HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000/04/12 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
· ~; _ PLANNING COMMISSION
! AGENDA
WEDNESDAY APRIL 12, 2000 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. Mannerino__ Com. Stewart__ Com. Tolstoy__
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 22, 2000
Adjourned Meeting March 22, 2000
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-
controversial. They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without
discussion. If anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for
discussion.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 99-72 - RYLAND HOMES - The design review of
building elevations and detailed site plan for 78 homes within
Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912 in the Low-Medium Residential
District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan,
located on the southwest and northeast corners of East Avenue
and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way -APN: 227-131-05
and 227-141-11 and 12. Related File: Variance 99-11. Staff has
prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for
consideration.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMEN'i'
REVIEW 00-07 - FORECAST HOMES - The design review of
building elevations and detailed site plan for recorded Tract 13759
consisting of 56 single-family lots on 14 acres of land in the Low
Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the
west side of Haven Avenue, east side of Center Avenue, and north
of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way- APN: 1076-301-20
through 75. Related files: Variance 00-01 and Tree Removal
Permit 00-07. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of
environmental impacts for consideration.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
~-he following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice
their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman
and address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such
opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign
in after speaking
C. VARIANCE 99-11 - RYLAND HOMES - A request to construct
perimeter tract walls up to approximately 17 feet high where a
maximum height of 6 feet is permitted for freeway noise mitigation
purposes for Tracts 15911 and 15912 in the Low-Medium
Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda
Specific Plan, located on the southwest and northeast corners of
East Avenue and the Southern Pacific right-of-way -
APN: 227-131-05 and 227-141-11 and 012, Related File:
Development Review 99-72.
D. VARIANCE 00-01- FORECAST HOMES - A request to increase
the wall height to 12 feet along the southern boundary of recorded
Tract 13759 where the Development Code allows a maximum wall
height of 6 feet for Development Review 00-07 located on the west
side of Haven Avenue, east side of Center Avenue and north of the
Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 1076-301-20
through 75. Related files: Development Review 00-07 and Tree
Removal Permit 00-07.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 15453
LEWIS OPERATING CORP. - The request for a parcel map to
create three parcels totaling 62.71 acres within the northeast
quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The parcel map is
intended for financing and conveyance purposes only between
Lewis Operating Corp. and Kaufman and Broad
APN: 227-151-22, 32, and 34. Staff has prepared a Negative
Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 15454 -
LEWIS OPERATING CORP. - The request for a parcel map to
create four parcels totaling 102.13 acres within the southeast
quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The parcel map is
Page 2
intended for financing and conveyance purposes only between
Lewis Operating Corp. and Kaufman and Broad
APN: 227-151-26, 30, and 52. Staff has prepared a Negative
Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 15455 -
LEWIS OPERATING CORP. - The request for a parcel map to
create three parcels totaling 43.27 acres within the southeast
quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The parcel map is
intended for financing and conveyance purposes only between
Lewis Operating Corp. and Kaufman and Broad
APN: 227-151-51 and 53. Staff has prepared a Negative
Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
VI. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
H. PRELIMINARY REVIEW 00-04 - CUCAMONGA SCHOOL
DISTRICT - A courtesy review of the proposed site acquisition of
approximately 10 acres of land for an elementary school, located at
the southeast corner of Sixth Street and Hellman Avenue -APN:
210-061-05 and 06.
I. A STAFF REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO INITIATE AN
AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ADD A
MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT
VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the commission. Items
to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda.
VIII. COMMISSION BUSINESS
J. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROGRESS - Oral report
IX. ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an
ll:O0 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shaft be heard
only with the consent of the Commission.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL ADJOURN TO A
WORKSHOP IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING IN THE DE ANZA
ROOM TO DISCUSS PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 00-06 -
RANCHO CUCAMONGA RV AND SELF STORAGE
Page 3
I, Gail 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 April 6, 2000, at least 72 hours prior to the
meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Ddve,
Rancho Cucarnonga.
Page 4
VICINITY MAP
CITY HALL
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
TH E C I T Y OF
I~ANCflO CUCAMONGA
DATE: April 12, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-72 -
RYLAND HOMES - The design review of building elevations and detailed site
plan for 78 homes within Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912 in the Low-Medium
Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan,
located on the southwest and northeast corners of East Avenue and the
Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way- APN: 227-131-05 and 227-141-11 and
12. Related File: Variance 99-11.
VARIANCE 99-11 - RYLAND HOMES - A request to construct perimeter tract
walls up to approximately 17 feet high where a maximum height of 6 feet is
permitted for freeway noise mitigation purposes for Tracts 15911 and 15912 in
the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda
Specific Plan, located on the southwest and northeast corners of East Avenue
and the Southern Pacific right-of-way - APN: 227-131-05 and 227-141-11 and
12, Related Files: Development Review 99-72, Tentative Tract 15911 and
15912.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Backqround: The Planning Commission approved Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912 in
October of 1998. The current request is for a Design Review of the homes, grading, and
landscaping for both tracts.
B. Site Characteristics: The project sites are located on the east and west sides of East
Avenue and on the north and south sides of an abandoned railroad right-of-way. The Tract
15911 site (east side of East Avenue) is undeveloped land with non-native grasses and
other ruderal plant species. There are no windrows or heritage trees within the project
boundaries. The mature windrow south of the abandoned railroad will not be impacted by
the project. The Tract 15912 site (west of East Avenue) contains a single-family dwelling,
accessory structures, and a collection of inoperable vehicles and debris. There are four
stands of Eucalyptus windrows on-site which show signs of damage by borer beetles, fire,
and barbed wire and are generally in poor condition. A healthy Eucalyptus windrow stand
Items A & C
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 99-72 & VAR 99-11 - RYLAND HOMES
April' 12, 2000
Page 2
is south of the site and will not be impacted by the project. The Planning Commission
approved a Tree Removal Permit for removal of the trees with the Tentative Tract Map.
The sites slopes approximately 2 to 3 pement from north to south.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The number of lots for the Tract 15911 site is proposed to be reduced from 26 to
23 to accommodate a larger home pJan than originally anticipated. Lot size ranges from
7,895 square feet to 18,600 square feet (10,000 square foot average) and homes range
from 2,566 square feet to 3,300 square feet. Four' home plans are proposed, each with
four separate elevation types (reverse plotting and side-on garage alternatives provide
even greater variation). A pedestrian paseo with river rock treatment (Iow maintenance) is
provided at the east side of Tract 15911 site connecting to a community horse trail. The
home designs are the same as were approved for Tract 15798 (currently being
constructed near the southwest corner of the Route 30 and 1-15 Freeways) and exhibit a
high level of design integrity.
B. Variance: The Tentative Tract Maps were conditionally approved by the Planning
Commission in October 1998. As environmental mitigation for freeway traffic noise, high
sound walls are required. The highest sound walls will be along the south and east sides
of the Tract 15911 site (northeast corner of Southern Pacific Railroad/East Avenue). The
wall along the south side is as high as 16 feet overall (retaining wall plus free standing wall
above) and along the east edge as high as 21 feet. The maximum allowed wall height in
Rancho Cucamonga is 6 feet; hence, a Variance is necessary. Staff believes that findings
can be made for approval of the Variance given the unique location of the sites so near the
1-15 Freeway (which is substantially higher than the project site), that strict enforcement of
the 6-foot height limit would preclude development of the site in accordance with the land
use designation since the high walls are necessary to comply with General
Plan/Development Code residential noise level criteria, and the excessive wall height will
not have a demonstrable negative visual impact. The height of the walls are proposed to
be softened by a combined split face/fluted block design with vine planting along the base
trained to climb the walls.
C. Desiqn Review Committee: The Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Coleman) reviewed the
project on February 29, 2000, and recommended approval with conditions. Refer to the
attached Design Review Action Agenda for further details (Exhibit H).
D. Technical Review Committee: The Grading and Technical Review Committees have
reviewed the project and recommend approval subject to conditions outlined in the
attached Resolution of Approval.
E. Environmental Assessment: The applicant has completed Part I of the Initial Study and
staff completed Part II (the Environmental Checklist). It was found that local
environmental conditions have not changed appreciably since the tracts were approved in
October of 1998. In brief, various drainage, biological, traffic, and noise issues impact the
site. Mitigation measures for these issues were adopted by the Commission with tract
approval and these mitigation measures are also included in the attached Resolution of
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 99-72 & VAR 99-11 - RYLAND HOMES
April 12, 2000
Page 3
Approval. Staff has determined that, with these mitigation measures, there would not be a
significant adverse impact upon the environment as a result of this project. ' Staff
recommends issuance of a Mitigated 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 property owners
within a 300-foot radius of the project site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development
Review 99-72 and Variance 99-11 through adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval
with Conditions and issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Respectfully submitted,
City Planner
BB:BLC:mlg
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit"C" - Grading Plan
Exhibit"D" - Landscape Plan
Exhibit "E" - Floor Plans
Exhibit "F" Elevations
Exhibit "G" - Initial Study Parts I and II
Exhibit "H" - Design Review Action Agenda dated February 29, 2000
Resolution of Approval DR 99-72
Resolution of Approval VAR 99-11
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15912
SITE UTILIZATION AND
~ASTER CIRCULATION pLAN
HOMETOWN II "~'
TRACT NO. 15911
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC,
RAN~UCAMONGA, CA.
HOMETOWN II I~.~:~
TRACT NO. 15912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. ~ ~ ..:~ '~ ~'~' .'~:'" ~ ~ -
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. ~-
~Tract
15911
]AI~ONEPILA~STUCCOWALL B IWOOO~NCE ~IsPLI~A~WAL~O~OWALL
................... LANDSCAPE PLAN
~Tract 15911
RYLAND HOMES
PILASTERS
__STUCCO PERIMETER
..... ~ ...... LANDSCAPE SECTIONS
AND ELEVATIONS
~ Tract 15912
~ RYLAND HOMES
............... LANDSCAPE PLAN ,~
OPT. BEDROOM
FLOOR PLAN 1
PLAN 1
4BR/3BA
2566 S,F.
DESIGN REVEW 8ET
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 18912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
OPT. BEDROOM 4 & 5
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
I PLAN 2
HOMETOWN II 4BR/38A
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912 3093 S.F.
RYLAND ~IOME$ OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 2
4BR/3BA
II
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
CUCAMONGA, CA.
FIRST FLOOR PLAN A
TRACT NO. 15911AND 15912 PLAN 2-1 (INSIDE)
RYLAHD HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. so9s S.F.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA, '~o... '
L~U~RY
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
HOMETOWN II
PLAN 2'1 (INSIDE}
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912 4BR/3RA
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. 3093 S.P.
R&NCHO4~AMONGA, CA.
BEDROOM 5 OPTION
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 2'0 (OUTSIDE)
HOMETOWN II 4BR,SRA
RYLANDTRACT NO. HOME8 159110F AND CALIFORNIA, 15912 INC. 3093 S,F.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
SECOND FLOOR PLAN A
DESI~ REVI~ 8ET
HOMETOWN J
II PLAN 2"0 (OUTSIDE)
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912 4BR/3RA coN'r,c~,
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. 3093 S.F. ~,~.,,,,..,,~..o~ ,-=-,, -
RANCH~)CAMONGA, CA.
FIRST FLOOR PLAN 3
PLAN 3
SBR/3BA
3612 $.F..
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911ANO 18912 ,,~,,,,o,,~z,~,~
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. ='"~" .~"" ....
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 3
5BR/3BA
TRACT NO. 1S911 AND 1S912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
IPLAN 3'0
58R/3BA
3612 S.F.
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
OPTION BEDROOM 4
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 3'O (OUTSIDE)
5ER/3BA
3812 8.F.,
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
RANCH~CAMONOA, CA.
FIRST FLOOR PLAN ALTERNATE GARAGE
PLAN 4 I PLAN 4'0 ~OUTS~DE~
5BR/2.SBA
3300 S.F.
DESIGN REYIEW 8ET
HOMETOWN II '~-'~"'~
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. "'"~ ....
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
SECOND FLOOR PLAN W/ ALTERNATE GARAGE
PLAN 4-0
IPLAH 4
5BR/2.$BA
3300 S,F.
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
SYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA,/NC.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
PLAN 1
HOMETOWN II --"----""=''~--
TRACT NO. 15011 AND 15912 ="'"~' ~'"'~'-*'
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. :~ '
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
ROOF PLAN
PLAN
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA,
ANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
-- '- ................... ,,.
COUNTRY TRADITIOHAL ~ 2A HEARTLAND
' '"". ~ - ,~-""' ·" ~.~ - -~'~ ...... -~ I~ ' ,,?~. ,c~.
. .~,s · ,, .. ~'~ . ,. , .,, , , ~ ..... ~ : ~ ~ ~"~
PLAN 2
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911AND 15912
RYLAND HOME8 OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
.... .,,~.. ,., ,,,~,,,.
~ANTA BARBARA 2C ~ CRAFTBMAN 2D
PLAN 2-1 & 2-0
HOMETOWN II
TRACT ~0, 16911 AND 18912 ~m'~
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC,
LEFT ELEVATION 28 REAR ELEVATION 28
ROOF PLAN B NIGHT ELEVATION 2B
PLAN 2 ~FLA. t*~ '~ 2-0 SIM~LAR~
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. ~"'"-"*"~'-*'~"
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
~- ~, ..,~' } ~. ~.~"
~~~g~ .... ~ ...........................
PLAN
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC,
NCHO CUCAMONQA,
' ....... ,,.:, .',~j , ,~r._ ~_. ,,
:::,;,,,,,,,,,BBB~ ~ ~]~ ,,,, ~ ~_~
- ~ ...... . ~ ~,,~, ~ % ~~ ...........................
SANTA BARBARA 3C CRAFTSMAN
PLAN 3-0
HOMETOWN
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912 ~;~"~"
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CA.
LEd 3C REAR 3C
ROOF PLAN 3C ~ RIGHT 3C
PLAN 3 (PLAN 3-0 S~M~LAR~
DESX~ REVlEW 8~r
HOMETOWN
"
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
'RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. """"*"'"~'~'-~'"
CUCAMONGAt CA.
-- ~-:.i~ ' .~' ~ '~' ,",'' ....... '.'" ,,:--~:- , -,,,':~.-~-..
~ ,
PLAN 4 PLAN
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
RYLAND HOME6 OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
LEFT 4D REAR 4D
ROOF PLAN 4D RIGHT 4D
PLAN 4 (PLAN 4-0 SIMILAR)
HOMETOWN II
TRACT NO. 15911 AND 15912
RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
CUCAMONGA, CA.
ENVIRONMENTAL
· -, ....... INFORMATION FORM
=~....~oc..~. ......... .. ..... (Part I -.Initial Study)
Planning DiW$ion
(g09) 477-2750
The purpose' of this form is to inform the City of the basic .c..ompo.ne. nts O[.!.he pr~S.ed
project so that the City may review the project pursuant to C~ pohc,es, ~rd,nag~a~?nd
guidelines; the California Environmental QUalityAct; and the C~ty's RUles and PrOC~aa~es
to Implement CEQA. It is important that the information requested in this applic~On be
provided in full.' :'.::' ::: :'' '" :... :.': *'":;? '::i ::'~.:;!;:!:~:~::;iiiii?:i~!i:i~:'!~i::i:i::
INCOMPLETE APPLICA TIONS W~LL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to enaure
that the application is complete at the time of submittal: Cily staff will not be available to pedorm work required to provide missing
information.
Application Number for the project to which this form pertains:
Project Title: Tract Nos. 15911 and 15912
eme&Addres$ofpmjectowner(s): Ryland Homes of California, Inc.
5373 Innovation Drive, Suite 300, San Diego, CA 92128
Name&AddressofdeveloperorprejectsponsoK Ryland Homes of California, Inc.
15373 Innovation Drive, Suite 300, San Diego, CA 92128
Contact Person & Address: Carlos F. Garcia, Jr., Forward planner
TelephonaNumber. (619) 675-0800 phone, (619) 675-0060 fax
Name & Address of person prepa#ng this form (if different from above): N/A .... . ....
Number. N/A
· -:*'~ *Information indicated bf*asterisk (°) is nt~ required of non-construction CUP's unless otherwise*requestod by staff. ....
Provide s full scale (8-1/2 x 1 I) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the
site boundaries.
2) Provide e set of color photographs which show representative views ~ the site from the north, south, east and weel,*
views into and fr~m the site from the primary access points which sen/e the site; and representative views of significant
features frpn~ the site. Include · map showing tocaUon of each photograph.
Will be provided at full submittal
3) Project Location (doscribe): The project consists of two tracts located on th~ east and
west sides of East Avenue, north of Base Line Road. Tract No. 15911 lies on the
east side of East Avenue, north of the SPRR right-of-way. Tract No. 15912'is
diagonally adjacent to the southeast,'oh-.the we~t side of East Avenue and the
south sl~e o~ the aDan~one~ SPF~K.
4) Assosso~s Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary):
227-141-011, -012; 227-131-005
'5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.): 27.01 gross acres total
(16.97 acres in Tract No. 15911 and 10.04 acres in Tract No. 15912)
'6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications):
20.82 net acres total
(12.96 acres 'in Tract NO. 15911 and 7.86 acres in Tract No. 15912)
7) Desc~fbe any proposed generel plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet
if necossaty:
None known
8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga end other governmental
agencies in order to fully implement the projecL'
City of Rancho Cucamonga -- building permits, encroachment permit, variance (wall)
Caltrans -- encroachment permit
Cucamonga County Water District -- sewer and water connections
INITSTD1.WPD - 4/96
9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the prejecl including information on topography, soil stability, plants
and animals, mature trees, trails and macls, dreinage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any exisEng structures on site
'including age and condition) and the use of the stfuclures.-..4ttach photographs of significant features described. In addition,
site all sources of infon'nation (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological aun/eys, baf~c studies):
The site is vacant and generally level, wi~h some gently rolling surface relief
and a slight slope to the south. Surrounding land uses include the 1-15 Freeway
to the east and s'outh, single family dwelliEgs to the' north and along East Avenue,
a plant nursery to the west, and vacant land. ~he abandoned SPRR right-of-waY
abuts the property. Existing eucalyptus windrows w, est of East Avenue are in poor
condition. There is no other significant vegetation on the site. Technical studies
(biological, geotechnical, hydrological) were prepared in connection with the
tentative maps for the property.
10) Desc~be the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Site all souroes of information (books, published reports end
oral history): .....
The site has no known cultural/historical resources or sensitivity.
11) DescribeanynoisesoureesandtheirlevelsthatpQwaffectthesite(aircroft.madwayn°ise'etc')andh°wtheywilleffecf
proposed uses:
Interstate 15 abuts the southeast corner of Tract No. 15911, atop a berm .
approximately 25-30 feet in height. East Avenue passes through the development.
The project incorporates sound walls (17 feet high' at 1-15, 6-11 feet high along
the former SPP~R right-of-way, a~d 6 feet high elsewhere at site perimeter).
INITb'r'DI.WPD - 4/96 /~ Page a ....
12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of uffimate use which
will result from the prosed project. Indicate ff there are preposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur
..... with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(a).if necessary: ..: :..
The project is a development of 78 single fabily detached homes ranging in size
'from 2,566 to 3,618 sq. ft. ~of livable area. The previously approved tract
maps established lot sizes ranging from 8,625 to 15,247 sq. ft. ;~ 1.88-acre
interim detention basin for control of drainage flows will also be constructed
as part of the project. '
13) Describethesurreundingpmperties~inc~udinginf~rmati~n~np~antsandanima~sandanycu~ture~°hist~rica~rscanloa~pects~
Indicate the type of land use (residential, commemial, etc.), inten$i~y of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops,
departreent stores, etc.)and $cate of development (height, frontage, setback, rear ya~, etc.): ....
Single family dwellings exist on East Avenue west and north of'the site, and
to the north along Victoria Avenue. other adjacent uses include the 1-15
Freeway, abandoned SPRR right~6f~way, a plant nursery, and vacant land.
