuance of building permits to offset the demand for parks created by new homes· In ~nhe subject case, the developer is dedicating land and constructing public park improvements · lieu of paying park fees. D. Drainage: A portion of the proposed development is located within a Zone D~ special flood hazard area as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Tracts to the northeast and east of the site have been required to construct special flood protection walls. The applicant has processed an application with the Federal Emergency Management Agency to remove the property from the undetermined flood zone area. The conditions of approval require that construction of the Etiwanda Channel and debds basin be initiated prior to the issuance of building permits· In addition, the developer will be required to provide protection from local flows that are not contained by the basin and channel. E. Wilson Avenue Parkway: The Etiwanda Specific Plan indicates the ultimate right-of-way for Wilson Avenue shall be 155 feet. The south side of the street bears the majority of the burden with a required right-of-way of 104 feet from the centerline of the street. The excess right-of-way on the south side of the street is necessary to accommodate the Metropolitan Water District north feeder line. When the Etiwanda Specific P an was prepared, the exact alignment of the Metropolitan Water District line within the Wilson Avenue street section was unknown. Correspondence from Metropolitan Water District indicates the water line is on the north side of the street at Wardman Bullock Road, fronting the project, and that the line crosses to the south side of Wilson Avenue 850 feet west of Wardman Bullock Road. Therefore, the 155 foot right-of-way dimension can be reduced along the frontage of the project site. Flood Zone D is an area in which flood hazards are undetermined. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'IT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT September 22, 1999 Page 3 As a result of Proposition 218, the City desires to limit publicly maintained landscaped areas to avoid the necessity of raising landscape maintenance district fees. In order to meet this goal and still provide a generous parkway, staff is proposing that the applicant process an Etiwanda Specific Plan amendment to reduce the parkway width from 65 feet to 40 feet between Wardman Bullock Road and 850 feet westerly, for an overall right-of-way width of 130 feet. Staff believes the 40-foot parkway width will successfully reduce the maintained area yet continue to provide room for trail and bike path amenities. The visual impacts of the transition between the two widths can be mitigated through landscaping. F. Street Lenqth: The City's Street Design Policy limits the maximum length of uninterrupted streets to 800 feet. This means that a street 800 feet or longer must have a knuckle or a "T" intersection. The applicant had attempted to accommodate the requirements of the City's Street Design Policy except for the length of "E" Street. This street is designed to be 1,283 feet between "T" intersections. Staff informed the applicant early in the review process that such a long uninterrupted street length is contrary to City design policy. The applicant, however, disagrees with the design policy and has maintained the excessive uninterrupted street length in the project design. Staff recommends that the street be redesigned to conform to City design policy and a condition of approval requires same. The City's Traffic division maintains that without such "interruption," an 800 foot long street will induce speeding and therefore negatively impact the quality of life for the residents in the neighborhood. In other areas of the City, attempts to control speed by signs has not proven effective. G. Planninq Commission Workshops: The Planning Commission conducted two Pre-Application Review workshops with the applicant on May 3, and August 12, 1998. Concerns expressed during the first workshop related primarily to the increased density proposed. The Commission felt that increasing density by relying on the Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan should only be undertaken if "exemplary, innovative, and special" design amenities would be provided. The applicant revised the plan to include parks and trails for the second workshop. The Commission reacted favorably to the open space elements, density transition, street scape design, and trails connecting major open space elements proposed with the new plan and directed the applicant to work closely with Parks Development and Planning staff on the open space elements. The applicant has been working diligently with staff to that satisfaction. H. Tree Removal Permit: The site contains remnant Eucalyptus windrows and a grove of Olive trees that will have to be removed to accommodate the project. An arborist report was prepared regarding the health of the trees. The arborist recommended preservation of the Olive trees, which will be incorporated into the landscaping for the project. Many of the Eucalyptus trees are not worthy of preservation due to potential structural weaknesses or other reasons. The easterly windrow will be preserved in-place. Eucalyptus windrows removed with the project will be replaced with new windrow planting in conformance with Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements. I. Desiqn Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (Stewart, Fong) reviewed the project on August 3, 1999, and requested the project be revised and brought back for further review as a consent calendar item. The revised project was reviewed by the Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Fong) on August 17, 1999, and the Committee recommended approval with conditions, see Exhibit "H." PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT September 22, 1999 Page 4 J. Technical Review Committee: The Technical and Grading Review Committees have reviewed the project and recommend approval subject to conditions outlined in the attached Resolution of Approval. K. Environmental Assessment: The applicant has completed Part I of the Initial Study and staff has completed Part II (Environmental Checklist). In completing the Initial Study checklist, staff found that the site is located in an area recently identified by the U .S. Department of Fish and Wildlife Service as potential habitat for endangered or threatened species. Habitat assessment and biological surveys were required to determine potential habitat value and any potential impacts, particularly to the federally-listed threatened California Gnatcatcher, the endangered San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat, and endangered Quino Checkerspot Butterfly. Habitat assessment and protocol surveys were conducted by LSA Associates, Inc., consulting biologists permitted by the U .S. Department Fish and Wildlife Service. The results of the surveys indicate that the site contains 18.8 acres of undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub that is high quality. Undisturbed sage scrub is closely associated with the California Gnatcatcher and the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat; however, protocol surveys detected neither species on-site. To mitigate the loss of this habitat it is recommended that it be replaced off-site at a ratio of 1:1. The main food plant for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly, Plantago eracta, was not found on-site and focused surveys for the adult butterfly were therefore not warranted. With mitigation, the proposed development of the 132 acre site will not likely result in adverse effects to rare, threatened, or endangered animal species. The project will also have potential impacts related to flooding, air quality (during grading/construction), transportation (increased traffic trips), fire hazards (wildland interface), geological problems (nearby fault systems), and cultural resources (grove of Olive trees). With implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in the attached Initial Study and Resolution of Approval, these potential impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant. If the Planning Commission concurs, then issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be in order. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINg: The applicant conducted a neighborhood meeting on August 4, 1999 with surrounding homeowners. Approximately 20 homeowners in the vicinity of the project site were in attendance. Concerns included: A. Increased traffic in the area before and after construction and emergency access. The applicant had a Traffic Impact Analysis/Congestion Management Program prepared to determine necessary regional improvements necessary to mitigate increased traffic from the project. There are several environmental mitigation measures and conditions of approval requiring the developer to perform transportation related improvements to accommodate the project. B. Are homes to be one or two-story? Developer anticipates all two-story. C. Home Price? Developer anticipates $240,000 to $300,000. D. Home size? 2,400 square foot to 3,000 square foot. E. How will project be phased? All one phase anticipated. F. Time frame? Start grading early in 2000, start selling by June/July 2000, finish by 2001. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT September 22, 1999 Page 5 G. Will existing trees along the east boundary of the site be preserved? Eucalyptus trees along east project boundary will be preserved in-place, Olive trees will be transplanted on-site, other windrows will be removed and replaced per Etiwanda Specific Plan. H. Schools overcrowding. Currently, children in area are bussed to schools in Fontana and residents don't feel thars fair. They "pay extra" to live in Rancho Cucamonga but their children have to go to school in Fontana. Etiwanda School District boundaries are not the same as City boundary. Developer will pay State mandated school impact fees, which will be charged at time of building permit issuance. I. Fire Protection. Residents want a Fire Station in the area. Fire Distdct is currently conducting a "Fire Defense Study" to ascertain possible substations as needed. Homes are required to have specialized construction techniques and fuel modification is required to mitigate fire hazards. J. Convenience Shopping Opportunities. Residents want a convenience store in the area so they won't have to drive so far to shop. There is a property designated "Neighborhood Commercial" on the south side of the unbuilt portion of Wilson Avenue to the west of the site but it is uncertain when it may be developed. K. Public parks are appealing but not if they will increase assessments. Only the homeowners within the subject tract would be assessed for the public parks. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public headng in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 600-foot radius of the project site. To date, staff has received a small number of phone calls, all of which were basic inquiries about the development. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 14759 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions and issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. City Planner Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "B" - Master Plan Exhibit "C" - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "D" - Open Space Exhibit "E" - Grading Plan Exhibit "F" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "G" - Illustrative Sections Exhibit "H" - Design Review Action Agendas Exhibit "1" - Initial Study Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions and Mitigation Monitoring Plan _. ~ ..... .....~ . . .. ~ ..... - -.- .--- ~ ,,,,,.,,-,,,-,,,,,.,,,,,,, 600' PERIMETER ZONE ~, [~ 8~ ~LIZA~ON MAP , ,, ~NTA~ ~ACT NO. 14759 [PREPARED BY: ALURD ENGINEERING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14759 ................. .:__, .......... * "'~""' ZZZ 0.32 -- 1,1 AC L15 AC l~ AC AC 0.63 AC AC 6.67 AC AC AC 0.47 AC 0.10 0.22 AC 0.58 --0.74 AC OPEN SPACE REQUIRED (o~a~e ~at~Ntdg~-d-wa~) 23.62 AC OPEN SPACE PRODDED 23.62 AC OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT ~-~rr "~" ( ~ .~.~') ~-7/ 'mmA~w~ 'r~c'r ,o. ~SLII41TLLC PRE~ARE'D BY: ALLARD E)IGINEE~ING INDEX MAP - CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14759 , · · ·-! ...... :-~- _ __~,~,,~ CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14759 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14759 RANCHO SUMMIT LLC NO. 14759 RANCHO SUMMIT LLC ,3RADINGi PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14759 RANCHO SUMMIT LLC CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14759 \ ,,,- -,-,' ~ ', ,:,.- ,~ ....,~.,,, ',, -- O~' -,.,-,,.. ',, - ~ .-.-' .,- .,.~.. -T .-.,-:.. - Ra~cho Summit RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA Tentative Tract 14759 ~ TYPICAL PARK ENTRY ELEVATION THEME FENCE'REAR ACCESS ELEVATION ~ Rancho Summit TYPICAL CONCEPT ELEVATIONS ~ON CONCEPT PLAN /~,~ ~ u A, " ~~ """°' Rancho Summit WARDMAN BULLOCK SECTION .......... INTERSECTION @ SUMMIT WARDMANBULLOCK /' C'/ NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS P,.L__,~ ( SUMMIT AVE SECTION - between streets CC and DD ~ Rancho Summit .... · =,= CONCEPT PLAN AND SECTION CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Brent Le Count August 17, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT - The proposed subdivision of 132 acres of land into 358 single family lots and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling 28.7 acres in the Low Residential District (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the east and west sides of Wardman Bullock Road, north and south of Summit Avenue - APN: 226-102-17. Desiqn Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Brent Le Count The Committee reviewed the revised plans and recommended approval. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Brent Le Count August 3, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT ~ The proposed subdivision of 132 acres of land into 358 single family lots and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling 28.7 acres in the Low Residential District (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the east and west sides of Wardman Bullock Road, north and south of Summit Avenue - APN: 226-102-17. Desiqn Parameters: The site is surrounded to the north by single family homes across Wilson Avenue, to the east by single family homes, to the west by a flood control channel, and to the south by a flood control basin. The site slopes from north to south at approximately 3.5 percent. The site contains a grove of Olive trees required to be preserved per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Access will be via an extension of Wardman Bullock Road connecting the current termini at Wilson Avenue and at the southwest area of Tract 13566 and by an extension of Summit Road into the site connecting with Wardman Bullock Road. A master planned access to the Etiwanda Northeast Park to the west of the site is proposed. The proposal is for subdivision only, home plans would be reviewed with a future Development Review application. The site is proposed to be developed under both the Basic and Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The northeastern portion of the site (93 lots north and east of Wardman Bullock Road) would be developed under Basic Standards with the remaining area south and west of Wardman Bullock Road under Optional Standards. The Etiwanda Specific Plan requires green ways for projects developed under Optional Development Standards. Green ways are required to be 10 feet to 20 feet wide, private trail easements to connect private common areas with public areas. Three "community parks" are proposed within the project varying in size from 3.7 acres to approximately 8 acres. The southern two parks within the Optional Standards area are proposed to be linked via a trail system following Wardman Bullock Road and Summit Avenue. The third park is located in the Basic Standards portion and is not connected to the greenbelt system. The applicant is currently working with Parks Development staff on resolving park design issues. Variances: The applicant is requesting to reduce the required building separation per Optional Development Standards from 20 feet to 15 feet to allow the construction of larger homes on the small lots. Such a reduction would require the applicant to seek approval of a Variance and staff does not believe findings can be established for granting of such. Furthermore, maximizing home size on smaller lots would be contrary to the rural character of the Etiwanda area. The applicant is also requesting reduced setbacks along Wardman Bullock Road because the City allowed the portion of Wardman Bullock Road east of the subject site (Tract 13566) to have reduced parkway dimensions (7 feet as opposed to 12 feet) due to inclusion of a public utility easement to make up the additional 5 feet (the setback is taken off of the right-of-way/property line). According to Engineering staff, the portion of Wardman Bullock Road, referenced by the applicant, was approved and constructed subject to rules and regulations no longer in affect (such as permitting curb adjacent sidewalks). Current City standards require a 12-foot wide parkway and the Etiwanda Specific Plan requires setbacks to be based off the property line. Such reduction in setbacks would also require approval of a Variance and there do not appear to be strong findings to justify. Planninq Commission Workshops: The Planning Commission conducted two Pre-Application Review workshops with the applicant on May 3rd and August 12th, 1998. Concerns expressed during the first workshop related primarily to the increased density proposed. The Commission felt that increasing density by relying on the Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan should only be undertaken if "exemplary, innovative, and special" design amenities would be provided. The applicant revised the plan to include parks and trails forthe second workshop. The Commission reacted favorably to the open space elements, density transition, street scape design, and trails connecting major open space elements proposed with the new plan and directed the applicant to work closely with Parks Development and Planning staff on the open space elements. DRC COMMENTS TT14759- RANCHO SUMMIT August3,1999 Page 2 Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Provide a green way trail system to link each neighborhood with parks and trails. This could take the form of pedestrian paseo connections between lots (for example: a paseo between Lots 7 and 8 linking the Parcel A park site with the greenway trail on Wardman Bullock Road, a paseo between Lots 73, 74, 75, 82, and 83 to link the 'J' Street cul-de- sac/neighborhood pocket with the Parcel A park site). 2. Expand "common landscape lot" on both sides of Wardman Bullock Road and Summit Avenue. The "Conceptual Development Plan" booklet provided by the applicant and shown to the Commission at the August 12, 1999 workshop, showed extensive landscape areas on both sides of Wardman Bullock Road and Summit Avenue which appear to be approximately one half the adjoining lot depth. The current proposal is about one fourth as deep as the adjoining lots. The Community Trails on the south and west side of Wardman Bullock Road and the south side of Summit Avenue should be paralleled by on-site pedestrian pathways. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.: 1. Avoid having lots side-on to rear of adjacent lots such as Lots 74/75 in Parcel A, and 70/94 in Parcel B-2. 2. For "T" intersections, plot lots to avoid headlight glare of oncoming traffic from the street. 3. Avoid having lots front onto 'R' Street as it will function as a busier, collector level street. 4. Avoid straight sections of street longer than 800 feet. Streets 'B' and "E" have almost 1000 foot long straight sections. 5~ Wherever possible, make corner lots wider than intedor lots to allow additional room for buffering from side streets. Code/Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Code or Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. Replace existing Eucalyptus windrows with new on-site plantings per Etiwanda Specific Plan at 50 linear feet per acre. (132 acres x 50 = 6600 linear feet of new windrow). Windrows shall follow a 330 foot by 660 foot grid pattern. Windrows should be used along the perimeter of the site to function as a landscape buffer similar to that portrayed in the "Conceptual Development Plan' booklet provided by the applicant. 2. The existing Olive grove along the northern tract boundary is required to be presen/ed by the Etiwanda Specific Plan. An arborist report for the project recommends that the trees have value and should be transplanted. It is recognized that the trees are in conflict with proposed improvements; therefore, transplant the existing Olive trees into on-site and street DRC COMMENTS TT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT ~ August 3, 1999 t.'~) Page 3 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised in light of the above comments and brought back for further Committee review. Attachments .Desiqn Review Committee Action: Members Present: Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Brent Le Count The Committee requested that the project be revised in light of staff's comments and the following addjtional comments be brought back for review as a Consent Calendar item. The applicant agreed to the Committees direction and staff's comments. 1. The Variances requested (front yard setback reduction and building separation) would be more appropriately requested with a formal Development Review submittal. The Committee would prefer design solutions that do not rely upon variances. 2. It is recognized that the secondary design issues identified by staff may not be complied with in an absolute fashion. So long as these items are minimized to tbe degree possible. ~ :E.~-~ 3. The proposed 40-foot width of landscape swaths on Wardman Bullock Road and Summit Avenue are acceptable so long as the Community Equestrian Trails are paralleled by on- site pedestrian pathways. 4. The applicant is willing to provide a green way trial system to link each neighborhood with parks and trails as necessary to comply with Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements. The applicant will work with staff to resolve this item. ' "' "'=" ' ~ ""' ' ~""; ' AREA C-2 .' ......................" l~,r..r~T ~ ~,~.~'~ ~ S U H H I T ILLUSTRATIVE LAND USE CHO ENTRY INTERSECTION CONCEPT :, , .. ~ REA B-3 OPEN SPACE CONCEPT ~ ~ DOUBLE FRONTAGE CONCEPT N C H O S U ~ ~ I T COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract 14759 2. Related Files: Pre-Application Review 98-09 3. DescriptiOn of Project: TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT - The proposed subdivision of 132 acres of land into 358 single family lots and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling 28.7 acres in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the east and west sides of Wardman Bullock Road, north and south of Summit Avenue - APN: 226-102-17. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Lennar Homes 24800 Chrisanta Drive Mission Viejo. CA 92691 5. General Plan Designation: Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) 6. Zoning: Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) Etiwanda Specific Plan 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is surrounded to the north by single family homes across Wilson Avenue, to the east by single family homes, to the west by a flood control channel, and to the south by a flood control basin. The site slopes from north to south at approximately 3.5 percent. The site contains a grove of Olive trees required to be preserved per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Access will be via an extension of Wardman Bullock Road connecting the current termini at Wilson Avenue and at the southwest area of Tract 13566 and by an extension of Summit Avenue into the site connecting with Wardman Bullock Road. A master planned access to the Etiwanda Northeast Park to the west of the site is proposed. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Brent Le Count (909) 477-2750 '10. Other agencies whose approval is required: A Traffic Impact Analysis has been completed for review by SANBAG. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page ? ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning (v') Transportation/Circulation (v') Public Services ( ) Population and Housing (t/) Biological Resources (v') Utilities and Service Systems ( ) Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources (v') Aesthetics (v') Water (f') Hazards (V') Cultural Resources (v') Air Quality (,/) Noise ( ) Recreation (V') Mandatop/Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ( ) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. (v') I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ( ) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1 ) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Brent Le Count, AICP Associate Planner October 25, 1999 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V') b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Comments: The project is designed in conformance with the Basic and Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. No increase in density or plan amendment are proposed. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V') Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~.) c) Seismic ground failure, including quefaction? ( ) ( ) ( ) d) Seiche h~ards? ( ) ( ) ( ) e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) ( ) (f) ~ Erosion, changes in topography. or unstable soil conditions from ex~vation, grading, or fill? ( ) (f) ( ) ( ) g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) ( ) h) Expansive soils? ( ) (~) ( ) ( ) i) Unique geologic or phys ~1 features? ( ) ( ) ( ) Commen~: f, h) The site is located approximately % mile from the Red Hill EaChquake Fault Zone. A Geotechni~l Investigation was prepared (Conveme Consultants, Januaff 20, 1998) to asce~ain whether there exist any geologi~l or seismic constraints that would impa~ the project. The study found that the site is not Io~ted within an identified eaChquake fault zone and the site is not sus~ptible to soil liquefa~ion, or other seismic activities/h~ards. All recommendations as outlined by Conveme Consul~n~ Preliminaff Geotechni~l Investigation of Januaff 20,1998 shall be complied with, including but not limited to: 1. Site grading, in general, shall include ramoval and replacement as process compacted fills of all undocumented fill materials, flood control dikes, and the upper 2 to 5 let of top soils and alluvial In deposit. Deeper removal may be required along the locally active channels within natural drainage areas. Site grading would involve ramoval and disposal, or on-site crushing, of considerable amoun~ of ove~ize material comprising cobbles and boulder. Site preparation would also include removal and disposal of vege~tion, weeds, brush, trees, debris piles, buried irrigation pipes, and the concrete water ~nk. 2. Additional investigation and geotechnical exploration shall occur during site grading to assess collapse potential of matrix material comprising silff sand with gravel and gravelly sand ma~rials. 3. A defiled geotechnical investigation mpo~, including defiled site grading and preliminaff foundation design and construction Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 5 recommendations, shall be prepared and submitted for review by the City, prior to issuance of grading permits. Wsth mitigation, the impact is not considered significant. 4. WATER. VVd/ the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) (v') ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) (~/) ( ) c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ) ( ) (v') d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ) ( ) (~/) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ) ( ) ( ) (v') f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ) ( ) ( ) (~/) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?. ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (e/) Comments: a, b) The absorption rate will be altered because of the paving and hard scape proposed. Runoff created by development of the site will be mitigated through the installation of a storm drain system, which will collect flows atthe southwest corner of the site and outlet into the San Sevaine Basin. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to protect the site from runoff using drainage facilities. A final drainage study will be prepared and reviewed for the design of the facility, prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map. If the applicant cannot acquire off-site property interests necessary to build the drainage facilities, the developer waives his right to recordation of the final map. The site is subject to potential flooding from the Etiwanda Creek wash. The project is proposed to be constructed on land that is designated as Rood Zone D on the Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page ~; Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as areas in which flood hazards are undetermined. The applicant has applied to FEMA for a change of zone designation and received a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR). The applicant will be conditioned to process for a Letter of Map Revision to remove the site from the Flood Zone D, pdor to recordation of the Final Tract Map. s 5. AIR QUALI~. Would the pmposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or proje~ed air quality violation? ( ) (~) ( ) ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) (f) ( ) ( ) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (f) d) Create obje~ionable odom? ( ) ( ) ( ) (f) Commen~: a, b) Air quali~ impa~s may occur dudng the site preparation including grading and equipment exhaust as it is used on-site. Major sour~s of emissions du~ng this phase include exhaust emissions from constm~ion vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of constation vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed suda~s, as well as sob distu~an~s by grading filling. Nox and PM10 levels may be exceeded on a daily basis dudrig constm~ion; however, with implemen~tion of mitigation measures, as listed below, impac~ will be reduced to less-than-significant levels. Peak grading and constm~ion emissions may ex~ed the South Coast Air Quality Management Distri~ thresholds forthe c~teda pollutant of Nox (2.5 tons per quatier) and PM10 (150 pounds per day). Emissions of other criteria pollutants would ~ below the standards. This is a potentially signifi~nt impa~, b~ould be reduced to a less-than significant level with implemen~tion of mitigation measures as listed below. 1. The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used on-site based on low emission facto~ and high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure ~at construction grading plans include a s~tement that all construction equipment will be tuned and main~ined in accordance with the manufactumr's specifications. 2. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-powered equipment in-lieu of gasoline-powered engines where feasible. 3. The construction contractor shall ensure ~at construction g~ding plans include a s~tement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 7 use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction period should be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. 4. The construction contractor shall support and encourage ride sharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. 5. Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on-site and kept to a minimum by following the dust control measures listed below. A. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. B. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. C. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed, the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated immediately by pickup of the soil until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. D. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. E. Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin. 6. The construction contractor shall utilize, as much as possible, prs- coated natural colored building materials, water-based or Iow-VOC coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, such as high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray method, or manual coatings application such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge. 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) (V') ( ) ( ) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page ;n; b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompat ble uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ( ) ( ) (v') d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ( ) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ( ) (v') f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) ( ) (v') g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/) Comments: a) A Congestion Management Program/Traffic Impact Analysis (CMP/TIA) study has been prepared to determine whether the project will cause increases in vehicle tdps or traffic congestion in excess of projections for the adopted land use. The CMP/TIA (RKJK and Associates, Inc., March 15, 1999) concluded that the project may result in excessive future traffic congestion. The report recommends certain roadway and freeway improvements to accommodate the project generated traffic. With the following mitigations, the impact is not expected to be significant. t. The project will be required to install frontage street improvements in their ultimate configuration, per City ordinance, and to pay Transportation Development fees for improvements within the City limits and CMP mitigation fees for improvements outside the City limits. 2. Summit Avenue shall be constructed curb-to. curb including street lights, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, from the west project boundary to East Avenue. Construction shall occur with the firat phase of development. The utilities off-sits shall be relocated as necessary. The overhead utilities on-site shall be under grounded. 3. Traffic signals shall be installed at the intersections of Wilson Avenue/Wardman Bullock Road and Summit Avenue/Young's Canyon Road. 4. A street or driveway connection to Hoppe Drive shall be provided for secondary access to Tract 13566-2. 5. Summit Avenue and Wardman Bullock Road shall be constructed full width within the project boundaries with the fiat phase of development. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 9 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or ram species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? (f) ( ) ( ) b) Locally designated species (e.g., hedtage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? (f) ( ) ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? (~) ( ) ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., mamh, dparian, and vernal pool)? ( ) (f) ( ) e) Wddlife dispemal or migration co~idom? ( ) (f) ( ) Commen~: a) The prope~y is located in an area recently identified by the U.S. Depa~ment d Fish and ~ldlife Se~ice as potential habitat for endangered or threatened s~cies. Habitat assessment and biological su~eys were required to dete~ine potential habitat value and any potential impa~s, pa~iculady to the fedemily-listed threatened California gnat~tcher, the endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat, and endangered Quino checkempot b~e~y. Habitat assessment and pmto~l su~eys were conduPed by LSAAssociates, Inc., consulting biologists periled bythe U.S. Depa~ment Fish and Wddlife Se~i~. The results of the su~eys indicate that the s~e ~ntains 62.48 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (18.8 acres undistuffied Rivemidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, 20.36 acres disturbed Rivemidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, and 23.32 acres of Buckheat Scrub [monotypic sage scrub]). Undistuffied sage scrub is closely associated with the California gnat~tcher and the San Bemardino kangaroo rat; however, protocol su~eys dete~ed neither s~cies on-site. The scrub habitat area is therefore considered to be of unoccupied status. Pumuant to the Intedm Project Review Guidelines as contained in the Memorandum of Undemtanding be~een the City, County, and U.S. Depa~ment Fish and W~ldlife Se~ice (USD~S) and Califomia Depa~ment of Fish and Game, a proje~ review meeting was held at Rancho Cucamonga City Hall on August 25, 1999. The USD~S recommended that the Coastal Sage Scrub on-site removed to accommodate the proje~ be mitigated by offisite mpla~ment at a ratio of 3:1. However, the 3:1 ratio does not appearto be based upon any scientific principles but is rother a preference of the Se~ice. Also, the 3:1 ratio is typically only applied to occupied habitat and in this case the habitat on s~e is unoccupied by threatened or endangered species. The Rivemidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub on-site, while dete~ined high quality, does not have long te~ viability. This type of plant community must have 50 to 100 year floods to su~ive over time. Past flood control effo~s to the nodh and west have cut off water drainage to the habitat area, thereby limiting it's long te~ viability. ~the 62.48 acres of on-site Coastal Sage Scrub, t8.8 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 10 acres are considered undisturbed (undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub). Replacement of the undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub at a ratio of 1:1 appears reasonable. The replacement area will be located within the Etiwanda Fan contiguous to existing preserve areas and unconstrained by flood control improvements. The disturbed sage scrub and buckwheat scrub on site does not appear worthy of preservation as it is relatively poor quality and has a lower species diversity than undisturbed areas. Also, disturbed sage scrub is typically only utilized by threatened or endangered species when there is no undisturbed habitat in the vicinity and there is high quality undisturbed sage scrub nearby. The undisturbed habitat is relatively isolated in that it is not necessary to provide a habitat linkage. Purchase and preserve (in perpetuity) off-site lands to provide substitute resources at a ratio of 1 :l for the undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub that would be lost through project implementation. Off site land shall be located within the Etiwanda Fan, shall be undisturbed and of high quality, and contiguous to the existing preserve areas. The main food plant for the Quino checkerspot butterfly, Plantago erecta, was not found on-site and focused surveys for the adult butterfly were therefore not warranted. The study indicates that five sensitive species (not on State or Federal lists) were found on-site including Monarch butterfly, Northern harrier, Golden eagle, Loggerhead shdke, and Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow. However, available information does not show that these species qualify as rare, threatened, or endangered. With mitigation, the proposed development of the 132-acre site will not likely result in adverse effects to rare, threatened, or endangered animal species. b) The project will cause the removal of many rows of Eucalyptus trees. The applicant has filed a Tree Removal Permit for consideration by the Planning Commission. The Etiwanda Specific Plan allows Eucalyptus windrows to be removed to accommodate a project subject to replacement with new windrow planting of 5-gallon Eucalyptus Maculata at 8-foot spacing. The existing Eucalyptus windrow along the east project boundary provides a significant landscape buffer between the subject property and the existing homes in Tract 13566 to the east. This windrow shall be preserved in-place. The site also contains a Coast Live Oak tree which should be either preserved in place or transplanted on-site. The impact is not considered significant. c) See Comment a) above regarding Coastal Sage Scrub. The site contains a grove of olive trees designated worthy of preservation by the Etiwanda Specific Plan. An arborist study (Harmsorth Associates, December 1998) was conducted which indicates that the trees are worthy of preservation and recommends they be transplanted. The project design mitigates removal by transplanting the olive trees to provide enhanced entry statement on Wardman Bullock Road per the Conceptual Landscape Plan submitted with the application. With mitigation, the impact is not considered significant. d) There appear to be two drainage courses through the site. Very little water has reached the drainages in several years due to flood control efforts to the northwest ofthe site. RePresentatives ofthe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Califomia Department of Fish and Game have visited the site and it has been determined that the drainages do not fall under Federal or State jurisdiction. There is no anticipated impact. Refer to letter from Department of Fish and Game confirming that the Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 11 drainages are not subject to Streambed Alteration Permits. Furthermore, no wetland/riparian habitat has been found on site (October 8, 1999 letter from LSA). e) The site may function to some degree as a habitat linkage but construction of the Route 30 Freeway to the south would prevent future linkage value of the site. The site is surrounded by existing residential development to the north and east. Furthermore, the site is surrounded to the south and west by open space/flood control improvements which could continue to provide a habitat linkage in the area. At best, the habitat on site is the terminus of a "finger" of potential habitat extending down from the undeveloped land to the norlhwest. The site does not link otherwise disconnected patches of habitat. Furthermore, the Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub on site, while determined high quality, does not have long term viability. This type of plant community must have 50 to 100 year floods to survive over time. Past flood control efforts to the north and west have cut off water drainage to the habitat area, thereby limiting it's long term viability, The impact is not considered significant. 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (v') b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manne~ (v') c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and (v') the residents of the State? 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, ( ) ( ) ) (~/) pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or ( ) ( ) ) (v') emergency evacuation plan? Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 1 ? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) (v') ( ) ( ) Comments: e) The site falls within the "Wildland/Urban Interface" zone and is therefore subject to fire hazard mitigation requirements, which may include vegetation management, specialized home construction methods, and other requirements. The current application involves subdivision only, no home designs are proposed. Specialized home construction techniques will be assessed with a future Development Review submittal. A condition of approval requires compliance with Fire Distdct requirements. With such mitigation, the impact is not considered significant. 10. NOISE. Willtheproposalresultin: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) (~/) ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise ( ) ( ) (v') ( ) levels? Comments: a, b) The project will increase noise leveJs since the site is currently vaunt, The site is not indicated to be in an area of excessive future noise by the General Plan, The southern edge of the site lies over 1,000 feet north and west of the Route 30/Interetate 15 interchange separated from the interchange by a flood control basin; therefore, future freeway noise is not expected to impact the site. Noise that does reach the site from the south will be attenuated by construction of a tract pedmeter wall along the south boundary and by typical home construction techniques. The impact is not considered significant. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 13 t 1. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government se~ices in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) (~) ( ) ( ) b) Poli~ pmtedion? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) (f) ( ) d) Maintenance of public facilities, ( ) ( ) ( ) (~) including roads? e) Other governmental seaices? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~) Commen~: a) The site falls within the "Wildland/Urban Interface" zone and is therefore suNect to fire h~rd mitigation requirement, which may include vegettion management, specialized home construction methods, and other requirement. The cu~ent appli~tion involves subdivision only, no home designs are proposed. Specialized home construeion techniques will be assessed with a future Development Review submi~al. A condition of approval requires compliance with Fire Distri~ requirements. ~th such mitigation, the impact is not ~nsidered significant. c) The Etiwanda School Distd~ has commented on several prior proje~s that school facilities am ovemrowded and in need of improvement and expansion. The applicant will pay the Site mandated school impact fees, prior to building petit issuance. ~th mitigation, the impa~ is not ~nsidemd signifi~nt. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) ( ) (f) b) Communistion systems? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (f) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 1.1 Signfficant d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ( ) (l/) e) Storm water drainage? ( (v') ( ) ( ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ( ) ( ) (v') g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ( ) ( ) (v') Comments: e) The project will result in increased runoff due to roofed and hard scape areas. The project will be required to construct local drainage facilities as necessary. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal.' a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic ( ) ( ( ) (v') highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) (~,) ( ) Comments: c) The project will increase light and glare since the site is currently vacant. However, the residential lighting will be consistent with surrounding neighborhoods. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ) ( ) (~,) ( ) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ) ( ) (f) ( ) c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ) ( ) (~,) ( ) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( ( ) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 15 e) Restrict existin9 religious or sacred uses within the potential irapad ( ) ( ) ( ) (f) area? Commen~: a-c) The site contains an old mse~oir, an Olive grove, stm~uml remains, and remnants of an irrigation system. A Cultural Resour~s Reconnaissance study was concluded (RMW Paleo Associates, Inc, December 1998) to assess potential cultural, archeologi~l, and historical resources and identify mitigation, if necessa~. The study found that the resources on-site lack sufficient integrity to ~ considered for pmse~ation or inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources. However, the study does recommend transplanting the Olive trees on-site. The project design includes transplanting existing OIive trees to main intemections such as Wardman Bullock Road and Summit Avenue. The study also recommends that gmdinglground disturbing activities in the noffhern half of the site be monitored by an amhaeologist due to the possibili~ that sub- surface deposi~ of historic era remains could be located on-site. 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or ( ) ( ) ) (~) other recreational facilities? b) Affe~ existing recreational ( ) ( ) ) (~) oppo~unities? Commen~: The projed is designed in confoman~ with the Basic and Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. No increase in density or plan amendment am proposed. The proje~ does take advantage of the Optional Standards provisions for maximizing density but this is o~et by provision of three large public parks within the project. The throe parks will provide needed recreational oppodunities for homeownem within the tract and in the vicinity. There is no impa~ Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 16 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, mdu~ the num~r or mstd~ the range of amm or ( ) ( ) ( ) endangered plant or animal, or eliminate impo~ant examples of the major pedods of California histo~ or pmhisto~? b) Sho~ te~: Does the proje~ have the potential to achieve sho~-te~, to the disadvantage of Iong-te~, environmental goals? (A sho~-te~ impact on the environment is one which occum in a relatively bdef, definitive pedod d time. Long-te~ ( ) ( ) ( ) impa~s will endure well into the future.) c) Cumulative: Does the proje~ have impa~s that am individually limited. but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effe~s of a proje~ am considerable when viewed in ~nne~ion with the effe~s of past proje~s, the effe~s of other ( ) ( ) (f) ( ) cu~ent proje~s, and the effe~s of probable future proje~s.) d) Subs~ntial adve~e: Does the proje~ have environmental effe~s which will cause substantial adveme effe~s on human beings, either ( ) ( ) ( ) (f) dim~ly or indim~ly? Commen~: Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 17 c) Adoption of the proposed project will not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. The proposed project will pay development impact fees established by the City, the rates of which have been designed to mitigate the potential impacts to fire protection services, police protection services, parks or other recreational facilities, and other governmental services to a level of non- significance. To the extent the project may impact upon utility resources provided by private utility companies, potential impacts upon such resources will be mitigated by the payment of rates and charges to these companies, EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15083(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): General Plan EIR (Certified Apdl 6, 1981) (e/) Master Environmental Assessment for the1989 General Plan Update (SCH ~-88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (V') Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR (SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 18 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES: Geological Problems: All recommendations as outlined by Converse Consultants Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation of January 20, 1998 shall be complied with, including but not limited to: 1. Site grading, in general, shall include removal and replacement as processed compacted fills of all undocumented fill materials, flood control dikes, and the upper 2 to 5 feet of top soils and alluvial fan deposits. Deeper removal may be required along the locally active channels within natural drainage areas. Site grading would involve removal and disposal, or on-site crushing, of considerable amounts of oversize material comprising cobbles and boulders. Site preparation would also include removal and disposal of vegetation, weeds, brush, trees, debds piles, buried irrigation pipes, and the concrete water tank. 2. Additional investigation and geotechnical exploration shall occur dudng site grading to assess collapse potential of matdx material compdsing silty sand with gravel and gravelly sand materials. 3. A detailed geotechnical investigation report, including detailed site grading and preliminary foundation design and construction recommendations, shall be prepared and submitted for review by the City, pdor to issuance of grading permits. Air Quality: 3. The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used on- site based on low emission factors and high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. 4. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-powered equipment in-lieu of gasoline-powered engines where feasible. 5. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction pedod should be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. 6. The construction contractor shall suppor~ and encourage ride sharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. 7. Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on-site and kept to a minimum by following the dust control measures listed below. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 19 A. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. B. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. C. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed, the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated immediately by pickup of the soil until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. D. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. E. Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials, and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin. 8. The construction contractor shall utilize as much as possible pre-coated natural colored building materials, water-based or Iow-VOC coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, such as high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray method, or manual coatings application such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge. Transportation: 1. Summit Avenue shall be constructed curb-to-curb including street lights, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, from the west project boundary to East Avenue. Construction shall occur with the first phase of development. The utilities off-site shall be relocated as necessary. The overhead utilities on-site shall be under grounded. 2. Traffic signals shall be installed at the intersections of Wilson Avenue/Wardman Bullock Road and Summit Avenue/Young's Canyon Road. 3. A street or driveway connection to Hoppe Drive shall be provided for secondary access to Tract 13566-2. 4. Summit Avenue and Wardman Bullock Road shall be constructed full width within the project boundaries with the first phase of development. 5. The project will be required to install frontage street improvements in their ultimate configuration, per City ordinance, and to pay Transportation Development fees for improvements within the City limits and Congestion Management Program mitigation fees for improvements outside the City limits. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 20 Water/Flooding: 1. The absorption rate will be altered because of the paving and hard scape proposed. Runoff created by development of the site will be mitigated through the installation of a storm drain system, which will collect flows at the southwest corner of the site and outlet into the San Sevaine Basin. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to protect the site from runoff using drainage facilities. A final drainage study will be prepared and reviewed for the design of the facility, pdor to recordation of the Final Tract Map. If the applicant cannot acquire off-site property interests necessary to build the drainage facilities, the developer waives his right to recordation of the Final Tract Map. Biological Resources: 1. All of the existing Olive trees on-site deemed worthy of transplantation by a certified arbodst shall be transplanted to be included in on-site landscaping. 2. The existing Eucalyptus windrew along the east project boundary shall be preserved and protected in-place as it serves a significant buffering function. Individual trees within the windrew may be removed if they are found to be diseased, dead, or dangerous in the future subject to replacement at a ratio of 1:1 with minimum 5.-gallon Eucalyptus Maculata at 8 feet on center per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 3. Eucalyptus windrows removed to accommodate the project shall be replaced with new windrew planting of minimum 5-gallon Eucalyptus Maculata at 8-foot spacing at a rate of 50 linear feet of new windrow per acre, 4. The Coast Live Oak tree shall either be preserved in-place or transplanted on- site. If the tree is damaged dudng transplantation or construction, it may be replaced with a minimum 48-inch box sized Coast Live Oak. 5. Purchase and preserve (in perpetuity) off-site lands to provide substitute resources at a ratio of 1:1 for the undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub that would be lost through project implementation. Off site land shall be located within the Etiwanda Fan, shall be undisturbed and high quality, and be contiguous to a preserve area. Hazards: 1. The site fails within the '~ildland/Urban Interface' zone and is therefore subject to fire hazard mitigation requirements such as vegetation management, specialized home construction methods, and other requirements to comply with the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District's Standards for the high fire hazard zone. Cultural Resources: Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 14759 Page 21 1. Per the recommendations of RMW Archeological Survey report dated December 1998, grading/ground disturbing activities in the northern half of the site shall be monitored by an archaeologist due to the possibility that sub- surface deposits of histodc era remains could be located on site. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. Print Name and Title: '~F>,z:}'/nc"b'~~; City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract 14759 Public Review Period Closes: October 27, 1999 Project Name: Rancho Summit Project Applicant: Lennar Homes Project Location (also see attached map): Located on the east and west sides of Wardman Bullock Road, north and south of Summit Avenue - APN: 226-102-17. Project Description: The proposed subdivision of 132 acres of land into 358 single family lots and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling 28.7 acres in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: [] The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or propesals made or agreed to by the applicant before this prepesed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where deady no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. November 10, 1999 Date of Determination Adopted By RESOLUTION NO. i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVETRACT NO. 14759, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 358 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND 3 LETTERED LOTS FOR COMMON OPEN SPACE/PARKS TOTALING 18.3 ACRES ON 132 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN. LOCATED ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD, NORTH AND SOUTH OF SUMMIT AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 226-102-17. A. Recitals. 1. Rancho Summit has flied an application for the approval of Tentative Tract No. 14759, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On September 22, and 29, October 27, and November 10, 1999, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites pdor to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on September 22, and 29, October 27, and November 10, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby spedfically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located on the south side of Wilson Avenue east and west of Wardman Bullock Road and north and south of Summit Avenue with a street frontage of 1.800 feet on Wilson Avenue and lot depth of 3,300 feet and is presently improved with a derelict building foundation, an old reservoir, an olive grove, an Oak tree, and Eucalyptus windrows. The site is in a Flood Zone "D" at the southeastem area of the Etiwanda (Alluvial) Fan and slopes from north to south at approximately 3.5 percant. The elevation difference across the site is approximately 115 feet. There are two remnant drainage courses through the site that no longer carry much water due to flood control efforts to the north and west of the site. Further drainage improvements will be conducted on-site and off-site to the north and west to protect the site from flooding. Vegetation on-site includes Riversidian Alluvial Fan Scrub, which is a plant community known to support habitat for threatened and endangered species. There is a grove of Olive trees on-site, which are required to be preserved by the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is vacant and developed with single family homes, the property to the south consists of a flood control basin, the property to the east is developed with single family homes, and the property to the west is vacant and improved with flood control facilities; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT November 10, 1999 Page 2 c. A Congestion Management Program/Traffic Impact Analysis has been prepared for the project to determine whether the project will cause increases in vehicle tdps or traffic congestion in excess of projections for the adopted land use. The project will be raquirad to install frontage street improvements in their ultimate configuration, per City ordinance, and pay Transportation Development fees for improvements within the City limits and Congestion Management Program mitigation fees for improvements outside the City limits. This will reduce traffic related impacts to a less than significant level; and d. The application is for subdivision purposes only, home and lot-by-lot landscape design would be reviewed with a future Development Review submittal; and e. The project is proposed to be developed under both the Basic and Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Increased density is offset by inclusion of three public parks within the project, which will provide recreational opportunities both for future residents within the tract and for the surrounding area; and f. The project site is potential habitat for threatened or endangered species (i.e., California Gnatcatcher and San Bernardino Merriam Kangaroo Rat, respectively) and biological surveys were conducted by a permitted biologist in accordance with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service protocols. The protocol surveys concluded that the species were not found; and g. The project site is potential habitat for an endangered species, the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly, and a habitat assessment was conducted and determined that, because of a lack of host plants, the site does not support adequate habitat and the species is not present; and h. The project site contains 18.8 acres of undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, the removal of which will be mitigated in an off-site mitigation land bank; and i. The project site is located within the "VVildland/Urban Interface" zone and San Bemardino County Fire Safety Oveday District; and j. The existing Eucalyptus tree windrows will be replaced with new windrow planting in conformance with the requirements of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and k. The existing Olive trees will be transplanted to be included in on-site landscaping; and I. Air quality impacts related to construction activities will be mitigated by following techniques recommended by the South Coast Air Quality Management District; and m. The site does not fall within an identified Seismic Special Studies Zone but the Red Hill Earthquake Fault Zone lies approximately one-half mile to the north. Specialized grading methods supervised by a geologist is required to mitigate potential seismic hazards; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudrig the above- referenced public headng and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission heraby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the Tentative Tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TI' 14759 - Rancho Summit October 27, 1999 Page 3 b. The design or improvements of the Tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan; 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 Tentative Tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the Tentative Tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Dedaretion, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Dedaretion and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this referenca, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder;, that said Mitigated Negative Dedaretion and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Dedaretion with regard to the application. b. Although the Mitigated Negative Dedaretion identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have been reducad to an acceptable level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project, which are listed below as conditions of approval. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public headng, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paregrephs 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 reeferenca. Plannin.q Division 1) Provide pedestrian connections between cul-de-sac Streets "J," "O," "P," and "S" and Wardman Bullock Road. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 14759 - Rancho Summit October 27, 1999 Page 4 2) For "T" intersections, plot homes to avoid headlight glare of oncoming traffic from the street as much as possible. 3) Provide retaining walls as necessary to maximize useable rear and comer side yard areas. 4) The decorative entry monumentation shall be located completely on- site, out of the public right-of-way and shall be maintained by the Homeowners' Association. ~ Division 1) Right-of-way shall be acquired for Summit Avenue from the west project boundary to East Avenue, in conjunction with the standard condition regarding condemnation. The north half shall be fully dedicated per figure 5-39 of the Etiwanda specific Plan. The south half shall be dedicated 23 feet wide as measured from the street centedine. The existing school site at the northeast comer of East Avenue and Summit Avenue is fully improved, no additional right-of- way will be required at this location. 2) Summit Avenue within the project boundaries shall be constructed 71 feet wide, per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Proposed additional parkways will be designed per City Standards and policies, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 3) The extension of Summit Avenue northeast of the Wardman Bullock Ddve intersection shall have a street right-of-way of 66 feet with a curb-to-curb street dimension of 44 feet. 4) The southwest leg of the Summit Avenue intersection shall have a 44 foot curb-to-curb street dimension for a distance of 250 feet. 5) A paved roadway with a minimum of two-way traffic from Wilson Avenue to East Avenue shall be provided for at all times. 6) The street and storm drain plans for Wilson Avenue, full width, from Wardman Bullock Road to 1,140 feet west of the west project boundary shall be prepared, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 7) Wardman Bullock Road/Young's Canyon Road within the project boundaries shall be constructed 102 feet wide, per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Proposed additional parkways will be designed per City Standards and policies, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer shall be eligible to receive transportation fee credit and reimbursement consistent with the policy towards the portions of Wardman Bullock Road and Young's Canyon Road that are classified as backbone. 8) Street "B" at the eastedy terminus shall be designed as a standard cul-de-sac, with the eastam curb face set 2 feet from the property line, standard cul-de-sac right-of-way. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 14759 - Rancho Summit October 27, 1999 Page 5 9) The drainage issues shall be resolved, to the satisfaction of all involved agencies, prior to recordation of the Final Map as follows: a) A final drainage study shall be prepared. In addition to the design and sizing of the drainage facilities for the project, the current drainage patterns and hydrology shall be discussed. The study will determine how much flow is being routed to the Etiwanda system and how much flow to the San Sevaine system. Drainage systems proposed with this development shall not increase flows to the Etiwanda system. b) The ultimate regional improvements including the Upper Etiwanda Regional Mainline Channel and the debris basin north of Wilson Avenue shall be bonded for, have appreved plans, and be under construction; or interim facilities shall be bonded for and approved. c) Facilities to protect the site from local flows shall be designed, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d) The developer, at his sole expense and effort, shall acquire all easements necessary to accommodate ultimate, local, and/or interim facilities. In the event the developer is not able to acquire the necessary off-site fight-of-way, the Final Map shall be disapproved per Chapter 4, Article 1, Section 66473 of the Subdivision Map Act. e) Maintenance responsibility of the drainage facilities that will be constructed to protect the site from local flows is undetermined. Appropriate measures shall be taken to provide for the maintenance. 10) Indicate school bus stop locations. If curb lane is less than 20 feet, a bus bay shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Any amendments to the tentative map resulting from the necessity of a bus bay shall be the responsibility of the developer. 11) An Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment shall be processed to reduce the southerly parkway of Wilson Avenue from Wardman Bullock Road to 1,400 feet west of Wardman Bullock Road, where the Metropolitan Water Distdct feeder line moves to the south side of Wilson Avenue, prior to approval of the Final Map. The padsway shall be raducad from 65 feet to 38 feet and maintain the proposed meandering bike path and equestrian trail. If denied, an amended Tentative Tract Map shall be processed to indicate the required Wilson Avenue fight-of- way and the new lot layout. 12) The standard parkways and trails along Wardman Bullock Road, Young's Canyon Road, Summit Avenue, and Wilson Avenue will be annexed into Landscape Maintenance District No. 7. All other areas proposed for public maintenance will be annexed into the newly created district. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Tr 14759 - Rancho Summit October 27, 1999 Page 6 13) The Tentative Tract will be conditioned to form and join a new assessment district, which will maintain the additional park lands and widened parkways. The distdct will be formed with an escalator to allow for increases in maintenance costs without a vote. 14) Consultant shall check with the Engineering Division for landscape design information pertaining to Wardman Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue. 15) The Community Trail along the south project boundary shall be 20 feet wide. A connection to the existing trail to the east, constructed with Tract 13566-2, shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developershall acquire any off-site right-of- way necessary to design the trail to City Standards, pdor to recordation of ~he adjacent phase of the map. 16) The local residential streets shall be constructed with property-line- adjacent sidewalk. 17) The developer is providing three parks as part of the project. The parks will be of varying sizes and be designed to encourage different levels of community activity. The 7.94-acre park will have a parking lot. community trail access, restroom facility, minimal ball fields, and open space. The 6.67-acre park will be a standard neighborhood park with programmed ball fields, restroom fadlity, parking lot, and open space. The 3.73-acre park will be a passive park with curbside parking, a tot lot, restrooms, and open space as follows: a) A parkway trail connecting the parks shall be provided, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. b) The tree parks shall be constructed in accordance with the recommendations of the Parks and Recreation Commission with the boundaries of the subdivision, in- lieu of payment of park fees. c) The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City to provide for the construction of the parks in-lieu of paying park fees, subject to City Council approval. d) Each park shall be fully constructed upon completion of one-half of the units within each respective parcel: the 46th unit for Parcel A, the 90th unit for Parcel B, and the 42nd unit for Parcel C. e) The Park and Recreation Commission shall approve the park design, including grading for each park, prior to respective map approval. f) All dedicated park lands are to be located on non-restricted developable, unencumbered lands. This includes, but is not limited to clear title, no easements, no seismic faults, no grades greater than 10 percent, and free from flood hazard. pLANNiNG COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT November 10, 1999 Page 5 9) The drainage issues shall be resolved, to the satisfaction of all involved agencies, prior to recordation of the Final Map as follows: a) A final drainage study shall be prepared. In addition to the design and sizing of the drainage facilities for the project, the current drainage patterns and hydrology shall be discussed. The study will determine how much flow is being routed to the Etiwanda system and how much flow to the San Sevaine system.~ Drainage systems proposed with this development shall not increase flows to the Etiwanda system. b) The ultimate regional improvements including the Upper Etiwanda Regional Mainline Channel and the debris basin north of Wilson Avenue shall be bonded for, have approved plans, and be under construction; or interim facilities shall be bonded for and approved. c) Facilities to protect the site from local flows shall be designed, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d) The developer, at his sole expense and effort, shall acquire all easements necessary to accommodate ultimate, local, and/or interim facilities. In the event the developer is not able to acquire the necessary off-site right-of-way, the Final Map shall be disapproved per Chapter 4, Article 1, Section 66473 of the Subdivision Map Act. e) Maintenance responsibility of the drainage facilities that will be constructed to protect the site from local flows is undetermined. Appropriate measures shall be taken to provide for the maintenance. 10) Indicate school bus stop locations. If curb lane is less than 20 feet, a bus bay shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Any amendments to the tentative map resulting from the necessity of a bus bay shall be the responsibility of the developer. 11) An Etiwanda Specific plan Amendment shall be Processed t° reduce the southerly parkway of Wilson Avenue from Wardman Bullock Road to 1,400 feet west of Wardman Bullock Road, where the Metropolitan Water District feeder line moves to the south side of Wilson Avenue, prior to approval of the Final Map, The parkway shall be reduced from 65 feet to 38 feet and maintain the proposed meandering bike path and equestrian trail. If denied, an amended Tentative Tract Map shall be processed to indicate the required Wilson Avenue right-of- way and the new lot layout, 12) ~""~ ......' " p:;,,~',:,G ;'7, G!,F,~GF, GF~GG .......... prc, pc, scd fC, r ""' "~ """~" " ""' t PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 'I'1' 14759 - RANCHO SUMMIT November 10,1999 Page 6 arklands and widened parkP~ays and other ublic areas at t~l~e sole expense of the developer. Such EFD will also encumber a dormant homeowners association (HOA). The CFD shall be for the purpose of allowing homeowners to pa for maintenance of park and opens space areas. The CYD will include an automatic escalation clause for future maintenance costs. In addition, the development is conditioned to join Landscape Maintenance District No. 7. The CFD shall be set u to allow the CFD to ay its share of the Landscape Main~>enance District No. '~costs The CFD sha be subject to the laws in effect at the time the map records and as approved b the City Attome and the City Engineer. The developer s~all prepare a no~ge to be given to each prospective individual lot owner regarding the ayment of assessments. Notice shall define the amount of ~l~e assessment acknowledge the future escalat on cause ~n the CFD, and also recognize the dormant HOA Sad notice shall be executed by each and every property owner and turned in to the City prior to occupancy. Said notice shall be prepared by the developer and approved by the city Engineer. / ~ ~ Consultant shall check with the Engineering Division for landscape design information pertaining to Wardman Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue. /~/ /~) The Community Trail along the south project boundary shall be 20 feet wide. A connection to the existing trail to the east, constructed with Tract 13566-2, shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developershall acquire any off-site right-of- way necessary to design the trail to City Standards, pdor to recordation of the adjacent phase of the map. /j- ~ The local residential streets shall be constructed with property-line- adjacent sidewalk. /~/) The developer is providing three parks as part of the project. The parks will be of varying sizes and be designed to encourage different levels of community activity. The 7.94-acre park will have a parking lot, community trail access, restroom facility, minimal ball fields, and open space. The 6.67-acre parkwill be a standard neighborhood park with programmed ball fields, restroom facility, parking lot, and open space. The 3.73-acre park will be a passive park with curbside parking, a tot lot, restrooms, and open space as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 14759 - Rancho Summit October 27, 1999 Page 7 g) It is acknowledged that the proposed location of the 7.94 acre park has a combined 2:1 and 3:1 slope occurring on the eastern most edge. -This area will be landscaped with planter areas and cobbles to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. h) The frontages of the parks within Parcels B and C shall be posted R26 "No Parking." Environmental Miti~ation Measures Geological Problems o All recommendations as outlined by Converse Consultants Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation of January 20, 1998, shall be complied with, including but not limited to: 1) Site grading, in general, shall include removal and replacement as processed compacted fills of all undocumented fill materials, flood control dikes, and the upper 2 to 5 feet of top soils and alluvial fan deposits. Deeper removal may be required along the locally active channels within natural drainage areas. Site grading would involve removal and disposal, or on-site crushing, of considerable amounts of oversize matedal comprising cobbles and boulders. Site preparation would also include removal and disposal of vegetation, weeds, brush, trees, debds piles, buded irrigation pipes, and the concrete water tank. 2) Additional investigation and geotechnical exploration shall occur during site grading to assess collapse potential of matdx matedal comprising silty sand with gravel and gravefly sand materials. 3) A detailed geotachnical investigation report, including detailed site grading and preliminary foundation design and construction recommendations, shall be prepared and submitted for review by the City, pdor to issuance of grading permits. Air Quality 1 ) The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used on*site based on low emission factors and high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction Grading Plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturers specifications. 2) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-powered equipment in lieu of gasoline-powered engines where feasible. 3) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction Grading Plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. Dudng smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction period should be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 'R' 14759 - Rancho Summit October 27, 1999 Page 8 4) The construction contractor shall support and encourage dde sharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. 5) Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on-site and kept to a minimum by following the dust control measures listed below: a) Dudng clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. b) During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later moming and after work is completed for the day, and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. c) After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed, the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated immediately by pickup of the soil until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. d) Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. e) Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials, and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin. 6) The construction contractor shall utilize as much as possible pre- coated natural colored building materials, water-based or Iow-VOC coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, such as high volume low prassura (HVLP) spray method, or manual coating applications such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge. Transportation 1) Summit Avenue shall be constructed curb-to-curb including street lights on both sides and sidewalk on the north side, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, from the west project boundary to East Avenue. Construction shall occur with the first phase of development. The utilities off-site shall be relocated as necessary. The overhead utilities on-site shall be under grounded per the City's under ground utility policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the cost of permanent off-site improvements from future development of the off-site properties fronting Summit Avenue. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 'IT 14759 o Rancho Summit October 27, 1999 Page 9 2) A traffic signal shall be designed and installed for the intersection of Wilson Avenue/Wardman Bullock Road and a traffic signal shall be designed for the intersection of Summit Avenue/Young's Canyon Road. The developer shall be eligible for fee credits toward and reimbursement of costs in excess of the Transportafion Development Fee, in conformance with City policy. 3) A street connection to Hoppe Ddve shall be provided for secondary access to Tract 13566-2. 4) Summit Avenue, Young's Canyon Road, and Wardman Bullock Road shall be constructed full width, including street lights and sidewalk, within the project boundaries with the first phase of development. Completion of parkway landscaping may be deferred with phased final maps. 5) The project will be required to install frontage street improvements in their ultimate configuration, per City ordinance, and to pay Transportation Development fees for improvements within the City limits and Congestion Management Program mitigation fees for improvements outside the City limits. 6) The project's congestion Management Program/Traffic Impact Analysis (CMP/'I'IA) study identified traffic impacts at three locations, which will result in an unacceptable level of service unless mitigated. The TIA has also determined the amount of this project's fair share contribution to these mitigations. A cash payment in-lieu of construction as contribution for the following future projects shall be paid, pdor to the issuance of building permits or Final Map approval, whichever occurs first, in the following amounts: Amount Recipient A~lency Future Project $16,037 City of Rancho Cucamonga Installation of a future traffic signal at the intersection of Cherry Avenue and Young's Canyon Road. $12,264 City of Fontana Installation of a future traffic signal at the intersection of Cherry Avenue and Summit Avenue/I-15 Freeway frontage road. $17,792 City of Fontaria Installation of a future traffic signal at the intersection of Cherry Avenue and Carter Avenue. Water/Flooding 1) The absorption rate will be altered because of the paving and hard scape proposed. Runoff created by development of the site will be mitigated through the installation of a storm drain system, which will PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 14759 - Rancho Summit October 27, 1999 Page 10 collect flows at the southwest comer of the site and outlet into the San Sevaine Basin. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to protect the site from runoff using drainage facilities. A final drainage study will be prepared and reviewed for the design of the facility, pdor to recordation of the Final Tract Map. If the applicant cannot acquire off- site property interests necessary to build the drainage facilities, the developer waives his dght to recordation of the Final Map. Biological Resources 1 ) All of the existing Olive trees on-site deemed worthy of transplantation by a certified arbodst shall be transplanted to be included in on-site landscaping. 2) The existing Eucalyptus windrow along the east project boundary shall be preserved and protected in-place as it serves a significant buffedng function. Individual trees within the windrow may be removed if they are found to be diseased, dead, or dangerous in the future subject to replacement at a ratio of 1:1 with minimum 5-gallon Eucalyptus Maculata at 8 feet on center per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 3) Eucalyptus windrows removed to accommodate the project shall be raplaced with new windrow planting of minimum 5-gallon Eucalyptus Maculata at 8-foot spacing at a rate of 50 linear feet of new windrow per acre. 4) The Coast Live Oak tree shall either be proserved in-place or transplanted on-site. If the tree is damaged during transplantation or construction, it may be replaced with a minimum 48-inch box sized Coast Live Oak tree. 5) Purchase and preserve (in perpetuity) off-site lands to provide substitute resources at a ratio of 1:1 for the undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub that would be lost through project implementation. Off-site land shall be located within the Etiwanda Fan, be undisturbed and high quality, and contiguous to a preserve area. Hazards 1) The site falls within the °~/Vildland/Urban Interrace" zone and is therefore subject to fire hazard mitigation requirements such as vegetation management, specialized home construction methods. and other requirements to comply with the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Distdct's Standards for the high fire hazard zone. Cultural Resources 1 ) Per the recommendations of RMW Aroheological Survey report dated December 1998, grading/ground disturbing activities in the northem half of the site shall be monitored by an archaeologist due to the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 'IT 14759 - Rancho Summit October 27, 1999 Page 11 possibility that sub-surface deposits of histodc era remains could be located on-site. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 1999. 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 Cucemonga, 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 10th day of November 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Tentative Tract 14759 - Rancho Summit This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and vedfication has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the City Planner, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covedng all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. An MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitodng Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the odginal authodty for processing the project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Ddve Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Mitigation Monitoring Program TT 14759 - Rancho Summit October 25, 1999 Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staffs is needed, as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate wdtten approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may adse requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required pedod of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of building permits. MIT!.cGtAFiTIION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III Projec lie No.: Tentative Tract 14759 Applicant:. Rancho Summ~ Initial Study Prepared by: Brent Le Count Date: October 25, 1999 Site grading shall include removal &replacement of BO C Ongoing A/C 2/4 undocumented fill materials, flood control dikes, top soils& all fan deposits Additional investigation & geotechnical exploration BO C Ongoing NC 2/4 during site grading to access collapse potential Geotechnical report of grading, foundation design & BO B Prior to C 2 construction recommendations construction permits Installation of storm drain system &final drainage CE B Final map D 1 study recordation Selection of low-emission construction equipment. CP/BO B/C Plan check C/A 2/4 Utilization of electdc or diesel-powered equipment CP/BO C Ongoing A 4 where feasible Grading Plans state equipment shut off when not in CP/BO C Plan check C 2 use. Extend construction period dudng smog season (May-October) Ride shadng & transit incentives encouraged for CP/BO C Ongoing A 4 construction crew Dust control measures to be utilized CP/BO C Ongoing A 4 Utilization of pre-coated natural colored building CP/BO B/C Ongoing A 4 materials where possible and, low pollution coatings and application methods MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 Page 2 Summit Avenue construction including street lights & CE A 1 st phase A 3/4 sidewalk construction Design &installation of traffic signal at Wilson Ave./ CE B Construction A 3/4 Wardman Bullock Rd. and design of signal for Summit Ave./Young's Canyon Rd. Provide street connection to Hoppe Drive for access CE B Construction NC 3/4 to Tract 13566-2 I ~ Construction of Summit Ave., Young's Canyon Rd., & CE A 1 st phase A 3/4 Wardman Bullock Rd. including street lights & construction ~ sidewalk ~ Install frontage street improvements and pay CE BD Prior to B/C/D 1/3/5 ,,,,,J Transportation Development fees for improvements occupancy within City limits and Congestion Management Program mitigation fees for improvements outside City limits Fair share cash payment to proper agency with CE B Prior to D 1/2 respect to CMP/TIA study: issuance of $16,037 to City of Rancho Cucamonga for traffic building signal at Cherry Ave./Young's Canyon Rd. permits or $12,264 to City of Fontana for traffic signal at Final Map Cherry Ave. & Summit Ave./I-15 Freeway approval, frontage road whichever $17,792 to City of Fontana for traffic signal at occurs firat Cherry Ave./Carter Ave. Transplantation of healthy Olive trees CP B/C Prior to NC 2/4 grading permit MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 Page 3 Preservation of Eucalyptus windrow along east CP B/C Pdor to A/C 2/4 boundary and replacement of diseased trees within grading same permit Replacement of Eucalyptus windrows removed to CP B/C Prior to NC 2/4 accommodate project grading permit Preservation or transplantation of Coast Live Oak CP B/C Prior to NC 2/4 tree grading permit Purchase and preservation of off-site habitat for CP B Prior to D 2 Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub permits ~ 2 Archaeologist to monitor grading/ground disturbing CP/BO Ongoing 2/4 activities in northern half of site Key to Checklist Abbreviations CDD - Communi~ ~velopment Dim~or A - ~th Each New Development A - On-site Inspe~ion 1 - ~thhold Re~ation of Final Map CP - Ci~ Planner or designee B - Pdor To Cons~u~ion B - ~her Agen~ Pe~ I Approval 2 - W~hhold Grading or Building Petit CE - Ci~ Engineer or designee C - Thmugho~ Constm~ion C - Plan Che~ 3 - W~hhold Ceffifi~te of Occupancy BO - Building ~clal or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submi~al (Repo~ / Studies / Plans) 4 - Stop Wo~ Order PO - Poli~ Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds ~ - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP I:~P~NNING~FINAL~PLNGCOMM~ENVDOC~14759mm che~list,wpd COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: Tentative Tract 14759 SUBJECT: Single family subdivision APPLICANT: Lennar Homes LOCATION: south side Wilson Avenue at Wardman Bullock Road ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements comp~euon Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, offcars, or employees, for any Court costs and attomey's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits 1. Subdivision approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 3 years from the date of approval. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the appreved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior matedais and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. sc -8t25/99 1 Project No. TT 14759 Completion Date 2. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shail be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment. building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 3. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 4. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single family residential developments. transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 5. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attomey. 