No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001/03/28 - Agenda PacketCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY MARCH 28, 2001 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 II1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES March 14, 2001 Adjourned Meeting of March 14, 2001 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. VACATION OF EXCESS PORTIONS OF VARIOUS STREETS (V-178) NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A request to vacate excess portions of Center Avenue between Humbolt Avenue and 24th Street, 25th Street between Hermosa Avenue and Deer Creek Channel, 25th Street between Center Avenue and Marine Avenue, and 25th Street between Deer Creek Channel and Center Avenue APN: 209-101-18, 23, and 24; 209-103-06, 209-104-08, 34, and 35; 209-112-17; and 209-121-22. Related file: Development Review 00-53. B. VACATION OF VEHICULAR ACCESS RIGHTS (V-179) CATELLUS - A request to vacate vehicular access rights for two driveways on the north side of Arrow Route, east of Milliken Avenue along Parcel 13 of Pamel Map 15295- APN: 229-011-32. Related file: Development Review 00-28. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. P/ease 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. P/ease sign in after speaking C. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM15651 - MARC DALE AND ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide a 7.34 acre pamel into 2 parcels in the General Industrial District (Subarea 13), located at the terminus of Rochester Court, south of 6th Street - APN: 229-263-08. Related files: Development Review 00-73 and Tree Removal Permit 00-49. (Continued from Mamh 14, 2001). D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRCCUP00-34 - COSTCO WHOLESALE - A request to construct a 148,663 square foot retail store, which also includes a tire sales and installation center (5,200 square feet), 'rood service (1,042 square feet), and gas pumps on 15.4 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4ti' Street between Buffalo Avenue and the Interstate 15 on/off ramps - APN: 229-263-69. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map 15579. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM15579 - COSTCO WHOLESALE - A request to subdivide 15.14 acres into three parcels in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street between Buffalo Avenue and the Interstate 15 freeway on/off ramps - APN 229-263-69. Related file: Conditional Use Permit 00-34. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION - A request for an extension of a previously approved residential subdivision of 27 single family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. Related file: Variance 96-02. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Page 2 G. VARIANCE DRC2001-00024 - RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES - A request to increase the wail height to 12 feet along the east boundary of lots 21-24 of Tract 16051 where the Development Code allows a maximum wall height of 6 feet in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Rochester Avenue-APN: 1089-031-24. H. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM15536 FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS - A request to subdivide 23 acres of land into two lots in Planning Area 6 of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, located on the north side of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue - APN: 210-082-46. Related file: Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment 00- 04 and Development Review 00-67. I. ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-04 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS - A request to amend Planning Area 6 of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan to allow multiple family residential development at a density range of 24 to 30 dwelling units per acre, located on the north side of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue - APN: 210-082-46. Related flies: Tentative Parcel Map 15536 and Development Review 00-67. VI. NEW BUSINESS J. ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIE'VV DRCDR00-67 FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS - A request to construct a 496-unit apartment project on 23 acres of land in Planning Area 6 of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, located on the north side of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue - APN: 210-082-46. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map 15536 and Addendum to Environmental Impact Report and Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment 00-04. 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 K. VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT IX. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. Page 3 I, Gall 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 March 22, 2001, at least 72 hours pdor to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. Page 4 Vicinity Map Planning Commission March 28, 2001 r Hillside Banyan 19th/210 Baseline ~ B % ~ oothill A Arrow I I nU,,',J ,-- "6th__ C 4th .~ ~ ~ U_ E City of Rancho Cucamonga Victoria Planned Community A CITY HAL.L N TH E C I T Y OF DATE: March 28, 2001 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Joe Stofa, Jr., Associate Engineer SUBJECT: VACATION OF EXCESS PORTIONS OF VARIOUS STREETS (V-178) - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A request to vacate excess portions of Center Avenue between Humboldt Avenue and 24th Street, 25th Street between Hermosa Avenue and Deer Creek Channel, 25th Street between Center Avenue and Marine Avenue, and 25th Street between Deer Creek Channel and Center Avenue - APN's: 209- 101- 18, 209-101-23, 209-101-24, 209-103-06, 209-104-06, 209- 104-34, 209-104-35,209- 112-17, and 209-121-22. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: On November 21, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 00- 131 approving Development Review 00-53 to construct single-family residences on eleven in-fill lots. Northtown Development Company (NTHDC) is currently processing DR 00-53 as phase three of its Infill Housing Program. In conjunction with this processing, NTHDC has requested the vacation of excess portions of Center Avenue and 25th Street. The original subdivision map (1887) created 80-foot wide street rights-of-way. Present standards only require 60-foot wide streets. In this area the public improvements exist within a 60-foot street area, thus the extra 10-feet on both sides of the street are excess and should be vacated and added to the front yards. The vacation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the circulation element of the general plan. The streets in this area of the City are also not included or required as "community travel routes" of the general plan. ITEM A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT V-178 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION March 28, 2001 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding through minute action that the proposed vacations conform to the City's General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for further processing and final approval. Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civil Engineer DJ:JS:dlw Attachment: Vicinity Map ...... ~qNEYARD AVE ~_ _ _ ..... H~t~MOSA AVE O, ONTARIO { ~A OF PROPOSED VACA~0NS ~ [ NOR~ ~C~ONGA ~CT (~) THE C I T Y OF ~AN C~ 0 C ~J CAM ONGA DATE: March 28, 2001 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: VACATION V-179 - CATELLU~ - A request to vacate vehicular access rights for two driveways on the north side of Arrow Route east of Milliken Avenue along Parcel 13 of Parcel Map No. 15295 - APN 229-011-32. Related File: DR 00-28 BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Catellus Development Corporation has received approval for the development of two industrial warehouse buildings totaling 917,780 square feet, located at the northwest and northeast corners of Arrow Route and Milliken Avenue. Two new driveways will be located on the Arrow Route frontage for Building "3" (GATX) with the first phase of the proposed development. The vacation of the vehicular access rights allows for the addition of these driveways. The proposed locations are consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding, through minute action, that the vacation is in conformance with the General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for further processing and final approval. Respectfully Submitted, Dan James ~ Senior Civil Engineer DJ:B^M:sc Attachments: Exhibit "A" Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" Vacation Exhibit ITEM B ~ NORTH ~ 1"=400' CITY OF ITEM: V- 179 RANCHO CUCAMONGA ff2-~'~D~. TLTLE: Vicini .ty Map/PM 15295 ENGINEERING DIVISION ~-.~'~ ~ EXHIBIT: "A" EXHIBIT 'A' LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR VACATION OF VEHICLE ACCESS RIGHTS FOR PARCEL 13 OF PARCEL MAP 15295 THE STREET FRONTAGE OF PARCEL 13 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 15295, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOVVN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 190, PAGES 74 THROUGH 83, INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOVVS: COMMENCING AT THE EASTER~.Y TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN LINE ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 13, SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP AS HAVING A BEARING OF NORTH 89°27'50" EAST, AND A LENGTH OF 300.00 FEET; SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.84 FEET, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 48.85 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13°56'11, TO A REVERSE CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 172.84 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 13~24'01" EAST, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 18.68 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°11 '38" TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 07°12'23" EAST; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CURVE 23.36 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7°44'33"; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 89~27'50" EAST 57.51 FEET. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCELS ARE SHOVVN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HEREWITH AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF. f JERALD E. t ANHORN JR. <P.DEC. ~1, 200 NO. 7159 EXHIBIT 'B' VACATION OF VEHICULAR ACCESS RIGHTS SCALE: I"-- I00' EXHIBIT 'A' LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR VACATION OF VEHICLE ACCESS RIGHTS FOR PARCEL 13 OF PARCEL MAP 15295 THE STREET FRONTAGE OF PARCEL 13 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 15295, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 190, PAGES 74 THROUGH 83, INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 13 AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 13 SOUTH 89°27'50" WEST 516.21 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE SOUTH 89~27'50' WEST 79.94 FEET. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCELS ARE SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HEREWITH AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF. JERALD E. ANHORN JR. XP.DEC. 51, 200. NO. 7159 ET~IRES 12/31/2003 -- DATE 11/09/00 F__xl41 tSIT EXHIBIT 'B' VACATION OF VEHICULAR ACCESS RIGHTS $C,41..~: 1'---- 100' S89~7'50"W -- -- S89'27°50"W 516.21' "-T.P.O.B. ARROW ROU'IE PCA LEGAL /~197-1~--022001 THE CITY OF I~AN CII 0 CUCAFIONGA Staff Report DATE: March 28, 2000 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Emily Wimer, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM15651 - MARC DALE AND ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide a 7.34 acre parcel into 2 parcels in the General Industrial District (Subarea 13), located at the terminus of Rochester Court, south of 6th Street - APN: 229-263-08. Related files: Development Review 00-73 and Tree Removal Permit 00-49. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surroundin.q Land Use and Zoninq: Project Site - Vacant land; General Industrial (Subarea 13) North - Industrial Buildings; General Industrial (Subarea 13) South - Across Jersey Avenue, existing industrial development; Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (Subarea 9) East Across Charles Smith Avenue, existing industrial development; General Industrial (Subarea 14) West Industrial warehouse development, General Industrial (Subarea 13) B. General Plan Desi.qnations: Project Site - General Industrial North - General Industrial South - General Industrial East General Industrial West General Industrial C. Site Characteristics: The site contains one vacant parcel that is 7.34 acres. The property has been graded and there is no significant vegetation on the site. The site slopes from north to south at less than 2 percent, and is relatively flat. ITEM C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TPM 15651 - MARC DALE & ASSOCIATES Mamh 28, 2001 Page 2 BACKGROUND: On January 16, 2001, the City Planner approved Design Review 00-73 for two industrial buildings totaling 125,728 square feet. The buildings are designed for warehouse tenants and are oriented to front Rochester Court (see Exhibit "A"). ANALYSIS: A. General: The project proposes to subdivide a 7.34-acre parcel into 2 parcels with one building each. This subdivision will be to facilitate the above referenced industrial development. Both parcels will house an industrial building with parking. There is adequate parking for each parcel and approved land use. The total required parking for both parcels is 71 spaces and the development will provide 130 parking stalls. B. Design Review, Technical, and Gradinq Committees: Tentative parcel maps are exempt from Committee reviews, pursuant to the City's Subdivision Ordinance. C. Environmental Assessment: On January 16, 2001, the Cit7 Planner adopted a Negative Declaration for the industrial development portion of the project and found that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment. The proposed subdivision is to facilitate the approved industrial development. No further environmental review is required. 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 properly owners within a 300-foot radius of the site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Parcel Map 15651 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:EW~ma Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Plan of Development Review 99-73 Exhibit "B" - Tentative Parcel Map 15651 (reduction) Exhibit "C" - City Planner Letter of Approval dated January 16, 2001 Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map 15651 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15651 T H E C I T Y 0 F A NC I-IO C UCA MONGA January 16, 2001 Bruce Kadsh 343 Third Street Suite 103 Laguna Beach, CA 92651 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-73 Dear Mr. Karish: The Development Review process for the above-described project has been successfully completed and approval has been granted based upon the following findings and conditions. Thank you for your participation and cooperation dudng this review process. Findinqs 1. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 2. The proposed project is in accordance with the objectives of the Development Code and the purpose of the district in which the site is located. 3. The proposed project, together with tl~e 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. The proposed project will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the General Industrial District. 5. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all wdtten reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Planner finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the 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 City Planner;, and, further, the City Planner has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. Meyer WiJ[iom J. AJexQnder Councilmember P(3ul BiQne Mayor Pro-Tern Dione WJllioms Councilmember Bob Duffon Jock Lorn, AICR Cily Monager Councilmember Jomes V. ]0500 Civic Center Drive · RO. Box 807 · Roncho Cucc~rnongo, CA 01720 · (009) 477-2700 · FAX [900) a77-284g www. ci.renc ~__~__~.~'non~o.co.us BRUCE KARISH DR 00-73 January16,2001 Page 2 c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Planner 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 orthe habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Planner dudng the public headng, the City Planner 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. Conditions This project is approved subject to the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: 1. Approval is granted for development of two industrial buildings located at 9210 Chades Smith Ddve. 2. Tree Removal Permit No. 00-49 is approved subject to the condition of relocation of the Heritage Pepper tree, which will be located at the southeast comer of the properly. 3. All parking areas shall be screened with berms an average of 3 feet (maximum slope not to exceed 3 ~:1). Enqineednq 1. Complete the missing public frontage improvements along the Rochester Court cul-de-sac and Chades Smith Avenue. Ddve approaches shall be a minimum of 35 feet wide and the sidewalk shall be 4 feet wide, adjacent to the property line. The outermost edge of the northerly ddve approach on Chades Smith Avenue shall be a minimum of 5 feet from the projection of the property line. 2. Provide additional street dedication on Chades Smith Avenue, 33 feet measured from the street centedine and also provide the cul-de-sac dedication on Rochester Court per City Standard 111. 3. Existing overhead utility lines, poles, anchors, etc. along the project side frontage on Chades Smith Avenue appears to be out of service. Pdor to issuance of public improvement construction permits, the developer shall determine the status of all overhead utilities from the service providers. If shown to be out of service, the developer shall remove the overhead utilities in their entirety. If any utilities are determined to be required, then the City's adopted policy for the under-grounding of existing overhead utilities shall apply. Please note that conditions may specifl/completion of certain plans or work prior to issuance of building permits. This decision shall be final following a ten-day appeal pedod beginning with the date of this letter. Appeals must be filed in wdting with the Planning Commission Secreta~, stating the reason for the appeal, and be accompanied by a $62 appeal fee. BRUCE KARISH DR 00-73 Janua~ 16,2001 Page 3 If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact Emily Wimer at (909) 477-2750, Monday through Thursday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sincerely, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION City Planner BB:EW~na Attachment: Standard Conditions Environmental Documents cc: Karen Mosley, Public Svc. Tech. I Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15651, SUBDIVIDING 7.34 ACRES INTO 2 PARCELS, LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF ROCHESTER COURT, SOUTH OF 6TH STREET - APN: 229-263-08. A. Recitals. 1. Marc Dale and Associates filed an application for approval of Tentative Parcel Map 15651, for the purpose of subdividing into two parcels, the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, State of California, identified as APN: 229-263-08, located at the terminus of Rochester Court, south of 6th Street, which is hereinafter referred to as "the application." 2. On January 16, 2001, the City Planner approved Development Review 00-73 for the subject property; and 3. On March 28, 2001, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public headng for the above-descdbed map. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby foun .d, 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 March 28, 2001, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed tentative parcel map is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan and Development Code; and b. The improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the Development Code and General Plan; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment; and e. The proposed project 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 facts and information contained in the Negative Declaration adopted on January 16, 2001, (for the industrial development portion of the project) and that the proposed subdivision of 7.34 acres into 2 smaller parcels is to facilitate the approved industrial development; no further environmental review is required. 4. Based upon the findings of approval and conclusion set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the Tentative Parcel Map subject to the following Special Conditions: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TPM 15651 - MARC DALE & ASSOCIATES March 28, 2001 Page 2 Plannin.q Division 1) The conditions of approval for Development Review 00-73, as contained in the City Planner's letter dated January 16, 2001, shall apply. En,qineerln.q Division 1) The approved conditions of Development Review 00°73, as contained in the City Planner's letter dated January 16, 2001, shall apply. 2) Provide full street improvements for Charles Smith Avenue and Rochester Court per "Local Industrial" street type and/or Cul-De-Sac per City of Rancho Cucamonga City Standards. 3) Provide proof of existing street dedication on Charles Smith Avenue. 4) Complete the 10-foot wide drainage easement traverse closure to point of discharge to public storm drain, catch basin location. 5) Obtain and provide proof of off-site drainage easement from the parcel property owner to the south of the subject site. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2001. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY 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 28th day of March 2001, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: pLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 01-28 TPM 15651 - MARC DALE & ASSOCIATES March 28, 2001 Page 2 4. Based upon the findings of approval and conclusion set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the Tentative Parcel Map subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference: Plannin,q Division 1) The conditions of approval for Development Review 00-73, as contained in the City Planner's letter dated January 16, 2001, shall apply. En,qineerin,q Division 1) The approved conditions of Development Review 00-73, as contained in the City Planner's letter dated January 16, 2001, shall apply. 2) Provide full street improvements for Charles Smith Avenue and Rochester Court per "Local Industrial" street type and/or Cul-De-Sac per City of Rancho Cucamonga City Standards. 3) Provide proof of existing street dedication on Charles Smith Avenue. 4) Complete the lO-foot wide drainage easement traverse closure to point of discharge to public store3 drain, catch basin location. 5) Obtain and provide proof of off-site drainage easement from the parcel property owner to the south of the subject site. If unable to obtain easement, provide drainage facilities to discharge flows to Charles Smith Avenue. Provide a drainage study and install facilities subject to City Engineer review and approval. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2001. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY Larry T. McNiel, Chairman AT['EST: Brad Bullet, Secretary COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM15651 SUBJECT: APPLICANT: MARC DALE AND ASSOCIATES LOCATION: TERMINUS OF ROCHESTER COURT, SOUTH OF 6TH STREET ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 33 Feet total feet on Chades Smith Avenue 33 Feet total feet on Rochester Court (cul-de-sac desi,qn) 61 Feet total feet on Rochester Court (Bulb) 2. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all pamels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the~ssuance of building permits, where no map is involved. 3. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. B. Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name Curb & A.C S de- Drve Street Street Comm Meal an B ke Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other CharlesSmithAve. X I X I X I X J X X Rochester Court X X X X X X SC-12-00 1 C Project No. TPM 15651 Completion Date 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights __/__/ on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attomey guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer Notes: (1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2)Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g.Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. __1__1__ C. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting / Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first, Formation costs shall be borne by the developer, D. Drainage and Flood Control 1. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map __1__1 approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. SC-t2..00 2 ProjectNo. TPM 15651 Completion Date E, Improvement Completion 1. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, / an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the Developer and the City will be required. F, Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, / electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the / Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bemardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the wa!er district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. G, General Requirements and Approvals 1.An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, for: Rochester Court. 2. Prior to approval of the final map, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under current Assessment District among the newly created parcels. SC-12-00 3 FRDFI : FAX HD. : Plat. 2~3 2001 O3:5i3PFI P2 C I T Y O F ONTARIO 303 EAST *B' STREET, CIVIC C~NT~" ONT~IO ~ ~ GE~LD A. DuBOI8 ~RY ~RTES, ~C ' ~vo, ,~ Mamh 27, 2001 c~. A~N O. ~PNER J~ES R MILHISER DE~ S. ~KER Ms. Debra Meier, AICP, Conlrac[ Planner City of' Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division P.O. Box g0? Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT NEGATIVE DECLARATION TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. IS579 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 00-34, NORT~ SIDE OF 4TM STREET, Bg.,TWE, I~N BUFFALO AVENUE AND INTERSTATE I$. l)ear Ms. Mnier: Thank you tbr the opportunity to roviaw and comment on the above-ret~re~ced project. I have only two comments as noted below: * Please clarify if the landscaping to be provided with the project h~eludes the t~eway right-of-way area along the easterly side of the site. an well a~ t~e area along the easterly side oftl~e ~-15 on/offramp, l)u~ to the high vi~ibilky of ~hes~ erenz, it ia important a quality landscape treatment be provided in these areas. e The lighting for the Co.~¢o t~ility is proposed to be essentially the same as tha~ for the previouz Auto Nalion use. Typically, an anW seies u~ would require muoh greater lighting level.~ ~han what would normally be associated with a cnmmorclal retail use. 