14) Wi~~thepr~p~sedprejectchangethepattern~sca~e~rcharecter~fthesurr~undinggenere~~rea~fthepr~ject?-
The project will provide relatively large hc~es on large lots (average
10,000+ sq. ft.) in keeping with the planned character of the area.
INITSTD1.WPD - 4/96 Page 4'
Indicate the type of short-tetra and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amount. How w~ll these noise levels
affect adjacent proper;les and on-site uses· What methods of sound proofing ara proposed?
No unusual noise generation is anticipated. Ail proposed uses'are single
family residential.
'1~ Indicateproposed mmovalsan~ormplacementsofmatum or$cenictmes:
Existing eucalyptus windrows on the property west of East Avenue are in poor
condition and will be removed. Tree Removal Permit 98-16 was approved in conneution
with the tentative map. Replacement plantings are included in the project.
17) indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains:
The project includes an interim stormwater detention basin. Controlled outflows
from the onsite basin will discharge to storm drain improvements in East Avenue.
Existing flows to Caltrans drainage facilities from the easternmost portion of
the property will be redirected to project storm drains as a result of the project.
18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Affachment A for usage estimates). For fudher clarification, please contact
the Cucamonga County Water District at 987-2591.
a. Residential(gal'day) 461,800 qpd Peek use (gaUDay) 93 ~600 qpd
bl ' Commemiak;nd. (gal~day/ac) N/A Peak use (ga~rn#~'ac)
19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ~ Septic Tank X Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, a~tach
percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See
Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clatfflcation, please contact the Cucamonga County Water Disbfcf at 987-2591.
a. Residential (gaYday) 21 ,o60 gl:,d
b. Commetcia~nd. (gal~day/ac) N/A
20) Number of residen§al units:
~)¢tached (indicate range of paroel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size:
78 single family detached dwellings
Lot size~ range from 8,625 to 15,247 sq. ft.
Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): .....
N/A ......
21) Anticipated ~ange of sale pdces and/or rents:
Sale Pdce(s) $. 280,000 t9 $ 350,000
Rent (per month) $. N/A to $.
Speci~ number of bedreoms by un~.~pe:
Single family units, 4 to 6 bedrooms
Average approximately 4.7 bedrooms per unit
2~ Indicateantidpatedhouseholds~ebyunit~pe:
Unknown, estimated average 3-4
24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appreptfete School
Districts as shown in Attachment B:
35 (0.45 students/DU)
a. Elementaq,:
16 [0,21 students/DU)
b. Junior High:
c. SeniorHigh 16 (0.20 students/DU)
COMMERCIAL. INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS
25) De$c#betype~fuse(s)andrnaj~rfuncti~n($)~fc~mrnercia~~industda~~rin$tituti~na~uses: N/A
26) Total floor area of commereial, industdal, or institutional uses by type:
N/A
Indicate hou~ of operation:
28) Numberof employees: Total: N/A
.Maximum Shift:
Time of Maximum Shift:
29) Pmvidebreakdownofanticipatedj°bclassificati°ns'includingwageandsalaryranges'aswellasanindicationOftherate
of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessaO'):
NIA '
30) Estimation of the number of worke= to be hired that currently reside in the City:
N/A
I) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the soupce, type and amount of air poflution emissions. (Data should be
ve~fied through the South Coast Air Quafity Management Disttfct, at (818) 572..6283):
32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their abilip/to provfde
adequate service to the proposed project? If $o, please indicate their response.
Agencies have been contacted and will-serve arrangements are being concluded.
33) In the known history of this propeK% has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic mate~fals?
Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but am not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and
-., ,'. heKoicides; fu.els, oils, ~soivents, and otherflammable liquids and gases.. Also.note underground storage of any of the above.
Please list the mate~fals and descdbe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the prepe~'ty, as well as the dates of use, ff
known. '
None kTtOWT~
34) i4/ill the praposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic
materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above ? If yes provide an inventory of all such matotfel$ to be
used and preposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along wilh the storage and shipment areas, she#be
shown and labeled on the application plans.
Not applicable
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the a~ached exhibits present the data end information required for
adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability, t~t,t~e facts, statements, and information presented ere tnJe end
COtTect tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further unj ~rst~d that additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City/f a~~nga/ ......
e,e- $igne,ure:
· ' Title: F~] ~p~ne,~/
INITSTD1.WPD - 4/g6 p~ge 8 ,'
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1. Project File: Development Review 99-72
2. Related Files:Tentative Tract Nos. 15911, 15912, and Variance 99-11
3. Description of Project:
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-72 - RYLAND HOMES - The design review of building
elevations and detailed site plan for 78 homes within Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912
in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda
Specific Plan, located on the southwest and northeast corners of East Avenue and the
Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way- APN: 227-131-05 and 227-141-11 and 12.
4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Ryland Homes
15373 Innovation Drive, Suite 300
San Diego, CA 92128
5. General Plan Designation: Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre)
6. Zoning: Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda
Specific Plan
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The sites are surrounded by existing homes,
vacant land, the 1-15 Freeway, and an abandoned railroad right-of-way.
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, Associate Planner
(909) 477-2750
t0. Other agencies whose approval is required: None
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes 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 (x) Transportation/Circulation (x) Public Services
( ) Population and Housing (x) Biological Resources (x) Utilities and Service Systems
(x) Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Aesthetics
(x) Water ( ) Hazards
( ) Air Quality (x) Noise ( ) Cultural Resources
( ) Mandatory Findin~ls of Significance ( ) Recreation
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
(x) 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.
~rent I'e Count
Associate Planner
March 15, 2000
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 proposah
a) Conflict with general plan designation or ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
zoning?
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project?
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
vicinity?
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
established community?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 3
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
Comments:
a) Perimeter tract walls as high as 17 feet are required to mitigate freeway noise.
The maximum allowed wall height is 6 feet. Therefore, a Variance application is
necessary to address excessive wall height. The applicant has submitted a
Variance for the walls. The visual impact of the wails is mitigated by project
design which includes colored split faced block with fluted block bands.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposah
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local ( ) (x)
population projections?
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either ( ) (x)
directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable ( ) (x)
housing?
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable ( ) ( ) (x) ( )
soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
f) The project involves grading to develop residential pad sites and streets. The
topography of the sites will be altered to allow the lots to drain to the new public
streets, where runoff will be conveyed to approved drainage facilities. The
design of the project site and construction of the proposed grading and
structures shall follow the recommendations of the soils engineer and shall
comply with the current building standards and codes at the time of construction.
The recommendations of the Final Soils Engineering Investigation Report will be
incorporated into the project design with pertinent information noted on the final
Grading Plan which will be reviewed and approved by the Building Official prior
to issuance of grading permits.
!
!
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 4
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
4. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, ( ) (x) ( ) ( )
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
b) Exposure of people or property to water related ( ) (x) ( ) ( )
hazards such as flooding?
c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
of surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
water body?
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction ( ) (x) ( ) ( )
of water movements?
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
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? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
groundwater otherwise available for public
water supplies?
Comments:
a) This project relies upon the construction of a proposed interim water detention
basin located outside of the project boundaries. The basin is proposed on a 10+
acre site within Tentative Tract 15912. A drainage study was prepared which
analyzes the drainage impacts and the adequacy of the proposed basin to serve
the project sites. Conditions of approval currently require Tentative Tract
15911 to provide adequate drainage facilities to serve the development.
Construction and availability of an interim water detention basin within
Tentative Tract 15912 is required per tract conditions. The proposed water
detention basin is required to be completed prior to occupancy. With
mitigation the impact is not considered significant.
b) The project is located in an area where the flood hazards are undetermined
(Zone D). Since the project is south of both the Victoria Basin and the future
Route 30 Freeway, it is expected the developer will be able to process a
redesignation to Zone X through FEMA. The Conditions of Approval for
Tentative Tract 15911 require the developer to obtain a re-designation
through FEMA to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
(
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 5
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitigation $igai~canl No
e) The southeastern portion of the Tentative Tract 15911 site presently drains to a
culvert that crosses under the,l-15 freeway. The topography of the site will be
altered to allow the lots to drain to the new public streets, where runoff will be
conveyed to approved drainage facilities. Surface runoff currently reaching the
site from off site areas will be conveyed to approved drainage facilities which will
be designed to handle the flows. The impact is not considered significant.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to ( ) (x)
an existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) (x)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, ( ) (x)
or cause any change in climate?
d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) (x) ( ) ( )
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
nearby uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or ( ) (x) ( ) ( )
bicyclists?
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
alternative transportation (e.g,, bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
a) The project will not increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion in excess of
projections for the adopted land use, for which the street widths were evaluated
at build-out conditions. The proposed density is less than the density range for
the property. The intersection of East Avenue and Victoria Street handles
significant peak hour traffic from the nearby high school. The conditions of
approval for Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912 include the preparation of a
Traffic Signal Study and mitigation to include provisions for installation of
a traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Victoria Street. The
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 6
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
project will be required to install frontage street improvements in their
ultimate configuration, per City Ordinance, and to pay Transportation
Development Fees. With mitigation the impact is not considered significant.
b) The circulation design features conform with our Street Design, Driveway, and
Intersection Line-of-Sight policies.
e) The project involves creating residential lots which will generate additional
pedestrian trips, including pedestrian trips to the nearby Etiwanda High School
on Victoria Street. The project design includes sidewalks and Class II bike lanes
along the East Avenue frontage; however, there will be a narrow, unimproved
gap on East Avenue between the project frontage and Victoria Street. In order
to provide for the safety of pedestrians traveling between the project and
the nearby school, the developer shall install a temporary asphalt sidewalk
from the northern boundary of the project to Victoria Street to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or ( ) (x)
their habitats (including, but not limited to:
plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)?
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, (x) ( )
eucalyptus windrow, etc.)?
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., ( ) (x)
eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and ( ) (x)
vernal pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) (x)
Comments:
b) The project involves removing two large shrubs along the northern boundary of
Tract 15911. The shrubs were identified in the biological report addendum
(Thomas Olsen Associates - July 10, 1998), as a Siberian elm, (Ulmus pumila),
and a blue elderberry shrub, (Sambucus mexicana). The shrubs are non-native
species and do not have historical, cultural, or scenic value. The shrubs do not
represent significant bird or wildlife resources. The removal of the shrubs is not
considered to be a significant impact. The project will also cause removal of 4
mature windrows on site. An arborist report by Thomas Olsen Associates dated
May 15, 1998, indicates the 4 mature windrows have suffered numerous losses
and show marked signs of borer beetle infestation or damage from other
sources (fire and barbed wire). None of the 4 mature windrows has a realistic
probability of recovery; nor do they have significant habitat value or wind-control
value in their present condition. The 4 windrows are not designated as existing
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 7
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: signpost Mitigation Significant No
windbreaks to be preserved in Figure 5-13 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. A
Tree Removal Permit (TRP 98-16) was approved by the Planning Commission
. with Tentative Tract 15912 and a condition of approval requires replacement
windrows of 15 gallon Eucalyptus maculata (spotted gum), planted 8- foot
on center, to mitigate the loss of the mature windrows. With mitigation the
impact is not considered significant.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
plans?
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
inefficient manner?
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
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 ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or
radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
health hazard?
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
potential health hazards?
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
brush, grass, or trees?
t 0. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) (x) ( ) ( )
Comments:
b) The project's eastern boundary borders the 1-15 Freeway and the Base Line
Road 1-15 off-ramp. The City's General Plan indicates projected noise levels
exceeding 65 LDN. A noise study was prepared for the project to determine the
noise exposure and necessary mitigation measures for development of the site.
/
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 8
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than
The study indicates a noise barrier ranging in height from 6 feet to 17 feet
in height will be necessary to mitigate freeway noise. High split faced
masonry walls are proposed consistent with noise study
recommendations. In addition, interior noise levels will be mitigated
through the imposition of a "Windows Closed" condition with a means of
mechanical ventilation and upgraded windows, A final acoustical analysis
shall be required prior to obtaining building permits for the project, The
design of the project shall follow the recommendations and mitigation
measures of the acoustical engineer, and shall comply with the current
building standards and codes at the time of construction. With mitigation,
the impact is not considered significant.
'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? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Schools? (x) ( ) ( )
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including ( ) ( ) (x)
roads?
e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
c) During review of the Tentative Tract Maps, the Etiwanda and Chaffey High
School Districts submitted correspondence indicating existing schools that
would serve this project are already at or above capacity. The Districts state
mitigation beyond the state statutory fees will be needed. A condition of
approval for Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912 requires the developer to
execute an agreement with the Districts to provide the additional mitigation or to
provide full mitigation. Full mitigation may be accomplished by means of a
requirement to form, or participate in an existing, Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District for school facilities.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies
or substantial alterations to the fo/lowing utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution ( ) ( ) (x)
facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 9
Issues and Supporting Info~'mation Sources: Significant Mitigation Significant No
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (x) 0
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
e) The project will not result in substantial alterations to the master plan of storm
drainage by proposing to alter the location of interim basins which are required
until the Regional Mainline facilities are installed by the San Bernardino County
Flood Control District. The drainage approach shall be justified in the preliminary
drainage report and a final drainage study will be required prior to map
recordation.
13, AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
effect?
c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
14, CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
which would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
the potential impact area?
15, RECREATION, Would the proposak
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
regional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 10
Issues and Supporting information Sources: Potentially Unless 'man
'16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have ( ) ( ) (x)
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 important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential ( ) ( ) (x)
to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental goals? (A short-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.)
c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts ( ) ( ) (x)
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 ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
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 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):
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 11
(x) General Plan EIR
(Certified April 6, 1981)
(x) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
(x) Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR
(SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983)
(x) Negative Declarations for Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912 approved by the
Planning Commission October 14, 1998
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES:
1) A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review ahd approval prior to
the issuance of building permits. The acoustical report shall evaluate exterior noise
impacts from the 1-15 Freeway. The acoustical report shall address the access trail
designated as Lot A and provide recommendations for noise attenuation return walls. The
design of the project shall comply with recommendations in the report.
2) A noise barrier ranging in height from 6 feet to 17 feet in height will be necessary to
mitigate freeway noise. The noise barrier may be a combination of berming and masonry
walls. In addition, interior noise levels shall be mitigated through the imposition of a
"Windows Closed" condition by the means of mechanical ventilation and upgraded
windows.
3) Construct a 6-foot wide paved shoulder on the east and west sides of East Avenue from
this development to Victoria Street, within existing rights-of-way.
4) Transportation Development Fees shall be paid prior to final map approval in anticipation
of a City project to install a traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Victoria
Street.
5) Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 8 Master Plan Storm Drain facilities to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer shall receive credit for the cost of
permanent master plan facilities up to the amount of the related drainage fees in effect at
the time reimbursement is requested and shall be reimbursed for excess costs from future
fee collection in accordance with City policy. 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.
6) Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Interim Master Basin No. 5 as follows, justified by a final
drainage report approved by the City Engineer:
a) Provide an ultimate design for the basin to serve the entire Etiwanda/San Sevaine
Area 8 developed tributary area north of Base Line Road.
b) Provide for maintenance vehicle access in the basin design.
c) Install sufficient capacity to mitigate the increased runoff from this development, with
an outlet system capable of handling the ultimate basin design (entire tributary area)
with a minimum amount of modification as incremental development occurs.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DR99-72 - Ryland Homes Page 12
d) An assessment district shall be formed for maintenance of the detention basin or a
maintenance agreement with a refundable deposit shall be executed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing private
maintenance of the facility, but providing the City with the right of access to maintain
the facility if private maintenance is insufficient and allowing the City to assess those
costs to the developer. Said agreement shall be recorded to run with the property.
e) Basin shall be completed and operational prior to the issuance of building permits.
f) The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the proportionate
cost of the land and ultimate basin related facilities (outlet, etc.) from future
development using the basin. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement
agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City,
all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate.
7) 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. ^ 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) shall be issued by
FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first.
8) The developer shall provide replacement windrows of 15-gallon Eucalyptus maculata
(spotted gum), planted 8 feet on center, pursuant to the approved landscape plan, prior to
occupancy.
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.
Signature: Date:
Print Name and Title:
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Brent Le Count February 29, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-72 - RYLAND HOMES-
The proposed construction of 78 homes within Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912 in the
Low-Medium District (4 to 8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the
southwest and northeast corners of East Avenue and the Southern Pacific right-of-way - APN: 227-
131-005 and 227-141-011 and 012, Related Files: Variance 99-11, Tentative Tract 15911 and
15912.
Design Parameters: The Tentative Tract Maps were approved by the Planning Commission in
October 1998. As environmental mitigation for freeway traffic noise, high sound walls are required.
The highest sound walls will be along the south and east sides of the Tract 15911 site (northeast
corner of SPRPJEast Avenue). The wall along the south side as high as 16 feet overall (retaining
wall plus free standing wall above) and along the east edge as high as 21 feet. The applicant has
submitted a request for a Variance (Variance 99-11) for the excessive wall height. The height of
the walls is proposed to be softened by a combined split face/fluted block design with vine planting
along the base trained to climb the walls.
The number of lots for the Tract 15911 site is proposed to be reduced from 26 to 23 to
accommodate a larger home plan than originally anticipated. Lot sizes range from 7,895 square
feet to 18,600 square feet (10,000 square foot average) and homes range from 2,566 square feet
to 3,300 square feet. Four home plans are proposed, each with four separate elevation types
(reverse plotting and side-on garage alternatives provide even greater variation). A pedestrian
paseo with river rock treatment (Iow maintenance) is provided at the east side of Tract 15911 site
connecting to a community horse trail.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion
regarding this project:
1. The applicant has been working diligently with staff to resolve major issues. There are no
remaining outstanding major issues. The home designs are the same as were approved
for Tract 15798 (near the southwest corner of the Route 30 and 1-15 Freeways) and
exhibit a high level of design integrity.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. The approved colors for Ryland Homes include a deep purple paint that is used extensively
on siding of certain elevations. The Committee should carefully review the proposed color
samples, and visit their existing homes in Tract 15798 (near the southwest corner of the
Route 30 and 1-15 Freeways).
2. The East Avenue Parkway walls (stone pilaster with stucco walls and river rock planters) for
Tract 15912 site should have regularly spaced indents similar to or matching that of Tract
15911.
3. Rear yard fencing visible from public streets (at top of slope) shall be decorative masonry.
4. Rip-rap application for detention basin shall be as naturalized as possible.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DR 99-72 - RYLAND HOMES
February 29, 2000
Page 2
5. Retaining walls used in rear yard areas shall be decorative masonry and shall have vine
planting at top of wall to cascade down over walls.
6. The developer proposes split face block walls along the east and south tract boundaries
because it requires less maintenance. The north tract wall is proposed as stucco. The
Committee should discuss whether it is acceptable to have a wall material transition from
stucco to split face at the southwest and northeast corners of Tract 15911 (northeast corner
of East Avenue and SPRR). The established theme for the East Avenue Parkway wall is
stucco with stone pilasters. Stone covered pilasters are proposed at transition points.
7. Adjust pad elevations, wall heights, and slopes for lots along East Avenue to avoid
excessively high retaining walls (such as Lots 1, 2, and 3 in Tract 15912 and Lots 2 and 33
in Tract 15911).
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Fieldstone veneer shall be natural river rock as opposed to a manufactured product. The
developer mistakenly used manufactured river rock on Tract 15798 (near the southwest
corner of the Route 30 and 1-15 Freeways); however, staff has issued a correction to remove
and replace with authentic river rock. Other types of stone veneers may be manufactured.
2. All walls visible from or facing a street shall be decorative masonry.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval with the above comments.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee recommends approval subject to staff's comments and the following:
1. Provide a two-tone color scheme with the darker color on the base to mitigate visual impact of
excessively high walls along the south and east boundaries of Tract 15911.
2. Provide a single-story home plotting along the north side of Tract 15911 to the degree possible.
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Brent Le Count
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.: Development Review 99-72 Public Review Period Closes: April 12, 2000
Project Name: Project Applicant: Ryland Homes
Project Location (also see attached map)'. Located on the southwest and northeast corners of East Avenue
and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way -APN: 227-131-05 and 227-141-11 and 12.