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. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 6. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be pen*nanenfiy maintained by the properly 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 approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for City Planner and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concems, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 8. Six-footdecorativeblockwallsshallbeconstructedalongtheprojectperimeter. Ifadoublewall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project's pedmetar. 9. For single family residential development, a 2-inch galvanized pipe shall be attached to each support post for all wood fences, with a minimum of two Y~-inch lag bolts, to withstand high winds. Both post and pipe shall be installed in an 18-inch deep concrete footing. Pipe shall extend at least 4 feet, 6 inches above grade. 10. Wood fencing shall be treated with stain, paint, or water sealant. 11. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. 12. On comer side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. 13. For residential development, retum walls and comer side walls shall be decorative masonry. 14. Where reck cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. SC -sr25~9 2 ProjedNo. TF14759 Completion Date D. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to 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 barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 3. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5- gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 5. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigations shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thdving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 6. Front yard and comer side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Code and/or Etiwanda Specific Plan. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 7. The final design of the pedmeter parkways, wails, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be 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. 8. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, Olive tree relocation, meandering sidewalks (with hodzontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Summit Avenue and Wardman Bullock Road. 9. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 10. Tree maintenance criteria shall 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. 11. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water (for model homes only) through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. sc ~-2~99 3 Project No, Tr 14759 Completion Date 12. New windrow planting of Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum) is required at a ratio of 50 linear feet per acre. The size, spacing, staking, and irrigation of these trees shall comply with the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance (RCMC 19.08.100). E. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $719.00, prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a wdtten monitoring and repoding program to the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: F. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., TT 14759). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of 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 unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautificetion Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Division prior to permit iSSUance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tractJparcel map racordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. G. Grading 1. Grading of the subject 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 conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. sc -8,2s/99 4 Project No, TT 14759 Completion Date 4. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California Registered Civil Engineer. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: H. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. private easementsfornon-publicfacilities(cross-lotdrainage, local feedertrails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centedine): X 48 total feet on Wilson Avenue east of Wardman Bullock Road X 79 total feet on Wilson Avenue west of Wardman Bullock Road subject to Plan Amendment 3. Comer property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 4. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: Wilson Avenue, Summit Avenue, Wardman Bullock Road, Young's Canyon Road. 5. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. 6. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, and bus bays, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. 7. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements, and if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required forthe improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. This condition applies in particular, but not limited to: Summit Avenue. I. Street Improvements 1. All public improvements (intedor streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 5 Project No. TT'14759 Completion Date 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Wilson Avenue X X ' Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and ovedays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) In-lieu fee. 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and appreved by the City Engineer. Secudty shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guarenteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and / interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or / reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect widng. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all comers of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City reads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with / adequate detours dudng construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cress sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be / / installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner pdor to submittal for first plan check. / / 4. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in / accordance with the City's street tree program. project No, TT14759 Completion Date 5. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. J. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: Wilson Avenue, Wardman Bullock Road, Young's Canyon Road, Summit Avenue, interior trails and parks. 2. Public landscape areas are required to incorporate substantial areas (40%) of mortared cobbta or other acceptable non-irrigated surfaces. 3. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 4. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. K. Drainage and Flood Control 1. The project (or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, flood protection measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 2. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone D designation removed __ from the project area. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shaft be issued by FEMA prior to building permit issuance. 3. Afinaldreinagestudysha~~besubmittedt~anda~pr~vedbytheCityEngineerpri~rt~fina~map / / approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 4. A permit from the San Bemardino County Flood Control District is required for work within its __/ / right-of-way. 5. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe __/__/__ measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. 6. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage __/__/__ in a sump catch basin on the public street. L. Utilities 1, Provide, separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, __/__/__ electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards, Easements shall be provided as required. Project No. Tr 14759 Completion Date 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the / Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water distdct within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. M. General Requirements and Approvals 1. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan Drainage / Fees shall be paid prior to final map approval or pdor to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 2. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right-of-way: San / Bemardino County Flood Control. 3. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the Law Enforcement Community / Facilities District shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the Developer. 4. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 5. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: N. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities Distdct requirements shall apply to this project. 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 development. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be: 1,50g gallons per minute, Per '97 UFC Appendix Ill-A, 3, (b) (Increase). a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. b. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and pdor to occupancy. Sc-arzs/99 8 Project No. TT14759 Completion Date 3. Fire hydrants are required. AHrequiredpublicoron-sitefirehydrantsshallbeinstalled,flushed, and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i .e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. 6. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 32. X Other: Wildland interface requirements. 7. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. 8. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet, 6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus. 9. Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District as follows: X $132 for Single Family Residential Tract (per phase). 10. Project is located in a high fire hazard area and is subject to special wildland/urban interface hazard mitigation requirements. Such requirements may include requirements related to vegetation management plans, special construction enhancements, emergency access, water supply, automatic fire extinguishing systems, and other special requirements. AN EXTRA SET OF PLANS IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF BUILDING PLAN SUBMITTAL. THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT COORDINATES ALL PLAN SUBMITTALS AND WILL FORWARD THE EXTRA SET TO THE FIRE PREVENTION NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT FOR FIRE PLAN REVIEW. If you have any questions regarding your plan review in fire, please contact the Fire Prevention New Construction Unit located in the Building and Safety Department at (909) 477-2730. TH CITY OF b~'X'NCHO ~"UCA~ONGA DATE: November I 0, 1999 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Bullet, City Planner BY: Debra Meier, AICP SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 16001 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES- A proposed subdivision of I 0 numbered lots and 4 lettered lots on 23.4 acres of land for condominium purposes in the Medium- Migh Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per acre) within the Terra Vista Community Plan generally bounded by East Elm and Spruce Avenues, Church Street, and the future La Mission Park - APN: 1077-791-01 through 09 and 1077-801-01 through 10. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES- The design review of 358 eondominium units on 23.5 acres in the Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) within the Terra Vista Community Plan generally bounded by East Elm and Spruce Avenues, Church Street, and the future La Mission Park APN: 1077-791-01 through 09 and 1077-801-01 through 10. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: The proposed project is 15.3 dwelling units per acre. The project is located within the Medium-High Residential Distdct (14 - 24 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Community Plan. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single-family residential/Low Medium Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per acre) South - Town Center Square/Community Commercial East - Coyote Canyon School/single-family residential/Low Medium Residential Distdct (4-8 dwelling units per acre) West Undeveloped land/Recently approved TT16000/Medium High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) ITEMS C & D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 16001 & DR 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES November 10, 1999 Page 2 C. General Plan Designations: Project Site: Medium-High Density Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre)/Terra Vista Community Plan North - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) South - Community Commercial East Elementary School/Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) West Medium-High Density Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) D. Site Characteristics: The site is in the same block as the future La Mission Park and has previously been rough graded as a "super-pad" under a previously approved Tract 13717. All perimeter streets, including East Elm Avenue, Spruce Avenue, and Church Street are existing. There are no remaining trees or significant vegetation on the site. E Parking Calculations: Parking Required: Two Bedroom - 1.8 spaces/unit X 172 = 310 spaces (one within an enclosed garage) Three Bedroom - 2.0 spaces/unit X 186 = 372 spaces (all within an enclosed garage) In addition to the number of spaces required for each unit, one parking space for every four units is required for guest parking: 358 X 0.25 = 90 spaces Therefore the total number of spaces required is 772. Of this total, a minimum of 527 spaces must be enclosed within an enclosed garage. Parking Provided: Enclosed: 548 Open: 224 Total: 772 F. Private Open Space: In accordance with the Park Development Agreement, private parks and recreation areas can be given % credit toward the provision of park land, based on the criteria established in the Park Implementation Plan. The open space shall be a ) exclusive of required yards and setbacks; b) privately maintained; c) restricted for recreational purposes by recording covenants which run with the land and cannot be defeated without consent of the City Council; d) 50 percent active in design and function and be reasonably contiguous in nature; and e) usable for recreational purposes, or have other recreational improvements that will meet needs of the residents The Open Space/Park Credit Plan (Exhibit 'T') identifies those areas for which park credit is being requested. The total amount of pdvate open space included in the request for park credit is 2.44 acres, 50 percent of this total, 1.22 acres, will then be credited toward park development obligations within Terra Vista. Staff recommends approval of the areas identified on the Private Open Space Exhibits. C_,¢D 8, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 16001 & DR 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES November 10, 1999 Page 3 ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant has indicated that this project, referred to as St. Moritz, is designed for the "renter by choice." The basic amenities within the project include upgraded wiring for phone/fax/modern usage, both attached and detached garages, clubhouse and outdoor activity centers, fitness center, pool/spa, and tot lot. The project is completely fenced, including security gates for both vehicular and pedestrian access at the project entries located on East Elm Avenue, Spruce Avenue, and Church Street. In addition, pedestrian gates are provided near the corner of East Elm and Spruce Avenues to allow access northerly to the Spruce Avenue Park and Ruth Musser Middle School and near the Church Street project entry to facilitate access into the proposed La Mission Park. The project includes 358 units, consisting of 172 two-bedroom and 186 three-bedroom units. The unit square footage ranges from 932 square feet to 1495 square feet. Units are arranged in four building types containing 2 to 14 units per building. All buildings are two- story. Enclosed garages are provided for each unit, and in some cases the garage is accessible directly from the unit. B. Desi~]n Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (Fong, Mannerino, and Stewart) reviewed the project on October 5, 1999. At that time the Committee approved the site plan and landscaping; however, the applicant was requested to address the architectural theme and related details of all buildings. The project returned to the Design Review Committee on October 19, 1999 with revised architecture. The applicant provided enhanced details, which reflect a traditional bungalow style architecture through the use of wood railings, shutters, garage door patterns, and siding material. The Committee requested that the applicant also incorporate additional eave details such as rafter tails, outriggers, and similar elements. The Committee recommended that these modifications be incorporated into plans that will be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The additional detailing, as requested by the Design Review Committee, has been incorporated in the attached exhibits. Revised color renderings will be available for review at the hearing. C. Technical Review/Grading Committee: The Technical Review Committee reviewed the project on October 6, 1999. All requirements of the committee are included as conditions of approval. The Grading Committee commented on the use of the 3-foot retaining wall at the boundary between the park and the project site. The park plans have previously been approved, along with the storm drain system, and modifications at this time would effect the design of previously approved plans. There were no other outstanding issues or extraordinary circumstances identified by either Committee. D. Environmental Assessment: The Initial Study Part II has been prepared for the project. In addition, a Noise impact Study and Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis have been prepared. Mitigation is included in the attached resolution for air quality, traffic and noise impacts. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 16001 & DR 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES November 10, 1999 Page 4 CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in theInland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: 8taft recommends that the Planning Commission approve issuance of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopt the resolutions of approval for Tentative Tract 16001 and Development Review 99-19 subject to all conditions of approval. Brad Buller City Planner BB:DM\Is Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Grading Plan Exhibit "E" - Elevations Exhibit "F" - Floor Plans Exhibit "G" - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "H" - Fence and Wall Plan- Exhibit 'T' - Open Space/Park Credit Plan Exhibit "J~' - Design Review Committee Minutes dated October 5, 1999 Exhibit "K" - Initial Study Part II Resolution Recommending Approval of Tentative Tract 16001 Resolution Recommending Approval of Development Review 99-19 ~ I1 BASE "HE riD.Ill IlL_:rESIDENTIAL I M LM M NC M M .Emu. e.mr, LM CO~ kMERCIAL CC LM LM NC MH LM . Op M LM MIXED USE _. PUBLIC & QUASI-PUBLIC M JrH MH P OP E , MH P CC CC CC MFC MHO CC I1~.,,, .~11 '11I Ill ltl n~ HF ~""'N FIGURE 111-17 ~ Density Ranges of Approved Projects may yaw slightly from the Plan; Land Use Plan s~ 'A~ ..., L~.~ U. P~o.~.. P..."- n..~. v,-3 o....~ v,-~. REVISED Ame.dment Nos. 1.2, 5, 6, 7 & 9 111-23 , ~ "~ ' ~ ...... 'L __~ ST R E ET SITE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT 1600l LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS ~7~"7~:"":~"'-:::-~: RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALl FOR N IA '." ::' ~ , ;'~"" o~, -~.~.-. .' .' (-}) . .~ SITE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT 16001 ~,~.~v~o~.,~,~ TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS / .: ................ SITE 'B' - T T 16001 ' " =::= .......... RANClIO ('U('AM()N(iA, CALIFORNIA Lewis Apartmeal Communities ............................. ~ "'~ ._ F:::. · .......... -~ .......................... ~""L~ .... / :: :: '~E2~ :-~"ZZ ,' / / / /,' ~ ~:'::2.'2' _- --,,, ,///-----. ....... DETAILED ENLARGEMENTS TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS /'J, SITE 'B' - T. T. 16001 / RANCIIOCUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA Lewis Apartment Communities ............... / [ 156 North Mountain Avenue Upland. Call fomia 91786 ".,28'" ':~'~; ' ",' --_O._ '~/ TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS ,'.~..w.~':=..~ SITE 'B' - T. T. 16001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFO~IA Lewis Apartment Communities 1156 North Mountain Avenue Upland. California 91786 .... · LEASING OFFICE ..... ' FRONI LOADING PlAN SIDE lOADING PlAN VIEW VIEW CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT 16001 SOUTH PORTION SEE SHEET 25 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PD~N TENTATIVE TRACT 16001 (FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES) IN THE Cl~ OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, C0UN~ 0F SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PACE 26 t J Elcvlllom Legelad: ' ~ ....... Wall Mattrial: (Light Sand Finish) 2x8 Wood him Fucia .S¢:aia~aOm'agcDoog o , ELEVATIONS AND ROOF PLAN RANCliO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ,~',,4//z-//,~/7" ,~"-/ FRONT ELEVATION RIGHT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION LEFT ELEVATION Wit Mamial: (Lighf Sand Fhmh) ~ "~'~ BUILDING TYPE 2 ELEVATIONS AND ROOF PLAN ~E~,s~P~R~.~co~U.,T,~S TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONG~ CALIFORNIA REAR ELEVA11ON RIGHT neRVATiON FRONT BLEVATION Wdl Mnsial: (s j~ Sand Finlab) A,-,--,,w ~ Sh.u~n ~ Gable ,~4.~v.=. BUILDING TYPE 3 ELEVATIONS AND ROOF PLAN LEWIS ApARTMENT COMMUNITIES TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAb!ONGA, CALIFO R/qlA PJ(]HT ELEVAl10N FRONT ELEVATION RoofMausid: Co~te~ FIN TiJc 4:12 ~ T~ MW~F~ · u~v__ BUILDING TYPE 4 ELEVATIONS AND ROOF PLAN LEWis APARTMENT COMMUNITIES TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONG~ CALIFORNIA RIGHT ELEVATION FRONT I~I.I~VAII()N Roof Malelid: Comxe~ Fbd Tile 4:12 eilchTypicd Wall Material: ~i~l S~ F~) A~um: ~ 8~ ~ ~ablc RECREATION BUILDING ..... ELEVATIONS AND ROOF PLAN L~,,S~pA~TMeNTCOMMUH,T,eS TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA , O~ RIGHT ELEVATION FRONT El EVATI()N .-~ REAR ELEVATION LEFT ELEVATION Wall MaSuial: (Light Sand Finish) Trim: Slucco Ovef Foam Accents: paimul Shun=rs ~ Gable LEASING BUILDING ELEVATIONS AND ROOF PLAN ' ~ ' LEW|S ApARTMENT COMMUNITIES TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA SIDE ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION Ekvatlon Legend: Wall Mat~ri.l: (Light Sand Finish) 2x8 Wood Palm Fascia WoodSecUemGasageDoor Trim: Stucco Ove~ Foam GARAOE BUILDINI3 ELEVATIONS AND ROOF PLAN LE~ItIS ApARTI~IENT COIdI~UNITIES RANCH0 CUCAMONOA, CALIFORNIA I . ~ LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION FLOOR PLAN REAR ELEVATION RIGHT ELEVATION R~F PLAN ~*~ RESTROOMS/POOL EQUI PM ENT FLOOR PLAN/ELEVATIONS AND ROOF PLAN APART~EnT CO~U~aTnES TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS :V..T:'." .. RANCHO CUCAM()NGA, CALIFORNIA ;~: ..... ' Plan B Plan C ... ~ ~ f sr.r , ~ ' Plan A ,, , , ~l ~ ~I t~ ~ Plan Plan B FLOOR PLANS A, B AND C L.w,SApA.~.N~CO~UNm'S TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Plan D Plan D ~ I 'ilii~ Plan DI Plan E Plan D FLOOR PLANS D, DI, AND E LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS 0~:~!~?:i RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR BUILDING TYPE I COMPOSITES LEWISApARTMENT COMMUNITIES TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA SECOND FLOOR ,.~ -.-_ -_,! FIRST FLOOR m,,___..=r.~', BUILDING TYPE 2 - COMPOSITES LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS {} ~-,-~,.~o..~ .... I::';E'7",'C'TC::;. '::.:ZC~ RANCHO CIJCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA II BUILDING TYPE 3 BUILDING TYPE 3 FIRST FLOOR SECOND FLOOR ac,,.e: ./,'- r-~ BUILDING TYPE 4 BUILDING TYPE 4 FIRST FLOOR SECOND FLOOR BUILDING TYPE 3 & 4 - COMPOSITES RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA _ RECREATION BUILDING FLOOR PLAN LEw,s^,'^RT,.,~uTco,.,,.,uu,'r,Es TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS O~T:'~,.-~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 16 [ [ Rcsidcnl Entrance Setteearia[ Anal MIf, Mannlet [ t LEASING BUILDING FLOOR PLAN L.w,s^.^.'r...~co.~un,T'"s TERRA VISTA APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ~ .......... ""'~' "~ '" ' ..... TENTATIVE TRACT 16001 FENCE &WALL PLAN / SITE 'B' - T. T. 16001 i.i, " / // ' ...... Lewis Apartment Communities , 'I"/'..:. i~ - , ~:'~::,~:,~' EXHIBIT ~ ARE/~ ~12c~5~ SF ' TR. 16001 ~' ~ LU ,-~[ PRIVATE OPEN AREA F___2'/-//sr/- "-Z' " - I EXHIBIT AREA= ~, ~d;:CZ) 5F TR. 16001 ~" 4: L~ --~---PRIVATE OPEN AREA EXHIBIT AREA= ~. ~ SF " TR. 16001 C__ ~[ L) _2:L3PRIVATE OPEN AREA EXHIBIT AREA:= H,qc:zP SF TR. 16001 C-c~ ~ 3 PRIVATE OPEN AREA " EXHIBIT A1=5,620 SF FZz22JA2= 2.,cl55 SF ~ TR. 16001 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 5:30 p.m. Debra Meier October 5, 1999 ENVIRON MENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 16001 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUN TIES - A proposed subdivision often numbered lots and four lettered lots on 23.5 acres of land for condon,]nium purposes; and the design review of 360 units in the Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre); within the Terra Vista Community Plan generally bounded by Elm and Spruce Avenues and Church Street, and the future La Mission Park - APN: 1077-421-040. Backqround: Tentative Tract 16001 is located in the southwest quadrant of Terra Vista. Existing multi-family residential and commercial development is predominant throughout this quadrant. Tentative Tract 13717 was previously approved on this site in 1990 and was never recorded. However, Tentative Tract 13717 modified the Terra Vista Community Plan land use from Medium (8- 14 dwelling units per acre) to the current Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) residential density. ~: Tentative Tract 16001, titled "Saint Moritz.," is described by the applicant as "an up-scale amenity-packed, luxuriously appointed community catering to the Renter by Choice." The proposed project features -European-theme" architecture with attached and detached garages, and a variety of recreational and open space amenities including pools and spas, barbecue nodes, tot lots, fitness and recreation center, and out door fireplace. The project consists of 360 units including 246 two-bedroom plans and 114 three-bedroom plans. Staff_Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. 1. Architecture theme: The applicants' project description describes the architecture as a "European-theme," which is not expressed on the .elevations. Additional decorative architectural elements for all elevations should be used to carry out the intended theme. 2. Access for pedestrians is limited to the three project entdes. It may be beneficial to provide pedestrian access near street intersections, especially at Spruce and Elm Avenues, to facilitate access to Ruth Musser Middle School and Spruce Avenue park; directly into La Mission Park; and at elm Avenue and church Street for access to the commercial development and restaurants; in order to discourage "fence-hopping." Second: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Vary the garage door pattern in pairs for additional variety. 2. Move the sidewalk that traverses through the open tuff area (located near the pdmaW pool) to take full advantage of the open play that is provided by this open space. 3. Mitigation measures stemming from traffic noise includes 5-foot high sound barrier, consisting of wood or plexi-glass. This is recommended along the second floor balconies for apadment units proposed that would be impacted by 60 dBA Ldn to reduce traffic noise levels in the outdoor activity area below, including all apadment units which face Church Street, Elm and Spruce Avenues. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee focus on the architectural theme, resolve the minor items noted above, and refer the project to Planning Commission for approval. ---, ca*O /--/ / /-r- " - I DRC COMMENTS TT16001 & DR 99-19-LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES October5,1999 Page 2 Desiqn Review Committee Action: Members Present: Nancy Fong, John Mannerino, Pare Stewart Staff Planner: Debra Meier The applicant corrected the information provided in their original application by describing that the architectural theme is "Traditional American" rather than "European." The Traditional style emphasis such elements as simple architectural forms, flat concrete, roof tile, wood shutters, and roof line relief. The restroom/pool equipment building has been revised, but is still a work-in-progress. The applicant is trying to achieve the right proportion of focus and scale for the small structure. The Committee commented that regardless of the chosen architectural style, the project looks like a "standard apartment project" and does not reflect the appearance of luxury apartments. The leasing and recreation building need to be enhanced to attract the attention of prospective tenants. The Committee suggested to the applicant's to consider the following: 1. What will attract a potential tenant to this project as a luxury apartment, in comparison to other project in the a~ea? The Committee requested that the applicant return to Design Review Committee on October 19, 1999 for review of modifications to architectural elements. Y '; 2- CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS 7:00 P.M. Debra Meier October 19, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 16001 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES - A proposed subdivision of ten numbered lots and four lettered lots on 23.5 acre~ of land for condominium purposes in the Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre); within the Terra Vista Community Plan generally bounded by Elm and Spruce Avenues and Church Street, and the future La Mission Park - APN: 1077-421-040. Related file: Development Review 99-19. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES - The design review of 360 condominium units on 23.5 acres in the Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre); within the Terra Vista Community Plan generally bounded by Elm and Spruce Avenues and Church Street, and the future La Mission Park - APN: 1077-421-040. Related file: Tentative Tract 16001. PLANS WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE MEETING Attachment Desiqn Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Debra Meier The modifications made by the applicant have improved the architectural theme of the project. However, the Committee indicated that the developer should continue working with staff on the elevations to add more detailing that will more completely carry the theme of the Traditional Bungalow style architecture. Details such as rafter tails, outriggers, etc., shall be used along the eave line. In addition, the applicant was requested to vary the wood railing, shutter and garage door details in order to create variety within the project. With these modifications, the Committee, recommended that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consideration. City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract 16001 and Development Review 99-19 2. Related Files: 3. Description of Project: TENTATIVE TRACT 16001 AND DESIGN REVIEW 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES - A proposed subdivision of ten numbered lots and four lettered lots on 23.5 acres of land for condominium purposes; and the design review of 360 units in the Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) district; within the Terra Vista Community Plan generally bounded by Elm and Spruce Avenues and Church Street, and the future La Mission Park forming the southeasterly boundary - APN: 1077-421-040. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: David Lewis, Managing Director Lewis Apartment Communities 1156 North Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786 5. General Plan Designation: Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) 6. Zoning: Medium-High Residential 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Tentative Tract 16001 is located in the southwest quadrant of the Terra Vista Planned Community. Existing multi-family residential and commercial development is predominant throughout this quadrant. The site was graded to the current "super-pad" condition in 1984, there are structures or significant vegetation remaining. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Ddve Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Debra Meier Contract Planner (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None D Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-!9 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning (,/) Transportation/Circulation (~') Public Services ( ) Population and Housing ( ) Biological Resources ( ) Utilities and Service Systems (v') Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources (v') Aesthetics (~') Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Cultural Resources (v') Air Quality (v') Noise (V') Recreation ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ( ) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. (v') I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an eadier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ( ) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigat~~pon the proposed project. Signed: Debra Meier Contract Planner September 29, 1999 Imtlal Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-19 Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) (v') b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) (v') c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) (k/) d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ) (v') Comments: The proposed Tentative Tract 16001 is consistent with the Medium-High Residential land use designation established on this site by the previous approval of Tentative Tract 13717. The project is consistent with the Terra Vista Community Plan and General Plan land use. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) (V') b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) (V') Comments: The proposed density of Tentative Tract 16001, 15.3 dwelling units per acre, ~s consistent with the Terra Vista Community Plan designation of Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) as well as the City's General Plan. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-19 Page4 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/) d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) ( ) (v') ( ) g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) (V') ( ) h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') i) Unique ge61ogic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V') Comments: f) The topography of the site will be modified by grading and construction. Grading activities will have minimal impact on the surrounding area due to the fact that all perimeter streets and infrastructure are existing. The Tujunga-Delhi soil association is of relatively loose texture, which can result in wind erosion. On-site grading will be performed under the supervision of a licensed civil engineer. The resulting · - impact will not be significant. g) The General Plan (Figure V-2) indicates that the site is tocated within the Tujunga- Delhi soil association. This soil association may have soil bearing capabilities that could. limit some development. Structures proposed on this soil type are permitted only after a site specific soils investigation has been performed that indicates that the soils can adequately support the weight of the proposed structure. Standard Conditions of approval will require a site specific soils report for review by the Building and Safety Division, pdor to the issuance of building permits. The resulting impact will not be significant. 4. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) ( ) (~/) ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) ( ) ( ) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/0R 99-19 Page c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( ) ( d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( ) ( e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) ( O Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial Io~s of groundwater recharge capabili~? ) ( ) ( ) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater othe~ise available for public water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) Comments~ a) The absorption rate will be altered due to the increase in pavement, hardscape, and building coverage. All mnoff will be conveyed to existing drainage facilities, which have been designed to accommodate anticipated flows. This impact is not considered significant. b) There are no special flood h~ard areas within or near the project site. NO IMPACT. e) The project will not alter the cour8e or direrion of water movement. Surface ranoff that currently reaches the site from off-~ite areas will be conveyed to the existing drainage facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. NO IMPACT. $. AIR QUALI~. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quali~ standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) (I) ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptom to pollutants? ( ) ( ) ( ) initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-19 Page 6 c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or ( ) ( ) ( ) cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Comments: a) The short term and long term air quality impacts were addressed in the certified EIR for the Terra Vista Planned Community. Typically, construction of a project of this size will exceed SCAQMD thresholds during grading activities for PM~o and NO,, and may also exceed SCAQMD thresholds for developed condition (operational impacts) for NO,. The proposed project represents only a fraction of the total emissions of NO, in the County; therefore, this impact is less than significant. The following mitigation measures will be required to reduce short term construction impac.ts to as less than significant level: 1 ) The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used on-site based on low emission factors and high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. 2) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-powered equipment in-lieu of gasoline powered engines where feasible. 3) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut-off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction period should be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. 4) The construction contractor shall support and encourage ride-sharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. 5) Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on-site and kept to a minimum by the following dust control measures listed below: a) During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler : systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. b) During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-19 Page 7 prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. c) After clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation is completed, the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated immediately by pickup of the soil until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. d) Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. e) Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials, and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin. 6) The construction contractor shall utilize, as much as possible, pre- coated natural colored building materials, water-based or Iow-VOC coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, such as high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray method, or manual coating applications such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge. 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) (v') ( ) ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ) (v') c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) ( ) (v') d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) (v') e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V') Comments: a) The project will generate additional trips due to the new construction of 360 apartment units. However, the project will not increase vehicle trips or traffic Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-19 Page 8 congestion in excess of projections for the adopted land use for which street widths were evaluated at a build-out condition. Traffic impacts were addressed in the certified EIR prepared for the Tetra Vista Planned Community. In addition, the project proponent was required to prepare a signal warrant study for the following intersections: Church Street at West Elm Avenue and Spruce Avenue at West Elm Avenue. The project proponent will be required to: 1) Protect existing traffic striping and signage, including R26(s) "No Stopping Anytime" signs on Spruce Avenue and Church Street frontages. Install traffic striping and signage, including R26 "No Parking Anytime" signs on East Elm Avenue frontage, as required. 2) The community trail on the west side of East Elm Avenue from the south project boundary to Church Street shall be completed with this development including the installation of a pedestrian-actuated signal on East Elm Avenue at the trail crossing from the east side of the school. b) The circulation design features conform to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Division Street Design for Intersection Line-of-Sight policies. NO I M PACT. c) The project is designed with adequate emergency access. NO IMPACT. e) The required street frontage improvements will include sidewalks and/or bike lanes in accordance with the Terra Vista Community Plan. NO IMPACT. Potenbalty SignScant 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) (V') b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) (v') c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) (V') d) Wettand habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( ) (v') e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) (v') Comments: The site was graded to the current "super-pad" condition in 1984. There are no structures, trees or significant vegetation remaining on the site. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-19 Page 9 Significant Potentially Unlesl Thaz~ 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal; ! a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (f') b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? (v') c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including. but not limited to: oil. pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (t/) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) ( ) ( ) (f) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ' ( ) (v') e) Increased fire hazard in areas with fiammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') 10. NOISE, Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) (V') ( ) ( ) b) Exposure ;3f p~ople to severe noise levels? ( ) (~') ( ) ( ) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-19 Page 10 Comments: a) The primary existing noise source in the project area is transportation corridors. Traffic along Church Street, Spruce Avenue, and East Elm Avenue are the predominant sources contributing to the ambient noise level in the area. A Noise I m pact Study was performed for the proposed project by LSA Associates dated April 28, 1999. The ambient noise levels range from 61.5 to 62.3 dBA, Leq (A weighted sound level, Equivalent Continuous Noise Level). Increases in noise levels could result from project related traffic on roads that provide access to the site. Project related long-term vehicular trip increases are anticipated to be moderate. The incremental traffic noise level increases would be less than significant (LSA, April 1999). Construction of the proposed project would potentially result in relatively high noise levels and annoyance at the closest residences. The following measures, as required by the City Development Code, would reduce short-term construction related noise impacts associated with the proposed project: 1 ) During all project site excavation and grading on site, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers standards. 2) The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 3) The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction related noise sources and noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. 4) During all project site construction, the construction contractor shall limit all construction related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 6:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction shall be allowed on Sundays and public holidays. b) The proposed on-site residential dwellings would be exposed to traffic noise level potential exceeding 60 dBA, Ldn (A-weighted sound level, day/night noise level) standard in outdoor activity areas. Mitigation measures will be required. The project proponent will be required to: 1) Provide mechanical ventilation (air conditioning system) for all dwelling units facing the project perimeter streets (Church Avenue, Spruce Avenue and East Elm Avenue). 2) Provide building facade upgrades, such as double-paned windows weatherstripping seals, for all rooms in dwelling units which face Church Street and Elm Avenue. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-19 Page 11 3) Provide a 5-foot high sound barrier along the second floor balconiee for all dwelling unite facing the perimeter etreets. With the implementation of the mitigation measures, the potential noise impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance (LSA, April 1999). 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Schools? ( ) ( ) (v') ( ) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (k~) e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/) Comments: 'c) The project site is within the attendance boundaries of the Central School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District. Both Districts have previously entered into mitigation agreements for the entire Terra Vista Planned Community and have formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) to fund school facilities. In addition, school impact fees are regulated by the State of California Government Code Section 65995 et. Seq., wherein the City is prohibited from denying a project based on the adequacy of school facilities. The project is within walking distance of the Coyote Canyon Elementary School and the Ruth Musser Middle School. The project proponent will be required to join the Mello-Roos CFD; therefore, the impact would be reduced to below a level of significance. Potentially , 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) (~) b) Communication systems? ( ) (~') c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) (~/) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) (~/) · c $ D 77 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga 3'F 16001/DR 99-19 Page 12 Sign~icant e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) ( ) O Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Impact Less Potentially Unless Than 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) (~) ( ) Comments: c) Development of the proposed project will result in additional sources of light and glare in the community. This impact is similar to existing and proposed development within the immediate area surrounding the site and would not result in a significant impact. 14. CULTU~L RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) (~) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) (~) c) Affe~ historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) (~) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? () () (f) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) (~) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TT 16001/DR 99-19 Page 13 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) (I) ( ) b) Affect existing recreational oppo~unities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) Comments: a) The proposed project will increase the demand for developed parkland in the Terra Vista Community. The project is located immediately southeast of the existing Spruce Avenue Park and in addition, will include conditions of approval for the development of La Mission Park (located immediately adjacent to the site). These park facilities are intended to sere the needs of residents of the proposed project, as well as the requirement established by the Tetra Vista Community Plan. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate impodant examples of the major periods of California histo~ or prehisto~? ( ) ( ) ( ) (I) b) Shod term: Does the project have the potential to achieve sho~-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A shod-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) ( ) (I) Jn~t~aj Study ~ar CIty Ot RanCl'lC Cucamonga T'F !egrJl!g.R 9~-1g ~a~ 14 C) Cumulieve: ~s the ~o~ have imp~ are indjv~uatlV limited, ~t ~mulat~ely consl0embte? ("CumuJatively ~nsider~le" means t~at the i~cromenlal eff~ of ~re cCns~era~ when v~ w~tn The e~s of past projects. t~ e~s of ot~r cu~t oroje~. and the 9~s of d) Sgbli~al adv/~e: ~s I~ ~r~ect have environmenti effete ~t~ w~ll cause s~lan~l adv~8 e~cts on ~u~a~ ~mgs, either dire~ly or in~tm~y? ( ) EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may ~e used w~ere, pursuant to the tiering. program EIR. or other CEQA procesS. one or mote efteels have been ade~luately analyzcd in an earlier EIR or Nagalive Declaration Oer,Sectio~n 1.5063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this projec~ were t~e scope De and adequately anehrzed in the fullowing eadier document(S) Oursuant to applica01e regal standards and such effects were addmad by m~ttgat~on measures Dosed the earher analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in cornplating thi6 Initial Study and are avad:=b~e I~Or rewew in the C/ry' of Rancho Cucamonga, Plannin.q Division off~ce~, 10500 Civic Center DiNe (checl{ all that appry): (!) General Plan EIR tCertffied April 6. 1981) {:Z ) Master Envkonmentaj Assessment for tt~e 1989 General Plan UUdate (SCH 888020115, certified January 4. 1989) 'rerra Vista lalen~ed Communily ~,SCH 18108Z808 cer~ffied Pal)rusty 18, 1983) APPLICAN'r CER'I'IFICATION I certify that I am ~ al~olicant for the projec~ clesctil~ed in this Inj{iai Study I acknowledge thal nave read this Imt~al Study and the proposed mitlgal~0n nneasuraa. Fur~ler, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree tO the prol)osed mitlgatlorl firleas,jres to avoid the effects Or mdlgate the effects to a point whore ctearly no significant anvlrr~mental effects City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract 16001 and Development Review 99-19 Public Review Period Closes: November 10, 1999 Project Name: St. Modtz Project Applicant: David Lewis, Managing Director Lewis Apadment Communities Project Location (also see attached map): Generally bounded by Elm and Spruce Avenues and Church Street, and the future La Mission Park forming the southeasterly boundary - APN: 1077-421-040. Project Description: A proposed subdivision of ten numbered lots and four lettered lots on 23.5 acres of land for condominium purposes; and the design review of 360 units in the Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) district; within the Terra Vista Community Plan. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: [] The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where cleady no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477*2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. November 10, 1999 Date of Determination Adopted By RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16001, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 23.4 ACRES OF LAND INTO 10 NUMBERED LOTS AND 4 LETTERED LOTS FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES IN THE MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN, BOUNDED BY CHURCH STREET, SPRUCE AVENUE AND EAST ELM AVENUE, WITH LA MISSION PARK FORMING THE SOUTH EASTERLY BOUNDARY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1077-791-01 THROUGH, 09 AND 1077-801-01 THROUGH 10. A. Recitals. 1. Lewis Apadment Communities has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 16001, as described in the title of this Resolution. Heraina~er in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 10th day of November 1999, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application and concluded said headng on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudrig the above- referenced public hearing on November 10, 1999, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property bounded by Church Street, Spruce Avenue, and East Elm Avenue with the southeasterly boundary formed by La Mission Park; and all perimeter streets are improved with curb, gutter, and street pavement; and b. The property to the north of the subject site includes single-family residential (Tract 12802), the property to the south consists of commercial development referred to as Town Center Square, the property to the east includes single-family residential (Tract 14803) and Coyote Canyon Elementary School, and the property to the west includes future multi-family development Tentative Tract 16000); and c. The project contains 10 numbered lots and 4 lettered lots for condominium purposes; and d, The project site is subject to noise levels of 65 CNEL along Church Street which can be mitigated to acceptable levels per the Noise Study prepared for the project; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 'El' MAP 16001 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES November 10, 1999 Page 2 e. The project will generate traffic trips which can be accommodated through public street improvement upgrades as conditioned herein; and f. The project is consistent with the General Plan Medium-High Residential land use designation (14-24 dwelling units per acre) with a proposed project density of 15.3 dwelling units per acre. g. The proposed project of 358 multi-family residential dwellings is in accordance with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the Medium-High Residential District. In addition, the proposed project is in accordance with objectives of the Terra Vista Community Plan. h. The proposed project conforms to the standards and regulations of the Development Code, as well as the Terra Vista Community Plan, in terms of setbacks, building separation, parking, and the provision of recreational amenities as noted in the staff report. i. The proposed project and the intended use, together with all conditions of approval will not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project proponents are required to complete all missing park~vay improvements adjacent to the site. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable 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 tentative tract is not likely to cause sedous public health problems; and f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all wdtten and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT MAP 16001 November 10,1999 Page 3 Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies cadain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have been reduced to an acceptable level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project, which are listed below as conditions of approval. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission dudng the public headng, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 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. En,qineerinq Division 1) La Mission Park shall be constructed with this project. The park shall be built per City Engineer's Drawing No. 1579, revised as required per current City Standards and Specifications, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The park shall be completed and accepted by the City pdor to occupancy of buildings or pdor to issuance of building permits for 50 percent of the buildings, whichever occurs first. 2) Coordinate with the Central School Distdct on bus stop locations and ' ' "Suggested Route to School" maps. Planninq Division 1) In accordance with the Park Implementation Plan, Tentative Tract 16001 shall be credited with 1.22 acres toward the overall obligations for park development within Terra Vista. Environmental Mana.qement Measures TRANSPORTATION 1) The community trail on the west side of East Elm Avenue from the south project boundary to Church Street shall be completed with this development including the installation of a pedestrian-actuated signal on East Elm Avenue at the trail crossing from the east side of the school. · 2) Protect existing traffic stdping and signage. including P,26(s) "No Stopping Anytime" signs on Spruce Avenue and Church Street frontages. Install traffic stdping and signage, including R26 "No Parking Anytime" signs, on East Elm Avenue frontage, as required. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT MAP 16001 November 10,1999 Page 4 NOISE 1) During all project site excavation and grading on site, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with propedy operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers' standards. 2) The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 3) The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction related noise sources and noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. 4) During all project site construction, the construction contractor shall limit all construction-related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 6:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction shall be allowed on Sundays and public holidays. 5) Provide mechanical ventilation (Air conditioning system) for all dwelling units facing the project perimeter streets (Church Street, Spruce Avenue, and East Elm Avenue). 6) Provide building facade upgrades, such as double-paned windows and weather-stripping seals, for all rooms in dwelling units which face Church Street and Elm Avenue. 7) Provide a 5-fcot high sound barlet along the second floor balconies for aft dwelling units facing the perimeter streets. AIR QUALITY 1) The Construction Contractor shall select the construction equipment used on-site based on low emission factors and high energy efficiency. The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with manufacturers' specifications. 2) The Construction Contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-powered equipment in-lieu of gasoline powered engines where feasible. 3) The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans incJude a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. Dudng smog season (May through October), the overaft length of the construction period should be extended, thereby decreasing ,~he size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. 4) The Construction Contractor shall support and encourage ride shadng and transit incentives for the construction crew. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT MAP 16001 November 10,1999 Page 5 5) Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on-site and kept to a minimum by the following the dust control measures listed below: a) Dudng deadng, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill rnatedals, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each days activities cease. b) Dudng construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later moming and after work is completed for the day, and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. c) After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed; the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated immediately by pickup of the soil until the area is paved or othenNise developed so that dust generation will not occur. d) Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. e) Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials and/or construction debds to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of odgin. 6) The Construction Contractor shall utilize, as much as possible, pre- coated natural colored building materials, water-based or IowoVOC coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, such as high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray method. or manual coating applications such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel. spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THiS 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 1999. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATrEST: Brad Buller, Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT MAP 16001 November 10,1999 Page 6 I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do heraby 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 10th day of November 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Tentative Tract 16001 and Development Review 99-19 This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and vedficetion has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the City Planner, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. An MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency Planning Division) 10500 Civic Center Ddve Rancho Cucemonga, CA 91730 Mitigation Monitoring Program 'El' 16001 and DR 99-19 Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staffs is needed, as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate wdtten approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is vedfied for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the . responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessanj funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required pedod of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of building permits. h~LANNING~INAL\CEQA\TT16001MMP 11-10 -99.wlxl MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: Tentative Tract 16001 Applicant: Lewis Apartment Communities Initial Study Prepared by:. Debra Meier, AICP Date: October 14, 1999 Selection of low-emission construction equipment. CPIBO B/C Plan Check 2/4 Utilize electric or diesel-powered equipment where CPIBO C Ongoing A 4 feasible. Contractor shall ensure that work crews shut-off CP/BO C Plan Check C/A 2/4 equipment when not in use. Extend the construction period to minimize the work area during smog season (May through October). Contractor shall encourage ride sharing for CP C Ongoing A 4 construction crew Dust control measures shall be implemented. CPIBO C Ongoing A 4 Utilize pre-coated natural colored building materials B/C Plan check/ CIA 2/4 and Iow-pollutant coatings and application methods CP/BO Ongoing whenever possible. Protect existing traffic signing and striping on E Elm CE C/D Construction NC 3/5 Avenue. Complete the community trail on the west side of East CE C/D Construction NC 3/5 Elm Avenue, including a pedestr an-actuated signal at the trail crossing. Mitigation Monitoring Checklist for Tentative Tract 16001 Page 2 Properly maintain all equipment consistent with CP/BO C Ongoing A 4 manufacturers specifications. Noise from stationary construction equipment shall be CP/BO C Ongoing A 4 directed away from sensitive receptors near the site. Equipment staging areas shall be located away from CPIBO C Ongoing A 4 sensitive receptors surrounding the site. Construction activities shall be restricted to 6:30 a.m. CP/BO C Ongoing A 4 to 8:00 p,m Monday through Saturday, no construction activity shaft occur on Sunday. Provide mechanical ventilation for all units facing CP/BO A/C Plan check C 2/3 perimeter streets. Provide double -paned windows, weather-stripping. CPIBO A/C Plan check C 2/3 etc. for all room that face Church Street and Elam Avenue. Provide sound barrier along the second floor CP/BO NC Plan check C 2/3 balconies for all units facing perimeter streets. Key to Checklist Abbreviations CDD - Community Development Director A - With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map CP - City planner or designee B - Prior To Construction B - Other Agency Permit / Approval 2 - Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Construdion C o Plan Check 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports / Studies / Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP i:%oLANNING~FINAL\CEQA'~MMCHKLST.WPD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: Tentative Tract 16001 SUBJECT: 358 Apartment Units APPLICANT: Lewis Apartment Communities LOCATION: NEC Church Street and Spruce Avenue ALL OF THE. FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans. building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits 1. Subdivision approval shall expire. unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 3 years from the date of approval. C. Site Development 1. The site Shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Tetra Vista Community Plan. SC ~'25/99 Project NO TT16001 CompletJon Date 2. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 3. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 5. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. D. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $719.00, prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures, These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures, Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. Said program shall identi~ the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: E, Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 2. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: Spruce Avenue, Church Street, and Elm Avenue. 3. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of building permits, where no map is involved. 4. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map, including vacation/abandonment of existing vehicular easements (for approved openings) as shown on TR map 13717. Project NO. TF16001 Completion Date F. Street Improvements I All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Curb & A,C Side- Ddve Street Street Comm Median Bike Other Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trail e s Trail Island Street Name X X Tr~ X ¢ Spruce Avenue X X X Church Street X X X East Elm Street Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) tf so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Install pedestrian-actuated signal at trail crossing from the east side of the school 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. · · . b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, ~ maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Project No TT16001 Completion Date e. Handicaf3ped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City __ __/ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with / adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be / installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. / 4.Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. 5. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. G. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and ~vaiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. H. Utilities 1. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 2. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. I. General Requirements and Approvals IAn easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. for the tract. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: J. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Rools Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the 'SC ~'25199 4 Project NO. 'Fr~6001 Completion Date development. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs 2. Fire flow requirement shall be: 2,500 gallons per minute, Per '97 UFC Appendix Ill-A, 3, (b) (Increase), a.A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval b. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operahie prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water pian approval Required hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire Distdct standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: a. Other: Per alternative method approved by RCFPD. Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworkir plastics manufacturing, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if the sprinkler system is adequate for proposec operations. 7. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of sprinkler system. 8. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: a. Other: Provide additional horn/strobes interconnected with fire sprinkler system. 9. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: a. All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 32. 10. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet 6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus. 11. A building directory shall be required, as noted below: a. Lighted directory within 20 feet of main entrance(s). 12 Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. Project NO ]'{'16001 C_ompletion Date 13 Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District as follows: / / a. $132 for Multi-Family Residential Tract (per phase). 1~:. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1997 UBC. UFC / / UPC. UMC, and RCFD Standards 32 and 15 and 1996 NEC. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO, 99-19, FOR 358 CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 23.5 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN, BOUNDED BY CHURCH STREET, SPRUCE AVENUE, AND EAST ELM AVENUE, WITH I_A MISSION PARK FORMING THE SOUTH EASTERLY BOUNDARY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1077-791-01 THROUGH 09; AND 1077-801-01 THROUGH 10. A. Recitals. 1. Lewis Apartment Communities has filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. 99-19, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereina~er in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 10th day of November 1999, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced meeting on November 10, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property bounded by Spruce Avenue, Church Street, and East Elm Avenue with La Mission Park forming the southeasterly boundary. The perimeter streets are improved with curb, gutter, and street pavement; and b. The property to the north of the subject site includes single-family residential (Tract 12802), the properly to the south consists of commercial development referred to as Town Center Square, the property to the east includes single-family residential (Tract 14803) and Coyote Canyon Elementary School, and the property to the west includes future multi-family development Tentative Tract 16000); and c. The proposed project of 358 multi-family residential dwellings is in accord with the objectives, standards, and regulations of the Development Code and the purposes of the Medium High Residential Distdct (14-24 dwelling units per acre). In addition the proposed project is in accord with the objectives, standards, and regulations of the Terra Vista Community Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and ce/ } 7o PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, DR 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES November 10, 1999 Page 2 b. That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Plannin.q Division 1 ) All pertinent conditions of approval for Tentative Tract No. 16001 shall apply. 2)Provide a pedestrian access gate near the corner of Spruce Avenue and East Elm Avenue. 3) Details such as wood railing, sfiutters, and garage doors shall vary to create variety within the project. En.qineering Division 1 ) The subdivision, Tentative Tract Map No. 16001, is being processed for this site. DR 99-19 is proposed on the site of said Tentative Map. The map shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. 2) All gated entdes shall be designed to conform to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's gated entrance design guide, 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 1999. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary 7/ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 99-19 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES November 10, 1999 Page 3 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 10th day of November 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT _: : :'_, ~r,,,' ' .... DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: Development Review 99-19 SUBJECT: 358 Apartment Units APPLICANT: Lewis Apartment Communities LOCATION: NEC Church Street and Spruce Avenues ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements completion Date 1 The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shaU not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2 A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planners letter of approval and all Standard Conditions, shall be incEuded in legible form on the grading plans, building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits 1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Terra Vista Community Plan. SC-8/25/99 I Prolect No DR 99-19 Completion Date 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. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) 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 adjacent properties. 8 Trash receptacle(s) are 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 prior to the issuance of building permits.. 9. · AJI ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults.. 10. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and consise manner including proper illumination. 11. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 12. For multiple family development, laundry facilities shall be provided as required by the Development Code. 13. For multiple family development, a minimum of 125 cubic feet of exterior lockable storage space shall be provided. 14. For residential development, recreation area/facility shall be provided as required by the Development Code. 15. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. Prolect NO ~OR 99-19 CornDletlon Date D, Building Design All roof appurtenances, including air conditionors and other roof mounted equipment and/or 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. E. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 2, 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). 3. 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. 4. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 5. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in i__ / depth from back of sidewalk. 6. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and __ __/__ Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn- around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars stacking into the public right-of-way, 7. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily ____/__ residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2,5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 pement on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. F, Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home ____/ landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. A minimum of 50 trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided __/__ within the project: 5% - 48-inch box or larger 5% - 36-inch box or larger. 20% - 24- inch box or larger, 70% - 15-gallon, and 0% - 5 gallon. Project NO DR 99-19 Completion Date 3 Within parking lots, trees snail be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. 4. 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. 5. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 6. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or later size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope are, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 7. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible 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 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. 8. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be 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. 9 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. 10.All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 11 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. G. Signs 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 Ranning Division prior to installation of any signs. 2. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or town homes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. Project NO DR 99-19 CompletTon Date 4. Environmental 1. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Ranner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials 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. 2. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shml be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $719.00 prior to the issuance of building permits. guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. I. Other Agencies 1. 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. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: J. General Requirements 1. Submit four complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; c. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch. number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Division Project Number (i.e., TT #, CUP #, DR #, etc.) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. Architect's/Engineers stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. SC 8z25/99 Project NO DR gg-Tg ComPletiOn Date 3. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. /__ 4.Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. 5 Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the Building and Safety Division. K. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of 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 unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m, Monday __/__ through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. 5. Construct trash enclosure(s) per City Standard (available at the Planning Division's public counter). 6. Submit pool plans to the County of San Bemardino's Environmental Health Services __/__ Department for approval. L. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for required occupancy separation(s). 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturers "high wind" instructions. 4. Provide draft stops in attic areas, not to exceed 3,000 square feet, in accordance with UBC __/___ Table 5-A. 5. Provide draft stops in attics in line with common walls. __/__ __ 6, Roofing materials shall be Class "A" --/-- -- 7 Exterior wails shall be constructed of the required fire rating in accordance with UBC Table / I 5-A 8. Openings in exterior wails shall be protected ~n accordance with UBC Table 5-A, / / 9, ~f the area of habitable space above the first floor exceeds 3,000 square feet, then the / / construction type shall be V-1 Hour. 10. Walls and floors separating dwelling units in the same building shall be not less than l-hour / / fire-resistive construction· ~ ' 11. Provide smoke and heat venting in accordance with UBC Section 906· / / 12, Provide method of airborne and impact sound transmission control between dwelling units. / M. Grading 1. Grading of the subject 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 conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to / perform such work· 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building __ permits, 4. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for / existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more · of combined cut and fill. The Grading Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California Registered Civil Engineer. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: N. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1, Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 2. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: Spruce Avenue, Church Street, and Elm Avenue. 3. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of building permits, where no map is involved. 4. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map including vacation/abandonment of existing vehicular easements (for applicable openings) as shown on Tract Map 13717. 5. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. Proiect NO DR 99-19 Comoletion Date O. Street Improvements 1 All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks. street lights, and street trees. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr, Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Spruce Avenue X X X Church Street X X X E Elm Avenue X X X X e Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked. an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Install pedestrian actuated siqnal at trail crossinq from east side of the school. 3 Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety __/__ lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a /__ construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, / and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or / reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otheRvise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Pro)ect No DR 99-17 Completion Date e Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City __ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer., f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with __ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Plan~er prior to submittal for first plan check. 6. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in ____1__ accordance with the City's street tree program. 7. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with __ __/__ adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. P. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. Q. Utilities 1. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 2. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardinc. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. R. General Requirements and Approvals 1. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, for: the tract. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477- 2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: S. General Fire Protection Conditions 1 Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. 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 Project NO DR 99-19 Completion Date fire station to serve the development. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be: 2500 gallons per minute, Per '97 UFC Appendix Ill-A, 3, (b) / / (Increase). a.A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. b. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants __/ / shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, / /__ flushed, and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required __/ /__ hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District, Fire District standards require a 6- inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Hydrant reflective ,markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. 6. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: a. Other: per attached method approved by RCFPD. / Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking plastics manufacturing, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled stock, etc Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if the sprinkler system is adequate for proposec operations. 7 Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion ____/__ of sprinkler system. 8. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: a. Other Provide additional horn/strobes. interconnected with final sprinkler system. ~ __/~ 9. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: a. All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 32. 10. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept tdmmed to a minimum of 14 feet, 6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus. 11. A building directory shall be required, as noted below: a. Lighted directory within 2O feet of main entrance(s). Project No DR 99-19 Completion Date 12 Gated/restr~cted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire Safety Dwis~on for specific details and ordering information 13 Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District as follows: a, $132 for Multi-Family Residential Tract (per phase), **Note: Separate plan check fees for Tenant Improvement work, fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans 14. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1997 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, and RCFD Standards 32 and 15 and 1996 NEC. NOTE: SEPARATE PLAN CHECK FEES FOR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS, FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS (SPRINKLERS, HOOD SYSTEMS, ALARMS, ETC.), AND/OR ANY CONSULTANT REVIEWS WILL BE ASSESSED UPON SUBMITTAL OF PLANS. NOTE: A SEPARATE GRADING PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL IS REQUIRED FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS WHERE IMPROVEMENTS BEING PROPOSED WILL GENERATE 50 CUBIC YARDS OR MORE OF COMBINED CUT AND FILL. THE GRADING PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED, STAMPED AND SIGNED BY A CALIFORNIA REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: T. Security Lighting 1 All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development, 2. Lighting in exterior areas areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. U. Security Hardware 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. 2, One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors, If windows are within 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 3 All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. V. Security Fencing 1. When utilizing security gates, a Knox box sub-master system security device shall be used since fire and law enforcement can access these devices. W. Windows All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be lifted from frame or track in any manner. Prolect No DR 99-19 Completion Date X. Building Numbering 1 Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. 2. At the entrances of complex, an illuminated map or directory of project shall be erected with vandal-resistant cover. The directory shall not contain names of tenants, but only address numbers, street names, and their locations in the complex. North shall be at the top and so indicated. Sign shall be in compliance with Sign Ordinance, including an application for a Sign Permit and approval by the Planning Division. Y, Alarm Systems 1. Install a burglar alarm system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of false alarms and in turn save dollars and lives. 8/25199 STAFF REPORT DATE: November 10, 1999 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Warren Morelion, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-42 - TOMRA PACIFIC, INC. - A request to install a baling press within an existing recycling facility on 2.49 acres of land in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 9910 East 6th Street - APN: 209-211-43 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq: North - Vacant land, General Industrial in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan South - Industrial complex, General Industrial in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan East - Industrial complex, General Industrial in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan West - Vacant land, General Industrial in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan B. General Plan Desiqnations: Project Site - General Industrial, Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 5 North - General Industrial, Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 5 South - General Industrial, Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 5 East General Industrial, Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 5 West - General Industrial, Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 5 C. Site Characteristics: The site is within an existing recycling facility on 2.49 acres of land in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The baling press will take the place of an existing storage trailer located outside of the main building on the east side of the facility. Two existing walls will screen the baling press from public view. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing the installation of a baling press within an existing recycling facility that has been in operation since 1978. Since that time, the facility has exclusively processed aluminum cans. Because of the adoption of the Beverage Container Act in 1989, the recycling facility has been mandated to receive and process all types of California Redemption Value (CRV) beverage containers. These containers include, but are not limited to, aluminum cans, plastic bottles, glass bottles, and bimetal cans. To process the vadety of containers, a baler is needed. The outdoor location of the baling press will be at the east side of the existing building. Based on the plans submitted to the Planning Division, the TTEM E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 99-42 - TOMRA PACIFIC, INC. November 10, 1999 Page 2 9-foot baling press will extend approximately 8 inches above the existing 8-foot 4-inch screen walls on-site. It has been determined that the 1 -inch pipe rail extending above the walls will not be visible from public view, and therefore, will not have to be screened (see Exhibit "C"). B. Desiqn Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (McNiel, Fong) reviewed the project on October 19, 1999, and recommended approval of the project as contained in the Design Review Action Comments with the exception of not requiring additional trees in the front landscaped area (see Exhibit "D"). C. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Committee reviewed the project on October 20, 1999, and determined that the project is consistent with all applicable standards and policies. D. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study was completed by the applicant and staff completed Part II. A noise study was prepared on September 23, 1999, to measure existing noise levels with and without a baling press. The Industrial Area Specific Plan performance standards require that noise levels not exceed 75 Ldn at property lines. The study concluded that all levels will remain below the maximum 75 Ldn level allowed in the district, except at the mid-site west property line where the level continues to remain 82 Ldn due to the existing cyclone blowers on the north and west side of the building. Staff has determined the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all proper'e/owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 99-07 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Brad Buller City Planner BB:WM:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Map Exhibit "C" - Elevations Exhibit "D" - Design Review Committee Comments dated October 19, 1999 Exhibit "E" - Operation Plan Exhibit "F" - Initial Study Part II and Negative Declaration Resolution of Approval with Conditions CUP 9~2 x 9910 E, 6TH STREET ~'~71--~ ~ '~ L ,,."~TEj:E,:~:rn:,~' ':"' Loftion Map :~:H 2] Proj~ Site IL I FI -~ ~,.'.'."'ZlII~ 11 Jl SPECIFICATIONS t £XI,STING ' ~ DO NOT USE FOR cL~a,mer~ o~Em~' CONSTRUCTION ,, _ ~ -~ T_ Di**,,, I' ........ ' L ~i ~,va~ ~vA~ APR04~I DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:15 P.M. Warren Morelion October 19, 1999 ENVIRON MENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99.42 - TOMRA PACIFIC, INC. - A request to install a baling machine within an existing recycling facility on 2.49 acres of land in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 991 E. 6th Street - APN: 209-211-43. Des..0.~_Gg Parameters: The Site is within an existing recycling facility, which has been in operation since 1978 exclusively for processing aluminum cans. Because of the adoption of the Beverage Container Act in 1989, the recycling facility has been mandated to receive and process all types of California Redemption Value (CRV) beverage containers. These containers include, but are not limited to, aluminum cans, plastic bottles, glass bottles, and bimetal cans. To process the vadety of containers a press is needed. The machine is proposed to be placed behind an 8ofoot 6-inch wall as shown on Exhibit "A." Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Based on the plans submitted to the Planning Division, the bailing press will extend approximately 8 inches above the two 8-foot 4-inch screen walls on-site (Exhibit "A"). Instead of requiring additional screening, staff recommend additional trees to be provided in front of the landscaped setback area subject to City Planner review and approval. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed. and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: ' 1. All exterior cable(s) and/or ducting extending from the baling press will have to be screened from public view. Screening shall be architecturally integrated with building design. 