'l'b, erei~re, you may w~nt to cousider reviewing tho illm. lna£inn levels and reduce them if appropriate, Please contac[ mo ii' you have Igly questions regarding these comments and fllank you again tbr thc opportunity to review Ihe proposed Negative Declaration. Sincerely, ONTARIO PLANNINC~ DEPARTMENT' Jeny L. Blum, Planning Director Christine Lavell Senior Planner T H E CITY OF Staff Report DATE: March 28, 2001 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Debra Meier, AICP, Contract Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRCCUP00-34 - COSTCO WHOLESALE - A request to construct a 148,663 square foot retail store, which also includes a tire sales and installation center (5,200 square feet), food service (1,042 square feet) and gas pumps on 15.4 acres of land in the Industrial Park Distdct (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street between Buffalo Avenue and the Interstate 15 freeway on/off ramps -APN: 229-263-69. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM15579. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM15579 - COSTCO WHOLESALE - A request to subdivide 15.14 acres into three parcels in the Industrial Park Distdct (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street between Buffalo Avenue and the Interstate 15 freeway on/off ramps - APN: 229-263-69. Related file: Conditional Use Permit DRCCUP00-34. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zonin,q: North Vacant land/Industrial Park South - Ontario Mills/City of Ontario East 1-15/General Industrial West - Vacant land/Industrial Park B. General Plan Desiqnations: Project Site - Industrial Park-General Commercial Oveday North Industrial Park South - City of Ontario/Commercial East - General Industrial West Industrial Park Site Characteristics: The site is that of the former AutoNation, constructed approximately two years ago, and since vacated. The landscaping on and around the site continues to be regularly maintained. The perimeter streets, 4th Street along the south boundary and Buffalo Avenue along the west boundary, were fully improved, including parkway landscaping, when AutoNation was constructed. ITEMS D & E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRCCUP00-34 & SUBTPM15579 - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 2 D. Parkinq Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footaqe Ratio Required Provided Commercial 148,663 5/1000 749 785 ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed Costco includes an indoor food service area and a tire canter (on the east side of the building) in addition to the warehouse style sales floor, which is typical of the warehouse commercial business operation. A Costco gas station is also proposed along the 4th Street frontage, featuring three gasoline-dispensing islands with an overhead canopy. The development of the site will first require the demolition of the AutoNation facilities and all on-site landscaping. Only the perimeter landscaping will be preserved in placa. The proposed Costco is a proposed relocation of the store from its current location on Foothill Boulevard, just east of 1-15 freeway, to this site on the north side of 4th Street, located immediately west of the 1-15 freeway. The proposed project was reviewed by the Planning Commission at workshop meetings on October 25 and November ~'1, 2000. The purpose of the workshop sessions was to provide the applicant with direction regarding the theme and architectural design of the building. The proposed Tentative Parcal Map establishes three parcels, one for the Costco store, and two separate parcels on the west portion of the site that will be subject to future development. Any future development on these parcels would be subject to separate Development/Design review. B. Desiqn Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (McNiel, Stewart, and Henderson) on March 6 and March 20, 2001. The applicant presented to the Committee revisions that had been made to the proposed project based on staff comments and the eadier Planning Commission Workshops. The applicant has proposed the use of an over-sized, irregular, split-face block that resembles a rough-cut stone in appearance. This heavy split face block was introduced on the entry tower and along the entire building as an 8-foot high wainscot. The proposed roof matedal is a lightweight concrete tile. The Site Plan had been revised with a redesigned project entry from Buffalo Avenue, which essentially exposed the loading dock area to full view of all patrons using this entry path. The Committee recommended that both the Site Plan and the building elevations incorporate modifications as outlined below for review by the Committee on March 20, 2001. Comments from the March 20 meeting are reflected in bold text. Site Planninq Issues: 1. The applicant proposed alternative entry paving designs for the pdmary entrance from 4th Street. The Committee preferred the Alternative "A," which incorporates pavers and a scored concrete pattern that is carded up the entire length of the entranceway to the front entrance to the building. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRCCUP00-34 & SUBTPM15579 - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 3 The alternative allows the parking in the north portion of the entry aisle to remain; however, the walkway, that would not only serve the handicap parking stalls, but also directs customers from the southern portion of the parking lot to the building entrance, is also identified with a paver with numerous tree well pockets. The Committee preferred to define the walkway using bollards, rather than wheel stops. The preferred entry design (labeled Alternative A) was modified in accordance with the comments above, including modification of the walkway and the use of bollards to define the handicap parking stalls. Buildinq Desi.qn Issues: 1. The Committee accepted the proposed large split-face block material as described by the architect. However, the Committee wanted the use of the material expanded to include all large columns along all elevations of the building. The architect has expanded the use of the stone, referred to as Cathedral Stone, on all building columns on all elevations. 2. The Committee indicated that the [~orth and west elevations of the building require additional architectural definition. The architect has added definition and articulation to the north and east elevations to the satisfaction of the Committee. 3. The loading dock area shall be screened or buffered from public view. The Committee preferred the on-site circulation plan for the Buffalo Avenue entrance that diverts inbound traffic south and away from the loading dock area; However, the Committee agreed to consider the new alignment if it can be demonstrated that the loading dock area can be screened and buffered from public view. The architect has redesigned the loading dock area by carrying the arcade roof-line across the front of the dock area, as well as continuing the building wall along the west elevation of the dock to create a building corner focal point from the westerly entry and screen loading activities. The Committee approved the design presented by the architect. 4. Screening of the reof-mounted equipment from public view is required. The applicant has provided cross-sections illustrating complete screening form 4th Street and Buffalo Avenue; however, they are still investigating the potential visibility of the rooftop from the freeway and off- ramp grade. Further details will be provided. Screening of the roof-mounted equipment must be addressed through the use of a detailed cross-section that will be review at the Planning Commission meeting. 5. The support columns and canopy at the gas station shall use the same materials as the primary building and characterize the same building theme. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRCCUP00-34 & SUBTPM15579 - COSTCO WHOLESALE Mamh 28, 2001 Page 4 The gas station canopy and columns shall be designed in a manner compatiblewith the remainder of the building. Details of the canopy and columns shall be reviewed at the Planning Commission hearing. 6. The architect shall supply a sample of all proposed building materials and colors for review and approval. The architect shall provide a revised building material sample board for review at the Planning Commission hearing. 7. All roll-up and man doors shall be painted to match the adjacent building color. Included as a Condition of Approval. Landscape Issues: 1. All landscape planters and tree wells shall be separated from the paved surface with a curb. All transformers, water valves, and similar items shall be placed within appropriate landscape areas and screened with shrubbery. Included as a Condition of Approval. 2. Landscaping shall be placed along the north elevation of the building (5-foot minimum width) and at the northwest corner of the building. Included as a Condition of Approval. 3. The automobiles and fuel dispensing pumps at the gas station shall be screened from view from 4th Street. The screening may be accomplished through a combination of retaining and/or Iow screen walls, berming and landscaping. Landscaping alone is not an adequate screening measure. The screening shall be illustrated through the use of a cross-section to the satisfaction of the Design Review Committee. The applicant presented a design that featured the use of a screen wall along the street frontage that will be coordinated with modified landscaping along 4th Street because of the construction of the right-turn lane end the screen wall. 4. The 12-foot landscape planter width, as depicted in the entrance design Alternative "A," shall be used in the entrance landscape design concept. Included in the modified design. C. Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee on Mamh 7, 2001, and recommended approval subject to the conditions which have been incorporated in the Resolutions of Approval for both the Conditional Use Permit and the Tentative Parcel Map. D. Environmental Assessment: An Initial Study has been prepared for the project. Mitigation Measures for air quality have been included in the attached Resolution pertaining to short-term air quality impacts during demolition and construction of the proposed project. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRCCUP00-34 & SUBTPM15579 - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 5 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 Commission review all the revisions to the project, which were reviewed by the Design Review Committee on March 20, 2001. All building elevations will be provided at the hearing, which reflect the modifications as presented to the Design Review Committee on March 20, 2001. Any modifications may need to be reflected in modifications to the Conditions of Approval that are included in the attached Resolutions of Approval. If the revisions are acceptable, then adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval would be appropriate. Staff also recommends the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. Brad Buller City Planner BB:DM:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhibit"D" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "E" - Initial Study Resolution of Approval - Conditional Use Permit DRCCUP00-34 Resolution of Approval - Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM15579 TENTATIVENo. PARCEL1 ~79 MAP ~ .j~ IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF S&N BERN~D~O, ~ r~ o .... X~ COSTCO ~=~- .............. ~'~ E, 4TH STREET _.--- ~.. ___.. _ ~ ------ ..... .... ____= ,-":,.: --~.~'____ ~, - DDR/CUP ~ ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM C~o, Ran~oc~=ga (Part I - Initial Study) Planntng D~n (909} 477-2750 The purpose of prolect so ~at the C~ may.rewew ~e proleCt:pumuant to Ci~61i~i~s; ~rdinahceS:, and gmdehnes; ~e Cahfomm Enwronmen~lQual~.~ct;~and~e:.C~i~:~and~Pmce~ums to Implement CE~.-1~3s ~mpo~nt:~at ~e mform~fion requeste~:[n~thm~apphcafion be provided In full. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS W;LL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform won~ required to provide missing infon'nation. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: Pmject Costco Title: Name&Addmssofpmject Auto Nation USA Corporation owner(s): 110 S.E. 6th Street Ft. Land. Florida 33301 Costco Wholesale - Peter Kahn Name&Addressofdevel~erorpmject 999 Lak~ Drive issaquah, WA 98027 ContactPe~on& McClellanHunter Architects - K~n McKent[y Add. ss: 120 West Bellevue Pasadena, CA ~1~0~ person preparing this fonw (if different from above): Telephone Number: Infon~ation indicated by asterisk (*) is not required of non-constroction CUP=s unless othem, ise requested by staf~ '1) Provide a full scale (8-1/2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs which show representative views into the site from the north, south, east and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points which serve the site; and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location (descdbe): Northwest corner o£ T-15 and East 4th Street 4) Assessor-s Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): #229-263-19,20,21, and a portion of 18. '5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.): 15.14 Acres (659,266 SF) '6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications): 15.14 AC 7) Descdbe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary: N/A ~cludeadescdptionofa#pe~itswhich ~llbenecessa~fmm ~eCi~ofRan~oCucamongaandother~vemmen~l a~ncies~o~er~fullyimplement~eproje~ DDR/Conditional Use/Parcel Map Grading/Building/Health Dept./Fire 9) Descdbe the physical setting of the site as it exists beforo the project including information on topography, soil stabili~, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Descdbe any existing stn~cturos on site (including age and condition) and the use of the stn~ctums. Attach photographs of significant features desc~fbed. In addition, site afl sources of information (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological sun/ey$, traffic studies): Existing site developed for recently completed Auto Nation, auto sales facility. Including showroom, service areas. 1~Desc~be~e~wncu~ra~and/~rhisi~#ca~a~ec~f~esite~Sitea#s~urces~f~ati~n~ks~pub~ishedrap~and oralh~: Since the site was redeveloped recently, no historical/cultural aspects appear to be relevant at this time. 11)Descdbeanynoisesoumesand~e~ve~atnowa~esite~i~m~ madwaynoise, e~)andhow~eywilla~ct proposed uses: Auto/Truck traffic on 1-15 and 4th Street. Proposed use will not be affected by ambient noise (freeway). l~Des~be~epmpos~pmje~tail. ~isshouldpmvideana~qua~descdp~onof~esite~te~sofulb~a~usewhich will msu~ fmm ~e proposed pmje~ ~dica~ ~ ~e~ am proposed phases ~r ~velopmen~ ~e ex~nt of ~velopment ~ occur with ea~ phase, and ~e anticipa~d completion of ea~ ~cmmen~ A~ch additional sheet~ E necessa~ The proposed project shall consist of a ±149,705 S.F. warehouse building incorporating retail sales, tire sales and installation, and walk-up food service. The buildinq is situated on the northeastly corner of the site with on-grade parking predominantly located to the south and west. A credit only gas pump facility with canopy is proposed at the southeast corner of the parcel. Access is proposed along 4th Street at two locations and across adjacent parcels on the west property line. 1~Desc~e me surrounding pmpe~ies, ~duding ~rma~n on p~n~ and an~a~ and any cu~m~ h~dca~ or scen~ a~ec~. Indica~ ~e type of ~nd use ~siden~ comme~ia~ e~.), ~ns~ or.nd use ~ne-~m~ apa~ment houses, shes, depa~ment s~ma, etc.) and sca~ of development ~eigh~ ~n~, ae~ac~ ~ar ~, etc.): Vacant parcels to the north and west accross Buffalo, 1-15 freeway to the west. Ontario Mills Shopping Center/ Edwards Cinema and retail structures accross East 4th Street to the south. 14) Veil the proposed project change the pattem, scale or character of the surrounding general area of the project? ~0 l~dica~ ~ety~ ~sho~4e~ andl~g-te~noise~ ~genem~dudings~rceandamount. How~ll~esenoise~vels a~adjacentpmpe~esandon-siteuses. Whatme~sofsoundproofingampmposed? Noise produced onsite will primarily be from truck or vehicular on site. Noise levels generated should have a negligible effect on adjacent pronerties. '1~ Indica~ proposed mmova~ an~or mp~cements of matum or scen~ tmes:Tr~~ t~ b~ removed have recently planted. Fan ~alms are proposed to be removed, others to be relocated ~ nossible. Setback landscapinq shall be retained wherever possible. 17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which_~_he site drains: N/A 18) lndicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For fu~ther cladfication, please contact the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at 987-2591. a. Residential (ga~/day) Peak use (gal/Day) b. CommemiaUlnd. (gal~day/ac) 3,000 ' Peakuse (gal~m/n/ac) 6,000 (per attached "A" ) 19)Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. Septic Tank X Sewer. If septic tanks ara proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at 987- 2591. a. Residential (gal~day) b. Commercial/Ind. (gal~day/ac) 2,000 (per attacehd "A") RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot N/A Altached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): 21)Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: N/A Sale Price(s) $ to $ Rent (per month) $ to $ 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: N / A 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. Elementary: N/A b. Junior High: c. Senior High COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s) and major function(s) of commemial, industrial or institutional Retail sales, food sales. _~as sales, and tire installation. 26) Total floorarea ofcommemial, industrial, orinstitufional uses by Retai 1: 143,643 S. F. type: Tire : 5,200 S.F. Food : 1,042 S.F. Gas : Canopy Only 27)lndicatehoureofoperetion: Warehouse: Mon-Fri. 10:00 a.m. - 8:30 p.m. Sat. 9:30 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. Sun. 10:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. Gas Station: Mon.-Fri. 6:00 a.m. - 10:00 [~.m. Sun./Sat. 7:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. 28) Number of Total: employees: '{ {3 ~3 Rm? ] ~_v~ ~. S Maximum Shift: ] 2 5 ~m?] c,y~ Time of Maximum Shift: N lA 29) Previde breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary): N/A 30) Estimation of the number of workem to be hired that currently reside in the City: As many as possible. *31)For commemial and industifal uses only, indicate th6 soume, type and amount of air pofiution emissions. (Data should be vedfied through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at (818) 572-6283): Customer automobile and truck (delivery) emissions, fueling station. ALL PROJECTS 3~Have~ewa~sewe¢fire, andfl~dcontmlagenciesse~ing~epmje~been~n~cted~ ~ine~e~ability~p~vide a~qua~$e~ice~ ~ep~posedp~je~? ffs~please~dica~ ~e~onse. Previous Auto Nation facility and research by Civil Enqineer shows adequate service availability. 33 In the known history of this properly, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? ')Examples of hazardous and/or toxic mate~fals include, but are 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 describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the prepedy, as well as the dates of use, if known. Not to my knowledge. Past auto uses may have required storage of fuel solvents. 34) Wi//the preposed project involve the temporary or Iong-tenw use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic matedals, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes, 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 areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. ~.~g ~nn: film developing. I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate uation of this project to the best of my ability, that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct tot he best y knowledge and belief I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: q/~ /~ ~ Signature: ~ .~/~. , City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND -' 1. Project File: Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579. 2. Related Files: None. 3. Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00-34 - COSTCO WHOLESALE - A proposal to construct a 148,663 square foot retail store, which also includes a tire sales and installation center (5,200 square feet), food service (1,042 square feet), and gas pumps, located on the north side of 4th Street between Buffalo Avenue and the Interstate 15 freeway on/off ramps, in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12) - APN: 229-263-19, 20, 21 and a portion of 18. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15579 - COSTCO WHOLESALE - The proposed subdivision of a 15.14-acre parcel into three parcels, located on the north side of 4th Street between Buffalo Avenue and the Interstate 15 freeway on/off ramps, in the Industri~l Park Distdct (Subarea 12) - APN: 229-263-19, 20, 21, and a portion of 18. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Costco Wholesale 999 Lake Ddve Issaquah, WA 98027 5. General Plan Designation: Industrial Park. 6. Zoning: Industrial Districts (Subarea 12); Industrial Park/General Commercial Overlay. 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The 15.14-acre site is the location of the former AutoNation automotive dealership that has since vacated the site. The subject properly is fully developed, except for 4 acres located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Buffalo Avenue, which has been graded and seeded with grass for erosion control. Existing buildings include the dealership sales offices and a separate vehicle maintenance facility. To date, all landscaping on-site and around the perimeter is irrigated, maintained, and in good condition. North and west of the site is undeveloped vacant land, the parcel to the north is General Industrial (Subarea 13), while the parcel to the west is Industrial Park (Subarea 12). Adjacent to the site on the east boundary is on/off-ramps to Interstate 15 freeway. On the south side of 4th Street, within the City of Ontario, is the existing Ontario Mills project of mixed retail, restaurant, and entertainment uses. All perimeter streets are completely improved and landscaped along the site boundary. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 2 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Debra Meier, AICP, Contract Planner (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None 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. PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES ( ) Land Use and Planning (x) Transportation/Circulation ( ) Population and Housing ( ) Biological Resources (x) Public Services (x) Utilities and Service Systems (x) Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources (x) Aesthetics (x) Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Cultural Resources (x) Air Quality ( ) Noise ( ) Mandatory Findings 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. Debra Meier, AICP Contract Planner February 21,2001 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 3 Issues and Suppoding Information Sources: P~..~,y u.,~ ~. 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 zoning? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 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? Comments: a-d) The proposed Costco Wholesale store is consistent with the land use established by the Industrial District (Subarea 12), with special consideration given for a General Commercial Overlay. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal. a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local () () () (x) population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) housing? Comments: a-b) The proposed Costco Wholesale store is consistent with the land use established by the Industrial District (Subarea 12), with special consideration given for a General Commercial Overlay. The existing Costco, located on Foothill Boulevard east of the Interstate 15 Freeway will be relocated to this site; therefore, there will be no net increase in the number of employees. Initial Study for, City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 4 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Po~o~.,y Unless Than C) NO housing exists on the 15-acre parcel. The land use on-site has been historically agricultural in nature until the development of the AutoNation facility in 1998. AutoNation has subsequently vacated the site. 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 (x) () conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? ( ( ) (x) h) Expansive soils? ( ( ) (x) i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ( ) (x) Comments: a-e) The site is not located within the boundaries of an earthquake Fault Zone as defined by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act of 1972, and no faults are known to pass through the site. The fault nearest to the site is the Redhill fault located approximately 4 miles to the northwest. f) Erosion due to demolition, excavation, and construction will have minimal impact because of previous development on the site. The Tujunga-Delhi soil association is comprised of relatively loose texture, which can also result in wind erosion. On-site demolition and grading will be preformed under the supervision of a civil engineer. The resulting impact will not be significant. g-i) The Tujunga-Delhi soils are not considered expansive, and there are no unique geological or physical features on or near the site. 4. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) 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 of ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 6 Significant Issues and Supporting Information Sources: .o~or.~y unless Than The proposed project was screened using the URBEMIS7G emissions model. Default values were used where the project specific information was unavailable. Though not required, construction emissions are screened and quantified to document the effectiveness of control measures (Table 1). The operational mobile source emissions were calculated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual 6th Edition values programmed into the URBEMIS7G model. The project operational emissions do not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance (Table 2). Table 1 URBEMIS7G Construction Emissions Summary ,Pounds per Day) NOx CO PM~o Source ROG Unmit. Mit. Unmit. Mit. Unmit. Mit. Unmit. Mit. Grading 0.64 0.64 7.89 7.50 20.69 5.86 Worker Trips 0.39 0.38 0.55 0.54 1.05 1.02 0.11 0.10 Mobile Equip - 2.17 2.17 1.65 1.65 0.10 0.10 Gas Mobile Equip- 0.92 0.87 7.60 7.22 0.68 0.65 Diesel Arch. Coatings 59.79 56.80 Asphalt 5.24 4.98 Totals 69.15 65.81 17.69 16.90 1.05 1.02 21.58 1.64 SCAQMDThres. 75 75 100 100 550 550 150 150 Significance No No No No No No No No Table 2 URBEMIS7G Operations Emissions Summary Pounds ,per Day),, NOx CO PM~o Source ROG Unmit. Mit. Unmit. Mit. Unmit. Mit. Unmit. Mit. Area Source 0.21 0.21 1.44 1.44 1.31 1.31 0.00 0.00 Mobile Source 41.66 41.66 42.40 42.40 299.24 299.24 22.85 22.85 Totals 41.87 41.87 43.84 43.84 300.55 300.55 22.85 22.85 SCAQMDThres. 