Project Description: The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 78 homes within
Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912 in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the
Etiwanda Specific Plan. Related File: Variance 99-11.
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 clearly 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.
April 12, 2000
Date of Determination Adopted By
!
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 99-72, THE DESIGN REVIEW FOR 78 HOMES WITHIN
TENTATIVE TRACTS 15911 AND 15912, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST
AND NORTHEAST CORNERS OF EAST AVENUE AND THE SOUTHERN
PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT, (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ARCE) AND MAKING FINDINGS
IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-131-05 and 227-141-11 and 12.
A. Recitals.
1. Ryland Homes has filed an application for the approval of Development Review
No. 99-72, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Development Review request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 14th day of October 1998, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a meeting and approved Tentative Tracts 15911 and 15912 which are the
sites of the current application.
3. On the 12th day of April 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date.
4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced meeting on April 12, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission
hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property located on both sides of East Avenue on the
north and south sides of an abandoned Southern Pacific railroad right-of-way with a street frontage
of 1,240 feet on East Avenue and lot depth of 600 to 1,300 feet and is presently vacant 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 vacant land and the 1-15 Freeway, the property
to the east is vacant and the 1-15 Freeway, and the property to the west is vacant and developed
with single family homes: and
c. The proposed home plans are the same as were recently approved for Tract 15798
and exhibit a high level of design integrity; and
d. The General Plan and the Etiwanda Specific Plan designate a public Community
Trail off-site within the railroad easement to the south of the Tract 15911 site; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 99-72- RYLAND HOMES
Apd112,2000
Page 2
e. The property is one block away from Etiwanda High School and approximately two
blocks away from Etiwanda Intermediate School and will generate additional traffic and school
children that will use East Avenue and Victoria Street; and
f. High sound walls are proposed which will reduce noise from the I-1§ Freeway for
future residents; and
g. The excessive height of the sound walls will be mitigated by using split faced and
fluted block and a two toned color scheme; and
h. The frontage improvements include construction of the East Avenue Parkway wall
consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and
i. Environmental impacts related to drainage, traffic, and noise will be mitigated to
a level of less than significant.
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
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 upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration, 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 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
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 certain 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.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 99-72 - RYLAND HOMES
April12,2000
Page 3
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-l-d) of Title 14 of the Califomia 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.
Planninq Division:
1 ) The East Avenue Parkway walls (stone pilastei' with stucco walls and
dver rock planters) for Tract 15912 site shall have regularly spaced
indents similar to or matching that of Tract 15911. The overall design
of the wall shall be per the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
2) Rear yard fencing visible from public streets (at top of slope) shall be
decorative masonry.
3) Rip-rap application for detention basin shall be as naturalized as
possible.
4) Retaining walls used in rear yard areas shall be decorative masonry
and shall have vine planting at top of wail to cascade down over walls.
5) Adjust pad elevations, wall heights, and slopes for lots along East
Avenue to avoid excessively high retaining walls (such as Lots 1, 2,
and 3 in Tract 15912 and Lots 2 and 33 in Tract 15911).
6) Fieldstone veneer shall be natural river rock as opposed to a
manufactured product. Other types of stone veneers may be
manufactured.
7) All walls visible from or facing a street shall be decorative masonry.
8) Provide a two-tone color scheme with the darker color on the base to
mitigate visual impact of excessively high walls along the south and
east boundaries of Tract 15911.
9)Provide a single-story home plotting along the north side of Tract 15911
to the degree possible.
10) Lot 2 of the Tract 15911 site shall have a terraced planter in rear yard
to reduce overall height of combined retaining wall/garden wall along
west property line.
/
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 99-72 - RYLAND HOMES
April12,2000
Page 4
11) Lower pad elevations along south side of Windy Grove Drive
(Tract 15911 site) to reduce retaining wall heights as m~Jch as possible.
12) For Lots 2, 11, 12, and 23 in Tract 15912 site, lower pad elevations so
that comer side yard retaining walls are either eliminated or reduced in
height. It would also be acceptable to provide 2-foot high terraced
retaining wall instead of single 4-foot high retaining wall.
13) For southwest comer of Lot I o1 Tract 15912 site, clip southwest comer
of lot so that future lot to south will have more useable street frontage
and extend wrought iron fencing eastedy to be flush with front of home.
Enqineednq Division:
1) All conditions of Tracts 1955 and 15912 shall apply.
2) Revisions to Lot A of Tract 15911 shall be accommodated as follows:
a) Lot A shall be widened (4 feet) and Lots 14 through 17 shortened
to accommodate a minimum separation of 5 feet between the
existing Cucamonga County Water Distdct sewer and the footing
for the perimeter sound and retaining wall.
b) Provide barder fencing on top of the retaining wall next to the
freeway drainage swale, in lieu of standard 2-rail PVC, subject.to
approval of the City engineer and City Planner.
Environmental Mitiqation Measures:
1) A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review
and approval pdor to the issuance of building permits. The
acoustical report shall evaluate extedor noise impacts from the 1-15
Freeway. The acoustical report shall address the access trail
designated as Lot A and provide recommendations for noise
attenuation return walls. The design of the project shall comply with
recommendations in the report.
2) A noise barrier ranging in height from 6 feet to 17 feet in height will
be necessary to mitigate freeway noise. The noise barrier may be a
combination of berming and masonry walls. In addition, intedor noise
levels shall be mitigated through the imposition of a "Windows
Closed" condition by the means of mechanical ventilation and
upgraded windows.
3) Construct a 6-foot wide paved shoulder on the east and west sides
of East Avenue from this development to Victoria Street, within
existing rights-of-way.
4) Transportation Development Fees shall be paid, prior to final map
approval in anticipation of a City project to install a traf~c signal at the
intersection of East Avenue and Victoria Street.
/
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 99-72 - RYLAND HOMES
April12,2000
Page 5
5) Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 8 Master Plan Storm Drain
facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer shall
receive credit for the cost of permanent master plan facilities up to
the amount of the related drainage fees in effect at the time
reimbursement is requested and shall be reimbursed for excess
costs from future fee collection in accordance with City policy, lethe
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.
6) Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Interim Master Basin No. 5 as
follows, justified by a final drainage report approved by the City
Engineer:
a) Provide an ultimate design for the basin to serve the entire
Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 8 developed tributary area north
of Base Line Road.
b) Provide for maintenance vehicle access in the basin design.
c) Install sufficient capacity to mitigate the increased runoff from
this development, with an outlet system capable of handling the
ultimate basin design (entire tributary area) with a minimum
amount of modification as incremental development occurs.
d) An Assessment District shall be formed for maintenance of the
detention basin or a maintenance agreement with a refundable
deposit shall be executed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing pdvate
maintenance of the facility, but providing the City with the dght
of access to maintain the facility if private maintenance is
insufficient and allowing the City to assess those costs to the
developer. Said agreement shall be recorded to run with the
property.
e) Basin shall be completed and operational, pdor to the issuance
of building permits.
f) The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to
recover the proportionate cost of the land and ultimate basin
related facilities (outlet, etc.) from future development using the
basin, if the developer fails to submit said reimbursement
agreement within six months of the public improvements being
accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to
reimbursement shall terminate.
7) 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
i
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 99-72 - RYLAND HOMES.
Apd112,2000
Page 6
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA, prior to
occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first.
8) The devetoper shall provide replacement windrows of 15-gallon
Eucalyptus maculata (spotted gum) planted 8 feet on center,
pursuant to the approved landscape plan, prior to occupancy.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2000.
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 12th day of April 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM
Project File No.: Development Review 99-72 - Ryland Homes
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 measuresare 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 verification 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 theyare 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. A 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 documentationwill
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 Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Mitigation Monitoring Program
DR 99-72 - RYLAND HOMES
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 written 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 thatwas 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 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 theMMP 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 requiredpedod 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.
MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III)
Project File No.: DR 99-72 Applicant: Ryland Homes
Initial Study Prepared by: Brent Le Count Date: March 21~ 2000
/cirCUl iO
Transportation at n ' ~ ' ~" ~'~' ''~'?
Construct off-site roadway improvements. CE C/D PERMIT FINAL A/C 2/3
Pay applicable Transportation Development Fees CE C/D PRIOR TO B/D 1
shall be paid prior to final map approval in FINAL MAP
anticipation of a City project to install a traffic APPROVAL
signal at the intersection of East Avenue and
Victoria Street.
Biological Resources ~.' ,:':~:! ~'. , . ;~ '"~""~'~:, ,~
,Replace eucalyptus windrows CP B/CID PLAN CHECK/ NC
INSPECTION
· Water . , , -, .~, *
Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Interim Master CE B/C PLAN CHECK/ NC 2/3
Basin No. 5 INSPECTION
Remove the current FIRM Zone D designation for CE B/C PRIOR TO BID 1
OCCUPANCY
the project area. CE B/C PLAN CHECK/ NC 2/3
Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 8 Master INSPECTION
Plan Storm Drain facilities.
Noise ' ;:i~ :' ~:' '!'~;
Construct a noise barrier ranging in height from 6 CP B/CID NC 2/3/4
feet to 17 feet in height above pad level to
mitigate freeway noise. Subm!t a final acoustical
report for review prior to issuance of building
permits,
h\PLAN NING\B RENT~Environmental\dr9972.chk.doc
Key to Checklist Abbreviations
Re~ponsible~Person Monitoring E~equency . '!:'. ~,i';~ :i i' ~eth~)~Jpf..V'~H,~.~lon~-?~:?::~¥~;~{:*?~'!..~:,.i.~;?.!;~,. ~S~.~16~i~:~?.,~'~i;~?,~?i~!,i~i~i~:~
CDD - Community Development Director A - With Each New Development A - On-sita Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map
CP - City Planner or designee B - Prior To Construdion B - Other Agency Permit / Approval 2 - Withhold Grading or Building Permit
CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Construction C - Plan Check 3 ~ Withhold Certificate of Occupancy
BO - Building Official or des*ghee 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:~PLAN NING\FINAL\CEQA\MMCHKLST.W pD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #: Development Review 99-72
SUBJECT: New Single Family
APPLICANT: Ryland Homes
LOCATION: Tracts 15011 amd 15012
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, padicipate 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. 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 Etiwanda Specific Plan.
2. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code
and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall
be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety
Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to
occupancy.
SC -2-00
Project NO. DR 99-72
Comoiefion Date
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. Ali site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for
consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment,
building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or
approved use has commenced, whichever comes first.
5. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development
Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in
effect at the time of building permit issuance.
6. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be
located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of
concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground
vaults.
7. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the
adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map.
8. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and
weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for City
Planner review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior
to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct
all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements.
a. Local Feeder Trails (i.e., private equestrian easements) shall, at a minimum, be fenced
with two-rail, 4-inch Iodgepole "peeler" logs to define both sides of the easement;
however, developer may upgrade to an alternate fence material.
b. Local Feeder Trail entrances shall also provide access for service vehicles, such as
veterinarians or hay deliveries, including a 12-foot minimum drive approach. Entrance
may be gated provided that equestrian access is maintained through step-throughs.
C. Local Feeder Trail grades shall not exceed 0.5% at the downstream end of a trail for a
distance of 25 feet behind the public right-of-way line to prohibit trail debris from
reaching.the street. Drainage devices may be required by the Building Official.
d. Provide a 24-foot by 24-foot corral area in the rear yard. Grade access from corral to
trail with a maximum slope of 5:1 and a minimum width of 10 feet.
9. 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 Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or
prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be
provided to the City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall .submit to the Planning
Division a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 0f each and
every year and whenever said information changes.
10. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double
wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the
adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all
contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences
along the project's perimeter.
11. 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 %-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.
SC -2-00
Project No. DR 99.72
Comoletion Date
12. Wood fencing shall be treated with stain, paint, or water sealant.
13. For residential development, return walls and corner side wails shall be decorative masonry.
14. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be
manufactured products.
D. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans)
1. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles
on this site unless they are the principal source of transpodation for the owner and prohibit
parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas.
E, Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home I
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. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than /
2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for
erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation
system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or I
greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their
appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-
gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover.
In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall
also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and
shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting
required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the
developer prior to occupancy.
4. For single family residential development, all s~ope planting and irrigation shall be I !
continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each
individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units,
an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in
satisfactory condition.
5. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the / !
Development Code and/or Etiwanda Specific Plan. This requirement shall be in addition to
the required street trees and slope planting.
6. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be / !
included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and
approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be
required by the Engineering Division.
7. Special landscape features such as East Avenue theme wall and intensified landscaping, is I /
required along East Avenue.
8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, / /
the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
9. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for City Planner review and / I
approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural
growth characteristics of the selected tree species.
SC -2-00
!
Project No. DR 99.72
Cornoletion Date
10. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of I
Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code.
11. On projects which abut the 1~15 Freeway, the developer shall provide landscaping within th~ /____
freeway right-of-way along the boundary of this project or pay an in-lieu of construction cash
· deposit. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared in conformance with Caltrans
and City Standards through the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Planner and City Engineer. Landscape and irrigation shall be installed
prior to the release of occupancy of the project. If final approvals and/or installation is
complete at that time, the City will accept a cash deposit for future landscaping of the Caltrans
right-of-way.
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).
F. Environmental
1. A final acoustical repod shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the
issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise
attenuation to 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 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 ali 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.
G. 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:
H. 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
SC -2-00
Project No, DR 99-72
ComDletion Date
g. Planning Division Project Number (i.e., '~r #, cuP #, DR #, etc.) clearly identified on the
outside of all plans.
2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils I
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 I
coverage to the City prior to permit issuance.
I, Site Development
1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be I
marked with the project file number (i.e., DR 99-72). 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 I
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. For projects using septic tank facilities, written certification of acceptability, including all
supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Department of
Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic
Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits.
5. 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.
6. Submit pool plans to the County of San Bernardino's Environmental Health Services
Department for approval.
J, 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 manufacturer's "high wind" instructions.
4. Roofing materials shall be Class "A."
K, 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.
SC -2-00
Project No. DR 99-72
Comoletlon Oate
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.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT,
(909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
L. 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
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:1,500 gallons per minute, Per '97 UFC Appendix Ill-A, 5, (b)
(Table).
a. A previous fire flow conducted (October 27, 1999 revealed 8556 gpm available at 20 psi.
-OR-
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 I /
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. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be I /
submitted to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is
available, pending completion of the required fire protection system.
6. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to
final inspection. / /
7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below:
Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
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 proposed operations.
8. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted:
All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 32. __/
9. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. I I
SC -2-00
Project No. DR 99-72
Comolelion Date
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. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the
Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information.
12. Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District as follows:
$132 for CCWD Water Plan review/underground waster supply.
$132 for Single Family Residence Development.
13. 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.
SC -2-00
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE
NO. 99-11 TO ALLOW WALLS UP TO APPROXIMATELY 21 FEET IN
HEIGHT FOR FREEWAY NOISE MITIGATION PURPOSES WHERE A
MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX FEET IS ALLOWED LOCATED ON THE
SOUTHWEST AND NORTHEAST CORNERS OF EAST AVENUE AND
THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE LOW-MEDIUM
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-131-05 AND 227-
141-11 AND 12.
A. Recitals.
1. Ryland Homes has filed an application for the issuance of Variance No. 99-11 as
described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request
is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 12th day of Apdl 2000, 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 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 April 12, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property located on both sides of East Avenue on the
north and south sides of abandoned railroad right-of~way with a street frontage of 1,240 feet on East
Avenue and lot depth of 600 to 1,300 feet and is presently vacant; 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 vacant land and the 1-15 Freeway, the property
to the east is vacant and the 1-15 Freeway, and the property to the west is vacant and developed
with single family homes; and
c. The increase in wall height is necessary to reduce noise from the 1-15 Freeway to
an acceptable level for residential development; and
d. The visual impact of the increase in wall height will be mitigated by providing a two-
tone color scheme and decorative wall material.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VAR 99-11-RYLAND HOMES
Apd112,2000
Page 2
3. Based upon the substantiat evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public headng 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 stdct or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations
would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives
of the Development Code in that the only alternative to mitigate freeway noise without exceeding
the six foot wall height limit would be to construct very high earthen berms which would severely limit
the site area available for residential development.
b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other
properties in the same district in that the site is located adjacent to the 1-15 Freeway which
generates substantial traffic noise. Freeway noise must be reduced to acceptable levels in order to
permit residential development of the site consistent with noise thresholds established by the
General Plan and the Development Code.
c. That stdct or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would
deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district in
that COmpliance with the six foot height limit would preclude the site from being developed in concert
with the permitted land uses due to excessive freeway noise.
d. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district in that most other
properties in the district are not equally impacted by the 1-15 Freeway noise.
e. That the granting of the Vadance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that for the most part
the walls will not be completely visible to the public and the walls will have a two-tone color scheme
with split faced and fluted block to soften their appearance.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, and 3 above, this
Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below:
a) Provide a two-tone color scheme with the darker color on the base of the walls.
Additionally use a split face/fluted block design along with a vine planting at the base to mitigate
visual impact of excessively high walls along the south and east boundaries of the Tract 1911 site.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall cedify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VAR 99-11 - RYLAND HOMES
Apd112, 2000
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 12th day of April 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
the city of
Rancho Cucamonsa
Staf:f Re rt
DATE: April 12, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-07 -
FORECAST HOMES - A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for
recorded Tract 13759 consisting of 56 single-family lots on 14 acres of land in the Low
Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Haven
Avenue, east side of Center Avenue, and north of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-
way - APN: 1076-301-20 through 75. Related files: Variance 00-01 and Tree Removal
Permit 00-07.
VARIANCE 00-01 - FORECAST HOMES - A request to increase the wall height to 12 feet
along the southern boundar~ of recorded Tract 13759 where the Development Code
allows a maximum wall height of 6 feet for Development Review 00-07 located on the
west side of Haven Avenue, east side of Center Avenue, and north of the Southern
Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 1076-301-20 through 75. Related files:
Development Review 00-07 and Tree Removal Permit 00-07.
SITE DESCRIPTION: The site is currently vacant and has been rough graded. Three Eucalyptus
windrows that were located in the center and along the north and east boundaries of the site have
been removed, in June of 1988, The Planning Commission approved a Tree Removal Permit
application in conjunction with the Tract Map approval. Haven Avenue bound the site to the east,
Center Avenue and single-family homes to the west. To the north are existing single-family homes
and to the south is the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way with the Alta Vista Mobile Home Park
below. The site has a natural slope of 2.5 to 3 percent from north to south.
ANALYSIS:
A. Backqround: The Planning Commission, in June of 1988, approved Tract 13759. Fu Mai
Limited processed the tract map application and recorded the tract map in March of 1993.
Forecast Homes Inc. is now processing the Development Review application for the design
of the homes.
B. General: The applicant is proposing to construct 56 single-family homes that will range in size
from 2,138 to 2,862 square feet. The site will be developed under the Low Residential
standards of the Development Code. Three house plans are being proposed, each having
ITEMS B & D
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 00-07 - VAR 00-01 - FORECAST HOMES
April 12, 2000
Page 2
four different amhitectural styles: Santa Barbara, Prairie, Heartland, and Craftsman. All plans
have a fireplace in the family room and each has a 3-car garage. The various configurations
are as follows:
Plan 1 is single-story, 2,138 square feet, and features a 3-car, front-on garage and a front
porch with a minimum depth of 6 feet 2 inches. There is an option for a bonus room or den
in place of the 1 -car garage and an option for a second fireplace for the living room along the
left side elevation. On some lots, such as 35 and 53, the large footprint of Plan 1 is at the 40
percent maximum lot coverage allowed by the Development Code.
Plan 2 is two-story, 2,542 square feet, and features a 2-car, side-on garage and a 1-car,
front-on garage. There is an option for a second fireplace for the living room along the right
side elevation.
Plan 3 is two-story, 2,862 square feet, and features a 3ocar, front-on garage and a front porch
with a minimum depth of 6 feet. There is an option for a second-story deck and patio and a
second fireplace for the living room along the left side elevation.
In conjunction with the Development Review Application, the applicant has submitted a
Variance Application requesting to increase the wail height along the southern boundary of
the project (adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way) to 12 feet where the
Development Code allows a maximum wall height of 6 feet.