2. Outdoor storage of the baler site is visible from adjacent properties and 6th Street. Per Industrial Area Specific Plan standards, all materials, supplies, equipment, and operating trucks in the General Industrial areas shall be stored within an enclosed building or a screened area from public view. The current application will not require the installation of screening at this time. Because the existing recycling canter was approved in 1978 and screening of the outdoor areas was not made a condition of the odginal approval, and in that the only proposed change to the existing use is the installation of the baler, staff does not believe it is reasonable at this time to require the screening of the existing outdoor storage areas. The recommendation will be forwarded to the Planning Commission. However, it is important that the applicant keep in mind that any outdoor storage should be kept at a minimum and out of the public view as much as possible. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee approve the project subject to the modifications as recommended above. Attachment Desiqn Review Commi~ee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Warren Morelion Z"A "O DRC COMMENTS CUP 99-42 - TOMRA PACIFIC, INC. October 19, 1999 Page 2 The Committee recommended approval of the project with the exception that the applicant did not have to provide additional trees in the front landscaped area. However, the Committee informed the applicant that if the 1-inch railing extending above the screen walls were visible to the public, it would have to be painted to match the existing building. OPERATING PLAN Overview &Current Bimetal cans methods of material handling and processing to support these Operations There are several methods of increases in supply. For th~ Initially when the Rencho processing recyclable materials. reasons, Tomra has analyzed all Cucamonga recycling Some of thes~ processes ate possible solutions and has processing facility ffacility) was unique to the type of material concluded that the facility's State of California had not yet facility is s~t up to process from the imtallation of a baler. adopted Assembly Bill 2020, aluminum cans by shreddin} Operating Benefits The Beverage Container them as preparation to Recycling Act (The Act). smelted and made into sh~t Today. the facility's operation Consequently, the operations for the production of new suffers greatly due to the of this facility concentrated aluminum cans. This type of inefficiencies accompanied by exclusively on the processing of process is unique to aluminum the handling of loose materials, aluminum cans, which has cans and is not available for the especially plastic P.E.T. traditionally yielded higher other types of materials that bottles. Currently, the profits than any other type of this facility receives. operations of this facility recyclable beverage container. requires receiving loose Within tbe recycling industry material, consolidating this Subsequent to the adoption of there lsamethodofprocesslng material into outside storage the Act, the facility began that is universal to the majority bunkers, re-loadin~ roll-off purchasing: other types of of materials generated containers with this material _beverab{e containers without regardless of their end use. and frequently shipping small the added benefit of additional This ptoc~a densities materials quantities to end markets (this processinF equipment for these into a product that is pro~ttr is not applicablt to ty~s of containers. As a State condud~/e for handling, storag~ alum/hum ofCalifotniacertified processor, and shipping. This typ~ of Tomta Pacific, Inc. (Tomta) is process requir~ a piece of Additionally, with the spac~ mandated to receive and equlpmentcalled a 'baler'. required to handle this loos~ process all types of California material in areas outside .of Redemption Value (CRV) Proposed- tram¢ patterns (for safety beverage containers. Thes~ Enhancements reasons), the fatility's operation CRV containers include, but With the addition of other has been forced to store baled are not limited to, the types of CRV containers and materials outside. This has following: the continuous increa.ses in been a phenomenon created by the use of docking space for · Aluminum cans recycling collection rates loose material which blocks throughout the State, state · Hastic bottles certified processors are access to the wat~hous~ and · Glass bottles and constantly s~king improved takes tip dock space for storage trailers. ~ [] E3[] With the installation of a baler, these issues would be r~solved combination of a slgnifican~t decrease in outbound s'hlpments and the ability to store baled material inside the warehouse and in storage trailers located at the dock if overflow situation occur (pleast n~nnce drawing). Tomra has analyzed these quantify the reduction in outbound shipments that would result with the installation of a baler as a minimum of 568 shipments annually. This reduction _ would not only elevate &Run operational pressures, but wo61d enhance the quality of llfe for our neighbors by reducing trafflc. PET/HOPE Orop Sixth Street City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Conditional Use Permit 99-42 2. Related Files: 3. Description of Project: A request to install a baling press within an existing recycling facility on 2.49 acres of land in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 9910 East 6th Street - APN: 209-211-43. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Tomra Pacific, Inc. C/o Charles Joseph Associates 10681 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 395 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 5, General Plan Designation: General Industrial 6. Zoning: Industrial Area Specific Plan, Subarea 5 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: South and east of the site have been developed with general industrial buildings. North and west of the site are vacant. Railroad tracks exist west of the property for shipping material to end markets. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Warren Morelion Assistant Planner (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 99-42 - TOMRA. Pacific, Inc. Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning ( ) Transportation/Circulation ( ) Public Services ( ) Population and Housing ( ) Biological Resources ( ) Utilities and Service Systems ( ) Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Aesthetics ( ) Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Air Quality (1) Noise ( ) Recreation ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (./) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ( ) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1 ) have been analyzed adequately in an eadier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signed: ~~_~" Warren Morelion Assistant Planner October 18, 1999 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 99-42 - TOMRA, Pacific, Inc. Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. Potentially Signfficant 1. LAND USE AND P~NNING. Would the proposak a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) ( ) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or pollpies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) ( ) ( ) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) ( ) ( ) d) Disrupt or~ivide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) b) Induce substantial gro~h in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or e~ension of major infrastru~ure)? ( ) (~) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 99-42 - TOMRA, Pacific, Inc. Page 4 Potentially b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) (./) d) Seiche hazards? ( ) (v') e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) (,/') f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) (,/) g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) (./) h) Expansive soils? ( ) ) ( ) (~') i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ) ( ) (./) 4. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) (,/) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) (v') c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( ) (V') d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( ) (V') e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) (v') f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) (,/) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) (,/) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) (,/) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 99-42 - TOMRA, Pacific, Inc. Page 5 i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) (v') c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) (Z) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) (,/) 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ( ) (,/) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (v') c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? (/) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (v') e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (/) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (./) g) Rail or air traffic impacts? (,/) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 99-42 - TOMRA, Pacific. Inc. Page 6 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) (,/) b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) (,/) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) (v') d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( ) (,/) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) (,/) Polentjaily Significant Irnpac~ Less PotentiallyUnless Than 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (./') b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V') c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ) ( ) ) (v') b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ) (,/) initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 99-42 - TOMRA, Pacific, Inc. Page 7 Potentially Signr~icant Impact Less Potentially Unless Than c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) e) increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) I O. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) (,7) ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) Comments: a) An acoustical elevation study was prepared (Bricken, September 23, 1999), which concludes that this project will have less than significant impact. The Industrial Area Specific Plan performance standards require that noise levels not exceed 75 Ldn at the property lines. The addition of the bailing press will not warrant mitigation because it increases noise levels by 1 Idn at the northeast corner of the site and the mid-site north property line and by 15 Ldn at the mid-site east property line and opposite baler at east side, and by 14 Idn at the southeast corner of the site. All levels will remain below the maximum 75 Ldn level allowed in the district except at the mid-site west property line, where the noise level continues to remain 82 Ldn due to the existing cyclone blowers located on the north side of the building and about mid-site on the west side.  Potentially S~nrficant Irnf:ac~ Less Potentially Unless Than 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered govemment services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 99-42 - TOMRA, Pacific, Inc. Page 8 Potentially d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) (v') b) Communication systems? ( ) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) (,/) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) (v') e) Storm water drainage? ( ) (v') f') Solid waste disposal? ( ) (,/) g) Local or regional water supplies? ) ) ( ) (,/) 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal.' a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ) ( ) (,/) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ) ( ) (,/) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ) ( ) (,/) 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) J Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 99-42 - TOMRA, Pacific, Inc. Page 9 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V') 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (./) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (./) '16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restdct the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) ( ) ( ) (./) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 99-42 - TOMRA, Pacific, Inc. Page 10 c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program El R, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (/) General Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981) (/)Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (/) Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR (Certified September 19, 1981 ) City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Conditional Use Permit 99-42 Public Review Period Closes: November 10, 1999 Project Name: Project Applicant: Tomra Pacific. Inc. Project Location (also see attached map): Located at 9910 East 6th Street - APN: 209-211-43. Project Description: A request to install a baling press within an existing recycling facility on 2.49 acres of land in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Ran. FINDING This is to advise that the C!ty of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: [] The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where cleady no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 4?7-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. November 10, 1999 Date of Determination Adopted By RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 99-42 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A BALING PRESS ON AN EXISTING 2.49-ACRE RECYCLING FACILITY SITE WITHIN SUBAREA 5 OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT 9910 EAST 6TH STREET AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF APN: 209-211-43. A. Recitals. 1. Tomra Pacific, Inc. has filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit No. 99-42, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 10th day of October 1999, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date, 3. All legal i:;rerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution, NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2, Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on October 10, 1999, 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 9910 East 6th Street with a street frontage of 271.22 feet and lot depth of 400 feet and which is presently improved with a recycling facility; and b. The properties to the north and west of the subject site are vacant land zoned General Industrial in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the properties to the south and east of the subject site are industrial complexes zoned General Industrial in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and c. The proposed project is a request to install a baling press within an existing recycling facility on 2.49 acres of land in Subarea 5 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 9910 East 6th Street. 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 I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 99-42 - TOMRA PACIFIC, INC. November 10, 1999 Page 2 a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the Industrial Area Specific Plan in which the site is located. b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that them is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission dudrig the public headng, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subjecl to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planninq Division 1 ) The applicant shall screen all extedor cable(s) and/or ducting extending from the baling press. Bcreenin9 shall be architecturally integrated with building color and design. 2) If the 1 -inch pipe railing extending above the screen walls is visible from public view, the applicant shall paint the railing to match existing building color. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall cerlif'/to the adoption of this Resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 99-42 - TOMRA PACIFIC, INC. November 10, 1999 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1999. 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 10th day of October 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: Conditional Use Permit 9942 SUBJECT: Baling] Press Installation APPLICANT: Tomra Pacific, Inc, - c/o Charles Joseph Associates LOCATION: 9910 East 6th Street ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909)477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City. its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval, The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. B. Time Limits 1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance. or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1, The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein. Development Code regulations, and the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 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. sc ~rzs~99 1 / PrOJeCt NO CUP 9942 Completion Date 3 Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances. and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 4. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single family residential developments. transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: D. General Requirements 1. Submit four complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; c. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; e Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors. panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans. including isometrics. underground diagrams, water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping. and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Division Project Number (i.e., 'IF #, CUP #. DR #. etc. ) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. Architect.s/Engineer's stamp and "wet'' signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. 4. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. E. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01 ). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code. Uniform Plumbing Code. National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, ordinanceS, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee, SC -8125199 2 Project No CUP 9942 Completion Date School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance. 3. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. F. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for required occupancy separation(s). 2. Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be needed. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: G. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 32. 2. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entm/key system. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 3. Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District as follows: X $132 for CUP. [ H E C J T Y 0 F I~ANCIIO CUCAMONGA S tffReport DATE: November 10, 1999 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: DIRECTOR'S REPORT - MASI PLAZA - A review of the interpretation of Recreation Commercial land uses. ABSTRACT: The al3plicant, Mike Scandiffio of Masi Commerce Center Partners, is requesting an interpretation to allow certain retail uses under the Recreational Commercial designation. Staff seeks direction from the Planning Commission as to the allowable retail uses under Recreational Commercial. BACKGROUND: The applicant contends that specialty sub-regional and secondary region serving retail uses do not have to be recreation or sports oriented based on the definition. The applicant has included in his letter a list of retail uses that he believes are permitted. Staff has developed a matrix (Exhibit "C") to evaluate the uses proposed. ANALYSIS: A. History and Intent of Recreational Commercial: In February of 1994, the Planning Commission first reviewed the request from the applicant to change the land use designation of Masi Plaza from industrial to commercial. In reviewing the proposed change, the Planning Commission raised concerns over the increase in commercially zoned land but determined that a special commercial land use category with an emphasis on recreation facilities and recreation and sports oriented retail use may be appropriate around the City's Sports Complex. A Recreational Commercial land use category was then created in the General Plan. In April of 1994, the City Council reviewed the recommendations of the Planning Commission and approved the new land use category with a modification in the language to include retail uses such as electronics, furniture and appliances as shown in Exhibit "B." B. Interpretation of Recreation Commercial: The applicant has raised a valid case for revisiting the definition of Recreational Commercial. The definition does not clearly separate sports related retail uses from the other retail uses. The general title "Recreation Commercial" appears to reflect a recreational orientation but the text itself appears to support non-sports related retail uses. ITEM F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DIRECTOR'S REPORT - MASI PLAZA November 10, 1999 Page 2 Further, It has been five years since the completion of the first phase development in Masi Plaza. The development of the site lends itself to attract both retail and recreation uses. In addition, because the site and the surrounding area are in close proximity to the freeway, there continues to be significant interest in retail development. Recently, the General Plan Task Force, in reviewing preferred land use alternatives, considered this project site and properties east of Rochester Avenue as prime retail centers because of their close proximity to the freeway and the future regional mall. The commercial study prepared by the General Plan consultant also supported this expansion of commercial uses. C. Specialty Building Supplies and Home Improvement Types of Land Uses: In June of 1992, at the request of the applicant, the City amended the Industrial Area Specific Plan to include Specialty Building Supplies and Home Improvement land use category in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The proposed uses listed in Exhibit "A," such as flooring, paint and wall coverings, mattress and bedding, light and lighting, and home improvements falls under this land use category. These types of land uses generally include retail, wholesale sales, and installation. The uses may require larger showrooms and storage areas. They may also need the use of roll-up doors for pick up and truck deliveries. Therefore, staff supports those uses under this land use category. D. Is Recreational Commercial Permitted or Conditionally Permitted?: The applicant requested that Recreational Commercial be permitted by right. Staff has continually stated to the applicant that uses classified under the Recreational Commercial land use category are permitted by right. This is not an issue. E. Should Recreational Commercial be Smaller than 3,500 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area?: The applicant requested an interpretation that uses classified under Recreational ' ' Commercial can be smaller than 3,500 square feet of gross floor area. The intent of a range in floor area from 3,500 feet to 55,000 feet is to ensure that uses, whether recreation or retail, are sub-regional and secondary region-serving and not the typical neighborhood commercial. Staff can support some flexibility to the range, but without some parameters it would be hard to implement. Staff recommends 10 percent smaller than the minimum floor area and 10 percent larger than the maximum floor area. RECOMMENDATION: Following are staff recommendations: A. Apply a liberal interpretation of retail uses in the Recreational Commercial land use category because there is support for a change in the land use designation by the General Plan Task Force. B. Maintain the applicant's proposed land uses of flooring, paint, wall coverings, mattress and bedding, light and lighting under Specialty Building Supplies and Home Improvement land use category, which is cor~ditionally permitted in the underlying zone of Industrial Park, Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. A minute action is requested. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DIRECTOR'S REPORT- MASI PLAZA November 10, 1999 Page 3 C. Allow the flexibility of 10 percent under 3,500 square feet and 10 percent over 55,000 square feet for retail uses under the Recreation Commercial category. Respectfully submitted -. City Planner BB:NF\ma Exhibit "A" - Applicant's Letter of Request Exhibit "B" - Definition of Recreational Commercial Exhibit "C" - Land Use Matrix with Staffs Comments PAGE 82 MEMO To; Brad Bullet, City' Pla~mer ~ 10/25/99 Cib' of Rancho Cucamonga ~v~j~.t~=~ Scai~diffio M$i Comrade Cent~ ~w: Gen~l Plan Amendment 93-02B, Pa~ A - Cla~h~on by Plann~g Commission Dear Brad: Masi Commerce Center Parmen requests clarification of the ~ove rei :rented amendment by the Plmming Commission at the next available public meeting: Masi Commerce Center Partners believes the following: ( I ) The Recreation Commercial phm amendment referenced above applies m all specialty sub-regional and secondary. region-serving uses and are not llmite4 to recreation related uses. Permitted retail uses would include appliances, art supplies, bed & bath, books & music, flooring, paint; wall coverings, mam'ess & bedding, light 8d lighting, home improvementsi clothingi clothing accessories_ & jewelS', e!ectroni0s & compute~, furniture & accessories, pet supplies, phones & communication systems, specialty food retail sales, toys, games ,t: hobbles, and ~ll other specialty r~milers. ha sum, permitted specialty retail uses apply to all us~ other than general merehanditse department stores, suDermarkets and drug stores, as referenced in the amendment. (2) These uses are permitted "as of d~hf' and no conditional use pe..i~ is required; and, (3) The "approximately 3,500 - 55,000 sqtm~ feet of goss leasable ~if~" is, as the amendment states, an approximation and that uses can in fact be smaller then 3,500 square feet. Please call me at 909481-5020 if you have any queslions. Sincerely, cc: Nancy Fong Page 4 GRq1~AL PLAN AMIIqIIMtLT 93-02B, PAR1 A Recreationa1 Cu,.,ercial: Developlent of recreation facilities and retail uses shall be encouraged alor~ Foothill Boulevard surrour~ng the Rancho Cuca~ong'a Adult Sport Fark near the intarsection of Rochester Avenue. The b~ll stadium and year-rcund sports activities in the Sports Fark create a unique opportunity to provide seomrf~ry region-serving specialit]; retail uses that are not major general ~d~r~e department stores or food or drug stores. ~1~ey generally use approximately 3,500 - 55,000 sc~mre feat of grn~ leasable area and require sit~ with high visibility and high ~fic counts. These centers typically have convenient freevay access and draw their custave_rs frun within a five to ten mile radius. Uses in this catsgory are regional in nature and not normally found in neighborhood cui.iercial centers. ~hese types of _oc-n_jpancies could incl,H~ di~<Dcunt retailers, such as sporting goods, apparel, electronics, furniture, ard appliances. Masi Plaza - Land Use Matrix for Proposed Uses USES STAFF COMMENTS Appliances Users are strictly retail and not related to recreation Ar~ Supplies A liberal interpretation will allow the uses Bed & Bath Books & Music Business Equipment &Supplies User is permined by right in Subarea 7 as Business Supply Retail & Services Carpet, Tile, Floor, Wall & Window Coverings CUP under Specialty Building Supplies & Home Improvement Clothing, Clothing Accessories & Jewelry Users are strictly retail and not related to recreation Electronics &Computers A liberal interpretation will allow the uses Furniture & Accessories Health Food &Nutrition Centers Relate to fitness and allow under if user is 3,500 sq. ft. Home Improvement CUP under Specialty Building Supplies &Home Light &Lamps Improvement Mattress & Bedding Pet Supplies Users are strictly retail and not related to recreation Phones &Communication Systems A liberal interpretation will allow the uses Specialty Foods Retail Sales Users are strictly retail and not related to recreation All other Specialty Retail A liberal interpretation will allow the uses Sporting Goods &Clothing Allow under Recreational Commercial if users are 3,500 Toys, Games &Hobbies sq. ft. Director's Report - Masi Plaza - 11/10/99 Exhibit "C" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: November 10, 1999 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner Laura Bonacorrsi, Associate Park Planner SUBJECT: DAY CREEK BOULEVARD SCENIC/RECREATION CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN - A review of the conceptual design of the future Day Creek Boulevard. BACKGROUND: In April of 1998, the land use for the surplus utility corridor at the east side of the future Day Creek Boulevard was changed from a Utility Corridor designation to residential and commercial land use designations as shown in Exhibit "A." An environmental rnitigation for the loss of open space was to expand the parkway on the east side of the street from 7 to 25 feet and to include a trail. A condition of approval for the land use amendments was to hire a consultant to design the special parkway, the landscape edge treatment, the community entries, the perimeter wall and the plant palette, etc., to be paid for by the developer, and to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. In October of 1998, staff received the money from the developer, Kaufman & Broad, formerly Lewis Homes, for the design work. Staff then contracted RJM Design Group, Inc., who has extensive landscape design experience within the Victoria Planned Community to do the design work. The design concept was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on October 5, 1999. ANALYSIS: A. Day Creek Boulevard Desiqn Concept: The street design stretches from future Route 210/30 south and ends at the Adult Sports Complex. Because Day Creek Boulevard leads to a major commercial hub of the City, the street is designed to have a more urban feel. The design concept will ultimately serve as a master plan for Day Creek Boulevard. The Master Plan will establish: · Regional Gateways and Community Entries - The identified entries are already listed as such within the Victoria Community Plan except for the Regional Gateway at Day Creek Boulevard and Highland Avenue, which is a new one. Staff will forward a request to the General Ptan Task Force to amend the appropriate element in the General Plan. ITEM G PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DAY CREEK BOULEVARD SCENIC/RECREATION CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN November 10, 1999 Page 2 · A Major Pedestrian Trail -This trail will be on the east parkway and will create a significant north-south link for this area of the city. Staff will forward a request to the General Plan Task force to amend the appropriate element of the General Plan. Plant Palette - The pallette consists of double rows of Mexican Fan Palms on both sides of the street with large canopy trees (Bradford Pear) in between the palms and along the median island, accent trees at community entries, appropriate shrub massing, and ground cover accented with river rock bands. Both the Palm trees and the large Bradford Pear trees are arranged in a formal pattern for the urban feel similar to Euclid Avenue in the City of Upland. Street Furniture Palette - The Palette will include such street features as benches, bollards, seat walls, hard scape, light fixtures, street light banners, provision for display of art, bus shelters, trellises, etc., to unify the street scape. · Theme Wall - A theme perimeter wall that will serve as the backdrop (edge) for the resident/ally zoned sections of the street. · Public Arts Program - Guidelines will be established to allow a "adopt a sidewalk" plan for art along the boulevard. Desiqn Review Committee: On October 5, 1999, the Design Review Committee (McNiel and Stewart) reviewed the concept and recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. Palm trees (brown trunk) shall be a minimum of 15 feet in height. 