55 55 55 55 550 550 150 150 Significance No No No No No No No No The implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce impacts from construction of the project to regional air quality will be reduced to less than significant levels: Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 5 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Poten~lly Unless 1'hah d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any () (x) water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of (x) ( ) 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 groundwater ) (x) otherwise available for public water supplies? Comments: a-i) The drainage patterns were altered at the time of development of Auto Nation in 1998. The development of Costco will entail demolition of the structures related to AutoNation; however, the drainage of the site will utilize drainage patterns and storm drain facilities now existing; therefore, the resulting impact to the existing drainage system is less than significant, as it has been designed to accommodate the developed condition of the site. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an ( ) (x) ( ) existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) (x) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or () (x) cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) (x) Comments: This project, at 148,663 gross square feet (GSF), falls beneath the 975,000 GSF threshold of significance for discount commercial construction under SCAQMD guidelines. The 15 acre site also is less than the 177 acres per quarter SCAQMD threshold of significance for grading emissions. Because the South Coast Air Basin is in nonattainment status for ozone and suspended particulates (PM~o) mitigation measures will be used to minimize the project contribution to regional emission of criteria pollutants. The criteria pollutants screened are: reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrous oxide (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulates (PM~o). Two of these, ROG and NOx, are ozone precursors. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 7 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: a) Potential Impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is the possibility that demolition and grading activity may exceed the 2.7 acres per day SCAQMD threshold significance. Dudng construction, fugitive dust and NOx emissions may contribute significantly to existing non-attainment within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). Sources of emissions during this phase include exhaust from construction vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed surfaces; however, with the implementation of the following mitigation measures, impacts from construction of the project to regional air quality will be reduced to less than significant levels: 1. The site contractor shall select the construction equipment used on-site based on Iow-emission factors and high-energy efficiency. The construction contractor shal~ ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. This will result in a 5 percent decrease in ROG, NOx, and PM~0 emissions. 2. The construction contractor shall utilize electric- or diesel-powered equipment in-lieu of gasoline-powered engines where feasible. This reduction in NOx and PM~0 emissions is not quantifiable. 3. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut-off equipment when not in use. This reduction in emissions is not quantifiable. 4. The construction contractor shall use Iow VOC asphalt and architectural coatings. This will result in a 5 percent decrease in ROG emissions during paving and painting activities. 5. The contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces a minimum of twice daily to suppress fugitive dust. This will result in a 70 percent decrease in PM~0 emissions. 6. The contractor shall water unpaved access roads, and paved roads where they join unpaved roads, a minimum of twice daily to minimize dust entrainment. This will decrease PM~0 emissions by 3 percent. 7. The contractor shall set and enforce a maximum speed limit below 15 miles per hour on all unpaved portions of the site. This will reduce PM~0 emissions by up to 70 percent. b-d) There are no sensitive receptors surrounding the project site. The proposed project is not of the size or scale that would alter or create a change in climate. The wholesale commercial nature of the proposed project would not be of the nature to result in the creation of objectionable odor. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 8 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pote,t,.,y Unl~s, Than 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 ( ) ( ) (x) curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby ( ) ( ) (x) uses? 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 ( ) ( ) (x) altemative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) Street and circulation improvements were made to the site and the perimeter street at the time of development of the AutoNation; therefore, only specific modifications will be made to accommodate the revisions to the driveway locations and configurations, including the addition of right-turn lanes. b) The proposed project has been designed to avoid hazards to safety resulting from both on- and off-site circulation, or from incompatible uses. NO IMPACT. c) The project has been designed with emergency access onto the site and around the entire building. NO IMPACT. d) The project has been designed to meet or exceed the parking requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. NO IMPACT. e-g) The proposed project is located adjacent to the Interstate 15 Freeway with frontage along 4th Street, which is a Major Arterial, which carries traffic from the freeway into the Cities of Rancho Cucamonga and Ontario. The proposed project would not add any barriers to pedestrians or bicycles. The proposed project is not located in close proximity to either a rail line or an airport and will therefore, not result in impacts to rail or air traffic. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 9 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: ,o~.~,y Unless Tllan 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their () () () (x) 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 vernal () () () (x) pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a-e) An environmental review conducted in 1996 (CUP 96-33), including a field survey. resulted in finding no sensitive plants or animals at the site. AutoNation was constructed in 1998, current conditions at the site are that of a completely developed site for the sale and display of automobiles. AutoNation subsequently vacated the site in 1999; however, the landscaping has continued to be irrigated and maintained. The proposed project proposes to retain and protect in-place most of the perimeter landscaping associated with the previous development. On-site landscaping will either be removed or boxed and replanted wherever possible. There will be no impact to endangered or threatened species of plants or animals or natural habitats. 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and () () () (x) inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? Comments: c) The project is not located in a Classified or Designated Mineral Resource area by the State Mining and Geology Board as identified by the County of San Bernardino or City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plans. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 10 Significant Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potent~flyunless T~an 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 response ( ) ( ) (x) 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 potential ( ) ( ) (x) health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable () () (x) brush, grass, or trees? Comments: a-e) There is no evidence of discarded drums, containers, hazardous materials or discolored soils resulting from any previous activities at the site. The previous user, AutoNation, operated a service bay and a drive-through carwash, and there is no indication of underground storage tanks or illegal dumping of hazardous material on- site. 10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a/b) The increased traffic caused by the wholesale commercial use of Costco will incrementally increase the background noise level in the general area; however, the nearest residential development are apartments located east of Etiwanda Avenue and north of Arrow Route, a distance of approximately 1½ miles. 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 roads? ( ) (x) ( ) e) Other governmental services? ( ) (x) ( ) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 11 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: ~o,..~t,v u.,~, ~n Comments: a) Fire Protection - The site, located on the north side of 4th Street immediately west of the Interstate 15 Freeway, would be served by the nearest fire station, which is located near the corner of Milliken Avenue and Jersey Boulevard. Standard Conditions of Approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes are included in the project approval. b) Police Protection - The proposed Costco Wholesale store will incrementally increase the need for routine police protection services, consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fee Schedule adopted by the City Council. c) Schools - The proposed project is located in the Cucamonga School District. Due to the wholesale commercial nature of the project, no impact to the school population is anticipated. The existing Costco, located on Foothill Boulevard east of the Interstate 15 Freeway will be relocated to this site; therefore, there will be no net increase in the number of employees. d/e) Parks - Since the proposed Costco is a relocation of an existing store within the City, there will be no net increase in population and, therefore, no impact on parks and recreational facilities. Public Services - The proposed Costco would incrementally increase traffic on adjacent public streets, in both the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the City of Ontario; however, the proposed use is consistent with land use expectations of the area and compatible with existing uses in the immediate area. Any increase in public services would be consistent with the City General Plan and Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council. 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 () (x) facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) (x) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) (x) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) (x) g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 12 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potent~,lly Unless 3'nan Comments: a-g) The proposed Costco will include the construction of a 148,663 square foot store and a gas station facility. The development of Costco will result in demolition of the improvements associated AutoNation, the previous user of the site. Existing utility systems are available at the site. The proposed project will not require major modifications or alterations to the existing utility systems. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposak a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Comments: a/b) The proposed project is clearly'visible from the Interstate 15 Freeway; therefore, the site as a whole, and specifically the east facing building elevations, were given added architectural expression. The streetscape will be landscaped in accordance with the 4th Street Beautification Plan. c) The lighting associated with the operation of Costco would be essentially the same as that degree of lighting required by AutoNation while it was in use. Them am no sensitive receptors within 1 mile of the site, and any incremental increase in light and glare would be less than significant when considered in context with the develop in the immediate area. 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 the ( ) ( ) (x) potential impact ama? Comments: a-e) No cultural resources have been observed on-site through the grading activity that was required to develop AutoNation. As a result, it is unlikely that any resources would be discovered through the process of demolition of the previous development (constructed in 1998) and construction of the new structures. In the event that a initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 13 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: .o~.~.,y UnleSS 'i~an historic or cultural resource is found, the contractor will be required to contact the owner of the site and the San Bernardino County Museum for the proper recovery and removal of the artifact. 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a/b) The proposed project will not increase the need for park and recreation services due to the fact that this is the relocation of an existing store within the City to this location; therefore, there would be no increase in the level of employment or increase in population. The site is not located in the proximity of any park or recreation facility. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) 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 to ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) 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 bdef, definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that () () () (X) 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.) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 14 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potent~atly Unless Than d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have () () () (X) environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: a) The site is not within an identified habitat area for any endangered species. Native vegetation was cleared from the site in 1998 with the development of AutoNation. The site is presently completely developed. Although AutoNation vacated the site in 1999, the site and landscaping is regularly maintained. b) The project site is 15.14 acres and grading will be limited to establishing proper drainage on the site once the AutoNation structures have been demolished. Through implementation of erosion control and dust suppression measures, construction of the site will not cause harm to any adjacent properties. c) The proposed project does oot have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. The site is located within the Industrial Development Districts, which permits this type of development in the Industrial Park land use district with a general commemial land use overlay. The Initial Study did not identify any impacts that could not be mitigated through the City's Standards and Conditions of Approval. d) The proposed development of 15.14 acres would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The site is located in an Industrial Park land use district with a general commercial land use overlay designation along 4th Street. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Conditional Use Permit 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Page 15 EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier 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 eadier 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): (x) General Plan EIR (Certified Apdl 6, 1981) (x) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (x)Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR (Certified September 19, 1981) ( ) Environmental Initial Study for CUP 96-33, 1996. 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 Signature: twh°eu ~dff°ecC~Su r°' r m i~ g a t e" t h e~ ~//7~-~:~ ~ ~t where clearly no significant environmental effects Date: ~/7/~:)// Print Namean~ ~:~--, ~~ 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 2109f and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM15579 and Conditional Use Permit DRCCUP00-34 Public Review Period Closes: March 28, 2001 Project Name: Project Applicant: Costco Wholesale Project Location (also see attached map): Located on the north side of 4th Street between Buffalo Avenue and the Interstate 15 freeway on/off ramps - APN 229-263-69. Project Description: A request to subdivide 15.14 acres into three pamels and to construct a 148,663 square foot retail store, which also includes a tire sales and installation center (5,200 square feet), food service (1,042 square feet), and gas pumps in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12). 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 substanfial 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 reviewwould 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. March 28, 2001 Date of Determination Adopted By RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00-34 (DRCCUP00-34), IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT, SUBAREA 12 (INDUSTRIAL PARK/GENERAL COMMERCIAL OVERLAY), LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 4TH STREET, BETWEEN BUFFALO AVENUE AND THE INTERSTATE 15 FREEWAY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 229-263-29. A. Recitals. 1. Costco Wholesale filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit DRCCUP00-34, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 28th day of March 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved bythe Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on March 28, 2001, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the northeast comer of 4th Street and Buffalo Avenue with a street frontage of 1,170 feet along 4th Street, and approximately 800 feet along Buffalo Avenue, and is presently improved with an existing auto sales facility which will be demolished; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is vacant, the property to the south consists of the Ontario Mills commeroial/entertainment center in the City of Ontario, the property to the east is the 1-15 freeway, and the proper~y to the west is vacant; and c. The application proposes construction of a wholesale commercial store of 148,663 square feet with related parking and gasoline dispensing area; and d. The existing Palm trees will require a Tree Removal Permit, and at that time, the applicant shall provide information as to the disposition of the Palm trees that are proposed for removal. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCCUP00-34 - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 2 a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all wdtten and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considerecr 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 have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources orthe habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission dudng the public headng, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Plannin,q Division Site Planning Issues 1) The applicant proposed alternative entry paving designs for the pdmary entrance from 4th Street. The Committee preferred the Alternative "A." Alternative "A" incorporates pavers and scored concrete a pattern that is carded up the entire length of the entrance way to the front entrance to the building. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCCUP00-34 - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 3 The alternative allows the parking in the north portion of the entry aisle to remain; however, the walkway, that would not only serve the handicap parking stalls, but also directs customers from the southern portion of the parking lot to the building entrance, is also identified with a paver, with numerous tree well pockets. The Committee prefen'ed to define the walkway using bollards, rather than wheel stops. Final design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. Building Design Issues 1) The Committee accepted the proposed large split-face block material as described by the architect and referred to as "Cathedral Stone." However, the Committee wanted the use of the material expanded to include all large columns along all elevations of the building. The Committee also indicated that the north and west elevations of the building require additional architectural definition. Final elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 2) The loading dock area shall be screened or buffered from public view to the satisfaction of the Design Review Committee. 3) Screening of the roof-mounted equipment from public view is required and shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Design Review Committee. 4) The support columns and canopy at the gas station shall use the same rnatefials as the pdmary building and characterize the same building theme to the satisfaction of the Design Review Committee. 5) The architect shall supply a sample of all proposed building materials and colors for review and approval by the Design Review Committee. 6) All roll-up and man doors shall be painted to match the adjacent building color. Landscape Issues 1) All landscape planters and tree wells shall be separated from the paved surface with a curb. All transformers, water valves, and similar items shall be placed within appropriate landscape areas and screened with shrubbery. 2) Landscaping shall be placed along the north elevation of the building (5-foot minimum width) and at the northwest comer of the building. 3) The automobiles and fuel dispensing pumps at the gas station shall be screened from view from 4th Street. The screening may be accomplished through a combination of retaining and/or Iow screen walls and berming. Landscaping alone is not an adequate screening PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCCUP00-34 - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 4 measure. The screening shall be illustrated through the use ora cross- section to the satisfaction of the Design Review Committee. 4) The 12-foot landscape planter width, as depicted in the entrance design Alternative "A," shall be used in the entrance landscape design concept. 5) Prior to the issuance of the Grading Permit, the applicant shall obtain a Tree Removal Permit for all existing trees that are in excess of 15-feet in height and have a single trunk circumference of 15-inches or more and multi-trunks with a circumference of 30-inches or more (as measured 24-inches above the ground surface). At that time, the applicant shall provide information as to the disposition of the Palm trees that are proposed for removal. To the extent feasible all Palm trees shall be boxed (or otherwise protected) and relocated either on- site or to other locations within the City as approved by the City Planner. En.qineedn.q Division 1) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66KV electriC:al) on the project side of 4th Street shall be under grounded along the entire project frontage, extending to the first off-site pole to the west of Buffalo Avenue and to the first off-site pole to the east of the eastedy project boundary. 2) All existing perimeter street improvement and parkway improvements, including the entry monument, shall be protected in-place. New or relocated street lights shall be spaced and located in accordance with City policy to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Street lights relocated along right tum lanes shall have 8-foot mast arms. 3) Complete 4th Street frontage improvements in accordance with the City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including but not limited to; driveway(s), curb and gutter to join existing as required, dght tum lanes, street paving, relocating and/or protecting existing street lights, replace R26(s) "NO STOPPING" signs as necessary and provide additional traffic striping and signage as required. 4) Right turn lane(s) along 4th street shall be concrete, with the flow line on the street side. Locations and lengths are acceptable as shown for Technical Review Committee submittal. 5) Complete Buffalo Avenue frontage improvements in accordance with the City "Major Arterial" standards as required and including; replacing and or modifying driveway(s), curb and gutter to join new or modified driveways, street paving, replace R26(s) "NO STOPPING" signs as necessary and provide additional traffic stdping and signage as required. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCCUP00-34 ~ COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 5 6) The north side of the existing southerly ddve approach on Buffalo Avenue shall be 24 feet wide; egress left turn lane shall be 10 feet wide, and egress right turn lane shall be 14 feet wide. 7) All sub-standard asphalt concrete paving along the street frontages of the property, to the centerlines of 4th Street and Buffalo Avenue shall be removed and replaced, or otherwise repaired, prior to issuance of a building permit. 8) The existing irrigation and landscaping shall be protected and maintained in its existing state as much as possible. All replacement landscaping and irrigation shall conform to and follow the same concept as the existing theme for the 4th Street Beautification Master Plan. 9) The Caltrans landscaped area to the east of the property near the southbound 1-15 freeway off ramp at 4th Street was constructed by the previous development through a highway planting improvement agreement with the State of California Department of Transportation Caltrans (District Agreement No. 8-1066). The applicant shall secure a similar agreement with Caltrans to provide all necessary repairs to the 1- 15 freeway ramp landscaped area, and to provide maintenance service in accordance with the Caltrans requirements and for all expenses thereof. 10) To discourage pedestrian access to the freeway off ramp intersection, do not install sidewalk along the 4th Street frontage, including access ramps and sidewalk in the curb return areas of the driveways. 11) Provide an update to the on-site portion of the hydrology study to address all the new site development concerns of the project. Environmental Miti,qation Air Quality 1) The site 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 manufacturer's specifications. This will result in a 5 percent decrease in ROG, NOx, and PM~0 emissions. 2) The construction contractor shall utilize electric- or diesel-powered equipment in-lieu of gasoline-powered engines where feasible. This reduction in NOx and PM~0 emissions is not quantifiable. 3) The construction contractor shall ensure that Construction-Grading Plans include a statement that work crews will shut-off equipment when not in use. This reduction in emissions is not quantifiable. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCCUP00-34 - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 6 4) The construction contractor shall use Iow VOC asphalt and architectural coatings. This will result in a 5 percent decrease in ROG emissions dudng paving and painting activities. 5) The contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces a minimum of twice daily to suppress fugitive dust. This will result in a 70 percent decrease in PM~o emissions. 6) The contractor shall water unpaved access roads, and paved roads where they join unpaved roads, a minimum of twice daily to minimize dust entrainment. This will decrease PM~0 emissions by 3 percent. 7) The contractor shall set and enforce a maximum speed limit below 15 miles per hour on all unpaved portions of the site. This will reduce PM~0 emissions by up to 70 percent. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2001. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Bullet, 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 28th day of March 2001, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Conditional Use Permit 00-34/Tentative Pamel Map 15579 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 Resoumes Code). Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and 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 pro~,ide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the City Planner, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. 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 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 Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Mitigation Monitoring Program Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's 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 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 ail mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required pedod of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of building permits. MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: CUP 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Applicant: Costco Wholesale Initial Study Prepared by:, Debra Meier Date: March 6, 2001 1. The site contractor shall select the construction equipment CP/BO C Observations dudng A 4 used on-site based on Iow-emission factors and high-energy construction efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained In accordance with manufacturer's specifications. 2. The construction contractor shall utilize electric- or diesel- CP/BO C Observationsdudng A 4 powered equipment in-lieu of gasoline-powered engines construction where feasible 3. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction- CP/BO C Provide notes on A 4 grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut- grading plan off equipment when not in use. 4. The construction contractor shall use Iow VOC asphalt and CP/BO C Provide notations on A 4 architectural coatings, building/grading plans :5. The contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces a CP/BO C Provide notes on A 4 I 6 minimum of twice daily to suppress fugitive dust. grading plans · The contractor shallwater unpaved access roads, andpaved CP/BO C Provide notes on A 4 roads where they join unpaved roads, a minimum of twice grading plan daily to minimize dust entrainment. 7. The contractor shall set and enforce a maximum speed limit CP/BO C Provide notes on A 4 below 15 miles per hour on all unpaved portions of the site. grading plan Key to Checklist Abbreviations CDD - Community Development Director ^ - With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection I - Withhold Recordation of Final Map CP - City Planner or designee B - Prior To Construction B - Other Agency Permit / Approval 2 - Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Constmcgon C - Plan Check 3 - Withhold Cedificate of Occupancy BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports / Studies / Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO - Poi[ce Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: Conditional Use Permit 00-34 (DRCCUP00-34) SUBJECT: APPLICANT: Costco Wholesale LOCATION: North side of 4th Street between Buffalo Avenue and 1-15 freeway ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and ail 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 sc. 2.00 t Project No. CUP00-34 Completion Date 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions / /_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and /. State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Ouilding and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _____/ submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code / / all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 8. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and /.__/__ the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. 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. 10.Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. D. Shopping Centers 1. The Master Plan is approved in concept only. Future development for (each building pad/pamel) /.__/__ shall be subject to separate Development/Design Review process for Planning Commission approval. Modifications to the Shopping Center Master Plan shall be subject to Planning Commission approval. 2. A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles, /___/ free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 3. Provide for the following design features in each trash enclosure, to the satisfaction of the City /__/__ Planner: a. Architecturally integrated into the design of (the shopping center/the project). / / b. Separate pedestrian access that does not require the opening of the main doors and to / / include self-closing pedestrian doors. c. Large enough to accommodate two trash bins. / / sc.,2.oo 2 Project No..CUPO0-34 Comeletion Date 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions / / of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and / / State Fire Marshal regulations have been compiled with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be / / submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. Ail site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / / consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, / / all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved '/ / by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. ~ 8. Trash receptacle(s) c,'; .'cq'--'!.'cd and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and ____/ / the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. 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. 10. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured __/~/ products. D. Shopping Centers 1 Thc ~A~... D,~ ~ ......... '~ ~ .......~ ~" The two parcels facing Buffalo Avenue are __/_~/ -~ "Not a Part" of this application. Future development on those parcels ~..,~/ ..... n shall be subject to separate Development/Design Review process fo,' ' ' . Any Mmodifications to the ,=~aef~..Cer~-overall site Master Plan shall be subject to Planning Commission approval. 2. A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles, __/.~/ free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. / ,~ ~lf trash enclosures required, the following design features in each trash .___/~/ 3. are enclosure, to the satisfaction of the City Planner: /- a. Architecturally integrated into the design of (the shopping center/the project), ___/~ b. Separate pedestrian access that does not require the opening of the main doors and to .__/ / include self-closing pedestrian doors. c. Large enough to accommodate two trash bins. / / SC-12-00 2 Project No. CUP00-34 Comeletion Date d. Roll-up doorc. / / e. Trash bins with counter-weighted lids. / / f. Architecturally treated overhead shade trellis. / / g. Chain link screen on top to prevent trash from blowing out of the enclosure and designed to __/__./ be hidden from view. 4. Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. / / 5. The entire site shall be kept free from trash and debris at all times and in no event shall trash and / / debris remain for more than 24 hours. 6. All operations-a~,~sse~on site shall be conducted to comply with the Class A ~ Performance Standards of the Industrial Park District. The maximum allowable exterior noise level of any use shall not exceed 65Ld, as measured by any location on the lot. hours cf ~,,.n~!0 p.m. ' ........... ~ 7. Textured pavement shall be provided across circulation aisle, pedestrian walkway, and plaza. / / They shall be of brick/tile pavers, exposed aggregate, integral color concrete, or any combination thereof. Full samples shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 8. All future building pads shall be seeded and irrigated for erosion control. Detailed plans shall be / / included in the landscape and irrigation plans to be submitted for Planning Division approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. The lighting fixture design shall compliment the architectural program. It shall include the plaza / / area lighting fixtures, building lighting fixtures (exterior), and parking lot lighting fixtures. 10. All future ~..~, ..................... r~-.-.* ....... development on tbs "~ot a Part" parcels shall be / designed to be compatible cg~ cons!stent with the architectural program established by this application. 11. Any outdoor vending machines shall be recessed into the building faces and shall not extend into / / the pedestrian walkways. The design details shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. 12. Cart corrals shall be provided for temporary storage as shown on the Site Plan. No~:hcpermanentp!_~r~n!n~, / / ~ outdoor storage of shopping carts shall be permitted unless ,othcr'.~'!-~c ~_~o'.'cd -Cemmisr,~mappropriate screening and security is provided subject to the approval of the City Planner. The-e,~,etM~o43--carts shall be collected and stored at the approved designated place at the end of each work day. E. Building Design 1. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be SC-12-00 3 Project No. CUPO0-34 Completion Date d. Roll-up doors. / / e. Trash bins with counter-weighted lids. __/--/ f. Amhitecturally treated overhead shade trellis. __/--/ g. Chain link screen on top to prevent trash from blowing out of the enclosure and designed to / / be hidden from view. 4. Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. / / 5. The entire site shall be kept free from trash and debris at all times and in no event shall trash and / / debris remain for more than 24 hours. 6.All operations and businesses shall be conducted to comply with the following standards which shall be incorporated into the lease agreements for all tenants: a. Noise Level - All commemial activities shall not create any noise that would exceed an / / exterior noise level of 60 dB during the hours of 10 p.m. until 7 a.m. and 65 dB during the hours of 7 a.m. until 10 p.m. b. Loading and Unloading - No person shall cause the loading, unloading, opening, closing, or /__/__ other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or other similar objects between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. unless otherwise specified herein, in a manner which would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area. 7. Textured pavement shall be provided across circulation aisle, pedestrian walkway, and plaza. / / They shall be of brick/tile pavers, exposed aggregate, integral color concrete, or any combination thereof. Full samples shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 8. All future building pads shall be seeded and irrigated for erosion control. Detailed plans shall be / / included in the landscape and irrigation plans to be submitted for Planning Division approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. The lighting fixture design shall compliment the amhitectural program. It shall include the plaza __/__/__ area lighting fixtures, building lighting fixtures (exterior), and parking lot lighting fixtures. 10. All future projects within the shopping center shall be designed to be compatible and consistent .__/ / with the architectural program established. 11. Any outdoor vending machines shall be recessed into the building faces and shall not extend into /__/__ the pedestrian walkways. The design details shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. 12. Cart corrals shall be provided for temporary storage. No permanent outdoor storage of shopping __/__/__ carts shall be permitted unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission. The shopping carts shall be collected and stored at the approved designated place at the end of each work day. E. Building Design 1. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or / / projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. 2. For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main __/__/ building colors. sc.,2-oo 3 Project No. CUP00-34 Completion Date F. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts / a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 2. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall ____/ contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). 3. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided / / throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/ recreational uses. 4. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances /_._/ and exits shall be striped per City standards. 5. Handicap accessible stalls shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or moro parking stalls. Designate two percent or one stall, whichever is greater, of the total number of stalls for use by the handicapped. 6. Motorcycle parking area shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more / / parking stalls. Developments with over 100 parking stalls shall provide motorcycle parking at the rate of one percent. The area for motorcycle parking shall be a minimum of 56 square feet. 7. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse.distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. 8. Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for commercial, office, and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area. If covered, the vertical clearance shall be no less than 9 feet. G. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in / / the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in / / accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 3.A minimum of 20% of trees planted within industrial projects, and a minimum of 30% within commercial and office projects, shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. 4.Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking __ stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. sc-12-00 4 Project No. CUP00-34 Completion Date included in buiJding plans. 2. For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll-up doorc and service doors to match main /. / building colors. F. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts /___/ a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 2. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall /. / contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). 3. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across cimulation aisles shall be provided / ~ within the project as shown on the Site Plan and Conceptual Landscape Plan "- ..... '- .... '1' 4. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, __/__/ and exits shall be striped per City standards. 5. Handicap accessible stalls shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more / / parking stalls. Designate two percent er one stall, whichever is greater, of the total number of stalls for use by the handicapped. 6. Motorcycle parking area shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more / / parking stalls. Developments with over 100 parking stalls shall provide motorcycle parking at the rate of one percent. The area for motorcycle parking shall be a minimum of 56 square feet. 7. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. 8. Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for / / commercial, office, and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area. If covered, the vertical clearance shall be no less than 9 feet. G. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation planrJnc!udJn=~ c!e?e ~"~'~t!~ ?'~'~ mede' he'''''~ ~"'~ .... ~""'~ ~' / / thc c~-=c ~'' '"~'~'~'~'~' ...... r ........ shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. __"r ?dar F~r~.~l m .......... r [,~ ~h ...... ~ ..... +.-.,~ I.~ ~.,l~,~l;..;..;.~ ThE P ~n shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Conceptual Landscape Plan. 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. SC-12-00 4 Project No. CUP00-34 Completion Date 5. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one __/____ tree per 30 linear feet of building. 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 ar)y parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 7. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering /.____ sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along 4th Street. 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. Ail walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the __/ __ design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 10.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. H. Signs 1. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. / / Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any signs. 2.A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $719.00 prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. J. 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: K. General Requirements 1. Submit four complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan; Project No. CUP00-34 Com~31etion Date 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, end 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. /___/__ Amhitect'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. 5.Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate o[ Occupancy issued by the Building and Safety Division. L. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commemial or industrial development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance. 3. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. 4. Construct trash enclosure(s) per City Standard (available at the Planning Division's public __ / counter). 5. The following is required for side yard use for increase in allowable area: /__ a. Provide a reduced site plan (8 Y~" x 11") which indicates the non-buildable easement. b. Recorded "Covenant and Agreement for the Maintenance of a I',lon-Buildable Easement," which is signed by the appropriate property owner(s). c. Sample document is available from the Building and Safety Division. sc.,2.oo 8 Project No. CUP00-34 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: K. 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/er walls. /- / 4. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to /_~/ the City prior to permit issuance. 5. Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the / Building and Safety Division. L. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be / / marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or addition / / to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance. 3. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday / / through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. ~ ~=:~7.:c.r).lf trash enclosures are required, they shall be developed per City Standard. 5. The following is required for side yard use for increase in allowable area: / / SC-12-00 6 y8 ~ ' Project No. CUP00-34 Comoletion Date a. Provide a reduced site plan (8 Y2" x 11 ") which indicates the non-buildable easement. b. Recorded "Covenant and Agreement for the Maintenance of a Non-Buildable Easement," which is signed by the appropriate property owner(s). c. Sample document is available from the Building and Safety Division. M. 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. Plans for food preparation areas shall be approved by County of San Bernardino Environmental /_____ Health Services prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be needed. N. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City /___/ Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State ~of California to /_ / perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the /_ / time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. /_ / APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: O. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 /.__/ feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. P. Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: /. / Street Name Curb& A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Medan B ke Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights T~,es Trail Island Trail Other "~'-'-"7 4thStreet (b) --~=-.~-I.~xx Buffa o Avenue (b) Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: SC-12-00 7 Project No. CUP00-34 Completion Date M. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the proper~y line clearances considering __/__/__ use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for required occupancy separation(s). / / 3. Plans for food preparation areas shall be approved by County of San Bernardino Environmental Health Services prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be needed. N. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3.A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR MPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: O. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. P. Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Curb & A.C $ de- Dr ve Street Street Comm Medan B ke StreetName lGutter Pvm, ] walk i Appr. lLightstTreesl Trail t island ITraillOther1 4th Street (b) x Buffalo Avenue (b) Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. {c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Project No. CUPO0-34 Completion Date b. Prior to any work being pedormed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction __ __/ permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and __ interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction __ project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer Notes: (1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2)Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City __ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with /___/__ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be __/ / installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. __ 3. intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with / / adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. Q. Public Maintenance Areas 1. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective __ Beautification Master Plan 4th Street. R. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. sc. 2.oo 8 5o Project No. CUPO0-34 Comeletion Date Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. __/__/ Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: S. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. The project is subject to the requirements of the Mello Roes Community Facilities District /.~./ 85-01. ~A~n~ =,,,,~. r, ...... ~" Fccilitie~ D!ctr!ct ,~.~ ................... ~.~.,j ~.ho t!mc rcccrd"t!cn cf '.Ac f!n=! m=7. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be: /_ / 2,750 gallons per minute -OR A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, /._._/ and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel.. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, /_ / if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be .~/ / 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 a(l hydrants and installed prior to final / /__ inspection. 7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: /__/__ x Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. x Other: CBC. 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. SC-12-00 9 D Project No. CUP00-34 CorneJetion Date 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. /.__ Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: S. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a 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: 2,750 gallons per minute -OR x A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. x For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/deve, loper and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be 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: / / x Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. x Other: CBC. 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. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of __/__/__ sprinkler system. sc.,2.o0 9 \ Project No. CUP00-34 Completion Date 9. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: ~ Other if required by CBC or CFC. 10. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: /__/ x All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 32. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall be __/ __ submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 14. A tenant use letter shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety / Division for the proper form letter. 15.Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District as follows: x $132 for CCWD Water Ptan review/underground water supply. x $677 for New Commercial and Industrial Development (per new building).** **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. 16. 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. T. Special Permits 1. Special permits may be required, depending on intended use, as noted below: a. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described / / below, which in the judgement of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions hazardous to life or property. b. Ovens (industrial baking and drying). c. Flammable and combustible liquids (storage, handling, or use). d. High piled combustible stock. e. Liquefied petroleum gas (storage, handling, transport, or use exceeding more than 120 gallons). 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 SUBMr]-FAL OF PLANS. NOTE: A SEPARATE GRADING PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL IS REQUIRED FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS WHERE IMPROVEMENTS BEING PROPOSED WILL GENERATE 50 CUBIC YARDS OR MORE OF COMBINED CUT AND FILL. THE GRADING PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED, STAMPED AND SIGNED BY A CALIFORNIA REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER. sc- 2-oo D rF_. Project No. CUPO0-34 Comoletion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 47%2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Security Lighting 1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have m~mmum maintained 1-foot candle power. These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. 2. All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with direct lighting to be provided by ail entryways. Lighting shalJ be consistent around the entire development. 3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. V. Security Hardware 1. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doom. If windows are within / / 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 2. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. __/__/ 3. All roof openings giving access to the building shall be secured with either iron bars, metal gates, / / or alarmed. W. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting co[or and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. 2. Developer shall paint roof top numbers on one or more roofs of this development. They shall be __/__ a minimum of three feet in length and two feet in width and of contrasting color to background. The stencils for this purpose are on loan at the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department. X. Alarm Systems 1. Install a burglar alarm system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and __/ / employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of false alarms and in turn save dollars and lives. 2. Alarm companies shall be provided with the 24-hour Sheriff's dispatch number: (909) 941-1488. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM15579, A SUBDIVISION CREATING 3 PARCELS ON 15.14 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 4TH STREET BETWEEN BUFFALO AVENUE AND THE 1-15 FREEWAY ON/OFF RAMPS, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 229-203-29. A. Recitals. 