C. Desiqn Review Committee: The Committee (McNeil, Stewart, Coleman) reviewed the project
on March 14, 2000, and on April 4, 2000, and recommend approval with conditions which
have been incorporated into the attached Resolution of Approval. Action comments have
been attached for your convenience (Exhibit H).
D. Gradinq Review Committee: The Grading Committee reviewed the project March 14, 2000,
and determined it was consistent with the conceptual grading plans approved with the Tract.
The Committee recommended approval subject to conditions contained in the attached
Resolution of Approval.
E. Neiqhborhood Meetinq'. On February 24, 2000, a neighborhood meeting was held by the
applicant to allow neighbors within the immediate vicinity of the project an opportunity to
review the proposed design of homes. The residents did not object to the proposed designs;
however, some did have concerns about the increase in traffic that will be generated by the
proposed development. Currently, there is a two-way stop sign at the intersection of Monte
Vista Street and Center Avenue. The two stop signs are located on the north and south sides
of Center Avenue. As Monte Vista continues east, a yield sign is present where it intersects
Mesada Street (Exhibit G). Some of the residents that attended the meeting requested that
Staff consult with the Engineering Traffic Division about having a four-way stop sign placed
at the intersection of Center Avenue and Monte Vista Street, and a three-way stop sign at
Monte Vista Street and Mesada Street. Staff forwarded the residents' concerns to the
Engineering Traffic Division for review. The Traffic Engineering Division responded stating the
yield sign at Monte Vista and Mesada Street can be replaced with a stop sign once the project
is completed. However, until the project is complete and traffic patterns are established, the
Traffic Management staff will evaluate the intersection of Monte Vista Street and Center
Avenue to determine if additional stop signs are needed on Monte Vista Street.
!
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 00-07 - VAR 00-01 - FORECAST HOMES
April 12, 2000
Page 3
F. Environmental Assessment: The applicant has prepared Part I of the Initial Study and staff has
completed Part II, the Environmental Checklist. Staff determined that the project could have
a significant adverse environmental impact through short-term air quality impacts during site
preparation, such as grading and equipment exhaust. Staff also determined that there may
be noise impacts to future residents within the subject tract resulting from traffic along Haven
Avenue as well as biological impacts resulting from Eucalyptus windrow removal. Three
Eucalyptus windrows were removed to accommodate project improvements. A noise study
was prepared which identified noise attenuation measures to reduce noise to acceptable
levels. Mitigation measures will be required to reduce the short-term air quality and noise
impacts to a less than significant impact and windrows are required to be replaced pursuant
to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance No. 276. If the Planning Commission concurs, then
the issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be in order.
VARIANCE ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a request to increase the height of the
perimeter wall along the southern boundary of the project (adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad
right-of-way) to 12 feet at the exterior side. The maximum wall height allowed in residential districts
is 6 feet. Because of the grade difference, a 6-foot retaining wall is required in addition to the
typical 6-foot high garden wall on top of it. The wall would be prominent along the planned Pacific
Electric Trail, a multi purpose trial within the rail corridor.
FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The purpose of a variance is to provide flexibility from the strict application
of development standards. However, the Planning Commission must make the following findings
in order to approve the request. The following are facts to support these findings:
1. That strict or fiteral interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in
practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the
Development Code.
Fact: The natural slope of the site combined with the existing street grade poses a physical
constraint to the grading concept of the site. In order for the lots along the south
boundary of the project site to properly drain onto La Vine Street, the pad grades have
to be raised, which results in the use of a 6-foot retaining wall. In addition, La Vine
Street cannot be lowered to reduce the height of the retaining wall because of the
existing sewer line in the street and the tie-in at Center Avenue. Therefore, without the
Variance, an unnecessary physical hardship for the applicant would be created.
2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other
properties in the same district.
Fact: The site is adjacent to the railroad right-of-way, which poses a physical constraint that
does not generally apply to other properties in the same district.
3. That strict or fiteral interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive
the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same districL
Fact: The proposed 12-foot wall height is necessary in order to ensure that future
homeowners enjoy the privilege of having a privacy and security wall. Without the
Variance, future homeowners would be deprived of privileges enjoyed by other
homeowners within the same district.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 00-07 - VAR 00-01 - FORECAST HOMES
April12,2000
Page 4
4. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent
with the limitations on other properties or improvements in the vicinity.
Fact: Because most properties in the same district are not equally impacted by the railroad
right-of-way, the granting of the Variance will not set a precedent.
5. That the granting ~f the Vadance wi~~ n~t be detrimenta~ t~ the pub~ic hea~th~ safety~ ~r we~fare~
or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
Fact: Granting of the Variance will not be dc?dmental to the public health, safety, or welfare
but, conversely, provide a security ar ~rivacy wall for the future homeowners.
Staff Conclusion: Based on the above analysis, ,¢~aff believes that there are sufficient facts to
support the findings. To address the aesthetics of the tall wall, a condition of approval requires the
wall to have decorative treatment, such as, but not limited to: two-tone color scheme pattern
arrangement to the materials, climbing vines along the south face of the wall, a decorative cap,
pilasters, etc.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within
a 300-foot radius of the project site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development
Review 00-07 and Variance 00-01 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with
Conditions and the issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
City Planner
BB:RZ~ma
Attachments: Exhibit"A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" Site Utilization Map
Exhibit "C" Site Plan
Exhibit "D" Grading Plan
Exhibit "E" Landscape Plan
Exhibit "F" Elevations and Floor Plans
Exhibit "G" Map of Existing Yield and Stop Signs
Exhibit "H" Design Review Committee Meeting Action Agenda and Minutes, Dated
March 14,2000, and April 4, 2000.
Exhibit "1" - Environmental Study Parts I and II.
Resolution Approving Development Review 00-07 with Standard Conditions
Resolution Approving Variance 00-01
LOCATION MAP
TRACT MAP 13759 & DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-07
Mobile
Baseline Road
SITE UTILIZATION MAP TRACT No. 13759
IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
TRACT NO. 13759
PRECISE GRADI. NG PLAN
TRACT NO. 1 .37.59
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
.o~: ~1_ ~1 ~ ~ i
CIT~ OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
~ TRACT NO. 15759
LOT MIX
NO.
CITY OF' RANCHO CUCAMONG,~
TRACT NO. 137,.59
:~RECISE GRADING PLAN
SHEET NO: 2 OF :s
80' SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION EASEMENT
................ ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
IL .... TRACT NO. 13759
~ PRECISE GRADING PLAN
SHEET NO:
SANTA BARBARA lA PRAIRIE ~"~t~AI~JFAC~ED ~lcl~ lB
-.r~-
..... ~ , . . ,, ,.,~
........ ,~"x'.'~ . '~*~ ..... "i'i'i'i'i;~'.;~.i'i'i'.~'i',',',, ~..
'~.', --,,, ~,~_,.~_~,?~.'.-~-q~.~.. ~~-~,~.~,~ .......................... ,,~,,-~. ~
HEARTLAND IC CRAFTSMAN 'ID
TI-I~ YMVTA ~..i~ COLLECTION
FORECAST HOME8
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
LEFT ELEVATION lA REAR ELEVATION lA
ROOF PLAN I RIGHT ELEVATION 11
THE ~A GE COLLECTION · ~Act
NOTEJ ELEVATION ENHANCEMENTS $'24'J000
FORECAST HOMES W~LL OCCUR ON LOTS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. :~' ~' ~s' 4;, ,4, s~, ~ ~. ~oz~
,',
I,~1',!:~ x. .
RI:AR FA~¥&'I'IO# 1E REAR ELEYATION 'lC
REAR ELEVATION 1D .
TIlE ~IIVTAGE COLLECTION : NOTE, ELEYATION ENHANCEMENTS
FORECAST HOMES WILL OCCUR ON LOTS 1-21,
RANCA~ .... ~AMONGA, CA. ~' ~' ~' 4~,., ~ ~ ~.
TI-I~ ~'TA G. E COLLECT.~ON PLAN '~
FORECAST HOMES 4., / · .A
RANCHO CUCAMONQA, CA. ~ .~..
MAR~ 5 2000
FLOOR PLAN ADDENDUM D FLOOR PLAN AODENDUM C
TIIE VINTAGE COLLECTION PLAN I ,-24-2000
FORECAST HOMES 4 BR / 2 BA 8HEET * 2 ~ 20
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. ~8 8~.. ~ oooT~
~~~~~/.~ '%~~ .... ~ ............ . . · . .
8ANTA BARBARA lA PRAIRIE .*~*c~p ~lc~ lB
~ ~: 1..,~,,,I,, I ..... .,,., ............ ~ ........................................ : ..
~ -~ ~ -~ ~: .... ~..~:~
~ARTLAND 2C CRAFTSMAN 2D
TRACT
THE VI~I'A GE COLLECTION
FORECAST HOMES .~ET · ~o OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
..~, ....... , , , .~i'i.;qx'i,i,i.i,i~i,i,i,i,i,~-~ : ~ .................... ,~.,~,.~.~,,~,.,~.~
LEFT ELEVATION 2B REAR ELEVATION 2B
ROOF PLAN B RIGHT ELEVATION
TIIE ~A ~.~. COLLECTION r .o.~, .L..,o.
FORECAST HOMES l W,LL OCCU. o. LOTS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. ' 28, ao, ~s, 42, 44,
~ ' [ ~]~I~T. I ,"~. ~. [-~I, 1.1.1. I ~ I ;I q~'~l~ ,~1-
REAR BVATBN 2A REAR ELEVATION 20
REAR ~VATIOH 2D
TRACT
THE IfJT~TA GE COLLECTION NOTE, ELEVATION E.HARCEMERTS
FORECAST HOMES WILL OCCUR ON LOTS 1-2t. 25. ,I~'ET · ~
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. as. 33, 35. 42. 44. 51, & 53.
'~t~,1~ ,.:.
OPTIONAL BEDROOM dS & e
OPTIONAL MASTER SUITE 2 W/ POWDER FIRST FLOOR PLAN
THE VINTAGE COLLECTION PLAN
FORECAST HOMES 4 .. * ~.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. ~.~
LOFT
OPT. BEDROOM 4
''
OPT. RETREAT
AT LOFT BECOND FLOOR PLAN
THE ~A G.E COLLECTION
FORECAST HOMES
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
FIRST FLOOR ADDENDUM B
FIRST FLOO
FIRST FLOOR ADDENDUM D ....
i TRACT et~715e
THE VINTAGE COLLECTION PLAN 2 ,.~,ooo
FORECAST HOMES , ,. * 0~. / u .A S~'T · 8 ~ ~
RANCHO CUCAMONQA, CA. ~ .~ .. *~
SECOND~OOR ADDENDUM B
SECOND FLOOR ADDENDUM C
SECOND FLOOR ADDENDUM D
FORECAST HOMES
RA.C,O CUCAMO.QA,
THE VINTAGE COLLECTION ,-2,-,cooTS'CT
FORECAST HOMES
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
TI'I.~ VINTAGE COLLECTION [ NOTE, ELEVATION ENHANOEMENTS
FORECAST HOMES I WiLL OCCUR ON LOTS t'21, 2S,
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 2e. 33, 35, 42, 44, 51, & s3. 9907~1
NOTE, ELEVATION EHHANCEMENT~
FORE~A~T HOME8 W~L OCCUR ON LOT~ 1-21,
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 2~, 33. =s, 42, ,4,
REAR ELEVATION 3C
lEFT ELEVATION
~ ~ O~,ONAL~EC~
ROOF PLAN ~C ....
TIlE VI1VTA~.E COLLECTION NOTE, I[I.EYATION ENHANCEMENTS $'24'2000
WILL OCCUR OM LOTS 1'2t, 25, ~ · ~ ~ ~
FORECAST HOMES · ~a,.,., -, 44, s~, ~ .. I IS~r~
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
MAR 2 5 ~.000.
·
lllfllll ~ : : '~,':
~ ~A~N 3D REAR ELEVATION 3D
ROOF P~N 3D RI~T ~VA~
THE VINTAGE COLLECTION
FORECAST HOMES WILL OCCUR
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 2E. 33. 3~ ~2. 4~ ~:: ,3.UOOT~.~
2000
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
TI-IE ~A~E COLLECTIO~I ] PL&H ~ ~,¢~. ~s,sss.~,.~ooo [
FORECAST HOMES ~ ~ * ,~s s a~ s~ ·. ~ ~
I
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. s~7~
OPT-RETREAT OPT. BEDROOM
TIlE VJ3~ITA OE COLLECTION PLAN
FOR~CA$? HOM£$
· RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA.
SECOND FLOOR ADDENDUM B FIRST FLOOR ADDENDUM B
SECOND ~OOR ADD~M C ~RST FLOOR ADDEN~M
C
T~ ~A ~ COLLECTION PLAN 3
FORECAST HOMES "" + ~ /
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. m~ 8~..
'MAR
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Rudy Zeledon March 14, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00 -07 - FORECAST HOMES
A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for recorded Tract 13759 consisting
of 56 single-family lots on 14 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per
acre), located on the west side of Haven Avenue, east side of Center Avenue and north of the
Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way- APN: 1076-301-20 through 75. Related file Variance 00-
01, Tree Removal Permit 00~07, and Tentative Tract 13759.
VARIANCE 00-01- FORECAST HOMES - A request to increase the wall height to 9 feet, along the
southern boundary of recorded Tract 13759, where the Development Code allows a maximum wall
height of 6 feet, for Development Review 00- 07 located on the west side of Haven Avenue, east
side of Center Avenue and north of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 1076-301-20
through 75. Related file Development Review 00-07, Tree Removal Permit 00-07, and Tentative
Tract 13759.
Background: The Planning Commission, in June of 1988, approved Tract 13759. Fu Mai Limited
processed the tract map application and recorded the tract map in March of 1993. Forecast Homes
is now processing new house designs on the recorded map.
Design Parameters: The site is vacant, except for three existing stands of windrows, and has a
natural slope of 2.5 to 3 percent from north to south. The site is bounded to the east by Haven
Avenue and to the west by Center Avenue and single-family homes. To the north are existing
single-family homes and to the south is the existing Southern Pacific Railroad with the Alta Vista
Mobile Home Park below.
The site will be developed under the Low Residential Standards of the Development Code. Three
house plans are being proposed, each having four different architectural styles; Santa Barbara,
Prairie, Heartland, and Craftsman. All plans have 3-car garages broken into vadous configurations
as follows:
Plan 1 is single-story, 2,138 square feet, and features a 3-car front-on garage and a front
porch with a minimum depth of 6-feet 2-inches. There is an option for a bonus room or den
in place of the 1-car garage and an option for a second fireplace for the living room along
the left side elevation. On some lots, such as 35 and 53, the large footprint of Plan 1 is at
the 40 percent maximum lot coverage allowed by the Development Code.
Plan 2 is two-story, 2,542 square feet, and features a 2-car side-on garage and a 1-car
front-on garage; There is an option for a second fireplace for the living room along the right
side elevation.
Plan 3 is two-story, 2,862 square feet, and features a 3-car front-on garage and a front
porch with a minimum depth of 6-feet. There is an option for a second-story deck and patio
and a second fireplace for the living room along the left side elevation.
Variance: In conjunction with the Development Review Application, the applicant has submitted a
Variance Application requesting to increase the wall height to 9-feet because of a retaining wall
along the southern boundary adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way. The
DRC AGENDA
DR 00-07
March 14, 2000
Page 2
Development Code allows a maximum wall height of 6-feet. The Variance is necessary because
of the existing sewer line under La Vine Street and the tie-in at Center Avenue, which restricts La
Vine Street from being lowered to reduce the wall height. As required by the conditions of approval
for the tract, the wall shall be constructed with a decorative dark textured block for the lower
retaining portion with a lighter decorative block on top. In addition, climbing vines are required to
be along the south face of the wall. The applicant is proposing to use a tan split-face block for the
lower portion of the wall, with two alternating bands of tan precision block on the top portion. The
block wall cap will consist of tan precision block, which will rap around onto the proposed split face
wall along Haven Avenue. In addition, the pilasters for the proposed wall along Haven Avenue will
incorporate the use of alternating bands of tan precision block and split face block to create a
smooth transition between the two walls.
Variances are also needed on certain lots because the front porch r, ~ment encroaches into the
required front yard setback (32 feet minimum from curb face). Inclu(~.; Lots 7, 27, 35, 36, 45, 53.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion:
Major Issues: The following broad issues will be the focus of the Committee's discussion regarding
this project:
1. Revise plotting to eliminate need for Variances for porches on Lots 7, 27, 35, 36, 45, 53.
2. Provide 360-degree architecture on side and rear elevations. Design features used on front
elevation should occur on sides and rears to a lessor extent, including shutters, window
mullions, kickers, and decorative vents. The only feature the developer is proposing is a
stucco trim surround.
3. Special "enhanced architecture" should be given to lots that side (lots on .outhem boundary)
or rear onto Haven Avenue. Consideration shall be given to include a mixture of second-
story pop-outs; greater use of window mullions, shutters, pot shelves, and second-story
decks on lots that side or rear on Haven Avenue.
4. Continue the wainscoting treatment along all elevations around to side elevations to the
proposed return wall location or to a logical ending.
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 corner, side, and return walls exposed to public view shall be of decorative masonry.
2. All proposed river rock wainscoting shall be constructed using natural river rock.
Policy issues: The following items are matters of the Planning Commission and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. A minimum 5-foot setback between fencing on comer side yards shall be maintained.
DRC AGENDA
DR 00-07
March 14, 2000
Page 3
2. Modify Lot 34 to include retaining wall to maintain a minimum 15-foot slope setback from the
house.
Staff Recommendations:_ Staff recommends that the project be revised and return to Design
Review Committee.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Rudy Zeledon
The Committee reviewed the project and did not recommend approval. The Committee directed
the applicant to continue to work on resolving the major issues presented at the meeting (360-
degree architecture and enhanced rear elevation along arterial). The Committee supported
simplifying chimney cap details. The applicant should revise the project and return to the Design
Review Committee on April 4, 2000, as a Consent Calendar item. In addition, the Committee
recommended the following change be incorporated in the revised plans:
1. All two-story homes that rear or side-on to Haven Avenue shall incorporate a second story
deck as a standard and not an option to the homebuyer.
CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Rudy Zeledon April 4, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-07 - FORECAST HOMES
- The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for recorded Tract 13759 consisting
of 56 single-family lots on 14 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per
acres), located on the west side of Haven Avenue, east side of Center Avenue and north of the
Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 1076-301-20 through 75. Related file: Variance
00-01 and Tree Removal Permit 00-07.
VARIANCE 00-01- FORECAST HOMES - A request to ir ?rease the wall height to 9 feet along the
southern boundary of recorded Tract 13759 where the D~': Jelopment Code allows a maximum wall
height of 6 feet for Development Review 00-07 located on the west side of Haven Avenue, east side
of Center Avenue and north of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 1076-301-20
through 75. Related files: Development Review 00-07 and Tree Removal Permit 00-07.
Design'Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Rudy Zeledon
The Committee reviewed the revised design and recommended approval with conditions.
.
INFORMATION FORM
C o,.on oCu mo.g. (Part I - Initial Study)
Planning Div~s~n
(909) 477-2750
The purpose of this form ~is'to infOrm the City of th~ baSic components of the, pr0P0~ed
project so that the City may review the project pumuant to.City policies, ordinances, and
guidelines; the California Environmental QUality ACt; and the City's Rules and Proc.e. dures
to Implement CEOA. It IS important that the information requested m this'application be
provided in full. - ,~" *~ ...... **-'-*~,' ........ · ..... -.' ~ ~ · .... · = ", **
INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure
that the application is complete at the time of submiffal; City staff will not be available to perform woE< required to provide missing
information.
Application Number for the preject to which this form pertains:
Project Title:
Name&Addressofprojectowner(s): Fo£~CO~+ flO~3't~ ~
Name & Add. ss of dereloper or p~j~et sponsoe
Contact Person & Address: '~l'q'"~
Name & Address of pe~on pmpadng this fo~ (if different f~m above):
Telephone Number:
Infonnation indicated by astedsk (°) is not required of non-constn:ction CUP's unless othenvise requested by staff.