2. Final design of bus shelter subject to Design Review Committee review and approval. 3. Consultant to continue to work with staff in refinement of the Master Plan Guidelines. C. Approved Proiects Adiacent to Day Creek Boulevard: Kaufman & Broad had processed and received approval of Tentative Tract Map 15785, east side of Day Creek Boulevard, before staff had commissioned a consultant to prepare the design. At the west side of Day Creek Boulevard, William Lyon Homes also processed and received approval of Tentative Tract Map 15871. Appropriate conditions of approval to ensure that the parkway will be developed according to the approved master plan for Day Creek Boulevard were placed for both projects. During the time that our consultant was designing the master plan, staff has been flexible in allowing both developers to continue working on the development. The developers on both sides of Day Creek Boulevard have been informed ofthe design concept and attended the Design Review Committee meeting. Based on the recommendations of the Design Review Committee, staff approved the perimeter walls for both projects, which comply with the design concept. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DAY CREEK BOULEVARD SCENIC/RECREATION CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN November 10, 1999 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Day Creek Boulevard Master Plan Design Guidelines by minute action. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:NF\Is Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Land Use Change for Utility Corridor Exhibit "B" - Day Creek Boulevard Master Plan Exhibit "C" - Projects Adjacent to Day Creek Boulevard Land Use An~ndment for Edison Utility Corddor (GPA 96-03B & GPA 97-01) (VPCA-96;0-1 -&-VPCA 97-01 ) ST. EXHIBIT A 0.57 0 0.57 1.14 Miles 'W'~ F__, .- ,~z s ~,~ :',~.~ .............. DAY CREEK BOULEVARD A ~' SCENIC RECREATION CORRIDOR N1ASTER ['LAX REGIONAL CITY GATEWAY 'A' AT FOOTHILL BOULEVARD DAY CREEK BOULEVARD ~IX DACT't LIFERA - DATE PALM RSTROE3,11.~, INDICA - CRAPE MYRTLE )ESTRIAN PLAZA ~VITH STAIR%VAY HANDICAP ~IP AND COBBLE -- 6' WEST SIDE - PEDESTRIAN PA% ING ~ITH BANDS TO REFLECT COMMUNITY ENTRY 'B' AT COMMERCIAL LAND USE DAY CREEK BOULEVARD SCENIC RECREATION CORRIDOR MASTER PL.z~N ~Z~ ~,t o ~, xNc BACKGROLNDTREES ~IX DACTYLIFERA RESIDENTIAL - DATE PALM LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA · CRAPE MYRTLE SHRUB/GROUNDCOVER pLANTING RO pEDESTRIAN PLAZA WITH ART/SCULI~rLRE CENTER PIECE COMMUNITY ENTRY 'B' AT RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DAY CREEK BOULEVARD SCENIC' REC'RE:V['ION C'ORRIDOR MASTER PLAN BUS `SHELTER PROPERTY %VALL ~ O~CRETE P ~x i~.. ~ ~ rtRxc ~SIDENTIAL PROJECT ENTRY PAVING ~=- THEME WALKWAY ' 'q LIGHTING ART/SCULPTURE EXAMPLES DAY CREEK BOULEVARD ~1~, %('E>.IC' RICC'RL.\ I'lOX C ()I~,I~IDOI>, \1 \~, FIZR PI.\N -~ 0ct-13-99 08:18A RjM DESIGN GROUP,INC 949 493 2690 0ct-13-99 08:18A RjM DESIGN GROUP,INC 949 493 2690 0ct-13-99 08:18A RJM DESIGN GROUP,INC 949 493 2690 P.O2 DAY CREEK BOULEVARD SCENIC / RECREATI(IN CORRIDOR MAS're'-R PLA~ pROI~EI~.'I'Y WALL AND COI,UMN I .EGEN D: 1. PRF. CAST CONCRETE CAP WITH NATURAL GREY COl,OR AND LIGHT SANDBLAST FINISI I. 2. RIVER RCJCK VENIZER COLUMN WITI I 12:1 BATTER WITII MASONRY 'l'lliS AS NEEDED. 3. 16" SQUARE COI.UMN PRECISION BLOCK. 4. 6 X 16 SI.UMP I!I.OCK PROTO WAI.I. SYSTEM. 5.4 X 8 SLUMP CAP PROTO WA'1.1. SYSTEM. 6. CONCKE'rE I:OO'[ING ANt) RF. fNFORCEMENT PER STRUCTURAL liNGINEER. 7. 90% COMPACTED SUBGRADE. 8. FINISI.I GRAI)E. NOTE: A. SLITMP BLOCK TO RECEIVE SACK FIN ISI I AND PAINTED WIIITE. '7'o ~v.~l':-~-~ ~..~,~-r,~4& ,/,c'rcc~!4 B. RIVER ROCK VENEER COLUMNS TO BE SPACED AT + 150' O.C. RA N C H O C U C A MON GA S ffReport DATE: November 10, 1999 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Butler, City Planner BY: Laura J. Bonaccorsi, Associate Park Planner SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT ISSUES PERTAINING TO TENTATIVE TRACT 15711-PACIFIC COMMUNITIES - Consideration of an alternate sidewalk and tree planting concept for the approved 283 lot subdivision on 80.39 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential district (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, generally located north of Foothill Boulevard, east of Etiwanda Avenue, south of the Interstate 15 Freeway, and west of East Avenue - APN: 1100-141-01 and 02, 1100-171-01 and 13, 1100- 181-01 and 04, and 1100-201-01. BACKGROUND: A. GENERAL: In October of 1997, in response to Proposition 218, the City Council adopted the attached guidelines, Design Strategies to Reduce Maintenance Costs. Two key concepts included in the strategies were the use of 40 percent hardscape and the use of curb-adjacent walks to take up some of that hardscape and consolidate/simplify the landscape areas. At the time the Planning Commission reviewed the Design Strategies, staff was advised to use the curb-adjacent walk where it would not conflict with existing street themes and to use creativity in the application of hardscape. They also suggested that the policies be reviewed after a time, to evaluate the merits of the design strategies. These concerns were incorporated into the measures adopted by the City Council. Since adoption of these measures, no projects have provided an opportunity to implement and evaluate the curb-adjacent walk. B, DESIGN ISSUE: Tentative Tract 15711 was conditioned to have a property-line adjacent sidewalk, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission (Planning Commission Resolution no. 99-83). The project was also approved with more publicly maintained landscaping than would normally occur, as City maintenance along interior streets is typically discouraged. The combined factors of a large amount of landscaping, plus a street configuration that lends itself to the use of curb-adjacent walks (see attached map) and the need to reduce maintenance costs, make this project an excellent opportunity to implement the curb-adjacent walk concept. Curb-adjacent walks are proposed for Garcia Drive, Dolcetto Place, and Miller (Church) Avenue. Engineering is following established sidewalk design themes for East Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue. ITEM H PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CURB-ADJACENT WALKS IN TRACT 15711 November 10, 1999 Page 2 Because the sidewalk conditions along Church Street vary throughout the City, sidewalk compatibility on Miller Avenue was not an issue, and the curb-adjacent condition was recommended per the Design Strategies approved by City Council. Flagged by an apparent conflict with a cross-section shown for Miller Avenue in the Etiwanda Specific Plan (Figure 5-29, attached), the issue of whether or not to use curb-adjacent walks in this development is before the Planning Commission for discussion. ANALYSIS: A. THE CHANGING IMAGE OF THE PARKWAY-LINED STREET: Historically, Planning has promoted sidewalks that are not adjacent to curbs (or walls). This objective was inspired by the image of evergreen, tree-lined parkways adjacent to the street, and a desire to provide a sense of separation between pedestrian and vehicular traffic. In recent years, this parkway image has changed somewhat where public maintenance is involved. To make the right-of-way landscapes safe, enduring, and cost-effective to manage; smaller parkways received correspondingly small trees and sometimes no trees when impacted by sight distance or other conflicts; ground covers gave way mulch, tuff was reserved for parks; and areas less than 3 feet wide were discouraged or hardscaped. Although all of these efforts were helping to reduce costs, Proposition 218 changed everything by making tax increases in the Landscape Maintenance Districts prohibitive. The City then took the somewhat controversial but necessary step to reduce maintenance costs further by implementing the attached Design Strategies approved by City Council. As a result, parkway strips in publicly maintained areas are now often dominated by the 40 percent hardscape requirement because the low hardscaping is kept to the foreground, while taller landscaping is usually located further back at the tract perimeter wall. Regardless of where the sidewalk goes, the street edges within publicly maintained areas will be reflecting substantial harriscape instead of greenery. B. THE ADVANTAGES OF THE CURB-ADJACENT SIDEWALK: The following analysis reflects the maintenance and aesthetic impacts of going to a curb-adjacent sidewalk. From a maintenance and cost savings approach, the use of the curb-adjacent sidewalk is perhaps one of the most effective design concepts to reduce maintenance for the following reasons: 1. Maintenance Advantages: a. The amount of edging and blowing is reduced by 2/3. (One edge to maintain instead of three.) In addition to less labor, this also reduces green waste and the related disposal fees. b. Reduced and simplified irrigation is less expensive to maintain - the irrigation is reduced from four rows of irrigation lines to two, with no costly -under-sidewalk repairs and an estimated 1/2 the sprinkler heads, due to larger spacing. Fewer sprinklers and simplified areas translate into fewer opportunities for vandalism. There are fewer valves to maintain with smaller, less expensive controllers and even less radio communication time (cost per valve in blocks of communication bytes purchased). PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CURB-ADJACENT WALKS IN TRACT 15711 November 10, 1999 Page 3 c. Simplified irrigation means less wasted water, less drainage problems, less runoff and less street repairs. d. The use of curb-adjacent walks reduces the City's liability with fewer sight line problems and the omission of edging and cleanup along curbs or within streets. e. Because a curb-adjacent walk promotes a larger consolidated landscape area, as opposed to smaller areas flanking a walk, the sidewalk improvement is less vulnerable to tree root damage, and there are less costly sidewalk repairs and/or tree removals. f. Larger plantin9 areas afford fewer larger shrubs which translates into less trimming activities. This also means less green waste. g. Tree pruning is reduced when conflicts with the walk/street are minimized. 2. Aesthetic Benefits: a. Some of the 40 percent landscape reduction is taken up unobtrusively by the wider sidewalk. This reduces the amount of rockscape used elsewhere in the landscape. b. The landscaping and irrigation of one larger planter vs. two smaller planters creates a simplified streetscape that affords more room for substantial trees and shrubs. Where property line-adjacent sidewalks bisect the parkway, the net effect is complicated in appearance, and often, to meet hardscape requirements, there is hardscape between the walk and the curb anyway. c. The use of curb-adjacent walks is useful where grading is an issue, and allows the area behind the walk to pick up grade and minimize retaining wall conditions. d. Where private maintenance is concerned, consolidating all landscaping on the homeowner's side of the walk encourages maintenance by the property owner, and thus opportunities for neglected side yard parkways are reduced. C. APPLICATION OF THE CONCEPT TO THIS PROJECT: Attached are exhibits illustrating how the proposed curb-adjacent sidewalks would be implemented. The sidewalks break away from the curb at cul-de-sac areas to provide accentuated green areas. These areas will feature less hardscape and clusters of large accent trees, and will reduce the originally proposed 1700 LF of curb-adjacent sidewalk on Garcia Drive by 600 LF, or 35 percent. The concept of large accent trees is proposed to extend to intersections throughout the project as well by incorporating additional landscape areas behind each corner. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CURB-ADJACENT WALKS IN TRACT 15711 November 10, 1999 Page 4 In conclusion, the financial and aesthetic benefits achieved with the revised sidewalk concept of curb-adjacent walks (with curb-adjacent landscaping at accent areas), weighed against the likelihood of hardscape between the curb and a property line-adjacent sidewalk, provide a defendable case for using curb-adjacent sidewalks in this location. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the above maintenance and aesthetic considerations regarding the use of curb-adjacent walks, and support their use in this project. City Planner BB:sd Attachments ,.......~/"~/~F~~ Typical Intersection Treatment- (Curb-adjacent sidewalk meets '~,c]~-~,~l~(/2//P./")~ prope~y line-adjacent sidewalk) ~~ with accent trees in additional landscape easement Typical Intersection Treatment - (Curb-adjacent sidewalk meets /'Y/ I L, L,I~ /z.. Typical Cul-de-sac Treatment - Sidewalk moves away from curb ~ith accent trees REPRESENTATIVE SKETCHES OF VARIOUS TYPICAL INTERSECTION TREATMENTS - REFER TO MAP FOR LOCATIONS 'TRACT NO, 157H FINAL HYDROLOGY STUOY EAST AVENUE ........ ; .~ b mak~ N E East of Etiwanda Ave. FIG. 5-29 REVISED 2/19/92 MILLER AVENUE West of 1-15 FIG. 5-30 R~D ~ ~ ~92 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAiVIONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 15, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Laura J. Bonaccorsi, Landscape Designer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF DESIGN STRATEGIES TO REDUCE MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR PUBLICLY MAINTAINED LANDSCAPING TO BE ADOPTED AS POLICY THROUGH MINUTE ACTION, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS SUBCOMMITTEE AND WITH INPUT FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION. RECOMMENDATIQN It is recommended that City Council review the attached design guidelines along with comments from the Planning Commission and adopt the measures as policy through minute action. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS In response to Proposition 218, the City has recognized a need to reduce Maintenance and Operations costs within the City's Landscape Maintenance Districts (LMD) and other publicly funded areas. On August 14, 1997, the Public Works Subcommittee revie~ved and approved the attached measures to reduce maintenance within publicly maintained parkways. These measures were presented to the Planning Commission for input on September 10, 1997. The Commission's comments are included with this report. Historically, design policies applied to LIVID plan reviews have promoted attractive, water conserving, low maintenance solutions. From time to time, these goals have been cornpromised to accommodate development objectives or other concerns determined to have more importance. The passage of Proposition 218, which requires any assessment increases CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT October 15, 1997 Page 2 within an LIVID to be put to public vote, obligates the City to take a hard look at not only what type of landscapes our districts absorb into their work programs, but also the mount and location of landscape improvements. More than ever, public works landscape areas merit careful consideration with regard to their long-term impacts on the community both financially and aesthetically. To keep operational cost increases as low as possible, adoption of the attached measures will assist staff and the development community in providing attractive, enduring landscapes which can be responsibly maintained. Additionally, these measures will promote a consistent City image while supporting the environmentally responsible goals of water conservation, reduced chemical applications and green waste reduction. This policy will be administered by the Engineering Division of the Communitiy Development Department. The attached document "Design Strategies to Reduce Maintenance Costs" (and related exhibits) identifies several design approaches which would help to anticipate and offset likely cost increases within the districts. The suggestions are directed at new and existing landscapes and also propose a public information campaign. Many of these concepts are already in practice, and staff is requesting formal support. Others, such as the suggested mandatory use of hardscape or the use of curb-adjacent side~valks, are new and perhaps controversial, but are a direct result of an immediate need to conserve resources in order to minimize assessment elections. As a significant policy decision, the issue ofhardscape is examined more closely through the attached exhibits. Although the mandatory use of hardscape will provide the most relief to the districts, its initial appearance and cost (approximately $6.00/sf for mortared rock cobble) may be of concern to the development community. With this in mind, the Subcommittee supported the recommended 40% as a target for all projects, with flexibility allowed as determined necessary from a design standpoint. For example, a transitional design ~vith less than 40% might be appropriate adjacent to a pre-existing lush landscape theme. The Public Works Subcommittee concluded that the focus of these measures is to keep the LMD's "revenue-neutral" so as to avoid assessment increases, and that overall, these measures could be implemented attractively. Upon reviewing the recommendations of the Public Works Subcommittee, the Planning Commission also reviewed the policy. The Planning Commission identified issues similar to those raised by the Public Works Subcommittee. The Commission expressed some concern regarding the 40% hardscape figure and how such quantities of hardscape would affect community image. They suggested, to the greatest extent possible, staff promote "' creative and flexible solutions to accomplish reductions in landscape (i.e. utilizing a 5' wide /-/q CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT October 15, 1997 Page 3 sidewalk instead of a 4' sidewalk to reduce the amount of decorative hardscape required.) The Commission also recommended the Planning Division have input regarding the decision making process. Staff notes the Planning Division jointly reviews landscape projects with Engineering staff. Similar to the issue raised by the Public Works Subcommittee, the Commission suggested curb-adjacent walks be adjusted to reflect guidelines as to where such walks could be best suited. The Commission suggested that consistency with established sidewalk pattems be taken into consideration. The Commission also suggested that the Policy be reviewed after a period of one year to evaluate the merit of the design strategies. Staff will bring this issue back to the Public Works Subcommittee in one year to review the effectiveness of the policy. Lastly, as a general policy issue the Commission expressed concern that using existing relationships of area per assessment unit as the control point would tend to limit certain areas of this City aesthetically. These costs are shown in the August 4, 1997 memo (attached). The Commission pointed to Landscape Maintenance District No. I as an example. In response to the general policy issue, the existing relationships of square feet maintained per assessment unit are the primary factors by which assessments are driven, and are a necessary benchmark for evaluating the impact of a project on a district. If these relationships change so as to increase the amount of landscape area "sponsored" per unit, the maintenance costs must be borne either by the City or the taxpayers through an election. To compare individual districts is not appropriate, as each district offers different benefits. LMD 2 (Victoria) and LMD 4 (Terra Vista) assessments cover more landscaping area because that is a benefit for which the residents are currently willing to pay. A homeowner paying into LMD 1 may not wish to increase the assessment to subsidize new developments with elaborate landscaping. Each district will be evaluated with regard to the number of units vs. landscaping each year and opportunities for increased landscaping can be identified if the ratio results warrant. This effort will be done in conjunction with the annual evaluation to monitor the cost benefit of the proposed design strategies and will be incorporated into the annual City Engineer's Report for each district. However, we note fixed costs to the District such as electricity and water are going to continue to increase. It is necessary to get control of landscape areas now so that the Districts are not in a position of requiring a voter election on rates each year. Both the Subcommittee meeting and the Planning Commission meeting were artended by Griffin Development, which is developing Tract 15727, the Comerpointe project. The developer requested the City explore the possibility of creating new districts which might address cost increases through a preapproved annual rate increase. Staff believes the creation of new districts will put the City in a position similar to managing localized homeowner's CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT October 15, I997 Page 4 associations. Continually forming new districts creates additional administrative time and would not be cost effective. The preferred alternative to forming additional assessment districts is the creation of homeowner's associations. This will give the residents the opportunity to control their own destiny in regards to the amount of landscaping and the amount of dollars they would be willing to put into maintaining their environment. Based on the direction of the Public Works Subcommittee and input from Planning Commission, staff recommends that the City Council approve the design strategies to reduce maintenance costs for publicly maintained landscaping. Respectfully submitted, Wil~x/a~mJ. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:LB:dlw Attachments /--/// CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: August 4,- 1997 TO: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer 5UB.IECT: HARDSCAPE In an eff.o~ to keep LMD (Landscape Maintenance District) costs in check, we are considering how much and what should go into our districts. To reduce planted and irrigated areas without sacrificing the overall landscape area needed to accommodate setbacks and grading needs, staff' is proposing a mandatory use of 40% bardscape preferab y mortared rock. Aside from the obvious benefit of.less area to maintain, the follo~ving information may be useful in further supporting the use of hardscape in the LMD's. To help stabilize the district assessments, and therefore minimize the occasions for assessment increase elections, the City rn ght employ the strategy that new development landscaping should not exceed the current ratio of landscaped area per assessment unit, listed belo~v. These figures are based upon current Engineer's Reports for the districts and have excluded parks, as locations vary and the maintenance is specialized. Further analysis could fine-tune these results, however, tilere is a basic premise that the ratios represent an average relationship for that particular district and that, although the numbers may have fiu×ed a bit ,,vifi~ every additional tract or project, tl~e basic ratio is representative of the "intensity" landscaping for a particular district over time. L~YD MALNTE~IANCE FIGURYS o COMPARISON OF SQUARE FOOTAGE CUILRENTLY ~L%.L.NTA. I~N'ED PER ASS ESS~fENT UNIT (DATA BASED ON 97-98 ENGIN EER'S REPORT) LMD # ASSESSMENT TOTAL UNITS TOTAL SF RATIO OF RATEFLhNIT* PER DISTRICT LA_NDSCAPE LANDSCAPE SF PER (FOR REFERENCE PER DISTRICT ASSESS~IENT UNIT O~NLY) I 592.21 9,981.00 1,140,836.40 I |4. SF/UNIT · 2 $422.00 4,082.27 3,889,472.40 953 SF/UNIT 3a 5413.74 8.00 6,098.40 762 SF/UNIT 3b S352.80 1,711.56 575,427.60 337 SF/UNIT 4 $252.50 4,439.50 652,528.80 147 SF/UNIT 5 5113.29 44.00 t4,374.80 327 SFfUNIT 6 5246.97 |,249.00 1,075,060.80 861 SFfUNIT 7 5307.05 1,044.00 503,553.60 482 SF/UNIT 8 5151.45 108.00 16,117.20 149 SF/UNIT * Last rate increase for all districts was in FY 93194 As an example, consider that LMD 8 is slated to increase by 300 assessment units, and the developer is proposing to add 80,000 sfof landscaping. Since the one assessment unit supports 149 sfof landscape area, 300 units each support. ing 149 sfwould allow 44,700 sfofthe proposed 80,000 sfto be landscaped ~,ithout disrupting the current ratio, and the remaining 35,300 sfcould be hardscaped or maintained by another mechanism, (i,e., an H.O.A.) This actually works out to be 44% of the landscape area, a percentage range we are considering for bardscape. Were the areas not reduced by some means, and the full 80,000 sfadded to the district, the landscape area "sponsored" by each unit would increase from 149 sf to 236 sf. This would translate into increased maintenance costs which would either have to be borne by the City or be put to the voters for approval. If we were to be really conservative (in anticipation of utility and other expected cost increases) perhaps 75% of the current area per unit should be allowed. While the 40% harriscape areas ~vill reduce maintenance costs proportionately, the percentage will not appear as substantial as plants are allowed to cascade or grow over wherever possible. To accommodate special or unusual design circumstances, the percentage could be modified at the discretion of the City Engineer. cc: Shintu Bose, Deputy City En,,ineer Walt Stickhey, Associate Engineer LARGE- PARKWAY- 30' WIDE WITH 6' CURB-ADJACENT WALK AND 40% HARDSCAPE WITH 4 MEANDERING WALK ~ AND 4 % HARDSCAPE "~ .... -/' , ~..,.-..~,._..-. -:.:::~.,:~-- , ISMALL PARKWAY - 2' WIDE" ..................... ~ _ ~.- """\"'~, _.~- _f""'~'~'.~, .............-- ...'..;<:. .. ..... _, SMALLPARLAY - 12' WIDE WITH 4' CENT~L WALK .' ~ ~I ~'~3~ AND 40% HARDS~PE AN EXAMPLE: EXCLUDING THE ROCKSCAPE IN THE MEDIAN NOSES, THE MILLIKEN AVENUE MEDIANS REPRESENT A LANDSCAPE UTILIZING 33% HARDSCAPE. ////7 Page 1 of 3 NEW DEVELOPMENT LANDSCAPES I. T~4KE LESS IN TO/1 VOID NEGATIVE FINANCIAL IMPACTS ON THE DISTRICTS A. Limit the areas LMD'S are responsible for - reduce the scope, not necessarily the area (smaller areas are often less efficient to maintain). No side yards, fewer remote Lot locations, no "freebies" (city maintenance of landscaping adjacent undeveloped land). B. Where conflicts would not occur with existing street themes, use curb-adjacent sidewalks to simpli~ and consolidate areas. Sidewalks bisecting small parkways create even smaller parkway planter areas, which require more intricate irrigation systems, limit tree size, and require smaller plants in greater quantities. Curb-adjacent walks, six feet wide, automatically reduce landscape areas by 2 feet. They also promote simplified planting and irrigation solutions which will are easier to maintain, and have more visual impact through the use of larger plant materials. Since most LMD areas are reverse front.age situations, these curb adjacent walks would not conflict with drive approaches, and can swing away from the curb occasionally to provide visual interest. See artached e.v. hibit. 2. WH~i T DOES GO INTO THE DISTRICTS SHOULD BE VERY LOaF M/tINTEN/tNCE A. Continue with the little or no turf policy for independent developments. Introduce the policy through transitions in master-planned developments with established turf themes (Tetra Vista, Victoria, and also Beautification Master Plans). Turf can be replaced with low, carpet-like groundcovers, or with rockscape. B. Discontinue acceptance of, or limit, special facilities such as project entry monumentalion, accent lighting, and other similar features. Required design amenities should be "bulletproof", constructed of enduring materials that facilitate easy maintenance. C. Continue with water conserving plant materials with greater emphasis placed on dryer palettes, which could withstand occasional lapses in water application. For example, more emphasis should be placed on the use of California natives, or equally durable materials from similar climates. D. Continue with high quality, state-of-the-art irrigation systems. These systems not only save water, but also reduce the man-hours necessary to monitor and repair the City's 300-plus irrigated landscapes, improve the longevity of landscapes through proper water application and reduce the City's exposure to liability. DESIGN STRATEGIES TO REDUCE MAINTENANCE COSTS Page 2 of 3 E. Reduce landscape areas by increasing hardscape areas. This should occur through wider sidewalks and decorative hardscape such as rockscape or pavers. Establish a minimum mount of required hardscape from an approved hardseape palette- 40% is suggested as a target requirement. If special circumstances warrant an adjustment, the hardscape may be reduced at the discretion of the City Engineer. See attachments. F. Minimize prunin°dtrimming requirements. Space plants based on mature size, and consider using shorter-lived species as in~ll. Promote natural looking landscapes. G. Continue employing best horticultural practices which encourage landscape longevity such as: · grouping plants with matched water requirements · avoiding monocultural planting schemes · design emphasis on long term appearance... short-lived interim plants giving way to maturing long-lived plants H. Continue proactive measures against vandalism and graf~ti. ;LANDSCAPES 1. IDENTIFY. EVALUATEAND REMEDYLMD AREAS WHICHARE COSTLYTO pIAINTAIN A.Program corrective measures as necessary: ·irrigation retrofits · alternate plant material · hardscape installation B. Update City Standards as necessary to keep pace with Green Industry technology and also feedback from field personnel regarding successes and failures of various design elements. IEDUCATE, INFORM AND INVOLVE THE COMMUNITY ] 1. IF WE ARE TAKING IN LESS. THEN OUR RESIDENTS WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MORE. PROVIDE SUPPORT TO THE COMMUNITY. A. Provide landscape information through newsletters, ~yers (i.e., tree care) and the City's Internet Home Page. /-//? DESIGN STRATEGIES TO REDUCE MAINTENANCE COSTS- Page 3 of 3 B. Increase street tree/community tree plantings, which green our community through private maintenance endeavors. Explore the possibility of tree sponsorships. C. Pursue the installation of Demonstration Gardens - currently proposed for the unfunded projects Central Park, Don Tapia Park, and Metrolink Park. The Fire District is also pursuing grant funds to support these projects. D. Promote.community involvement projects.