1. Costco Wholesale filed an application for approval of Tentative Parcel Map 15579, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Parcel Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On March 28, 2001, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public heating for the above-descdbed map. 3. All legal prerequisites pdor to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced meeting on March 28, 2001, including wdtten and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed tentative parcel map is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan and Development Code; and b. The improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with Subarea 12 of the Development Districts Chapter of the Development Code, and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or public health problems or have adverse effects on abutting properties. 3. Based upon the facts and information contained in the Negative Declaration, together with all wdtten and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TPM 15579 (SUBTPM 15579) - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 2 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. 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 have potential for an adverse impact upon witdlife resources orthe habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission dudng the public 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. 4. Tentative Parcel Map 15579 is hereby approved subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this 'reference. EnRineerin.q Division 1) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66KV electrical) on the project side of 4th Street shall be undergrounded along the entire project frontage, extending to the first off-site pole to the west of Buffalo Avenue and to the first off-site pole to the east of the eastedy project boundary. 2) All existing perimeter street improvement and parkway improvements, including the entry monument, shall be protected in-place. New or relocated streetlights shall be spaced and located in accordance with City policy to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Streetlights relocated along right-turn lanes shall have 8-foot mast arms. 3) Complete 4th Street frontage improvements in accordance with the City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including, but not limited to; driveway(s), curb and gutter to join existing as required, dght- tum lanes, street paving, relocating and/or protecting existing street lights, replacing R26(s) "NO STOPPING" signs as necessary, and providing additional traffic striping and signage as required. 4) Right-turn lane(s) along 4th street shall be concrete with the flow line on the street side. Locations and lengths are acceptable as shown for Technical Review Committee submittal. 5) Complete Buffalo Avenue frontage improvements in accordance with the City "Major Arterial" standards as required and including; replacing and or modifying driveway(s), curb and gutter to join new or modified PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TPM 15579 (SUBTPM15579) - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 3 driveways, street paving, replacing R26(s) "NO STOPPING" signs as necessary, and providing additional traffic striping and signage as required. 6) The north side of the existing southerly ddve approach on Buffalo Avenue shall be 24 feet wide; egress left-turn lane shall be 10 feet wide, and egress right-turn lane shall be 14 feet wide. 7) All sub-standard asphalt concrete paving along the street frontages of the property, to the centedines of 4th Street and Buffalo Avenue, shall be removed or otherwise replaced to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, pdor to issuance of a building permit. 8) The existing irrigation and landscaping shall be protected and maintained in its existing state as much as possible. All replacement landscaping and irrigation shall conform to and followthe same concept as the existing theme for the 4th Street Beautification Master Plan. 9) The Caltrans landscaped area to the east of the property near the southbound 1-15 freeway off ramp at 4th Street was constructed by the previous development through a highway planting improvement agreement with the State bf California Department of Transportation Caltrans (District Agreement No. 8-1066). The applicant shall secure a similar agreement with Caltrans to provide all necessary repairs to the 1-15 freeway ramp landscaped area, and to provide maintenance service in accordance with the Caltrans requirements and for all expenses thereof. 10) To discourage pedestrian access to the freeway off ramp intersection, do not install sidewalk along the 4th Street frontage, including access ramps and sidewalk in the curb return areas of the driveways. 11) Provide an update to the on-site portion of the hydrology study to address all the new site development concerns of the project. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION Air Quality 1) The site 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 manufacturer's specifications. This will result in a 5 percent decrease in ROG, NOx, and PMm emissions. 2) The construction contractor shall utilize electric- or diesel-powered equipment in-lieu of gasoline-powered engines where feasible. This reduction in NOx and PM~o emissions is not quantifiable. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TPM 15579 (SUBTPM 15579) - COSTCO WHOLESALE March 28, 2001 Page 4 3) The construction contractor shall ensure that Construction-Grading Plans include a statement that work crews will shut-off equipment when not in use. This reduction in emissions is not quantifiable. 4) The construction contractor shall use Iow VOC asphalt and architectural coatings. This will result in a 5 percent decrease in ROG emissions during paving and painting activities. 5) The contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces a minimum of twice daily to suppress fugitive dust. This will result in a 70 percent decrease in PM~0 emissions. 6) The contractor shall water unpaved access roads, and paved roads where they join unpaved roads, a minimum of twice daily to minimize dust entrainment. This will decrease PM~o emissions by 3 percent. 7) The contractor shall set and enforce a maximum speed limit below 15 miles per hour on all unpaved portions of the site. This will reduce PM~0 emissions by up to 70 percent. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2001. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY 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 28th day of March 2001, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Conditional Use Permit 00-34/Tentative Parcel Map 15579 This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and 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 pro~/ide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the City Planner, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. 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 documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the odginal 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 Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's 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 vedfied for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may adse requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necassa~ funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required pedod of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to knowwhether 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 pdor to the issuance of building permits. MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: CUP 00-34 and Tentative Parcel Map 15579 Applicant: Costco Wholesale Initial Study Prepared by:. Debra Meier Date: March 6, 2001 1. The site contractor shall $etect the construction equipment CP/BO C Observations during A 4 used on-site based on Iow-emission factors and high-energy construction efficiency, The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans Include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained In accordance with manufacturer's specifications. 2. The construction contractor shall utilize electric- or diesel- CP/BO C Observations dudng A 4 powered equipment In-lieu of gasoline-powered engines construction where feasible 3. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction- CP/BO C Provide notes on A 4 grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut- grading plan ' off equipment when not in use. 4. The construction contractor shall use Iow VOC asphalt and CP/BO C Provide notations on A 4 architectural coatings, building/grading plans 5. The contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces a CP/BO C Provide notes on A 4 minimum of twice daily to suppress fugitive dual grading plans 6. The contractor shall water unpaved access roads, and paved CP/BO C Provide notes on A 4 roads where they join unpaved roads, a minimum of twice grading plan I daily to minimize dust entrainment. 7. The contractor shall set and enforce a maximum speed limit CP/BO C Provide notes on A 4 below 15 miles per hour on all unpaved portions of the site. grading plan Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsib e Person .~,, .,,,~ :~ Mon!torl~ngF~uency~ ~,~, Me~ofVer~lon~ ~ ~;~, , · ~ ,San, tons, ~ ~ ~ CDD - Community Development Director A - With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection I - Withhold Recordation of Final Map CP - City Planner or designee B - Prior To Construction B - Other Agency Permit / Approval 2 - Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Construction C - Plan Check 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports / Studies / Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: Tentative Parcel Map 15579 (SUBTPM15579) SUBJECT: APPLICANT: Costco Wholesale LOCATION: North side of 4th Street between Buffalo Avenue and 1-15 freeway ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its / / agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. 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. This tentative tract map er tentative pamel 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. 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. SC-12-00 1 Project No. TPM 15579 Completion Date 2. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and __/ / State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 3. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be ___/ / submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance, of building permits. 4. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / / consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 5. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, / /~ all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. D. Shopping Centers 1. The Master Plan is approved in concept only. Future development for (each building pad/pamel) ___/ / shall be subject to separate Development/Design Review process for Planning Commission approval. Modifications to the Shopping Center Master Plan shall be subject to Planning Commission approval. 2. All future building pads shall be seeded and irrigated for erosion control. Detailed plans shall be / / included in the landscape and irrigation plans to be submitted for Planning Division approval prior tothe issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: E. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for / / approved openings: 4th Street. 2. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or /.__/__ noted on the final map. 3. Additional street right-of:way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7' ___/ / feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. F. Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / / Street Name Icurb ' I A.C. I Side- I Drive J Street I Street I Comm J Median I Bike J Other J JGutter/ Pvmt J walk IAppr. lLightsITre~sj Trail J Island ITra,lI I 4th Street (b) x Buffalo Avenue I I lb, I I I I t J t I I Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item SC-12-00 · 2 Project No. TPM 15579 Completion Date 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights / / on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. · b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction /_._/ permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and / / interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction / /___ project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer Notes: (1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City / / Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with / / adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be / / installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. / / 3. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with / / adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. G, Improvement Completion 1. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, / / an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the Developer and the City will be required for: Parcel 1 frontage improvements. H, Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, / / electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. SC-12-00 3 43 Project No. TPM 15579 Completion Date 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. __/__/ 3, Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the / Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approva~ or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. / /.__ Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. I. General Requirements and Approvals 1. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance of / / building permits, whichever occurs first, for: Buffalo Avenue/4th Street. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: J. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. The developer /___/ shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-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: / / .2,750 gallons per minute. -OR ~ A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. x For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, / / and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, __/ / if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be / / . 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. $C-12-00 4 Project No. TPM 15579 Completion Date 7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: -~/ / x Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. x Other: CBC. 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. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of __/ / sprinkler system. 9. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: --/ / x Other if required by CBC or CFC. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall be /___/ submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 13. A tenant use letter shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety / / Division for the proper form letter. 14. 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 water supply. $677 for New Commercial and Industria Development (per new building).** **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. 15. 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. K. Special Permits 1. Special permits may be required, depending on intended use, as noted below: a. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described / / below, which in the judgement of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions hazardous to life or property. b. Ovens (industrial baking and drying). / / c. Flammable and combustible liquids (storage, handling, or use). / / d. High piled combustible stock. / J e. Liquefied petroleum gas (storage, handling, transport, or use exceeding more than 120 / / gallons). SC-12-00 5 D Project No. TPM 15579 Completion Date NOTE: SEPARATE PLAN CHECK FEES FOR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS, FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS (SPRINKLERS, HOOD SYSTEMS, ALARMS, ETC.), AND/OR ANY CONSULTANT REVIEVVS WILL BE ASSESSED UPON SUBMITTAL OF PLANS. NOTE: A SEPARATE GRADING PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL IS REQUIRED FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS WHERE IMPROVEMENTS BEING PROPOSED WILL GENERATE 50 CUBIC YARDS OR MORE OF COMBINED CUT AND FILL. THE GRADING PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED, STAMPED AND SIGNED BY A CALIFORNIA REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477~2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L. Security Lighting 1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. ___/ / These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. 2. All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with / / direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development. 3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. / / M. Security Hardware 1. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doom. If windows are within / /.__ 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 2. All garage or rolling doom shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. __/__/ 3. All roof openings giving access to the building shall be secured with either iron bars, metal gates, /~ or alarmed. N. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime / / visibility. 2. Developer shall paint roof top numbers on one or more roofs of this development. They shall be / / a minimum of three feet in length and two feet in width and of contrasting color to background. The stencils for this purpose are on loan at the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department. O. Alarm Systems 1. Install a burglar alarm system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and ___/ /__ employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of false alarms and in turn save dollars and lives. 2. Alarm companies shall be provided with the 24-hour Sheriff's dispatch number: (909) 941-1488. __/__/__ SC-12-00 6 TH E C IT Y O F I~ANCHO CUCAHONGA DATE: March 28, 2001 TO: Chairman and Members of the Plannin§ Commission FROM: Bra0 Bullet, City Planner BY: Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT15873 - G & D CONSTRUCTION - A request for an extension of a previously approved residential subdivision of 27 single-family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related File: Variance 96-02. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 15783 was approved by the Planning Commission on March 25, 1998, for a two-year period. The Commission concurrently approved Variance 96-02 along with the tentative tract. This is the second request for an extension. The project is currently going through the plan check process. ANALYSIS: A. Subdivision Map: On January 6, 1999, the City Council amended the City's Subdivision Ordinance to establish a three-year initial approval period for tracts (increased from two years previously). Also, the amendment allows the Planning Commission authority to grant time extensions in 12-month increments for up to five years (a maximum of eight years from the original time approval), which is the maximum allowed under the State Subdivision Map Act, Section 66452.69(e). The maximum life of this project would be up to eight years from the date of approval (final expiration on March 25, 2006). B. Related Items Desiqn Review and Variance: The original approval for the project also included review for construction of 27 single-family residential units and a variance for the following: reduce the minimum area requirement for the use of Optional Development Standards; reduce the rear yard setback along the north and west project boundary; reduce the building-to-curb setback; reduce the building-to-building separation; reduce the average and minimum landscape setback along Carnelian Street; reduce the parking streetscape setback; and increase the wall height along the north and west project boundary. ITEM F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'ir 15783 & VAR 96-02 - G & D CONSTRUCTION March 28, 2001 Page 2 The time extension for design reviews and variance is regulated by the City's' Development Code. The Development Code was amended by Ordinance No. 596 to grant a five-year approval period with no possible time extensions. The maximum approval period would be five years from the original approval. The final expiration of the design review and variance would be Mamh 25, 2003. On May 10, 2000, the Planning Commission granted a time extensions for both the variance and desiqn review to March 25, 2003. No further time extension is possible. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: In granting the previous time extension on May 10, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Conditions in the area have not changed appreciably and no further environmental review is required. Staff recommends adherence to the mitigation measures for geologic, water, transportation/circulation, biological resources and noise, which were included in the original approval (see attached Mitigation Monitoring Program). 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 grant a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract 15783 througl~ adoption of the attached Resolution. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:DRma Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Applicant dated February 8, 2001 Exhibit "B"- Location Map Exhibit "C"- Illustrative Site Plan Exhibit "D"- Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "E" - Elevations/Floor Plans Exhibit "F" - Street Scene Exhibit "G"- Design Review Comments Exhibit "H"- Initial Study Part I and II Resolution of Approval for Time Extension for Tentative Tract 15783 G 8,: D CONSTRUCTION, INC. Architecture · Oevelopment · Construction February 8. 2001 Doug Fenn Planning Division The City Of Rancho Cucamonga ILO. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91729 RE: Tentative Tract 15783, Time Extensions Dear Mr. Fenn. This letter shall request a time extension, for the subdivision on Carnelian St., Rancho Cucamonga. Tentative Tract 15783. Please extend all planning department, engineering, standard conditions and all other necessary documents tbr a minimum period of I year fi'om March 25. 2001. Plans are in there final stages of completion by our engineer as per the corrections requested by various departments. Attached please find the extension application, radius map and labels. Please call me with any questions. My direct line is (626)447-3,118. Thank You. Todd Leibl. C.F.O. I'~or: G&D Construction. Inc. NORTH SANTA ANITA AVENUE, SUITE A · ARCADIA. CALIFORNIA Tel: (626) 447-3104 · Fax: (626) 447-3162 · License No. 432793 Todd Leibl: (626) 447-3118 · Lars Dennert: 16-6) 447-~ I _ I Daniel Leibk (626) 447~-99~,3 I~ Earl Richer: (626 574-9445 2ND FLOOR ST FLOOR ~.- ~. Project' CITY OF R~~AMONGA Title: '~J~..(~te PLA~,~O. ~q Exhi,~xh/bit E-I" Date: ,~1 [~,-~ REAR 1Aw/Fireplace LEFT lA,lB ~ 'Fi~_AR lB w/oFi~eplace 'FRONT. lB FRONT ~ 2ND FLOOR I ~ST FLO(pR : LAN 2  Project: '~'~- ~' Title: r/v~4,~J~.~ ~¢ c,~ o~. ~o.~ " PLA~I~VI~ON Exhibit t~ *~ ~ "E-3"-- Date: REAR 2q LEFT 2B RIGHT 2B ~~ ~~ ~ RIGHT 2A ~, ' Project: ~ Title: ~)Jx/W~I,vt~ / CITY OF R AMONGA P LA N~III~I-~I',II S~ O N Exhibit "E-4'?: !ND FLOOR FLOOR : ~ 3A w/Fireplace LEFT 3A&$B REAR 3B w/oFireplace · FE~ONT 3B RIGHT 3A C [ Project:. ~'~ I~"~ ~ Title: ~?If~'~..~?,,"/~o/ Cl~ OF R AMONGA PLA~I~YI~ON i Exhibit "E-6"; ~ Date' L ""'"'-'- ~ ~ ""' F ~,,.-. - ENLARGED SITE PLAN at UNIT ENTRIES ~ RIG~ ~ ~' TYPICAL STREET SECTION ~'~~ .. ,. STREET SCENES I DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 p.m. Tom Grahn November 19, 1996 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15783 - O & D CONSTRUCTION - A residential subdivision of 29 single family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Residential Distri~ (8-14 dwelling units per acres), located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. ' ' To the north of the project site are single family homes and a CCWD water tank, to the east are single family homes, and to the west and south is the Cucamonga Creek Channel. The project site is roughly triangular in shape fronting onto the west side of Carnelian Street. There are a number of trees located throughout the project site and a row of Eucalyptus trees adjacent to Carnelian Street, the vast majority of which are proposed for removal with development of th~ project. There are no 'known cultural resources located on the project site. The small site area and triangular shape present unique design challenges. Also, additional dedication is need to realign Carnelian Street to address lxaffic safety concerns. As a result there are multiple variances needed. lqelated Proiects: In October 1989, the 'Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract No. 14263 which proposed the development of thirty-two con'dominium units on the project site. In January 1993, the Planning Commission approved a design review modification to the project site to revise the site plan and building elevations for thirty-two town homes. Both previous approvals utilized duplexes for the project design. Staff Comments: The I;ollowing comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Development Standards - The project is required to utilize the Optional Development Standards to develop single family detached homes in the Medium District; however, the Development Code identifies a minimum project area of 5 acres for use of these standards. Therefore, the applicant has submitted a Variance to address th.is inadequacy. The Development Code states that "[the optional development] standardx are intended to provide high standar, ds for the development of projects of superior quality and compatibilit):" The Committee should consider whether the project features a superior architectural design, site planning, and its relationship ofp. rivate and common open space areas, and in its relationship to adjacent uses. 2. Architectural Style - The project proposes the development of twenty-nine units utilizing one floor plan W/th five elevations. These elevations utilize a variety of materials, window trea3ments, garage door treatments, etc. The Committee should consider whether the massing and proportion are too repetitive and do not provide 'enough variety when viewed from the adjacent street fi'ontage. To breakup the repetitive nature of the project architectural style an additional floor plan could be provided that utilizes distinctly differen~t massing, proportion, and scale. DRC AGENDA '. age15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION ,ember 19, t996 2 3. RecreationalAmenities - The project complies w/th the required amemtte~ for projects of~0 umts or less. Secondary Is~ue~: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permit'tin, g, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Provide decorative paving at the project entry behind the public right-of-way. 2. Provide berming w/thin the landscaped area adjacent to Carnelian Street. The berming should be undulating, approximately 3 feet in height, and non-uniform in appearance. Berming must be designed taking in. to consideration the requirements of the drainage improvements to Carnelian trees. Since no fence is proposed, a careful combination of landscaping and berming should be used to a) define the private on-site space to discourage unwanted entries, b) soften the appearance of nine garages from Carnelian Street, and c) discourage children from running out onto Carnelian Street. 