'1) Previde a full scale (8-1/2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the
site boundades.
2) Provide a set of color photographs which show representative views int_~o the site from the north, south, east and west;
views into and from the site from the pdmary access points which serve the site; and representative views of signi§cant
features'-Trem the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph.
3) ProjectLocation(descdbe):
c ofo 3o0 44-
4) Assessor'sPareelNumbera(attachadditionalsheetifnecessary): /'Oq~ - 301~'o~0 7~/-0~
'5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.): / ~/ ~ C.,
'6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications):
7) Descdbe any proposed general ptan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet
if necessary:
8) Include a description of afl permits which will be necessaq/ from the City of Rancho Cucarnonga and other governmental
agencies in order to fully implement the preject:
Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including infonwation on topography, soil stability, plants
and animals, mature trees, treils and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Desc#be any existing structures on site
(including age and condition) and the use of the structures. A~tach photographs of significant features described. In addition,
site all sources of information (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traflTc studies):
-, I~ -__ . . /
10) Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of lhe site. Site ail sources of information (books, pubilshed reporfs and
oral histoq/):
11) Describe any n~ise s~urces and their ~eve~s tha~ n~w a~ec~ ~he site (ain~raft~ r~adway n~ise~ e~c~) and h~w they wil~ a~ect
proposed uses:
~ ~,,',~ ~' ~,~ ~o~.~ " ~.~..,~./~,. ~;~,~ ~ ~,~ ..'.~
12) Descdbe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate desc~fption of the $ite in terms of ultimate use which
will ~sult from the pmsed project. Indicate it ther~ are pmposed phases for development, the extent of development to o¢cur
with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary:
Indicate the type of land use (residential, comme~ial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops,
department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.):
14) Vv7~ the pr~p~sed pmject change the pat~em~ sca~e ~r character ~f the surmunding gene~ area ~f the pmject?
15) Indicate the type of short-term and Iong-temt noise to be generated, including soume and amount. How will these noise levels
affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What methods of sound proofing ara proposed?
~ t I [~
17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains:
18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (Seo Attachment A for usage estimates). For further cladfication, please contact
the Cucamonga County Water Oistdct at 987-2591.
a. Residential(gal/day) .~ ~,[00 (c4o]/~J~Peakuse(gal/Day),
b. Commercial, find. (gal~day/ac) Peak use (gal~rain/ad
19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. Septic Tank Sewer. If septic tanks are preposed, attach
percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitaq/ sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See
Attachment A for usage estimates). Forfurther clarification, please contact the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at 987-2591.
a. Re$idential (gaYday) / ~,/ ~ 0
b. Commercial/Ind. (gal~day/ac)
RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS:
20) Number of residential units:
Detached(indicaterangeofparcelsizes, minimumlotsizeandmaximumlotsize: ~ //~/-~-
J
- 4~96 1~ f;::: D ~'"1 Page 5
i
.Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units):
21) Anficipated range of sale pdces and/or rents:
Rent (per month) ~$ ' to $
22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type:
23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type:
24) Indicate the expected number of school ~hildren who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School
Districts as shown in Attachment B:
a. Elementary:
b. Junior High:
c. SeniorHigh
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS
25) · type of use(s) and major function(s) of commeroia~, I uses:
26) Total floor area of commercial, y type:
28) Number of employees: ./'
Maximum~ft: /×"
Time of Maxi~ft: //
Provide breakdown of anticipated job. classifica~ns, including wa~//and salary ranges,
29) of hire for each classification (attach additional sh~e~t if neces~ar~): as well as an indication of the rate
"31) For commercial and iodustdal uses only, indicate the source, ~ype and amount of air pol1~n emissions. (Data should be
verified through the~outh Coast Air Quality Management District, at ($18) 572-6283): ~
ALL PROJECTS
32) Havethewater~sewer~~re~and~~~dc~ntr~~agenciesservingtheprcjectbeenc~ntactedt~determinetheirabi~ityt~pr~vide
adequate service to the propoaed project? If so, please indicate their msponse.
33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials?
Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but ara not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and
herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above.
Please list the materials and descdbe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if
known.
Mo^/e
34) VvTII the preposed project involve the temporary or Iong-ten~ use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic
materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes, provide an in' .~t of all such materials to be
used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storag hipment areas, shall be
shown and labeled on the application plans.
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information requirad for
adequate evaluation of this project to the best of roy ability, that the facts, statements, end infon~ation presented ara tme and
correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I fu~her undec~tand that additional information roay be rrequired to be submitted
before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1. Project File: Development Review 00-07
2. Related Files: Tract Map 13759
3. Description of Project: A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan
for recorded Tract 13759 consisting of 56 single-family lots on 14 acres of land in the
Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acres), located on the west side of Haven
Avenue, east side of Center Avenue and north of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way
- APN: 1076-301-20 through 75. Related file: Variance 00-01 and Tree Removal
Permit 00-07.
4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Forecast Homes
10670 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
5. General Plan Designation: Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre).
6. Zoning: Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre).
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is vacant except for three existing
Eucalyptus windrows and has a natural slope of 2.5 to 3 percent from north to south. The
site is bounded to the east by Haven Avenue and to the west by Center Avenue and single-
family homes. To the north are existing single-family homes and to the south is the
abandoned Southern Pacific Railroad with the Alta Vista Mobile Home Park below.
8. Lead Agency Name end Address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
9. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Rudy Zeledon
(909) 477-2750
10. Other agencies whose approval is required:
None
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Re,.:ew 00-07 Parle 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 (v') Transportation/Circulation ( ) Public Services
( ) Population and Housing (v') Biological Resources ( ) Utilities and Service Systems
(v') Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resoumes ( ) Aesthetics
(t/) Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Cultural Resources
(~') Air Quality (v~) Noise ( ) Recreation
( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
(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.
Signed: // ~ - -
/u~.~lj~d o n
/AMs~§~ht~ ~lanner
March 8, 2000
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation
· ,, ' ' t" "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation
is reqmred for a Potentially S~gmflcant Impac,
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? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/)
I
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Parle 3
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the
vicinity? ( ( ) ( ) (v')
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community? ( ( ) ( ) (v')
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposah
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? ( ) ( )
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')
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in
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? ( ) (v') ( )
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) (~/)
f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) (~/) ( )
g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) (v')
h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) ' (~/)
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) (¢)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Parle 4
Comments:
a,b,c,
and d) The southeast comer of the project site falls within the Red Hill Fault Zone per Figure
V-4 of the General Plan and, therefore, is subject to potential fault rupture, ground
shaking, and ground failure. The General Plan also indicates that "differential
subsidence could occur across the Red Hill Fault causing ground shaking." A
Geologic Fault Study was prepared to identify any fault traces on-site and establish
mitigation measures if any fault traces were found. Evidence of a near surface,
active fault line was not encountered on the project site. See Fault Line Investigation
by Ray Eastman, dated November 2, 1997.
f) The site will be graded to accommc ta the proposed structures. Grading will be
conducted under supervision of a ~ ~sed surveyor or civil engineer to ensure
compliance with applicable regulatio, The impact is not considered significant.
4. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) (t/) ( )
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)? ( ) ( ) (~')
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? ( ) ( ) (v')
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) (~/)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
() ()
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Page 5
Comments:
a) Paving and hardscape necessary to accommodate the project will result in increased
runoff from the site. Drainage will be conveyed to existing facilities, which have been
designated to handle the flows. In addition, the applicant will construct City Master
Plan storm drain improvements, that will include the undergmunding of the current
storm drain facility on Haven Avenue (along the eastern property of the project site.
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? (~/) ( )
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate? ( ) (v')
d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) )
Comments:
a & b) Air quality impacts may occur during the site preparation including grading and
equipment exhaust as it is used on-site. Major sources of emissions during this
phase include exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and equipment and
fugitive dust generated as a result of construction vehicles and equipment traveling
over exposed surfaces, as well as soil disturbances by grading filling. NOx and
PM10 levels will be exceeded on a daily basis during construction. The following
mitigation measures will be required to reduce impacts to a less-than
significant level:
1) The Construction Contractor shall select the construction equipment
used on-site based on Iow-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.
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.
Dq-q
I
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Pacjle 6
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
v;ork is cc oleted for the day, ~,nd whenever wind exceeds 15
r.~iles per h ~ur.
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 P ;tural colored building materials, water-based or Iow-VOC
coating, L.nd coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer
efficiency, such as high volume Iow 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 vehi~ ? trips or traffic congestion? ( ) (v') ( )
b) Hazards to saf~ V 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? ( ) (~')
Initial Study for City of Rancho. Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Parle 7
S~gnificant
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? ( ) (e/)
Comments:
a) The project will not exceed the maximum density allowed in the district in which it is
located; however, the project will generate additional vehicle trips because of new
construction. The number of trips is not considered significant; therefore, the project
does not warrant a Traffic Study Analysis. The proposal is consistent with the
General Plan for which street widths were evaluated at build-out condition. The
project will result in the construction of additional streets within the project
boundaries only. There will be no access taken off of Haven Avenue.
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.)? ( ) ( ) ( )
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal
poo )? ( ) ( ) ( )
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
Comments:
b) Project construction will result in the removal of three existing Eucalyptus windrows
at the center of the site and along the northern and eastern property boundaries. An
arborist report was prepared (Knapp Associates, 1987) for the project site to
determine the significance of the trees and the feasibility of relocating them to areas,
which are not in conflict with the proposed project. The Planning Commission
approved Tree Removal Permit 87-87, in conjunction with the Tract Map approval
in January of 1988. However, the Tree Removal Application has since expired. The
Initial Study for City of Rancho. Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 , Page 8
applicant has submitted a new Tree Removal Application, w~ .,ch is subject to
the following mitigation placed on the previously approved Tree Removal
Permit by the Planning Commission (see Approved Resolution 88-20):
1) The windrow adjacent to Haven Avenue shall be replaced pursuant to
the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance No. 276. The replacement of the
trees shall be consistent with the Haven Avenue Beautification Master
Plan for Street Trees, which requires the planting of the following trees:
a) Magnolia Grendiflora (Magnolia Hybrid) planted as a foreground
tree in front of sidewalk, 15-gallon in size and spaced 60 feet on
the center.
b) Brachychiton Populneus (Bottle Tree) planted as a background
tree behind sidewalk, 15-gallon in size and spaced 25 feet on
center.
2) To the interior of the tract, a more intensive landscape treatment, which
is to include additional tree plantings, shall be provided in areas with
required planting (such as slope areas and along interior street public
right-of-way).
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
prnposal:
a/ Conflict with adopted energy conset'.:ation plans? ( ) ( ) (~)
b) Use non-renewable resoumes in a wasteful and
inefficient manne~ ( ) ( ) (~')
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 evacuati(~n plan? ( ( ) ( ) (~)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Parle 9
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard? ( ) ( ) ( )
d) Exposure of people to existing soumes of potential
health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) (~/) ( )
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) (v') ( ) ( )
Comments:
a) The project involves the construction of 56 single-family homes. Construction activity
is likely to result in an increase in noise levels from associated grading and
development activity. Construction hours will be limited as required by the
Development Code to lesson any construction related disturbance in noise levels in
the surrounding properties. The resulting residential project is not likely to produce
a significant increase in existing noise levels.
b) The General Plan indicates future noise levels exceeding 65 Ldn on Haven Avenue,
which requires detailed analysis of noise attenuation measures. Significant noise
impacts on the residents will likely result if sound attenuation devices (interior and
exterior) are not incorporated into the project design to screen noise impacts created
by traffic on Haven Avenue. An acoustical analysis was prepared by McKay Conant
Brook Inc., on August 30, 1989, to determine what mitigated measures would be
necessary to reduce noise levels to a permissible level. To mitigate significant
adverse noise impacts from Haven Avenue to "safe" levels, a minimum 7-foot
high wall must be constructed adjacent to Haven Avenue and shall continue
around Lot 1 to the north and Lots 6 and 7 to the south.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Parle 10
Significant
Impact Less
Potentially UnleSs T~larl
Issues an~ S~p~orting Infom~alion Sources: Significant Mitigation Signilicant No
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 fo/lowing areas:
a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) (v') ( )
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V')
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) (V') ( )
d) Maintenance c' public facilities, including roeds? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
e) Other governr ntal services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/)
Comments:
a,c) The development of 56 single-family homes will increase the demand on public
services. Conditions of approval that will be placed on the project require the
developer to participate in the funding of special districts for the necessary
construction and maintenance of fire protection and school facilities. Therefore, the
impact is not considered significant.
12. ~ .ITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
f ~osal result in a need for new systems or supplies or
5~stantial 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? ( ) ( )
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ) (~/)
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ) (~)
initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Pa~e 11
13, AESTHETICS. Would the proposah
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/)
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resoumes? ( ) ) ( ) (V')
b) Disturb archaeological resoumes? ( ) ) ( ) (~/)
c) Affect historical or cultural resoumes? ( ) ) ( ) (~/)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) ) ( ) (v')
e) Restdct existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? ( ) ) ( ) (~/)
15. RECREATION. Would the proposah
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
· parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~/)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( )
Comments:
a) The development of 56 homes will increase the demand on parks. The developer
will be responsible for payment of park fees at the time of building permit issuance
to offset any impact on parks. The impact is not considered significant.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Parle 12
Significant
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 important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) (v')
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to
achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-
term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact
on the environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive pedod of time. Long-term
impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) (v')
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
pr,~gcts, and the effects of probable future () () (e/)
pr_ ~cts.)
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have
environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ( ) ( ) (v')
indirectly?.
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 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):
(v') General Plan EIR
(Certified April 6, 1981 )
Master Environmental Assessment for the '1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Development Review 00-07 Parle 13
APPLICANT CERTIFICATION
I certify that I am the applicant [or 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 cieady no significant environmental effects would
Occur,
?
Signature: ~ ,," Date:
Priht Name a~nd Title: , .-?-~Y~¢ ;5 P/'"e~','~, '
%
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.: Development Review 00-07 Public Review Period Closes: April 12, 2000
Project Name: Project Applicant: Forecast Homes
Project Location (also see attached map): Located on the west side of Haven Avenue, east side of Center
Avenue and north ofthe Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way -APN: 1076-301-20 through 75.
Project Description: The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for recorded Tract
13759 consisting of 56 single-family lots on 14 acres of land in the Low Residential District '(2 -4 dwelling units
per acres). Related files: Variance 00-01 and Tree Removal Permit 00-07.
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 clearly 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.
April 12, 2000
Date of Determination Adopted By
%
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW NO. 00-07, LOCATED IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4
DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ON THE WEST SIDE OF HAVEN
AVENUE, EAST SIDE OF CENTER AVENUE, AND NORTH OF THE
SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1076-301-20 THROUGH 75.
A. Recitals.
1. Forecast Homes has filed an application for the approval of Development Review
No. 00-07, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Development Review request is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 12th day of April 2000, 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 during the above-
referenced meeting on April 12, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission
hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to Tract Map 13759, located on the west side of Haven
Avenue, east side of Center Avenue, and north o[ the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, and
is presently unimproved; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is Low Residential, the property to the
south of the site is Low-Medium Residential, the property to the east is Low Residential, and the
property to the west is Low Residential; and
c. The proposed Development Review application has been reviewed by the Design
Review, Technical, and Grading Committees and approved subject to the condition contained within
this resolution; and
d. The proposed design is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and
the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and
e. The proposed design is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 00-07 - FORECAST HOMES
Apri! 12, 2000
Page 2
f. The proposed design, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
3. Based upon the 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
b. That the proposed use is in ~ ~rd with the, 'ectives of the Development Code
and the purposes of the district in which the s s located; ar
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 upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration, 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 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
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 certain 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 h' -~ potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat
upon which wildlife ds :is. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the
Mitigated Negative Dec :on, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the
Planning Commission ~: :g the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the
presumption of adverse e~gct as set forth in Section 753.5(o-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code
of Regulations.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 00-07 - FORECAST HOMES
April 12, 2000
Page 3
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth
below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Planninq Division
1 ) All conditions of Resolution No. 88-20 approving Tract Map 13759 shall
apply.
2) All corner, side and return walls exposed to public view shall be of
decorative material.
3) A minimum 15-foot flat useable rear yard area shall be maintained on
all lots.
4) A minimum 5-foot setback between fencing on corner side yards and
sidewalk shall be maintained.
5) All two-story homes that rear or side-on to Haven Avenue shall
incorporate a second-story deck as a standard option.
6) The perimeter wall and landscape treatment along Haven Avenue shall
be consistent with the Haven Avenue Beautification Master Plan and
be subject to Planning and Engineering Division approval.
7) All proposed dwelling unit porches shall be functional with a minimum
usable 6-foot depth.
8) A block or masonry wall shall be erected along the north property line
wherever an existing fence is of a material other than masonry or block
(such as wood or chain link) or is adjacent to the property line. The
applicant shall work with adjacent property owners to resolve any
double wall situations prior to the issuance of building permits.
9) The applicant shall, in a good faith effort, work with the adjacent
property owners, along the north boundary of the tract, in repainting the
exterior of their walls prior to the release of occupancy.
10) The existing Eucalyptus trees on Lots 39 and 47, (required to be
preserved in place) shall be pruned in accordance with Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 19.08.120 and proper arboreal
practices.
Enqineerinq Division
1) All missing public improvements shall be installed, including sidewalks,
parkway trees, and other improvements as may be required per the
conditions of approval of the previously approved Tract No. 13759 and
Improvement Plan No. 1486 on file in the office of the City Engineer.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 00-07 - FORECAST HOMES
April 12, 2000
Page 4
2) Street Improvement Plan No. 1486, sheets 1 through 12 of 19, shaft be
revised by a registered Civil Engineer to reflect the latest adopted City
Engineering Standard Plans. Revisions shall also include drive
approach locations for all lots as required by the new building
footprints, and parkway trees type and spacing (see attached Street
Tree Requirement Form). Landscape Improvement Plan No. 1486-L,
Sheets 13 through 19 of 19, shall be voided (as revision) and replaced
with new plans, see condition No.3 below. All plan revisions shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer, plan check fees will
be required. Prior to any work being performed in public right"-,~f-way,
fees shall be paid and a con'- ction permit shall be obtaineo tm the
City's Engineer's office.
3) A separate parkway landscape and irrigation plan per City Standards
shall be provided subject to approval of the City Engineer for Haven
Avenue. This plan shall replace the voided/revised plan, Sheets 13
through 19 of Plan No. 1786-L, as noted on condition No.2 above.
Plan check fees will be required.
4) Corner property line cutoff easements, at all interior and project street
intersections, shall be dedicated per City Standard Plan 100-B
(attached).
5) An encroachment permits shall be obtained from the City Engineer's
office for the placement of the side yard wall and perimeter rear wall
across the public storm ~' ~'~ easement on Lot 5 at the south¢ ·
corner of Tract 13759. T' id construction of wall shall provid~
street sump overflows to .brough the wall. A path for emerg
overflows of storm water. Jst be maintained at all times alon
existing storm drain easement.
6) It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current Flood
Insurance Rat Map (FIRM) Zone A 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 the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) prior to final map approval
or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map
Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or
improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first.
Environmental Mitiqation Measures
Air quality impacts may occur during the site preparation including grading
and equipment exhaust as it is used on-site. Major soumes of emissions
during this phase include exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and
equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of construction vehicles
and equipment traveling over exposed sur/aces, as well as soil disturbances
by grading filling. NOx and PM10 levels will be exceeded on a daily basis
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 00-07 - FORECAST HOMES
Apri~ 12, 2000
Page 5
during construction. The following mitigation measures will be required to
reduce impacts to a less than significant level:
1 ) The Construction Contractor shall select the construction equipment
used on-site based on Iow-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.
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 following the dust control measures listed
below:
a) During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or
transpor[ation 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) Affer clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed,
the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated immediately by
pick up 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.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 00-07 - FORECA°T HOMES
April 12, 2000
P~age 6
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 Iow pressure (HVLP) spray method, or
manual coating applications such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel,
spatula, dauber, rag or sponge.
7) To mitigate significant adverse noise impacts from Haven Avenue to
"safe" levels, a minimum 7-foot high wall must be constructed adjacent
to Haven Avenue and shall continue around Lot 1 to the north and Lots
6 and 7 to the south.
8) The windrow adjacent to Haven Avenue shall be replaced pursuant to
the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance No. 276. The replacement of
the trees shall be consistent with the Haven Avenue Beautification
Master Plan for Street Trees, which requires the planting of the
following trees:
a) Magnolia Grandiflora (Magnolia Hybrid) planted as a foreground
tree in front of sidewalk shall be 15-gallon in size and spaced 60
feet on center.
b) Brachychiton Populneus (Bottle Tree) planted as a background
tree behind sidewalk shall be 15-gallon in size and spaced 25
feet on center.
To the interior of the tract, a more intensive landscape treatment, which
is to include additional tree plantings, shall be provided in areas with
required planting (such as slope areas and along interior street public
right-of-way).
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
DR 00-07 - FORECAST HOMES
April12,2000
Page 7
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was du~y and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 12th day of April 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
City of Rancho CUcamonga
MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM
Project File No.: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-07
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 folio? ~ elements:
1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation r ~asures 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 verification 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 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 Cucamonga, CA 91730
Mitigation Monitoring Program
DR 00-07
April 12, 2000
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 written 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 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 wdtten
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 repor~ on the mitigation measure for the required period 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 idenafy the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether
the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall
conform to the Citys MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director pdor
to the issuance of building permits.
MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III)
Project File No.: Development Review 00-07 Applicant: Forecast Homes
Initial Study Prepared by: Rud¥ Zeledon Date: March 7, 2000
The use Iow-emissions and high-energy efficiency CP/BP B/C As Necessary A 4
construction equipment.
· Utilization of electric or diesel-powered equipment CP/BP B/C As Necessary A 4
where feasible,
i Encourage ride sharing and transit incentives for CP B/C As Necessary A/D 2
construction crew.
Dust generated by the development shall be CP/BO C As Necessary A 4
retained on-site.
Utilization, as much as possible, the use of pre- CP/BO B/C As Necessary A/C 2/4
coated natural colored building materials (water-
based or Iow VOC coating) and manual coating or
spray equipment with high efficiency transfer.
~!~!~g[?~.~l~eso~es. ' ...... : ,~ ~'~
· The windrow adjacenl to Haven Avenue shall be CP D As Necessary A 3
replaced pursuant to the City's Tree Preservation
Ordinance No. 276. The replacement of the trees
shall be consistent with the Haven Avenue
Beautification Master Plan for Street Trees, which
requires the planting of the Magnolia Grandiflora
(Magnoli Hybrid) and Brachychiton Populneus
(Bottle Tree).
· To the interior of the tract, a more intensive CP D As Necessary A 3
landscape treatment, whibh is to include additional
tree plantings, shall be provided in areas with
required planting (such as slope areas and along
interior street public right-of-way). I
· To mitigate significant adverse noise impacts from CP D As Necessary A 3
Haven Avenue to "safe" levels, a minimum 7-foot
high wall must be constructed adjacent to Haven
Avenue and shall continue around Lot 1 to the north
and Lots 6 and 7 to the south.
Key to Checklist Abbreviations
~,MethodofVerificatlo~: ':, ~:..,.*~ Sanctions ~,~ ........ ...... ~.
CDD - Community Development A - With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map
Director
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 Construction C - Plan Check 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy
· BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal 4 - Stop Work Order
(Reports/Studies/Plans)
PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds
FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-07
SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW OF 56 SINGLE-FAMILY LOT:
APPLICANT: FORECAST HOMES
LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF HAVEN, NORTH OF SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD
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 Co,no,etlon Cat.
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. 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.
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. '~.~ D
Project No: DR 00-07
Completion Date
4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be __/ i
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. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units
with all receptacles shielded from public view.
8. 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.
9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, /
including proper illumination.
10. 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 Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or
prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be
provided to the City Engineer. 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.
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
approv, ed prior to the issuance of building permits.
12. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double ___/ /
wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the
adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all
contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences
along the project's perimeter.
13. 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 Y2-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.
14. Wood fencing shall be treated with stain, paint, or water sealant. ___./ /
15. On co~'ner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between wails/fences and sidewalk. /
16. For residential development, return wails and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. .__/ /
17. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be ___/ /
manufactured products.
Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans)
1. Multiple car garage driveways shall be tapered down to a standard two-car width at street. !_._/
Project No: DR 00-07
Completion Date
E. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home ~ I
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, sh~tl be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for
erosion contr Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation
system to be '+ailed 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 irrigation shall be ..__/ /
continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each
individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units,
an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in
satisfactory condition.
6. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the _~ !
Development Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and
slope planting.
7. 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.
8. 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.
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 I /
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 through the principles of / !
Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code.
F. Environmental
1. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the ! /
issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise
attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided,
SC-2 0 D"7
I
3
Project No: DR 0~-07
Completion Date
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 / g
implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required
to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guaragtee 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 bythe approved environmental documents
shall be considered grounds for forfeit.
G. Other Agencies
1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and I__/
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:
H. 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/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.
I. 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.
sc-2 o D"73
4
Project No: DR 00-07
CqrnDletion Date
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to / i
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 ~ I
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.
J. New Structures
1. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions. / /
K. Grading
1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City / I
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 i I
pedorm such work.
3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the i I
time of application for grading plan check.
4. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits.
5. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for _~/ I
existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more
of combined cut and fill. The Grading Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a
California Registered Civil Engineer.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT,
(909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
L. General Fire Protection Conditions
1. Fire flow requirement shall bo: 1,500 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.
2. 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
3. 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
Project NO: DR 00-07
Cornoletion Date
4. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be /__J
submitted to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is
available, pending completion of the required fire protection system.
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:
a. Other: Per City Standards. / /
7. Emergency access, a minimum of 26 feet wide, shall be provided, and maintained free and /.____
clear of obstructions at all times during construction, in accordance with Fire District
requirements.
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. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the __/ /
Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information.
10. 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 Single 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.
11. 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 BUILDIGNS 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:
M. Security Hardware
1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doom. / /
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. / !
Project No: DR 00-87
Completion Date
N. Windows
1. All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be / ~
lifted from frame or track in any manner.
O. Building Numbering
1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for ~ /
nighttime visibility.
sc -2-00 I
7
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE NO.
00-01, A REQUEST TO INCREASE THE WALL HEIGHT TO 12 FEET,
ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF TRACT 13759, WHERE THE
DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS A MAXIMUM WALL HEIGHT OF 6 FEET,
IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF 56 SINGLE-FAMILY
HOMES, LOCATED IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4
DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ON THE WEST SIDE OF HAVEN
AVENUE, EAST SIDE OF CENTER AVENUE, AND NORTH OF THE
SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1076-301-20 THROUGH 75.
A. Recitals.
1. Forecast Homes has filed an application for the issuance of Variance No. 00-01 as
described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution. the subject Variance request
is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 12th day of April 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing
on that date.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on April 12, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to Tract Map 13759, located on the west side of Haven
Avenue, east side of Center Avenue, and north of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, and
is presently unimproved; and
b. The properties to the north and west are vacant and are a part of the San
Bernardino Flood Control Channel. The properties to the south and east consist of single-family and
mobile homes; and
c. The applicant has submitted a Variance Application requesting to increase the wall
height along the southern boundary of the project (adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-
way) to 12 feet where the Development Code allows a maximum wall height of 6 feet; and
d. That the Variance as specified in the application will not be detrimental to the goals
and objectives of the General Plan or Development Code and will not promote detrimental
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VAR 00-01 - FORECAST HOMES
April 12, 2000
Page 2
conditions to the persons or properties in the immediate vicinity on the subject site for the reasons
that follow:
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations
would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the
objectives of the Development Code.
· The natural slope of the site combined v h the existing street grades poses
a physical constraint to the grading concept of the site. In ,-der for the lots along the south
boundary of the project site to properly drain onto La Vine Street, the pad grades have to be raised,
which results in the use of a 6-foot retaining wall. In addition, La Vine Street cannot be lowered to
reduce the height of the retaining wall because of the existing sewer line in the street and the tie-in
at Center Avenue. Therefore, without the Variance, an unnecessary physical hardship for the
app. licant would be created.
b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other
properties in the same district.
· The site is adjacent to the railroad right-of-way, which poses a physical
constraint that does not generally apply to other properties in the same district.
c. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the speci~ '~ regulation would
deprive the applica?: of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties .=. same district.
· The proposed 12-foot wall height is necessary in order ~,sure that future
homeowners enjoy the privilege of having a privacy and security wall. Without . Variance, future
homeowners would be deprived of privileges enjoyed by other homeowner with;n the same district.
d. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district.
· Because most properties in the same district are not equally impacted by
railroad right-of-way, the granting of the Variance will not set a precedent.
e. That the granting of the Vadance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
· Granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare but, conversely, provide a security and privacy wall for the future homeowners.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, and 3 above, this
Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below.
a. Vadance approval shall expire if building permits are not issued within 5 years from
the date of approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
VAR 00-01 - FORECAST HOMES
April 12, 2000
Page 3
b. The wall shall be constructed with a decorative textured block of a dark color, for
the lower retaining portion with a lighter color decorative block on top, subject to City Planner
approval. In addition, climbing vines are required along the south face of the wall.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall cer[ify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2000.
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 12th day of April 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
the city of
Rancho Cucamonga
Staff Report
DATE: April 12, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Debra Meier, AICP, Contract Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 15453 - LEWIS
OPERATING CORP. - The request for a parcel map to create three pamels totaling
62.71 acres within the northeast quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The
parcel map is intended for financing and conveyance purposes only between Lewis
Operating Corp. and Kaufman and Broad. APN: 227-151-22, 32, and 34.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 15454 - LEWIS
OPERATING CORP. - The request for a pamel map to create four parcels totaling
102.13 acres within the southeast quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The
parcel map is intended for financing and conveyance purposes only between Lewis
Operating Corp. and Kaufman and Broad. APN: 227-151-26, 30, and 52.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 15455 - LEWIS
OPERATING CORP. - The request for a pamel map to create three pamels totaling
43.27 acres within the southeast quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The
parcel map is intended for financing and conveyance purposes only between Lewis
Operating Corp. and Kaufman and Broad. APN: 227-151-51 and 53.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq:
North North of Base Line Road - Victoria Community Plan/existing single-family
residences/Low-Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre).
South - South of Foothill Boulevard - Industrial Specific Area Plan/Lowe's Home
Improvement Center (now under construction)/Industriai Park (Subarea 7).
East East of Rochester Avenue - Existing single-family residential (a.k.a. "The Rochester
Tract")/Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre).
West West of Milliken Avenue - Terra Vista Community Plan/existing single and multi-
family development/Low-Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre);
Medium Density Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre); and Medium-High
Density Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre); and Mixed Use (MFC).
ITEM E, F, & G
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PM 15453-54-55
April 12, 2000
Page 2
B. General Plan Desiqnations:
Project Site - Commercial; Low-Medium Density Residential; Medium Density Residential
North - Low-Medium Density Residential
South- Industrial
East Low Density Residential
West Low-Medium Density Residential; Medium Density Residential; Medium-High
Density Residential; and Commercial.
C. Site Characteristics: Staff has reviewed the parcel maps and found them to be in conformance
with the Terra Vista Community Plan. The proposed parcel maps are located within the
eastern half of the Terra Vista Community, generally south of Base Line Road, north of Foothill
Boulevard, west of Rochester Avenue, and east of Milliken Avenue. The project area consists
of remnant vineyards, and some areas that have been previously mass-graded. The land
generally slopes from north to south at an approximate grade of 2 percent.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The three parcel maps are intended for financing and conveyance of parcels
between Lewis Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for
development are included in this application. Conditions of approval will be developed
specifically to each parcel at the time development applications ara proposed.
Parcel Map 15453 is comprised of three parcels located south of Base Line Road, east of
Milliken Avenue and north of the East Greenway Trail corridor. Parcel 1 (16.12 acres) is on
the south side of Base Line Road and the east side of Ellena West with a land use designation
of Medium-High Density Residential. Parcel 2 (38.67 acres) lies eastedy of Milliken Avenue
between Terra Vista Parkway and Mountain View Drive with a land use designation of Low-
Medium Residential. Parcel 3 (7.91 acres) lies between Mountain View Ddve and the East
Greenway Trail corridor with a land use designation of Medium Density Residential.
Pamel Map 15454 is comprised of four parcels located along the north side of Church Street,
between Milliken Avenue and Terra Vista Parkway and along the south side of Church Street,
between Poplar and Rochester Avenues. Parcel 1 (38.53 acres) is the portion lying along the
south side of Church Street between Poplar and Rochester with land use designations of Low-
Medium and Medium Residential. Parcel 2 (38.15 acres) lies at the corner of Terra Vista
Parkway and Church Street with a land use designation of Medium and Medium-High Density
Residential. Parcels 3 and 4 lie north of Church Street; Parcel 3 (13.31 acres) has a land use
designation of Medium-High Density Residential and Parcel 4 (12.13 acres) has a land use
designation of High Density Residential.
Parcel Map 15455 is comprised of three parcels located north of Foothill Boulevard along
Milliken Avenue. Parcel 1 (9.33 acres) is a portion of The Commons commercial master plan
with a land use designation of MFC (Mixed Use); Parcel 2 (22.88 acres) is the remainder of
the block which surrounds the Rancho San Antonio Medical Center with a land use
designation of MHO (Mixed Use): and Parcel 3 (11.06 acres) is located on the north side of
Church Street on the east side of Milliken Avenue with a land use designation ~f Commercial
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PM 15453-54-55
April 12, 2000
Page 3
No requirements or conditions for public or on-site improvements are being included with the
parcel maps. However, at such time that development is proposed for any portion of a parcel,
a master plan will be required for the entire parcel. The master plan will be required to include
(but not be timited to) access, circulation, driveway locations, community greenways and trails,
and land use. This has been included as a condition of approval on the attached Resolutions
of Approval.
B. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study was completed by the applicant and staff
completed Part II. There were no mitigation measures required as a result of the analysis.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within
a 300-foot radius of the project site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approves issuance of the
Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolutions of Approval for each parcel map.
Respectfully submitted,
City Planner
BB:DM~ma
Attachments: Exhibit "A" Parcel Map 15453
Exhibit "B" Parcel Map 15454
Exhibit "C" Parcel Map 15455
Exhibit "D" Environmental Study Parts I and II for Parcel Map 15453
Exhibit "E" Environmental Study Parts I and II for Parcel Map 15454
Exhibit "F" Environmental Study Parts I and II for Parcel Map 15455
Resolutions of Approval
""'"'" PARCEL MAP NO 15453
PARCEL MAP
,, /
"~',.--~'~"~ PARCEL MAP NO 15454
'
~ ......~---
---, ~~~/~
BOUNDARY AND SHEET INDEX MAP
"'"'"-' 455
,'"'.-~'"'~ PARCEL MAP NO 15
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION FORM
(Part i - Initial Study)
The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the proposed
project so that the City may review the project pursuant to City policies, ordinances, and
guidelines; the California Environmental Quality Act; and the City's Rules and Procedures
to Implement CEQA. It is important that the information.requested in this application be
provided in full. -' '
INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that il is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure
that the application is complete at the time of submittal; CJty staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing
infon'nation.
Application Number for the project to which this fon'n pertains:
relepho, o Numbe~. ['q,~) qg.~- 7e~ .
Name & Address of pereon prepa6ng this form (if different [tom above):
/,~/ ~,.~,.v.~ ..~r~'~7- '~'~'/7'z'
Nu he .
Information indicateo , ' asterisk (') ia not requited of non-constn~cifon CUP's unless othen~4ae requested by sta~
'1) Provide a full scale (8-1z2 x 11) copy of t~e USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site; and indicate the
site boundaries.
2) Provide a set of color photographs which show raprasentafive ~iews into the site from the norlh, south, east and west;
views into and from the site from the ptfmary access points which serve the site; and representative views of significant
faatura$ [r~m the site. Include a reap showing location of each photograph.
4) AssessoK$ Parcel Nurebet~ (attach additional sheet if necessary):
Net Site Area (toial site ~ize minus.araa of public street; & proposed dedications): ~ .~_.. , ~;~ / z/ ~Z~____~
7} Deschbe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the prcje'ct si~e (attach additional sheet
if necessary:
8) Include a desc~ption of afl pan, its which will be necessary frcm the City of Rancho Cucareonga and other governmental
agencies in on,er to fully implereent the project:
iNiTSTD1.Wi=[:).4/96 ~"'~ F ~ ~ '~ Page2
9) Descnbe the phy~cal setting of the ~ite a~ it exists before the prcject incfuo~ng infomlation on topography. ~oil stability, plant~
and animal& mature ~ee& trails and macls, drainage cou~es, and scenic aspect& Desc~fbe any existing structures on site
(incJuding age and condition) and the use of the structures. Altach photograph~ of significant features described. In addition,
site all sources o~ inf°n'nalian (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic aludie~, biotic and amheological suP~eys, traffic studies):
· 10) Describe the known cultural and/or histo#cal aspects of the ~ite. Site all soon:es of information (books, published moorts and
oral history):
11) Desc~fbe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect
pn~posed uses:
12) Descdbe the proposed project in detail This should pt~v4de an adequate descdp#~n of the site in terms of ultimate use which
will result fram the prosed prajecL Indicate if them am pmpo,sed phases for developmenL the extent of development to occur
with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. AJtach additional sheet(s) if necessary:
13] Deschbe the surrounding praperties, including infom~alion on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects.
Indicate the type of land use (residential. commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family. apartment houses, shops.
deparlment stores, etc.) end scale of development (height. frontage, setback, mar yar~. etc.):
I~r,~ ¢.4'. ~..~e,¢ ~,~ -¢"/¢ ,¢c¢,¢~. /~ ~ ~_..~~ ¢¢.,et~
14) Will the praposed praject change the pattem. $cale or character °f the sun~unding genet~l ama °f the pr°ject?
15) Indicate the type of short4etm and long-term noise to be generate~ including source and amount. How vaTI these noise levet~
affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What method~ of sound proofing am prcposed~
'16) /ndicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scedic trees:
17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains:
18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clanfication, please contact
the Cucamonga County Water Dist~fct at 987-2591.
a. Residential (gal~day) /~,4~'~ Peak use (gaVOay)
b. Commercial/Ind. (gal~day/ac) ~ Peak use (gal~rain/ac)
19) Indicate prcposed method of sewage disl~osaL __ Septic Tank ~ Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach
percolation tests. If discha~Je to a sanitaq~ sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See
Attachment A for usage estimates), For further cla~ficafiun, please contacf the Cucamonga County Water Dist~ct at 987-2591.
a. Residential (gal~day)
b. Commercial/Ind. (gal~day~ac)
RE,~IDENTIAL PROJECT~:
20] Number of residential units:
Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size:
Altached (indicate whether units am rental or for sale units):
21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or renL~:
I~ent (per month) $ /~./~'- to $,
22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type:
23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type:
24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School
Districts as shown in Attachment B:
a. Elementaq~:'
b. Junior High: J~./,~,
C Senior High /(//'~('
/
COMMERCIAL. INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS
25) Descdbetypeofuse($)andmajorfunction($)ofcommercial, incfustdalorinsUtuUonaluses:
Total floor area of commen:ial, in(~ustrial, or institutional uses by typo:
Indicate hour~ of operation:
28) Number of employees: Total'.
Maximum Shift:
Time of Maximum Shift:
29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications,'incJuding wage and salaq~ ranges, as well as an indication of the rate
of hire [or each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary):
30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently raside in the City:
For commercial and industrfal uses only. indicate the source, type and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be
verified through the South Coast Air Quality Managemenl Oi$~rk;t. al (818) 572..~253):
32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the projecf been contacted to deten'nine their ability to provide
adequate service to the proposed project? If $o. please indicate their response.