3. The project should be designed w/th a trail connection to the future regional l~ail located along the Cucamonga Creek Channel. A lockable gate should be provided. It is not clear whether a trail connection is proposed between Units 9 and 10. Revise the internal driveway to delete the extra Paving beyond the 50-foot radius in the e.'axeme northeast and northwest comers of the project site. The affected driveways, sidewalks, etc., should be extended accordingly. 5. Delete the connections from Lot I and 8 to the pool/spa area. The location and size of these areas could become a security and maintenance problem. 6. Adequate on-site lighting shall be provided to ensure a safe environment while at the same time not causing areas of intense light or glare. The only lights identified are wall-mounted fixtures adjacent to unit garage doors. Lighting needs to be expanded to identify lighting driveways and recreation areas. Fixtures and poles shall be designed and placed in a manner consistent and compatible w/th the overall site and building character. 7. Provide decorative metal fence, w/th gated access, to secure the open space and tot lot area north of Unit 27. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and returned for review by the Design Review Committee. Design Review Committee Comments: Members Present: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong' Tom Grahn DRC AGENDA 'IT 15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION November 19, 1996 Page 3 The Committee recommended that the. applicant work with staff to revise the project to address the following design issues and remm to the Design Review Committee for review. 1. The project Site Plan and architecture should be revised to reflect a project of superior qualiD' and design consistent with the Optional Development Standards. 2. The Site Plan appears too tight and should be reduced in density to open up space around units and provide for more useable common open space. 3. Provide an additional floor plan with different massing, proportion, and scale. This will reduce the monotony of.the streetscape when viewing the project from Carnelian Street. 4. Revise the design of the common open space areas to provide areas suitable for recreation. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Tom Grahn May 6, 1997 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 157193 G & D ~ - A residential subdivision of 27 single family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. Backeround: This project was reviewed at the November 19, 1996, Design Review Committee 'meeting (see attached minutes). At that meeting the Committee recommended the following design modifications: 1. The Site Plan and architecture should be revised to reflect a project of superior quality and design consistent with the Optional Development Standards. 2. The Site Plan appears too tight and should be reduced in density to open up space around units and provide for more useable common open space. 3. Provide an additional floor plan with different massing, proportion, and scale. This will reduce the monotony of the streetscape when viewing the project from Carnelian Street. 4. Revise the design of the common open space areas to provide areas suitable for recreation. Design Parameters: The project site is roughly triangular in shape fronting onto the west side of _amelian Street. To the north of the project site are single family homes and a Cucamonga C.ounty ater District water tank, to the east are single family homes, and to the west and south ~s the Cucamonga Creek Channel. There are a number of trees located throughout the project site and a row of Eucalyptus trees adjacent to Carnelian Street, the vast majority of which are proposed for removal ~vith development of the project. There are no known cultural resources. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion: Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding !his project: 1. Development Standards - The project proposes the development of single family homes in the Medium Residential District and because of the product type (i.e., single family homes) is required to utilize the Optional Development Standards. Optional Development Standards are "intended to provide high standards for the development of projects of superior quality and compatibility." The Committee must determine if the project Site Plan and architecture reflect a design of superior quality and compatibility. 2. Project Density - The Site Plan was revised to reduce the number of proposed.units from 29 to 27. Based upon the net project acreage of 3.35 acres of land, there are 8.05 units proposed per acre. This reduction in densit3' opened up the project and increased the area of private open space around each unit. 3. Architecture - The original project design included one floor plan with two elevations that provided five elevation alternatives through variation in the placement of garage doors, front entry doors, second story windows, and roof massing. The project architecture was revised to provide one additional elevation with two alternatives that provide different roof massing and window placement. DRC COMMENTS TT15783- G&D CONSTRUCTION May 6, 1997 Page 2 4. Recreational Amenities - The previous Design Review submittal complied with the required number of recreational amenities for projects with 30 units or less by providing a swimming pool, barbeque facility, and large open lawn area at one area of the project site. The Committee should determine if the recreational amenities provided meet the intent of the code requirements. 'Seconda _ry Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Provide berming within the landscaped area adjacent to Carnelian Street. The berming should be undulating, approximately 3 feet in height, and non-uniform in appearance. Berming must be designed to take into consideration the requirements of the drainage improvements to the trees adjacent to Cametian Street. Since no fencing is proposed, a careful combination of landscaping and berming should be used adjacent to Carnelian Street to: a) define private on-site space to discourage unwanted entries; b) soften the appearance of nine front-on garages, and c) discourage children from running into the street. 2. Revise the internal driveway to delete the extra paving beyond the 50-foot radius in the extreme northwest comer of the project site. The affected driveways, sidewalks, etc., should be extended accordingly. 3. Adequate on-site lighting shall be provided to ensure a safe environment while at the same time not causing areas of intense light or glare. No lighting is currently shown; however, the previous submittal only identified wall mounted fixtures adjacent to garage doors. Project lighting needs to identify lighted driveways and recreation areas. Fixtures and poles should be designed and placed in a manner consistent and compatible with the overall site and building character. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. The project has proposed a trail connection to the future regional trail located along the Cucamonga Creek Channel. This access is located between Lots 9 and 10. A lockable gate should be provided. The final design of the trail connection is subject to the recommendation by the Trails Committee. StaffReeommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for their consideration. Attachment: DRC Action Comments Dated November 19, 1997 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Bill Bethel, Dan Coleman StaffPlanner: Tom Grahn The Committee recommended that the applicant work with staffto revise the project by addressing the following design issues and return to the Design Review Committee for review. DR.C COMMENTS TT 15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION ~May 6, 1997 Page 3 1. The Committee supported the revised Site Plan design and the curcem grouping of on-site amenities. 2. The Committee did not support the proposed architectural style nor the proposed colors. The following comments were presented and should be addressed in any revised submittal: a. The architectural style appears dated and the proposed colors appear cartoon like. The Committee is not opposed to a craftsman architectural style, but did not support the proposed architecture. b. The street scheme is dominated by garage doors, massive dark roofs, and a heavy wood feel to the front elevation. c. The massive dark roof elements need to be lightened up with a different roof tile color. d. The applicant should explore the use of alternative roof massing to provide additional variety. The Committee felt there was too much of a box design to the elevations and suggested a gable roof facing the street to soften the street scheme. e. The use of roll-up garage doors may be considered. If utilized, they should provide variation in the garage door pattem. f. The Committee expressed concern with the minimal back yards provided for most fruits. g. Provide more landscaping to soften the project design. Landscaping should meet City standards. h. Explore lighter accent colors. 3. Revise the internal driveway to delete the extra paving beyond the 50-foot radius of the extreme northwest comer of the project site.' The affected driveways, sidewalks, etc., should be extended accordingly. 4. Adequate on-site lighting should be provided and designed in a manner to minimize vandalism. 5. Relocate the proposed trail connection to Cucamonga Creek from between units nine and ten to the recreation area. DESIGN I~EVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Tom Grahn May 20, 1997 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION - A residential subdivision of 27 single f~imily homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. 'This project was reviewed at the May 6, 1997 Design Review meeting. Al that meeting the Committee recommended that the applicant work with staff to revise the project by addressing the following design issues and return to the Design Review Committee for review. 1. The Committee supported the revised Site Plan design and the current grouping of on-site amenities. 2. The Committee did not support the proposed architectural style nor the proposed colors. The following comments were presented and should be addressed in any revised submittal: a. The architectural style appears dated and the proposed colors appear cartoon like. The Committee is not opposed to a craftsman architectural style, but did not support the proposed architecture. b. The street scheme is dominated by garage doors, massive dark roofs, and a heavy wood feel to the front elevation. '" c. The massive dark roof elements need to be lightened up with a different roof tile color. d. The applicant should explore the use of alternative roof massing to provide additional variety. The Committee felt there was too much ora box design to the elevations and suggested a gable roof facing the street to soften the street scheme. e. The use of roll-up garage doors may be considered. If utilized, they should provide variation in the garage door pattern. f. The Committee expressed concern with the minimal back yards provided for most units. g. Provide more landscaping to soften the project design. Landscaping should meet City standards. h. Explore lighter accent colors. 3. Revise the internal driveway to delete the extra paving beyond the 50-foot radius of the extreme northwest comer of the project site. The affected driveways, sidewalks, etc., should be extended accordingly. 4. Adequate on-site lighting should be provided and designed in a manner to minimize vandalism. 5. Relocate the proposed trail connection to Cucamonga Creek from between units nine and ten to the recreation area. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for their consideration. d~DRC COMMENTS 15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION ~May 20, 1997 Page 2 Attachment: DRC Comments dated May 6, 1997, and DRC Action Comments dated November 19, 1996. Design Review Committee Action: MEmbers Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Tom Grahn The Design Review Committee concluded that the project may proceed to the Planning Commission for their consideration, but did not recommend approval due to concerns over the proposed architectural design. The following comments were identified: 1. The Committee did not support the proposed architectural style and therefore did not recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Macias favored the project's architectural style, as it utilized a design style other than Spanish or Mediterranean. Commissioner Bethel did not favor the project architecture for the reasons noted in the May 6, 1997, Design Review Committee Action. The Committee supported the revised Site Plan design and the current grouping of on-site amenities, the revised trail location, and the proposed lighting. The Committee did not support the proposed I O-foot rear yard setbacks along the west property line and identified that they could support shifting the project to the east by 5 feet, further reducing the landscape setback along Carnelian Street, to provide an increase in the usable rear yard area. Lots 6 through 13 would be effected by site plan adjustment. 4. The Committee reviewed the revised color scheme and supported the proposed color modification. · DESIGN RE¥tE'~ CO~'vhMENTS _'_'.. 8:30 p.m. Tom Grahn September 2, 1997. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15783'-: 'G&D CONSTRUCTION.- A residential subdivision of 29 single family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the lVledium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-5'4 and 64. This project was previously reviewed by the Design Review Committee on May 6, and May 20, 1997, and November 19, 1996. At the last meeting the Committee did not support the proposed architectural style or the proposed colors, however, it was determined that the applicant could proceed to the Planning Commission for consideration. The following comments were presented by the Committee on May 20, 1997. 1. The architectural style appears dated and the proposed colors appear cartoon like. The committee was not opposed to a craftsman architectural style, but did not support the proposed architecture. 2. THe street scheme is dominated by garage doors, massive dark roofs, and a heaD' wood feel to the front elevation. 3. The massive dark roof elements need to be lightened up with different roof tile color. 4. The applicant should explore the use of alternative roof massing to provide additional variety,. The Corrtmittee felt there was too much ora box .design to the elevations and suggested a gable roof facing the street to soften the street scheme. 5. The use of roll-up garage doors may be considered. If utilized, they should provide variation in the garage door patten. 6. Explore lighter accent colors. ~ The applicant did not want to proceed to the Planning Commission without a favorable recommendation from the Design Review Committee, and therefore, submitted for additional review. The following architectural modifications were provided to the front elevations. These modifications should be the basis of Commiuee discussion to determine whether or not the elevations are acceptable or will require further modification. I. Variation in the roof pitch to decrease the box like design. 2. Variation in the roof line through additional gable roofs. 3. Reduction in the heavy wood feel of the elevation. 4. Providing a brick veneer as an accent material on all elevations. This material will '.,,'rap around the side elevation to a logical termination point. 5. The modification of awkv,'ard, box like unfunctional dormers into a functional element. 6. Revised color and roof tile samples will be available for Committee consideration. Staff Recommendation: Staffrecorru'nends the Cornmittee for-.vard the project to the Planning Corru'nission for their consideration. DRC COMMENTS : -; pa~=e5783 - G&D CONSTRUCTION .... mber 2, 1997 . - 2 Anackment: DRC Action Comments dated May 20 and May 6, 1997 and November 19, 1996. Design Review Commitlee Action: Members Present: Bill Bethel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Tom Orahn The Commit'tee appreciated the effort the applicant went th. rough to revise the elevations and concluded that the applicant may proceed to the Planning Commission for their consideration subject to the following. I. Delete the proposed elevation lB.  ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM ~"0"~"'~-'~.~-~.,,~.,.,~., (Part ! - Initial Study) (909) 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 CECLA. It is important that the information requested in this application be provided in full. INCOMPLETE APRLICA TION$ WILL NOT BE PROCESSED Please note that it is the mspon$il~Tily of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: ContactPe.'~on&Addres$: %c/J L~-I"~ / Name & Address of person preparfng this form (if different from above): Telephone Numbec ~ Infon~ation i~dicated by aate~f~k (*) is not required of non-const~u~Jon CUP's unle.~ otherwise mcluested by star '1) Provide a full scale (8-1/2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrent Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundade$. 2) Provide a set of color photographs Which show representative views into the site from the no~th, south, east and weal; views into and from the site from the pl~mary access points which se~e-e the ~te; and reprosentative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photogreph. 4) Asse$$oK$ Parcel IVumbet~ (attach additional sheet if necessary): '5) Gross Site Area (acl_~q. ft.): ~1~ C 2 ,4 d Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications): 7) Describe any preposed generel plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary: I 8) Include a desc#ption of all pen'nits which will be necessary from the Cib/ of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental agencies in or, er to fully implement the project'. d,,,? ;~,.i~,,~ ~, ~',~.~1 ~,.~,o, G~,~ ~,'~, ' 9) Desc~fbe the physical seffing of the site as it exists before the project including inforrnalion on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and rcads, d~inage Course~ and scenic aspects, Describe any existing sb~ctums on ~te (inc~udir~j age and condition) and the use of the ~ructums. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition. site all soumes of information (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and atcheological sun/eys, traffic studie~jfll~k "¥ - ! 10) Desc~be the known cultural ancYor historical aspects of lhe $ile. Sile ail sources of inforrnation (book$, pubilshed rapo~ls and o~1 history): 11) Desc~fbe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site (aircraft. roadway noise, elc.) and how they ~il affect proposed uses: 12) Desctfbe the proposed p~oject in detail. This =hould prm4de an adequate desc~fpb'on of the site in terms of ultimate use which will ~esult from the prosed p~oject. Indicate i£ there are p~oposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur wfth eecl~ phase, and the anticipated completion of each inomment. Attach additional sheet(s) if nece.~ary: JO' ' 13) Desctfbe the surrounding properties, including infomlation on plants and animals and any cultul--~t, historical, orscenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential. commercial, etc.), inten~ty of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops. department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height. frontage, setback, rear yan~. etc.): 14) t48~ the pr~p~sed pr~ject change the pattem~ $ca~e ~r character ~f the suu~unding gene~al area ~f the ~r~ject? Indicate the type of short-te~m and long-term noise to be genelated, including source and amount. Now will these noise levels affectadjacentpropertiesandon-siteuses. WhatmethodsofsoundpmoEngampmposed? · 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contal the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) ~O Peak use (gal/Day) ' ['~ ~ ~ b. Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) Peak uae (gal/rain/ac) 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. Septic Tank ~ Sewer. If septic tanks am proposed, attach pemolation tests. If di$chatcJe to a sanita~/ sewage system is proposed inCicate expected daily sewage gecet;tion: (See Attachment A forusage estimates). Forfurther cla#flcation, please contact the Cucamonga County WaterDistdct at 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) '~ ~-~') b. Commemial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: '~ ~ Oetached(indicatetangeo, pamelsize$,minimumlotstzeandmaxirnumlotsize: ~'~ &' '~"*/'l.~,'~ ~ Attachecl (indicate whether units ale rental or for sale un#a): 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or lents: Sale Prfce(s) $ f ~/ ~C~ to $ ~ [ ~ '~ ~ Rent (per month) $ to $ Speci ' um ero, bed om , un,,ty e.._ ? 24) Indicate the expected number o! achool children who will be le~iding within the preject: Contact the appropriate School Dist/fcts as shown in Attachment a. Elementary: b. JuniorHigh: c. Senior High COMMERCIAL~ INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECT~ 25) Desc/fbe type of use(a) and major function(a) of commercial, induat#al or institutionai uaes: 26) Total floor area of commercial, induat#al, or institutional uses by type: INITSTDI.VVPD - 4/96 ' ~ 4:~ O] Page6 27) Indicate hou= of operation: 28) Number of employees: Total: Maximum Shift: Time of Maximum Shift: 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and ~ala~/ranges. as well as an indicab'on of the rate of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessa~t): 30) Estimation of the number of workera to be hired that currently reside in the ~'ly: '31) For commerc/al and industrial uses only, indicate 'the Source, type and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be ve#fied through the South Coast Air Qualily Management Distdcl. at (818) 572-6283): ALL PROJECTS 32) Have~eweter~$ewer'~re~and~c~ntr~agencle$$etaring~epre~eclbeenc~ntacl~lt~detetmine~eirabi~i~yt~pmvide acYequate sen4ce to the proposed project? If so, please incYicate their response. iNITSTD1.WPD - 4/96 ' ~ <~,~)O Page7 33) In the k~awn history of this property, has there been any use. ~torage. or d~'c~a~e of h~za~lou$ a~d/or toxic male~fal$ ? ~xamples of hazardous and/or toxic mate~als include, but a~ not I"~fed to PCB's; r~dic~cli~ sub~ar~c~s; pesti=ides and hemiclde$; fuels, oil=. solvents, and other flammable liquids a~l ga=e~ Also r~te undefgrou~l =torege of a~y of the above. I=leese list the mate~fals and desc~be their use, =~orage. ar~Yor discl~arge o~ the pmpertYo a~ wbll as the dates of use. if k~own. 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use. stooge or disc, barge of hazardous an~/or toxic mate~al~ including but not limited to those examples listed above? If ye~ provide a~ invenfc~y of afl ~ materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of ~ u=e~. along with the ~o~age a~d shipment a~a~ shall be Shown a~d labeled on the application plans. I hereby certify that the statements fumiahed above and in the attached exhibits present the data and infon~alion required for equate evaluation of this project to the beat of my ~bility. that the fact=. =~otemon~ ond informaEan presented are tree and rrecl tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further uncle=land that ad~tional information may be required to be submitted [ore a~ adequate evaluation can be made by the C~ty of Rancho r tia: City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract 15783/Variance 96-02 2. Related Files: Tentative Tract 14263 3. Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15783 - G&D CONSTRUCTION - A one-year time extension for the tentative tract map for a residential subdivision and design review of 27 single-family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Density Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. Associated with this request is a Tree Removal Permit 98-08 and Variance 96-02. VARIANCE 96-02 - G&D CONSTRUCTION - A request to modify the following development standards: 1) reduce t. he minimum area requirement for the use of Optional Development Standards, 2) reduce the rear yard setback along the north and west project boundary, 3) reduce the building-to-curb setback, 4) reduce the building-to- building separation, 5) reduce the average and minimum landscape setback along Carnelian Street, 6) reduce the parking streetscape setback, and 7) increase the wall height along the north and west project boundary, for a residential subdivision and design review of 27 single-family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Density Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. Related Files: Tentative Tract 14263 and Tentative Tract 15783. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Todd Leibl, CFO G & D Construction, Inc. 25 North Santa Anita Avenue, Suite A Arcadia, CA 91006 626-447-3118 5. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) 6. Zoning: Medium Density Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: No change to the existing surrounding setting has occurred since the Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted in March 1998. Surrounding land uses include single-family residential and a CCWD water tank to the north, Cucamonga Creek Channel along the southwesterly site boundary, and single family residential east of Carnelian Street. The project site is currently vacant, although there were previously several single-family residences on the northern portion of the project. All of the structures have been demolished. The site slopes approximately Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. Page 2 six percent from nodh to south. There are 45 existing trees on-site, 43 of which are slated for removal, and two will be relocated on-site. 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: ' Doug Fenn, Associate Planner (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783- G&D Construction, Inc. Page 3 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 ( ) Population and Housing (v') Biological Resources ( ) Public Services (v') Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Utilities and Service Systems (v') Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Aesthetics (v') Noise ( ) Cultural Resources (v') Air Quality (v~) Mandato~/Findings of Significance ( ) Recreation DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: () I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the propose, d 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 efl'ect 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. Sign ed:'~ [X,),.k,~¥~~ Nab,.~y M. Fer~u~on Senior Planndr.~ April 19, 2000 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. Page 4 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. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: po~.