33) In the known history of this properly, has there been any use. storage, or discha~je o! hazatclous and/or toxic materials?
Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's: mdicaclivo substances: peatici~es and
heKoicldes: fuels, oSs, ~otvent~ and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note unde~mund stomge of any of the above.
Please list the rnatetfals and describe their use, storege, and/or discharge on the pmperb/, as well as the dates of use, if
34) V~II the proposed pmjeot involve the temporary or '7-ten~ use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic
materials, including but not limited to those examp~ ;ted above? If yes, provide an inventory of all such malerials to be
used and preposed method of disposal. The Iocalic ~ such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be
shown and labeled on the application plans.
I hereby cerli~y that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present Ihe data and info.nation required for
adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability, that the facts, statements, and infuemation presented are tnt, e and
correct lot he best of my knowledge and belief.. I furlher under~tand that additional information may be required to be submitted
bef°re an adequate evaluati°n can be made by lhe C~/~f~ch° Cucam°nga'
f
/
BASE LINE ~OAD
66 KV & 12 KV ELECTRICAL
& TELEPHONE
z
W
"~ LEGEND: ~J
~ TENTAT I VE o-oLINEOVERHEAD POWER
~ z P,M, NO, 15453
JI
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1. Project File: Parcel Map 15453
2. Related Files: Parcel Maps 15454 and 15455
3. Description of Proje~'+' Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 15453 - Lewis
Operatin,q Corp. - The uest for a Parcel Map to create three parcels totaling 62.71 acres
within the northeast q **rant of the Term Vista Community Plan. The parcel map is
intended for financing a, ~ conveyance purposes only, between Lewis Operating Corp. and
Kaufman and Broad. APN 227-151-22,32,34
4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Lewis Operating Corporation
1156 North Mountain Avenue
Upland CA 91786
5. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre)
6. Zoning: Terra Vista Community Plan consisting of the following Land Use Designations:
Low-Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), Medium Density Residential
(8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High Density Residential (14-24 dwelling units
per acre).
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Parcel Map 15453 is located in the northeast
quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. Existing land uses in the immediate area
include single- and multi-family residential within Terra Vista, and existing single family
residential north of the site within the Victoria Community Plan. The project area consists
of some remnant vineyards, and some areas that have been previously mass-graded. The
land generally slopes from north to south at an approximate grade of 2%.
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:
Debra Meier, AICP, Contract Planner
(909) 477-2750
10. Other agencies whose approval is required:
None
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 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 ( ) Noise ( ) Recreation
( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
(x) 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 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.
Signed:
Debra Meier, AICP
Contract Planner
March 21, 2000
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 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? ( ) (x)
~b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project? ( ) (x)
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the
vicinity? ( ) (x)
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community? ( ) ( ) ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the
time development applications are proposed.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? ( ) (x)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either
directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)? ( ) (x)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ( ) (x)
!
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 Page 4
Comments:
a/b) The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are
included in this application. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each
parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
c) There are no existing housing units present within the area of the proposed parcel
map.
impact P°tentially I ]S~nificant
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in
or expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of geologic impacts will occur at the time that development
is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the time
development applications are proposed.
4. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 Page 5
Potentially Unless 3'nan
b) Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration
of surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements? ( ) ( ) (x)
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? ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of
groundwater otherwise available for public
water supplies? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of water and drainage related impacts will occur at the time
that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each
parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to
an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 Page 6
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of air quality impacts will occur at the time that development
is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the time
development applications are proposed.
PotentiallYlmpactPotentiallYSigmficant Unlesslmpact Impact Than Less Impact
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to
nearby uses? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) (x)
t') Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Bread. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of transportation and traffic-related impacts will occur at the
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each pamel at the time development applications are proposed.
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)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucemonga
Parcel Map 15453 Page 7
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees,
eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.,
eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and
vernal pool)? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of biological impacts will occur at the time that development
is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the time
development applications are proposed.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposah
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? ( ) ( ) (x)
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? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on energy and mineral resources will occur at the
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 Page 8
impact P°tentiallyISignificantimpact Less I c~l
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)? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
b) Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of
potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts from hazards will occur at the time that
development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel
at the time development applications are proposed.
10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of transportation and noise-related impacts will occur at the
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 Page 9
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 fo/lowing areas:
a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
c) The project site is within the attendance boundaries of the Etiwanda and Central
School Districts and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District. Both districts have
previously entered into mitigation agreements for the entire Terra Vista Community
Plan and formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) to fund school
facilities.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposa, result in a need for new systems or supplies or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (x)
0 Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Pamel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on utilities and service systems will occur at the
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 Page 10
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposah
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic
effect? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on aesthetics will occur at the time that
development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel
at the time development applications are proposed.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change
which would affect unique ethnic cultural
values? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within
the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on cultural resources will occur at the time that
development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel
at the time development applications are proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 Page 11
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
Developed Parkland is provided throughout Terra Vista as part of the Park Implementation
Plan in conjunction with the review and approval of any residential project.
'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 important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) ( ( ) (x)
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental goals? (A short-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.) ( ( ) ( ) (x)
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.) ( ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15453 Page 12
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have
environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
EARLIER ANALYSES
Eadier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiedng, program EIR, 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:
(x) General Plan EIR
(Certified April 6, 1981)
(x)Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
(x) Terra Vista Planned Community EIR
(SCH #81082808, certified February 16, 1983)
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 that no significant environmental effects would occur.
Signature: Date:
Print Name and Title:
[:\FINAL\CEQA\INSTUDY.PT2
~:NVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION FORM
°"~"';~"~'..~o~. (Part i - Initial Study)
(~0~) 477.2750
The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the proposed
project so that the City may review the project Pursuant to City policies, ordinances, and
guidelines; the California Environmental Quality Act; and the City's Rules and Procedures
to Implement CEQA. It is important that the information.requested in this application be
provided in full.
INCOMPLETE APP£1CA TIONS W1LL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure
that the application is complete at the time of submillal; C~*ly staff will not be available lo perform work required to previde missing
information.
Application Number for the project to which this form pertains:
Naree & Address of pe~on p~padng this fo~ (if different from above):
/~/ ~~ ~ ~/~
I
=y asterisk (') is not required of non-construction CUP's unless othenMse requested by staff.
'1) Provide a full scale (8-1/2 x 1 I) copy of the USGS Ouadrent Sheet(s) which includes the project site. and indicate the
site boundaries.
2) Provide a set of color photogrephs which ~how ropmsentative views into the site from the north, south, east and west;
views into and f~m the ~ite from the primary access points which serve the site; and representative views of significant
features (~m the site. Include a map showing location of each photogreph.
3) Project Location (deschbe): {~_j(t'~c~,~ ~,/ '~' ~4,1,/V~/~ ~ ~,,~/,,,/,,4.~ ~ 7~ ~
4) Assessor's Parcel Numbem (attach additional sheet if necessary):
,v.2=7- aaa
7) Deschbe any proposed generel plan amendment or zone change which would affect the proje'ct siie (a~ach additional sheet
if necessary:
8) Include a description of all permits which wfll be necessary from the Cily of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental
agencies in onYer to fully implement the project:
9) Desc~fbe the physical setting of the site as it exist~ before the project including infommtion on topography, soil stability, plants
and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, d~inage coupes, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structuma on site
(including age and con.lion) and the u~e of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features clear,bed. In addition,
site aX sources of information (i.e., geo!~Jical and/or hydrologic studies, biob'c and archeological SUrVeys, b"affic studies):
· 10) Desc;fbe the known cultuml and/orhistodcalaspect$ of ihe site. site 88 sources ofinformalion (book$, published reports and
o~1 history):
11) Describe any noise spumes and their levels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect
ptDposed usas:
E)~/~/'/~/& ~m ///~T ~/~/~,~-. . ~ ~_~r ~
~/~/~_
12) Desc~be the propOsed project in detail, This should prm4de an adequate desc~ption of the site in ten~s of ultimate uae which
will result from the prosed project, thdicate if them am proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur
with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each incmrnent. Attach additional sheet(s) if neceasary:
13) Deschbe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, histedcal, or scenic aspects.
Indicate the type of land use (residential. commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops.
department stoma, etc.) and scale of development (height. frontage, setback, mar yard. etc.):
14] ~fl the ~m~osed project change the pattern, scale or cha~er of the su~unding gene~l ama of the project?
15) Indicate the type of ~o~t-tem~ and long-term noise to be generated, including ~ource and amoun£ How wTI these noise levels
affect adjacent pmpen~'es and on-site uses. W~at methoda of sound proofing am proposed?
'16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacement3 of mature or scenic trees:
17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains:
18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For futther clarification, please contact
the Cucamonga County Water District at 987*2591.
a. Residential (gal/day), /~ Peak use (gal/Day)
b. Commerciablnd. (gal/day/ac) ~ Peak uae (gal/rain/ac)
19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. SePtic Tank~ Sewer. If septic tanks are ptopoaecl, attach
pemolation tests. If discha~e to a sanitaq, sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily aewage generation: (See
Attachment A for usage estimates). For further cJarification, please contact the Cucamonga County Water District at 987-2591.
a. Residential (gal/day)
b. Commefc~aYlnd. (gal/day/ac)
R ID NTIA R ·
20) Number of residential units:
Detached (indicate range of pan:el sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size:
Page
Attached ([nd[cate whether units aM rantal or [or sate unita):
2 I) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rants:
Sale Pdce(s) $ ~/~J, to $.
Rent (per month) $ ~/'~-' to $
22) SpecJfy number of bedrooms by unit type:
23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type:
24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be ra=iding within the project: Contact the appr~ptfate School
Dist~fcts aa shown in Attachment B:
a. Elementary: ' /~*~/~-
b. Junior High:
c. Senior High
COMMERCIAL. INOU~T~IA~, AND INSTF~JTTONAL PROJE~T~
25) Desc~fbe type of use(s) and major function(s) of commercial, induct#al or institutional uses:
20) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by ~ypo:
27) Indicate hours of operation:
28) Number of employees: Total:
Maximum Shift:
Time of Maximum Shift:
29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the cate
of hire for each classification (altach additional sheet if necessary):
30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City:
For commercial and indust#al uses only. indicate the $oume. type and amount of air pollution emissions, (Data should be
verified threugh the South Coast Air Quality Management Dist#ct. at (818) 572-6283):
32) Have the water, sewer, fire. and flo~d control agencies sen~ing the project been contacfed to determine their ability to provide
adequate Service to the proposecl project? I! $0. please indicate their response.
/
33) In the known hi=tory of this pmpen~, has there been any use. storable, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials?
~amplas of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but am not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and
herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and otherflammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above.
Please list the materials and dascribe their use. storage, and/or discha~e on the properly, as well aa the dates of use. if
known,
34) Will the proposed project involve the temporaq/ or long-term use. storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic
mate~fals, including but not limited lo those examples listed above? frye=, provide an inventory of all such materials to be
used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses. along with the storage and shipment ames. shall be
shown and labeled on the application plans,
ereby cetfify that the =talements furnished above and in the a~tached exhibits present the data and information roquimd for
quate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability, that the facts, statement=, and information prasented am troe and
ct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I fu~lher under~tand that additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaluation can be made by the C~'b//~f Rancho Cucamonga.
!
TENTATZVE
P,~, NO, 15454
LEGEND:
o~o OVERHEAD PnWER
LINE
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1. Project File: Parcel Map 15454
2. Related Files: Parcel Maps 15453 and 15455
3. Description of Project: Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 15454 - Lewis
Operatin.q Corp. - The request for a Parcel Map to create four parcels totaling 102.13 acres
within the southeast quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The parcel map is
intended for financing and conveyance purposes only, between Lewis Operating Corp. and
Kaufamn and Broad. APN 227-151-26,30,52
4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Lewis Operating Corporation
1156 North Mountain Avenue
Upland CA 91786
5. General Plan Designation: Low-Medium and Medium Density Residential
6. Zoning: Terra Vista Community Plan consisting of the following Land Use Designations:
Low-Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), Medium Density Residential
(8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High Density Residential (14-24 dwelling units
per acre).
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Parcel Map 15454 is located in the southeast
quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. Existing land uses in the immediate area
include single- and multi-family residential within Terra Vista, and existing single family
residential north of the site within the Victoria Community Plan.The project area consists
of some remnant vineyards, and some areas that have been previously mass-graded. The
land generally slopes from north to south at an approximate grade of 2%.
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:
Debra Meier, AICP, Contract Planner
(909) 477-2750
10. Other agencies whose approval is required:
None
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 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 ( ) Noise ( ) Recreation
( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
(x) 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 eadier 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.
Signed: ~er, AIC/~P'
Contract Planner
March 21, 2000 ,
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 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? ( ) (x)
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project? ( ) (x)
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the
vicinity? ( ) (x)
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement Of an
established community? ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the
time development applications are proposed.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal'.
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? ( ) (x)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either
directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)? ( ) (x)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 Page 4
Comments:
a/b) The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are
included in this application. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each
parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
c) There are no existing housing units present within the area of the proposed parcel
map.
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEF Would the proposal result in
or expose people to po~ al impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ) (x)
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ) (x)
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) ) (x)
d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) ) (x)
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) ) (x)
f~ Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of geologic impacts will occur at the time that development
is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the time
development applications are proposed.
4. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? '( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
/
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 Page 5
b) Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration
of surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements? ( ) ( ) (x)
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? ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of
groundwater otherwise available for public
water supplies? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of water and drainage related impacts will occur at the time
that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each
parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to
an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 Page 6
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of air quality impacts will occur at the time that development
is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the time
development applications are proposed.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Woul; ,
proposal result in:
a) increased vehicle trips or traffic conge .? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Hazards to safety from design features ~d.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to
nearby uses? ( ) (x)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) (x)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ) (x)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? ( ) ). (x)
g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of transportation and traffic-related impacts will occur at the
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
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)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
/
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 Page 7
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees,
eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.,
eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and
vernal pool)? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of biological impacts will occur at the time that development
is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the time
development applications are proposed.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposah
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
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? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on energy and mineral resources will occur at the
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 Page 8
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)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of
potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts from hazards will occur at the time that
development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel
at the time development applications are proposed.
10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ) ( ) (x)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of transportation and noise-related impacts will occur at the
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho. Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 Page 9
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? ( ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Police protection? ( ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Schools? ( ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Other governmental services? ( ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
c) The project site is within the attendance boundaries of the Etiwanda and Central
School Districts and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District. Both districts have
previously entered into mitigation agreements for the entire Terra Vista Community
Plan and formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) to fund school
facilities.
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? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (x)
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on utilities and service systems will occur at the
Initial Study for City of Rancho. Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 Page 10
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
Potentially
'13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic
effect? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on aesthetics will occur at the time that
development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel
at the time development applications are proposed,
'14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposah
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) (). ( ) (x)
c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within
the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on cultural resources will occur at the time that
development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel
at the time development applications are proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 Page 11
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
Comments:
Developed Parkland is provided throughout Terra Vista as part of the Park Implementation
Plan in conjunction with the review and approval of any residential project.
'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 important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental goals? (A short-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.) ( ) ( ) ( (x)
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.) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15454 Page 12
Impact P°tentially I I[Signit"~cantImpact .~
Potentially un~ess
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have
environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
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 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:
(x) General Plan EIR
(Certified April 6, 1981)
(x)Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #-88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
(x) Terra Vista Planned Community EIR
(SCH #81082808, certified February 16, 1983)
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 that no significant environmental effects would occur.
Signature: Date:
Print Name and Title:
I:\FINAL\CEQA\INSTUDY.PT2
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION FORM
(Part I - Initial Study)
The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the proposed
project so that the City may review the project pursuant to City policies, ordinances, and
guidelines; the California Environmental Quality Act; and the City's Rules and Procedures
to Implement CEQA. It is important that the information.requested in this application be
provided in full. ' '
INCOMP~.ET'E APPLICA TIONS WILL NOT BE PROCE$SE=D Please note that it is the responsibility of lhe applicant to ensure
that the application is complete at the time of suhmitlal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing
infom~ation.
Application Number for the project to whicll this form pertains: ' '
relepho.e Numbe~ ('~'e,q) qSP&- 7~
Name & Address of per,on pmpadng this fo~ (if diffemnt lmm above): ~A ~ ~ E ~
Information indicated by a=te#sk (°) is not required of non-constmc~'on CUP's unlegs othe~se requested by
'1) Pm~de a full ~cale (~ 1~ x 11) ~py of the USGS Ouad~t Sh~t(~) whi~ injuries the project ~ite, and indicate the
gte boundade&
2) Provide a set of c~or photographs whi~ show mpmsenta~e ~ews ~ the ~te from the no~h, south, east and
~ews int~ and f~m the site from the pdma~ acce~ poin~ ~i~ =e~e the ~te: and representative views of ~ignificant
features (~m the ~te. Include a map =ho~ng Iocati~ of ea~ photograph.
3) Project Location (des~be): ~ ~ ~ ~d~ ~ ~/~ ~ ~ ~
4) Assessot'a Parcel Numbet~ (attach additional sheet ff necessary):
,4. ~. ,~. '~ =~7- /~/- ~/ ,~.-~
'6) Net Site Area (total site size minus .area of public streel~ & proposed dedications):
7) Describe any prcposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the prcje'ct si~e (attach additional sheet
if necessary:
8) Include a desc#plion of all pen'nits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental
agencies in ot~er to fully implement the pn~ject:
9) Descn*~e the physical setbng of the site a~ it exists before the project including iniormaUon on iopogMphy, soil stability, plants
and animals, mature ~e~, baS~ and road~, drainage coupes, and scenic aspect. Oe$c,~be any existing structures on site
(incioding age and condition) and the u~e of the Stn~c~re& Attach photo~mph$ of significant featu~$ de$c~bed. In addition,
=ire all $ource$ ~ infon~aflon (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic $tudie$. biotic and a~heoiogical Surveys, baffic studies):
· 10) Desc#betheknownculturaland/orhi$io#calaspect$oftheSite. Sileall$ourcesofinfotmation(books' published~eporfsand
o~1 hisioq/) :
11) De$cr~be any n~i$e $~urc~ and ~heir ~eve~$ that ~w a~ect the $i~e (ait~J~a~ madw~y nol$e~ e~c~) and h~w th~y w#~ ~ect
pn~l~osed uses:
12) Desc~be the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate desc,'fp#on of the ~ite in terms of ulUmate use which
v,,ill result from the pro, ed pmjecL Indicate if them am proposed phases for developmenL the extent of development to occur
with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary:
13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on pl~t$ and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects.
Indicate the type of land use (residential. commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family. apartment houses, shops.
department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height. frontage, setback, rear yafcl, etc.):
14) V, fill the proposed project change the pattern, scale or character of the surrounding general ama of the project?
,~7.7_' ~__~._ 5~,~ Page4
INITSTO1.VVPD-4/cJ6 ~ ,~ /
15) Indicate the type of short-tern1 and Iong4em~ noise to be generated, including soume and amounL How wrTI these noise levels
affect adjacent p~operfies and on-site uses. What methods of sound proofing are proposed?
'16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees:
17) Indicate any bodies of Water (including domestic water supplies) into whicl~ the site
18) Indicale exl~ected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimate$). For fu~ther clanfication, please contact
the Cucamonga County Water District at 987-2591.
a. Residential (gal~day) ~,*~J'~ Peak use (gal/Day)
b. Commercial/Ind. (gal~day/ac) ~ Peek use (gal~rain/ac)
19) Indicale preposed method of sewage disposal. Septic Tank Sewer. If septic tanks are pro~osed, attach
percolation tests. If di$cha~Je to a senilely sewage system is prol~osed indicate expectmY daily sewage generation: (See
Attachment A for usage estimates). For further ciarfication, please contact the Cucamonga County Water Dialect at 987-2591.
a. Residential (gal~day)
b. Commercial/Ind. (gal~day/ac)
RE ID NTIA ·
20) Number of residential units:
Detach~,~ (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size:
Attached (indicate whether units am rental or for sale units):
21) Anticipated renge of sale pdcea and/or mnts:
Rant mer month) $ J~./~" tO $
22) Specify number of bedrooms by unil type:
23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit ~/pe:
. 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the prcject: Contact the appmp#ate School
Oist~cts as shown in Attact;ment B:
a. Elemental/:
b. Junior High: ~ /A
c. Senior High ~lf /.~
!
~QMM~IAL. INDUSTRIAl. AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS
25) De$c~fbetype~fu$e($)andmaj~rfuncti~n(s)~fcommercfa~industria~rinstituti~na~u$e$:
2~) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uaes by typo:
27) Indicate hour= of operation:
28) Number of employees: Total:
Maximum Shift:
Time of Maximum Shift:
29) Provide breakd~wn ~f an~cipated j~b c~assi~cati~ns~ inctuding wage and sa~aP/ ranges~ as we~~ as an indicati~n ~f the cate
of him for each ctassifica#on (attach acYditional sheet if necessary):
30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that curmntly mside in the City:
For comme~ial and indust#al uses only. indicate the source, type and amount of airpollution emissions. (Data should be
re,fried through the South Coast Air Quality Management Dist~fct. at (818) 572-~283]:
32] Have the water, sewer, tim. and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to provide
adequate service to the proposed project? If so. please indicate Iheir msponse.
33) ~n the kn~wn hist~q/ ~f this pr~pettY~ has them been any u~e~ st~rage~ ~r discharge ~f hazard~us ~d/~r t~xic mate~fa~s?
Examples of hazanYous an~Yor toxic maletfal$ include, but are not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances: pesticides and
herbicides; fuels, oiL~ ~olvents. and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the abo~e.
Please list the mate~fal$ and describe their use, storage, and/or discha~Je on the property, as well as the dates of use, if
known.
34) Will the proposed project involve Ihe temporary or Iong-tem~ use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic
mate~als, including but not limited lo those examples listed above? If yes. provide an inventory of ail such materials to be
used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, afung with the storage and shipment areas, shall be
shown and labeled on the application plans.
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits presenl the data and infonnalion required for
adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability, that the facts, statements, and infon~ation prasented are tn~e and
correct lot he best of my knowledge and belief. I fu~lher unde~Jtand that additional infon~ation may be mquirad to be submitted
before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Cily/~f Rancho Cucomonga. ..
~
15~55
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
'1. Project File: Parcel Map 15455
2. Related Files: Parcel Maps 15453 and 15454
3. Description of Project: Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 15455 - Lewis
Operatin.q Corp. - The request for a Parcel Map to create three parcels total 43.27 acres
within the southeast quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The parcel map is
intended for financing and conveyance purposes only, between Lewis Operating Corp. and
Kaufman and Broad. APN 227-151-51,53
4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Lewis Operating Corporation
1156 North Mountain Avenue
Upland CA 91786
5. General Plan Designation: Commercial
6. Zoning: Terra Vista Community Plan consisting of the following Land Use Designations:
Recreation and Mixed Use.
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Parcel Map 15455 is located in the southeast
quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. Existing land uses in the immediate area
include multi-family.residential and commercial development within Terra Vista, and the
Lowe's Home Improvement Center, now under construction, located south of Foothill
Boulevard in the Industrial Park District. The project area consists of some remnant
vineyards, and some areas that have been previously mass-graded. The land generally
slopes from north to south at an approximate grade of 2%.
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:
Debra Meier, AICP, Cc :tact Planner
(909) 477-2750
10. Other agencies whose approval is required:
None
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 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 ( ) Noise ( ) Recreation
( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
(x) 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 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.
Signed: ~
Debra Meier, AICP
Contract Planner
March 21, 2000
/
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 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
mit!gate the significant effects identified.
Significant
Impac[ Less
Potentially UnlesS Than
issues and SupPorting I~fon'nat~on Sources: Significant Mitigation Sign~mant No
t. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the
vicinity? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the
time development applications are proposed.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either
directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 Page 4
Comments:
a/b) The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are
included in this application. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each
parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
c) There are no existing housing units present within the area of the proposed parcel
map.
Impact Signlfica~tP°tentially ~mpact Impact
Issues anti Supporling Infon'nation Sources: impact Less
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in
or expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) (x)
· d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Landslides or mudfiows? ( ) ( ) (x)
f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of geologic impacts will occur at the time that development
is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the time
development applications are proposed.
4. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
/
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 Page 5
b) Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding? ( ) ( ( ) (x)
c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration
of surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
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? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of
groundwater otherwise available for public
water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of water and drainage related impacts will occur at the time
that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each
parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to
an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) ) (x)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) ) (x)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
/,
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 Page 6
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of air quality impacts will occur at the time that development
is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the time
development applications are proposed.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to
nearby uses? ( ) (x)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) (x)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) (x)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufrnan and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of transportation and traffic-related impacts will occur at the
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
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)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 Page 7
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees,
eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.,
eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and
vernal pool)? ( ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of biological impacts will occur at the time that development
is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel at the time
development applications are proposed.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposah
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans? ( ( ) ) (x)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? ( ( ) ) (x)
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? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on energy and mineral resources will occur at the
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 Page 8
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)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of
potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts from hazards will occur at the time that
development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel
at the time development applications are proposed.
10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of transportation and noise-related impacts will occur at the
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho .Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 Page 9
Potentially Unless Titan
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 fo/lowing areas:
a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
c) The project site is within the attendance boundaries of the Etiwanda and Central
School Districts and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District. Both districts have
previously entered into mitigation agreements for the entire Terra Vista Community
Plan and formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) to fund school
facilities.
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? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) (x)
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (x)
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on utilities and service systems will occur at the
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 Page 10
time that development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to
each parcel at the time development applications are proposed.
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposah
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Have a demonstrable negative aestheti~
effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on aesthetics will occur at the time that
development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel
at the time development applications are proposed.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change
which would affect unique ethnic cultural ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
values?
d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within
the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
Comments:
The Parcel Map is intended for financing and conveyance of parcels between Lewis
Operating Corporation and Kaufman and Broad. No proposals for development are included
in this application. An analysis of impacts on cultural resources will occur at the time that
development is proposed. Conditions of approval will be developed specific to each parcel
at the time development applications are proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 Page 11
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
b) Affect existing recreational oppodunities? ( ) ( ) ( (x)
Comments:
Developed Parkland is provided throughout Terra Vista as part of the Park Implementation
Plan in conjunction with the review and approval of any residential project.
'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 important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) ( ( ) (x)
b) Short term: Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental goals? (A short-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.) ( ) ( ( ) (x)
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.) ( ) ( ) ) (x)
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Parcel Map 15455 Page 12
d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have
environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x)
EARLIER ANALYSES
Eadier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiedng, program EIR, 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 eadier 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:
(x) General Plan EIR
(Certified April 6, 1981)
(x)Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
(x) Terra Vista Planned Community EIR
(SCH #81082808, certified February 16, 1983)
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 that no significant environmental effects would occur.
Signature: Date:
Print Name and Title:
I:\FINAL\CEQA\INSTUDY.PT2
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.: Parcet Map No. 15453 Public Review Period Closes: April 12, 2000
Project Name: Project Applicant: Lewis Operating Corp.
Project Location (also see attached map): Located south of Base Line Road, east of Milliken Avenue
and north of the East Greenway Trail corridor. Pamel 1 (16.12 acres) is on the south side of Base Line Road
and the east side of EIlena West with a land use designation of Medium-High Density Residential. Parcel 2
(38.67 acres) lies easterly of Milliken Avenue between Terra Vista Parkway and Mountain View Drive with
a land use designation of Low-Medium Residentiat. Parcel 3 (7.91 acres) lies between Mountain View Drive
and the East Greenway Trail corridor with a land use designation of Medium Density Residential. APN:
227-151-22, 32, and 34.
Project Description: The request for a parcel map to create three parcels totaling 62.71 acres within the
northeast quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The parcel map is intended for financing and
conveyance purposes only between Lewis Operating Corp; and Kaufman and Broad. Related files: Parcel
Map 15454 and Parcel Map 15455.
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 clearly 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.
April 12, 20000
Date of Determination · Adopted By
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15453, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
BASE LINE ROAD EAST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS
IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-151-22, 32, AND 34.
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 15453, submitted by Lewis Operating Corp.,
applicants, for the purpose of subdividing into 3 parcels, the real property situated in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, State of California, identified as APN: 277-151-22,
32, and 34, located on the south side of Base Line Road, east of Milliken Avenue; and
WHEREAS, on April 12, 2000, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public
hearing for the above-described map.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the Terra Vista
Community Plan and the General Plan.
2. That no improvements are proposed with this subdivision which is
intended for financing and conveyance purposes only.
3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed future development.
4. That the proposed subdivision will not cause substantial environmental
damage or public health problems or have adverse effects on abutting
properties.
SECTION 2: 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 there is no substantial evidence that the project
will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon
the findings as follows:
1. 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.
2. That, based upon the environmental analysis, no significant adverse
environmental effects will occur.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-03
PM 15453- LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS
April 12, 2000
Page 2
3. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the
California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as
follo~vs: 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 substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the
staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the planning
Commission during the public hearing, 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.
SECTION 3: Tentative Parcel Map 15453 is hereby approved subject to the following
Special Conditions:
Planninq Division
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) This tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning
Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the City Engineer
within 3 years from the date of the approval.
3) Master planning will be required for proposed development within any
portion of each parcel. The Master Plan shall include, but not be
limited to, access, circulation, ddveway locations, community
greenways and trails, and land use.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-03
PM 15453 - LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS
April12,2000
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 12th day of April 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
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.: Parcel Map 15454 Public Review Period Closes: April 12, 2000
Project Name: Project Applicant: Lewis Operating Corp.
Project Location (also see attached map): Located along the north side of Church Street, between
Milliken Avenue and Terra Vista Parkway and along the south side of Church Stree'. between Poplar and
Rochester Avenues. Parcel 1 (38.53 acres) is the portion lying along the south side of C,3urch Street between
Poplar and Rochester with land use designations of Low-Medium and Medium Residential. Parcel 2 (38.15
acres) lies at the corner of Terra Vista Parkway and Church Street with a land use designation of Medium and
Medium-High Density Residential. Parcels 3 and 4 lie north of Church Street; Parcel 3 (13.31 acres) has a
land use designation of Medium-High Density Residential and Parcel 4 (12.13 acres) has a land use
designation of High Density Residential. APN: 227-151-26, 30, and 52.
Project Description: The request for a parcel map to create four parcels totaling 102.13 acres within the
southeast quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The parcel map is intended for financing and
conveyance purposes only between Lewis Operating Corp. and Kaufman and Broad.
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 clearly 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 Ran"ho Cucamonga Planning Division at
10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-284
NOTICE
The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period.
April 12, 2000
Date of Determination · Adopted By
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15454, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
CHURCH STREET AND POPLAR DRIVE BETWEEN MILLIKEN AND
ROCHESTER AVENUES, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF - APN: 227-151-26, 30, AND 52.
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 15454, submitted by Lewis Operating Corp.,
applicants, for the purpose of subdividing into 4 pamels, the real property situated in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, identified as APN: 227-151-26,
30, and 52, located on the north side of Church Street and Poplar Drive, between Milliken and
Rochester Avenues; and
WHEREAS, on April 12, 2000, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public
hearing for the above-described map.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the Terra Vista
Community Plan and the General Plan.
2. That no improvements are proposed with this subdivision which is
intended for financing and conveyance purposes only.
3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed future development.
4. That the proposed subdivision will not cause substantial environmental
damage or public health problems or have adverse effects on abutting
properties.
SECTION 2: 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 thero is no substantial evidence that the project
will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon
the findings as follows:
1. 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.
2. That, based upon the environmental analysis, no significant adverse
environmental effects will occur.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PM 15454 - LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS
April 12, 2000
Page 2
3. 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 substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the
staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning
Commission during the public hearing, 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.
SECTION 3: Tentative Parcel Map 15454 is hereby approved subject to the following
Special Conditions:
Planninq Division
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 no relieve applicant of his obligations under this
condition.
2) This tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning
Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the City Engineer
within 3 years from the date of the approval.
3) Master planning will be required for proposed development within any
portion of each parcel. The Master Plan shall include, but not be
limited to access, circulation, ddveway locations, community greenways
and trails, and land use.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNi. !, Chairman
ATTEST:.
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PM 15454 - LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS
April 12, 2000
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 12th day of April 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
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 2~092 of the Public Resources Code.
Project File No.: Parcel Map No. 15455 Public Review Period Closes: April 12, 2000
Project Name: Project Applicant: Lewis Operating Corp.
Project Location (also see attached map): Located north of Foothill Boulevard along Milliken Avenue.
Parcel 1 (9.33 acres) is a portion of The Commons commemial master plan with a land use designation of
MFC (Mixed Use); Parcel 2 (22.88 acres) is the remainder of the block which surrounds the Rancho San
Antonio Medical Center with a land use designation of MHO (Mixed Use): and Parcel 3 (11.06 acres) is
located on the north side of Church Street on the east side of Milliken Avenue with a land use designation of
Commercial Recreation. APN: 227-151-51 and 53.
Project Description: The request for a parcel map to create three pamels totaling 43.27 acres within the
southeast quadrant of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The parcel map is intended for financing and
conveyance purposes only between Lewis Operating Corp. and Kaufman and Broad.
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 clearly 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.
April 12, 2000
Date of Determination ~----~/~ ~,/~_~.op,~y
!
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15455, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD BE-I'VVEEN MILLIKEN AND MAYTEN AVENUES,
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 227-151-51 AND
53.
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 15455, submitted by Lewis Retail Centers,
applicants, for the purpose of subdividing into 3 parcels, the real property situated in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, identified as APN: 227-151-51,
and 53, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Milliken and Mayten Avenues; and
WHEREAS, on April 12, 2000, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public
hearing for the above-described map.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the Terra Vista
Community Plan and the General Plan.
2. That no improvements are proposed with this subdivision which is
intended for financing and conveyance purposes only.
3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed future development.
4. That the proposed subdivision will not cause substantial environmental
damage or public health problems or have adverse effects on abutting
properties.
SECTION 2: Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed 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 Negative Declaration based upon
the findings as follows:
1. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with
the Califomia 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.
2. That, based upon the environmental analysis, no significant adverse
environmental effects will occur.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-03
PM 15455 - LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS
January 12 2000
Page 2
3. 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 substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the
staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning
Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission
hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section
753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
SECTION 3: Tentative Parcel Map 15455 is hereby approved suoject to the following
Special Conditions:
Planning Division
1) The applicant shall agree to defend at this 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 no relieve applicant of his obligations under this
condition.
2) This tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning
Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the City Engineer
within 3 years from the date of the approval.
3) Master planning will be required for proposed development within any
portion of each parcel. The Master Plan shall include, but not be
limited to, access, circulation, driveway locations, community
greenways and trails, and land use.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-03
PM 15455 - LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS
January 12, 2000
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 12th day of April 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
/
THE CITY OF
1~ A N C Il 0 C U C A H 0 N O A
St; tff Report
DATE: April 12, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY REVIEW 00-04 - CUCAMONGA SCHOOL DISTRICT - A
courtesy review of the proposed site acquisition of approximately 10 acres of
land for an elementary school, located at the southeast corner of Sixth Street and
Hellman Avenue -APN: 210-061-05 and 06
ABSTRACT: Under State law, the Office of the State Architect has the authority to review and
approve school facilities. In order "to promote the safety of pupils and comprehensive
community planning," the school district is required to solicit a written report from the Planning
Commission prior to acquiring the land. The Planning Commission is required to investigate the
site and detail its recommendations, in writing, to the school district.
SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Single family residences; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units/acre)
South -Vacant and single family residences; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling
units/acre)
East - Public Park; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units/acre)
West - Single family residences; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units/acre)
B. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units/acre)
North - Low-Residential (2-4 dwelling units/acre)
South - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units/acre)
East - Park
West - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units/acre)
C. Site Characteristics: Predominantly vacant land used for vineyards; however, there are
two homes at the northwest corner with mature trees.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Cucamonga School District is proposing to purchase property
to construct a new elementary school.
ITEM H
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PR 00-04
April 12, 2000
Page 2
ANALYSIS:
A. Land Use: The proposed school site is consistent with the General Plan policy to
"organize educational, cultural, and recreational activities in close proximity to one another
and conveniently accessible to their potential users." Typically, the City and school
districts have worked together to locate schools and parks next to each other. This
arrangement benefits the City by making school facilities available for City programs
through the Community Services Department and benefits the school by providing larger
open space and play area for children. The proposed school site is located across the
street from Golden Oak Park, a public neighborhood park. This park was a condition of
approval for the Griffin Homes development of 341 single family homes, The Hawthornes,
which is located to the south of the proposed school site. Within the Cucamonga School
District, the nearest existing elementary schools are Cucamonga Elementary (1 mile
away) and Los Amigos Elementary (1.5 miles away).
B. Design Review Committee: As a courtesy review, the proposed site acquisition does not
require Design Review Committee review.
C. Technical Review Committee: As a courtesy review, the proposed site acquisition does not
require Technical Review Committee review; however, the site acquisition was reviewed
by the Planning Division. The following comments are offered for the Planning
Commission's consideration:
1. Decorative metal fencing, rather than chain link, should be used to secure the site.
2. Eievations should be submitted to the Planning Commission for.courtesy review.
School design should incorporate some of the major theme elements from the
surrounding residential master planned community.
3. The western portion of Golden Oak Road up to the entry gate to the residential
development should be widened to collector width of 44 feet to allow some on-street
parking.
4. The school district should coordinate street widths and access locations with the City
Traffic Engineer.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission's comments be forwarded, by staff, in
writing to the school district for their consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
City Planner
Attachments: Exhibit "A" '- Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Letter from Cucamonga School District
Board of Trustees Administration
Marlene Baum ~ Michael R. Ramos, Ed.D.
Alene Hirz James O. Ballard
Elsie P. Millet Busine~s/Pe~onnel Service~
Cynthia J. Turner Claudia Maidenberg
Doris Wallace Educational Services
8776 Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730-4698 R [~ C ~' i V I= D
(909) 987-8942 / FAX (909) 948-9399
/~PR 0 4 2000 :
City o! Rancho ~$'~',.~:~ non.c '~,~
March 30, 2000 -- Division
City of Rancho Cucamonga
City Planning Commission
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Re: New Elementary School Site
Dear Planning Commissioners:
Pursuant to Public Resource Code, Section 21151.2, we are hereby giving written notice to the
City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission of a proposed acquisition site for a new
elementary school. The location of this new school site is located at 6th and Hellman. Please
review the map and site description attached hereto.
We request that the City Planning Commission investigate the proposed site and submit a written
report to the governing Board of the Cucamonga School District within 30 days after receipt of
this notice.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Administrator, Business/Personnel Services
tlb
TH CITY 0 F
R A N (] ~i 0 (] (J C A ~ 0 N OA
SlaffR rt
DATE: April 12, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
SUBJECT: A STAFF REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO INITATE AN AMENDMENT TO
THE DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ADD A MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT
BACKGROUND
The Planning Department recently received an application to change the land use designation for
the old packinghouse site on the east side of Amethyst Avenue. The front portion of the site is
presehtly planned for commercial uses on which the applicant, Northtown Housing Development
Corp., is interested in developing a senior housing project. At staffs suggestion, the applicant
requests that the General Plan and Zoning categories be changed to Mixed Use in order to provide
flexibility to allow for office/commercial development on portions of the site that might not be used
for residential purposes. The General Plan Amendment will request a mix of multiple family and
office/commercial uses.
While the General Plan has an existing Mixed Use category, corresponding Mixed Use zoning is
only included in the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan.
Therefore, a Mixed Use District should be drafted for the Development Code so that properties
designated by the General Plan can be regulated by the Development Code.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission authorize staff to develop Mixed Use
Development Code provisions to be presented for the Commission's consideration along with the
new GPA and DDA applications.
Sincerely,
City Planner
BB:AVV~Is
ITEM I