~,y Uniass Than 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ('/) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or ( ) ('") policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the ( ) (v') vicinity? d) Disrupt or divide the physical a. rrangement of an ( ) (v') established community? Comments: a-d) The proposed project is within the Medium Density land use designation of the General Plan and the Medium Density Residential District. Previous approvals by the City Council (GPA 89-02A and DDA 87-12) modified the land use designation and district from Flood Control to Medium Density Residential. The proposed project has been designed in accordance with the Medium Density Residential District, with the exception of those items included in Variance 96-02. The proposed project is the establishment of a 27-1ot subdivision on 3.35 acres consistent with the Medium Density Residential District (8-14 du/ac). Therefore the proposed project will not result in conflicts to general plan, or zoning, or be incompatible with the surrounding environment. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposak a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local ( ) ( ) ( ) ('/') population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. Page 5 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') housing? Comments: a-b) Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. The .proposed project will result in 27 single-family residences in the Medium Density Residential Distdct (8-14 du/ac), no increase in density is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan land use density for the site, and will not result in a significant increase in population not otherwise planned by the City in its forecasts. c) The site is currently void of any structures. No existing housing is located onsite. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the p/:oposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? .( ) ( ) ( ) (v') b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) (v') ( ) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) (v') ( ) d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,') f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil ( ) (-/) ( ) ( ) conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,') Comments: a/b) No known faults pass through the site, it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault. The Red Hill Fault passes immediately south of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 4 miles northerly. These faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0 - 7.0 earthquakes, respectively. Also, the San Jacinto fault, capable of producing up to Mw 7.5 earthquakes is 12 miles northeast of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 13 miles northeast of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. Page 6 c) Figure V-4 of the General Plan identifies that the site is within an area subject to ground failures, such as liquefaction, and as such has the potential to expose people and property to geologic hazards. Based upon this condition, a Soils Engineering Investigation Report was prepared for the project site (Richard Mills and Associates, Inc., Soils Engineering Investigation, October 10, 1988). The report evaluated soil conditions at the site to assess their potential impact on proposed development, and to provide recommendations to mitigate any potentially adverse soil conditions. The report concluded that liquefaction is not a potential hazard at the subject site due to the depth of the water table and the grain size of the soils (RMA, page 7, 3.07 Liquefaction). The site is otherwise located on stable soils, adhering to the Uniform Building Code and all recommendations of the Soils Engineering Investigation will ensure that geologic impacts are less than sign~cant. d) The site is not located near a body of water. e) The site lies on a planar alluvial fan emanating from the San Gabriel Mountains and is not in the path nor on any existing landslide or mudflow (RMA, page 4, 2.04 Slope Stability). f) 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. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan was adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract map. Implementation of mitigation measures associated with approval of the map will reduce impacts to less than significant. g/h) Soil type on-site and in the vicinity is Ramona-Arlington. The soils encountered during the test borings on-site consisted of silty sands with gravel near the surface, with increasing amounts of gravel and cobbles as depth increases. These soils are basically coarse-grained non-plastic, and non-expansive in nature (RMA, page 4, 2.02 Subsurface soil Conditions). i) The site contains no unique geologic or physical features. I Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially UnlesS Than 4. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, ( ) (v') ( ) ( ) or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related ( ) (,/) ( ) ( ) hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration ( ) ( ) ( ) of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. Page 7 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: ~,ot,,n(~,unless Then d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,") water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction ( ) ( ) (,,') of water movements? 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 less of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') i) -Substantial reduction in the amount of ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,') groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? Comments: a) The project is expected to result in incremental changes in absorption rates and drainage patterns due to an increase of paved surface area. The City Engineer must review and approve site and drainage plans that show that all runoff will be conveyed to existing and proposed drainage facilities which were designed to handle the subject water flows. b) The installation of frontage street improvements, including flood protection measures to be determined by the final drainage study, will alter the cross section of flood waters in Carnelian Street. The developer will be required to mitigate any increase in the depth of flow through the installation of adequate catch basins to offset any changes in the capacity of the existing drainage facility south of the project entry. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan was adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract map. Implementation of mitigation measures associated with approval of the map will reduce impacts to less than significant. Carnelian Street is in a Flood Zone A. The developer will be required to install flood protection measures, to the satisfaction of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, allowing the designation to be removed from the project site. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan was adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract map. Implementation of mitigation measures associated with approval of the map will reduce impacts to less than significant. The City recently completed construction of improvements to Carnelian Street, including drainage improvements. However, the developer will still be required to prepare a drainage plan to show how the site will be developed in conjunction with the new drainage improvements on Carnelian Street, per the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783- G&D Construction, Inc. Page 8 c-e) The project site is not located near a body of water. f-i) The project will not interfere with groundwater management practices in the area. The site is not used for groundwater recharge. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: s~.~,ca.tMitigation SignificantNo 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the propose/: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to ('") ( ) ( ) an existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ('/) ( ) ( ) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or ( ) ( ) ('/) cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ('/') Comments: a-b) Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super- Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be emitted from grading the site. Nonetheless, dust emissions could be sufficient to warrant the use of water or other dust palliatives at this site. Sources of emissions during construction include exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of construction vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed surfaces. NOx and PM~0 levels may be exceeded during this phase. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan was adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract map. Implementation of mitigation measures associated with approval of the map will reduce impacts to less than significant. c-d) The proposed 27 single-family residences will not generate emissions that could cause climatic changes or objectionable odors. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially UnleSs Than 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ( ) ("') ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., ( ) (~') ( ) ( ) sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783- G&D Construction, Inc. Page 9 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than C) Inadequate emergency access or access to ( ) ( ) (,,') nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) (v') e) Hazards or barders for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) (v') f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting ( ) (,,') alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) (v') Comments: a) The proposed 27 single-family residences will incrementally ~ncrease traffic in the immediate vicinity. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, for which street widths were evaluated at a build-out condition. The developer will be required to install street frontage improvements in their ultimate configuration, per City Ordinance, and pay associated Transportation Development Fees. Therefore, this impact is less than significant.. b-d) A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared for the project (O'Rourke Engineering, Traffic Impact Analysis, August 1989). The traffic report evaluated roadway conditions and determined .that intersection improvements are warranted based on existing conditions and not as result of the proposed project. To minimize the potential for traffic conflicts, the project was designed to align the driveway with Vivero Street to the east, and will be required to install a traffic signal at the Camelian Street and Vivero Street intersection. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan was adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract map. Implementation of mitigation measures associated with approval of/he map will reduce impacts to less than significant. e/f) The proposed project is appropriately designed to avoid posing a hazard or barrier to pedestrians or cyclists. g) Located four miles northerly of the Ontario Airport, the site is offset north of the flight path and will not be dangerous to users or aircraft. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. Page 10 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotenliaUyUnless 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their ( ) ( ) ( ) (~') habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., ( ) (,,') ( ) ( ) eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and ( ) ( ) ( ) (-/) vernal pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) Comments: a) The project site does not contain Natural Resources as identified on Figure V-3 of the General Plan. Additionally, the site does not contain any Coastal Sage Scrub, Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, or Delhi-Sands flowering-loving fly habitat. b/c) The proposed project includes the removal of 43 trees located within site boundaries. The majority proposed for removal are Eucalyptus sideroxlyn rosea (Red Ironbark) which were planted as part of the Carnelian Beautification Project, and are in conflict with the street right-of-way improvements along Carnelian Street and internal circulation improvements. Extensive arborist studies were preformed to determine the health and condition of the existing trees, and their suitability for preservation in-place or through transplanting on-site. Because of their location within the project boundaries as compared to the proposed development, no trees are proposed to be preserved in-place. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan was adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract map. Implementation of mitigation measures associated with approval of the map will reduce impacts to less than significant. The City recently completed construction of improvements to Carnelian Street that resulted in the removal of some of the trees located within the site boundaries. So the number of trees that will be removed due to the proposed project would be less. However, the developer will still be required to replace trees on-site as they are removed, per the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. d) There is no riparian or wetland habitat on-site. e) The site is undeveloped, however, development in the immediate area has eliminated any wildlife corridors that may have occurred in the past. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783- G&D Construction, Inc. Page 11 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially unl~ Than 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposah a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') inefficient manner? 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? Comments: a-b) The project will be required to conform to applicable City standards for energy conservation. c) The project site is located on the Day Creek alluvial fan, an area classified as a Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ-2). An MRZ-2 zone contains deposits of known value and marketability. However, the Sate Geologist has determined that the area is not a Designated Area of available resoumes due to urbanization. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: ~,ote,.~,yu.~.. T,a. 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of ( ) ( ) (,,') hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency ( ) ( ) (,,') response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential ( ) ( ) (,,') health hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing soumes of ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') potential health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') brush, grass, or trees? Comments: a/c-d) There is no evidence of prior commercial or industrial uses. No evidence of discarded drums, containers, hazardous wastes or discolored soils have been Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. Page 12 observed. There was no indication of underground storage tanks or illegal dumping of refuse on-site. b) The tract map has been designed to accommodate emergency vehicles and is accessible from two access points. e) The site is not located in a fire hazard area. I Potentia~y Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unles~ Than 10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,") b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) (v') ( ) ( ) Comments: a/b) A noise study was prepared (Davy & Associates, August 1988) to determine the noise exposure and necessary mitigation measures for development of the project site. The report concludes tha.t noise impacts are a result of traffic-related noise on Carnelian Street, and that the proposed project will not increase the existing noise levels to the surrounding area. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan was adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract map. Implementation of mitigation measures associated with approval of the map will reduce impacts to less than significant. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Un,ss Than 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? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,") b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (-/) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,") d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') Comments: a-e) Fire Protection - The site, located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street, is served by a fire station located near either 19th and Amethyst (approximately two miles northeasterly of the project site) or San Bernardino Road at Leucite Avenue (approximately one mile southeasterly of the project site). Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783- G&D Construction, Inc. Page 13 Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project. Police protection - The proposed project will incrementally increase the need for routine police protection services. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council the developer will be responsible for paying all appropriate fees. Schools - The proposed project will incrementally increase the need for schools through the potential for increased population growth. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fees established by the school district the developer will pay all appropriate development impact fees. Parks - The proposed project will incrementally increase the need for park and recreation services through the potential for increased population growth. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council the developer will pay all appropriate development impact fees. Public facilities -The proposed project will incrementally increase traffic on adjacent streets. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council the developer will pay all appropriate developmeht impact fees. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) (,") b) Communication systems? ( ) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution ( ) facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (,,') f) Solid waste disposal? ( ( ) ( ) (,,') g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ( ) ( ) (-/) Comments: a-g) The proposed project will include the construction of 27 single-family residences. The proposed development will extend as necessary existing systems and utilities available in the immediate area. The proposed project will not require major modifications or alterations to the existing utility systems. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. Page 14 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Then 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') Comments: a/b) The site will be landscaped along the streetscape as well as through the site, and developed in conformance with all residential design guidelines and general plan policies. c) The proposed project will incrementally add to the creation of additional light or glare within the area due to additional street lights. Similar single-family development is existing in the immediate vicinity. The site plans will include proposed street lighting in conformance with City standards. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Unless Than 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposah a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) (v') b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) (¢') c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) (v') d) Have the potential to cause a physical change, ( ) (v') which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within ( ) (v') the potential impact area? Comments: a-e) The site is vacant with single family homes to the north and east. On the west and south is the Cucamonga Creek channel, a drainage feature constructed and maintained for flood control. These previously developed areas around the site have not produced any resources. It is unlikely that development of the site would impact cultural resources. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783- G&D Construction, Inc. Page 15 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: potem~eJlyunless Than 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,-) regional parks or other recreat onal facilities? b) Affect existing recreationa opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) Comments: a) The proposed project will incrementally increase the need for park and recreation services through population growth. The project is consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and the developer will pay the appropriate fees in accordance with Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council. b) There is no impact to existing recreational opportunities as the site and property surrounding the project area is designated for residential development and flood control related to the Cucamonga Creek Channel. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potent~lh/Unless Than 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? b) Short term: Does the project have the potential ( ) ( ) (v') ( ) 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.) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. Page 16 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Polentially Ur~lsss Than C) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that ( ) ( ) (,,') ( ) are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? .Comments: a) The project site does not contain Natural Resources as identified on Figure V-3 of the General Plan. Additionally, the site does not contain any Coastal Sage Scrub, Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage.Scrub, or Delhi-Sands flowering-loving fly habitat. No sensitive species were detected on-site and it is unlikely any will move on to the site due to the lack of natural habitat. b) Dudng construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be emitted from grading the site. Nonetheless, dust emissions could be sufficient to warrant the use of water or other dust palliatives at this site. 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. NO× and PM~0 levels may be exceeded during this phase. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan was adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract map. Implementation of mitigation measures associated with approval of the map will reduce impacts to less than significant. c) The developer is required to pay development impact fees established by the City Council, the rates of which have been set to mitigate the potential impacts to fire protection service, police protection services, parks and recreational facilities, and other governmental services to less than significant. To the extent the project may impact utility resources provided by private utility companies, potential impacts upon such services will be mitigated by payment of rates and fees set by each utility agency. The project will also pay transportation impact fees to mitigate incremental imapcts to the traffic system. d) The proposed project on three-acres would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The site is located in an residential area along Carnelian Street. Mitigation measures are included in a mitigation monitoring plan adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted in March 1998. Therefore impacts are less than significant. Initial Study for Tentative Trac~ 15783 - G&D Construction, Inc. City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 17 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 Ddve (check all that apply): General Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981) · Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) · Initial Study prepared for Tentative Tract 14263, October 1989. · Soils Engineering Investigation, Richard Mills Associates, Inc, October 1988. · Acoustical Analysis, Davy & Associates, Inc. August 1988. 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 signi[icant environmental effects would occur. City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: 'CF 15783 This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and 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. 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 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 Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Mitigation Monitoring Program Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed, as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate wdtten approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may adse requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after 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 plander or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required 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 identity 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 pdor to the issuance of building permits. I:~FINAL~CEQAWlMP Form-rev.wpd MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: TT 15783 Applicant: G & D Construction Initial Study Prepared by: Nancy Fer.quson Date: April 19, 2000 Install street improvements and pay associated CE BID Review street CIA 1/2 Transportation Development Fees. , improvement plans Two Palm Trees shall be preserved through relocation I CP I B/C I Review and approve I CIA I I 2/3 I within the project boundaries, landscape plans to CP B/C address relocation, Other trees shall be replaced with largest nurser/grown removal and stock available per Tree Removal Permit 98-06 replacement. Prepare a Final 'Acoustical Analysis to determine noise CP BID Review acoustical CIA 213 source and level and appropriate mitigation measures, report and mitigation Key to Checklist Abbreviations CDD - Community Development Director A - With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map CP - City Planner or designee B - Prior To Construction B - Other Agency Permit I Approval 2 - Withhold Grading or Bulldthg 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 (Reports / Studies I 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:\PLANNIN G\FINAL\CEQA~MM CHKLST.W PD RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE 'PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT15873, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 27 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON 3.35 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF CARNELIAN STREET AT VlVERO STREET, IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 207-022-54 AND 64. A. Recitals. 1. G & D Construction filed an application for the extension of the approval of Tentative Tract Map 15783, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject tentative tract map time extension request is referred to as "the application." 2. On March 25, 1998, this Commission adopted its Resolution 98-20, thereby approving Tentative Tract 15783, subject to specific conditions and time limits 3. On May 10, 2000, this Commission granted a time extension and adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 4. On the 28th day of March 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application and concluded said headng on that date. 5. All legal prerequisites pdor to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved bythe Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on March 28, 2001, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The previously approved tentative tract map is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes and policies; and b. The extension of the tentative tract map approval will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies; and c. The extension of the tentative tract map approval is not likely to cause public health 'and safety problems; and d. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION TT 15783 - G&D CONSTRUCTION March 28, 2001 Page 2 e. The extension of the tentative tract map is in compliance with the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted by the Planning Commission on May 10, 2000. 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Application Applicant Expiration Tentative Tract 15783 G & D Construction March 25, 2002 4. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2001. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Bullet, Secretary I, Brad Bullet, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted bythe Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 28th day of Mamh 2001, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSEHT: COMMISSIONERS: TH E C I T Y OF ]~ANCHO CUCAHO NGA DATE: March 28, 2001 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: VARIANCE DRC2001-00024 RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES- A request to increase the wall height to 12 feet along the east boundary of Lots 21-24 of Tract 16051 where the Development Code allows_ a maximum wall height of 6 feet, in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Rochester Avenue - APN: 1089-031-24. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Backqround: The Planning Commission approved Tract 16051 on May 10, 2000. During the Plan Check process, it was discovered that a combination retaining wall and fence exceeding 6 feet in height would be needed along the southeast corner of the site because of the difference in grade between the project site and the Southern California Edison Utility Corddor property to the east of project. Originally, the project was designed to allow the grading of off- site slopes on the Edison property to the east, which would have reduced the wall height to 6 feet; however, Southern California Edison denied the applicant permission to off-site grade onto their property; therefore, the applicant has submitted a Variance application. B. Analysis: The applicant has submitted a request to increase the height of the perimeter wall at the rear of Lots 21,22, 23, and 24, adjacent to the Southern California Edison Utility Corridor 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; however, approximately 8 feet to a maximum of 10 feet 7 inches of the proposed 12-foot wall will be exposed to public view and visible from Base Line Road (Exhibit "D"). 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 east face of the wall, a decorative cap, pilasters, etc. ITEM G PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VARIANCE (DRC2000-00024) Mamh 28, 2001 Page 2 FACTS FOR FINDINGR: 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. Following are facts to support these findings: 1. Finding: That strict or literal 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 east boundary of the project site to properly drain onto Westhaven Place, the pad grades cannot be lowered to reduce the need for a retaining wall. The sites grading design is predicated on the design of the sewer at minimum grade (0.40 percent) from Rochester Avenue. Although the final reach of the sewer at Rochester Avenue is greater than minimum, the elevation gained is calculated at 0.91 feet. The site, if redesigned, could only be lowered less than a foot, which would still result in the need for a Variance; therefore, without the Variance, an unnecessary physical hardship for the applicant would be created. 2. Finding: 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 Southern California Edison Utility Corridor, which poses a physical constraint that does not generally apply to other properties in the same district. 3. Finding: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. 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. 4. Finding: 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: The Southern California Edison Utility Corridor does not equally impact most properties in the same district; the granting of the Variance will not set a precedent. 5. Finding: That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Fact: 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. Based on the above analysis, staff 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 east face of the wall, a decorative cap, pilasters, etc. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VARIANCE (DRC2000-00024) March 28, 2001 Page 3 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 Vadance DRC2001-00024 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:RZ~ma Attachments: Exhibit"A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Applicant Letter Exhibit "C" - Tract Map Exhibit "D" - Retaining WalllFence Profile Resolution of Approval Location Map. Tract 16051 ~ Project Site Bldngs.shp Parcels Consulting Group Chrll En~,]neerlng, Land Surveying, Planning and Public Works December 22, 2000 Job No. 181.00 City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Attention: Rudy Zeledon Subject: Tract No. 16051, Grading Variance Dear Sir: In response to the request of Richmond American Homes and the City of Rancho Cucamonga, We are providing a list of justifications for allowing a variance to construct a non-standard perimeter wall along the East Tract Boundary. As shown by the Rough Grading Plan, combination retaining and screen walls will exceed the maximum allowed height by the city, which is 8 feet total. The 8 feet can be various combinations of retaining and screen wall, depending on the situation. The following is a list of reasons why we are requesting this variance: 1. Originally, the project was designed to allow the grading of off-site slopes on the Edison Property to the east. Subsequent to these initial discussions and final plan preparation, they now indicate that this will not be allowed. No reason for the denial. 2. The sites grading design is predicated on the design of the sewer at minimum grade (0.40%) from Rochester Avenue. Although the final reach of sewer at Rochester Ave. is greater than minimum, the elevation gained is calculated at 0.91 feet. The site, if redesigned, could be lowered less than a foot. 3. The people living in the houses complying with the maximum 8. Wall will have less than 6 foot high screen walls at their east property line. This could pose a hazard for small children living in these houses, as well as easy access to these yards and houses from an open space area. This is not a desirable situation. 8175 East Kaiser Blvd., Anaheim, California 92808 (714) 921-8472 FAX (714) 921-8471 Page 2 of 2 December 22, 2000 4. The Edison Property is used for transmission towers and access for maintenance of these facilities. The public or other homeowners will not view the lots adjacent to these towers, since no development is allowed for this area. IVlinor amounts of the property line will be viewed from Baseline Road, primarily Lots 21 and 22. However, we think this is a minor issue. 5. The geometry of the walls result in vertical steps that occur quite frequently along the property line. As a result more of the footing ends up being buried below the existing ground, not exposed to view. Typical footing cover is 12" minimum, which can grow to almost 2 feet before a footing step is encountered. This effectively reduces the exposed wall that will be viewed from the exterior. This can be 1 foot to 2 feet less than the calculated difference between the top of wall and the top of footing. This certainly lessens the impact of the viewable portion of the combination retaining and screen wall. 6. The project grading is currently and was always designed to have an on-site earth work balance. Changing the site elevation will create an export, which would increase the project costs significantly. Another undesirable result would be the loss of 2 lots to accommodate the steeper'streets and resulting side yard slopes. If the City finds that these are valid concerns, then we ask the City to grant the variance, as requested. We look forward to your decision. Sincerely, The SP Const~iting Group .....r". Thomas A. Petersen, PE .. ~. 8175 East Kaiser Blvd., Amahcim, Califonaia 92808 (714) 921-8472 FAX (714) 921-8471 I 1 6 55 134 33 8 53 JJ36 31 I o 71 62 4~ 40 27 70 117 ...... s9 164 8 il--b~-- 67 66 ~'-'~ "] --4~- -4T5-- -~,-'-4~- HUNTLEY DR. 13 14 15 __1_6_ 17 18 BASELINE ROAD Variance Requests TRACT 16051 Rear yard walls of Lots 21-24 RANCHO CUCAMONGA NORTH GLEN RICHMOND AMERICAN FEBRUARY 28, 2001 Retaining Wall and Fence Profile - , . Fenee 6' Max -- ~ Fence 6' Max Fence 6' ~ax ~ ~ , ~ ~ Ret. Exposed 3'-2" Max. / l° Ret. Exposed 2' Ma: ,Lot 21 Lot 22 lot 23 Lot 24 Retaining wall: 6 feet Retaining wall: 5 feet and 3 inches. Retaining wall: 4 feet and 7 inches. Retaining wall: 2 feet and 7 inches. Fence: 6 feet Fence: 6 feet. Fence: 6 feet. Fence: 6 feet. Total wall height: 12 feet Total wall height: 11 feet and 3 inches. Total wall height: 10 feet and 7 inches. Total wall height: 8 feet and 7 inches. Total wall height exposed Total wall height exposed Total wall height exposed Total wall height exposed to public viev~feet 7 inches to public view: 10 feet and 3 inches, ublic view: 7 feet and 9 inches, to public: view: 8 feet0 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2001-00024, A REQUEST TO INCREASE THE WALL HEIGHT TO 12 FEET ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY OF LOTS 21-24 OF TRACT 16051 WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS A MAXIMUM WALL HEIGHT OF 6 FEET IN THE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD AND ROCHESTER AVENUE - AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, APN: 1089-031-24 A. Recitals. 1. Richmond American Homes filed an application for the issuance of Variance DCR2001-0024, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Vadance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 28th day of Mamh 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application and concluded said headng 'on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved bythe Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public hearing on March 28, 2001, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to Tract Map 16051, located on the northeast comer of Base Line Road and Rochester Avenue, and is presently under construction; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is vacant and currently being utilized by the City as a maintenance storage yard. Base Line Road bounds the property to the south and Rochester Avenue to the west. The property to the east is the Southern California Edison Utility Corridor; and c. The applicant has submitted a Vadance Application requesting an increase in wall height along the rear of Lots 21, 22, 23 and 24 (adjacent to the Southern California Edison Utility Corridor) to 12 feet, where the Development Code allows a maximum wall height of 6 feet; and d. The Vadance as specified in the application will not be detrimental to the goals and objectives of the General Plan or Development Code and will not promote detrimental conditions to the persons or properties in the immediate vicinity on the subject site for the reasons that follow: GlO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VARIANCE DRC2001-00024 - RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES March 28, 2001 Page 2 i. The natural slope of the site combined with the existing street grades poses a physical constraint to the grading concept of the site. In order for the lots along the east boundary of the project site to properly drain onto Westhaven Place, the pad grades cannot be lowered to reduce the need for a retaining wall. The site's grading design is predicated on the design of the sewer at minimum grade (0.40 percent) from Rochester Avenue. Although the final reach of the sewer at Rochester Avenue is greater than minimum, the elevation gained is calculated at 0.91 feet. The site, if redesigned, could only be lowered less than a foot, which would still result in the need for a Variance; therefore, without the Variance, an unnecessary physical hardship for the applicant would be created; and ii. The site is adjacent to the Southern California Edison Corridor, which poses a physical constraint that does not generally apply to other properties in the same district; and iii. The proposed 12-foot wall height is necessary in order to ensure that future homeowners enjoy the privilege of having a pdvacy and security wall. Without the Variance, future homeowners would be deprived of privileges enjoyed by other homeowner within the same district; and iv. Because Southern California Edison Corridor does not equally impact most properties in the same district, the granting of the Variance will not set a precedent; and e. Granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, but, conversely, provide a secudty and pdvacy wall for the future homeowners. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public headng and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not. apply generally to other properties in the same district. c. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. d. That the granting of the Vadance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. e. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. 1) Vadance approval shall expire if building permits are not issued within 5 years from the date of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VARIANCE DRC2001-00024 - RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES March 28, 2001 Page 3 2) The wall shall be constructed with a decorative textured block of a dark color for the lower retaining portion, with a lighter color decorative block on top, subject to City Planner approval. In addition, climbing vines are required along the east face of the wall. 3) All applicable Conditions of Approval per Resolution 00-42 approving Tentative Tract Map 16051 shall apply. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2001. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: 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 28th day of March 2001, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: TH E C ~ ]' Y O F I~ANCH 0 CUCAMONGA TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner DATE: March 28, 2001 SUBJECT: ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONIVENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEVV DRCDR00-67 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS - A request to construct a 496-unit apartment project on 23 acres of land in Planning Area 6 of the Subarea 18 Specfic Plan, located on the north side of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue - APN: 210-082-46. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUJ~TPM15536 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS -A request to subdivide 23 acres of land into two lots in Planning Area 6 of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, located on the north side of 4th Street, west of Mlliken Avenue - APN: 210-082-46. ADDENDUM TO B'qV1RONIVENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-04- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS - A request to amend Planning Area 6 of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan to allow multiple family residential development at a density range of 24 to 30 dwelling units per acre, located on the north side of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue - APN: 210-082-46. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION A. Existinq Zoninq: Office Uses/Business Park designation of Planning Area 6 of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan. B. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq: North - Empire Lakes Golf Course; Subarea 18 Specific Plan. South - Vacant land on the south side of 4th Street within the City of Ontario. East Vacant Land; Mixed Use Commercial Planning Area 7 (Subarea 18). West Empire Lakes Golf Course; Subarea 18 Specific Plan. C. General Plan Desiqnations: Project Site - Mixed Use North Open Space South - City of Ontario East Mixed Use West Open Space ITEMS H,I,J PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 00-67, PM 15536, SUBAREA 18 SPA 00-04 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 2 D. Site Characteristics: The 23-acre site is cultivated as a vineyard and contains no significant vegetation. The site slopes north to south approximately 27 feet over approximately 1,700 linear feet, or 1.5 percent slope. The site will take access off of 4th Street to the south and future 5th Street to the north. E. Parkinq Calculations: Number of Number of Type Parking Spaces Spaces Of Use Ratio Required Provided Apartment's One Bedroom Unit(s) 288 x 1.5 432 432 Two Bedroom Unit(s) 184 x 1.8 331 334 Three Bedroom Unit(s) 24 x 2 48 68 Guest 496/4 124 160 Total: 935 994 The proposed project requires the minimum provision of 935 parking spaces, 811 resident spaces and 124 guest spaces. Resident parking would be provided in attached garages, covered carports, and surface parking. A total of 138 parking spaces are required to be within enclosed garages, and 295 parking spaces are proposed within enclosed garages (both attached and detached from the units). Another 258 parking spaces are proposed to be within carports. The total open surface parking is 441 spaces. ANALYSIS: A. General: The project would include 496 apartment units located in 23 separate unit cluster buildings, with a combination of garage, carport, and surface parking. There are 288 one-bedroom units, 184 two-bedroom units, and 24 three-bedrooro units. The units range in size from approximately 715 to 1,285 square feet of living area. Each unit would have a patio or deck and laundry facilities (including a washer and dryer). The overall site is proposed to be divided into two parcels separated by a wrought iron fence. Both "sub" projects would have their respective sets of multi-family amenities, including a club house, lawn areas, barbeque facilities, seating areas with overhead trellises (many oriented to take advantage of golf course views), pool and spa. The amenities are scattered throughout the complex to maximize convenience of use. The buildings have a mixture of hip and gable style roofs with fiat concrete tile. The buildings are accented with stacked stone to match the Empire Lakes golf course and horizontal siding. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 00-67, PM 15536, SUBAREA 18 SPA 00-04 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS Mamh 28, 2001 B. Specific Plan Amendment: The applicant is requesting to amend the Subarea 18 Specific Plan to allow multiple family residential development at a density range of 24 to 30 dwelling units per acre, and reduce minimum building separations for Subarea 6. A similar amendment was approved for the JPI apartment project, which is under construction at the northwest corner of 6th Street and Milliken Avenue. C. Parcel Map: The applicant wishes to split the project into two parcels separated by a wrought iron fence. The southern parcel will take access off of 4th Street, and the northern parcel will take access off of future 5th Street. This is due to their marketing needs; therefore, included herein is a request for a parcel map to subdivide the property into two parcels. The request is in conformance with applicable regulations. D. Desiqn Review: The Development Agreement exempts this project from Design Review Committee review. Staff is responsible for reviewing the design and making recommendations to the Planning Commission. The overall design of the project will make a positive contribution to the mixed use Master Plan. In keeping with the direction desired by the Commission to make this project a "luxury high-end" project, additional conditions should be added to the Resolution of Approval, as follows: Outstandinq Desiqn Issues: 1. Provide additional stacked stone elements and horizontal siding for all sides of all buildings within the project. Some sides of the buildings are almost entirely covered with stucco. Additional stacked stone and horizontal siding would substantially enhance the buildings consistent with the intent to develop a high-end, luxury residential project. 2. Provide stacked stone pilasters, maximum 150 feet on center, for the masonry/stucco walls to match that proposed for the wrought iron fencing. The overall dimensions of the pilasters shall match that established by the Empire Lakes golf course. 3. Provide stacked stone for the freestanding curved wall at the southeast entrance off of 4th Street. 4. Mail service structures shall be architecturally compatible with the project. 5. If the market dynamics change, and more than 3 percent of the renters are families with children, then immediate provisions must be made to provide additional outdoor recreational amenities for children. E. Gradinq and Technical Committees: The project was scheduled for Grading and Technical Committee review on March 20th and 21st, respectively. Staff has been working closely with the applicant to resolve issues. F. Environmental Assessment: An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified as a Master EIR for Subarea 18 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan in 1994. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides that once a Master EIR has been certified, no further EIR or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects within the scope of the Master EIR; PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 00-67, PM 15536, SUBAREA 18 SPA 00-04 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 4 however, Planning Area 6, of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan is being amended to include residential development, and an Addendum was prepared to address the issue of residential development. In short, the proposed residential development will have less environmental impact than other mixed uses, such as industrial, office, or retail. The amendment to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan has been prepared in conjunction with an Addendum to the previously certified Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan Final EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055). The Addendum identified that there are no substantial changes in the project that require major revisions to the previous EIR. The appropriate findings of the Addendum are included in the attached Resolution of Approval. A noise study was prepared for this project to address traffic noise impacts. Recommended mitigation measures include a 6-foot high sound barder for all patios and balconies in buildings facing 4th Street, "windows closed" design with mechanical ventilation system, and upgraded windows. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review DRCDR00-67 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM15536 through adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions. Staff recommends that the Commission also review and consider the attached Addendum to be within the scope of the certified Master EIR for the site and recommend approval to the City Council of Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment 00-04. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:BL/jc Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Plan Exhibit"B" - Grading Plan Exhibit"C" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Illustrative Cross Sections Exhibit "E" - Floor Plans Exhibit"F"- Elevations Exhibit"G" - Clubhouse Drawings Exhibit "H" - Leasing Office Drawings Exhibit "1" - Garage Drawings Exhibit"J" - Noise Mitigation Details Exhibit"K" - Parcel Map Addendum To Rancho Cucamonga Subarea 18 Industrial Area Specific Plan Final EIR Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRCDR 00-67 Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM15536 Resolution Recommending Approval of Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment 00-04 EMPIRE LAKES . "' / 'T GOLF COURSE .," ,/ ..... - ,.'" '~, I // I .........F-O U ~ T kT ..... ~)-T ~' E-"E"-T ..................... )) ................... SITE PLAN ........... .,., ............................................................................................. :';' ..... Al-la ~ EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS · -- GOLF COURSE ~ E M P R E L A K E 8 - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T 8 ~"2;,,'~ _.--~"~'_--_Z:~ EMPIRE LAKES, / ..... ~ '---- r e--- .'.'...,'"*'~.'. .... ~: ~_;~.. :. GOLF COURSE ......... '" -- ' ~ ' ~ .... :'--~"~'~' ~ ~ PARCEL 8 ,...~.:.. ,., _. ~i' SITE (I} + ,. ~ ¢ l Al-lb ~ RANCHO C UC A MONGA CALIFORNIA AEI-CASC ENGINEERING JUNE, 1999 ........ dl,I , , ,~.,,.~,. i~ I~ ~  ~; ' S[CTION H-H ~,, ........ r,~ :~-?~7~'~:=~q: ...... SECTION G-G SECTION ~B ....... ~. ~,~ SECTIQN C-C SECTIQN D-D SECTIQN E-E SECTION F-F SECTION K-K " FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING I-3 -~..~...~ E U P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S [,~:~:.:.,==.~' ..... TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING ---- .""7 E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~._. .... RANCHO C U CAMON GA CALIFORNIA ~,, ! ;!~;::~ FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS RANCHO CUC AMONG A CALIFORNIA '- TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN RUILDING IV-3 E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T O .~:~i.i~' FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING V-3 . A NC HO CUCA MO~ A C A LI~ORNIA ~ ~:~:~!~ a'~'.',' - TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING V-3 r IIi EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS ~? ...... ULF~F~F~ F--~ ~ F)RST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN (GARAGE LEVEL) BUILDING VII-3 ~,~e_'l[S~. E M P I R E L A K E ~) P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~,~ -'~%::'-' , i L TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING VII-3 EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN (GARAGE LEVEL) BUILDING VIII-3 E M P I R E L A K E S - p A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~,- / TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING VIII-3 EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS F I R 8 T LEVEL FLOOR PLAN IG A R A GE LEVEL) BUILDING X Ill - 3 EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS TYPICAL LEVEL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING XIII- 3 ?~.'~.~ E M P I R E L A K E $ - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~;.-'.;.;_ SIDE (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING I-3 (PHASE FRONT (STREET( ELEVATION BUILDING I-3 (PHASE I) EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS ~ 81DE {L AND8 C APE} ELEVATION BUILDING I-3 IPHA SE I] FRONT (LANDSCAPE} ELEVATION BUILDING I-3 (PH ABE II E M P I R E L A K E 8 P A R C E L 6 A p A R T M E N T 8 ~".~;.~ 81DE (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING I-3 [PHASE II} FRONT [ST R E ET] ELEVATION BUILDING I-3 (PHASE II) E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~'~'.-"::"- ,.~ BIDE (L AND 8 C APE} ELEVATION BUILDING I-3 {P HA BE Ill FRONT {LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING t-3 (PHASE I1! E M P I R E L A K E 8 P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T 8 ~;~_. BIDE (BTRE ET) ELEVATION BUILDING IV-3 (PH ABE I) FRONT (BTREETI ELEVATION BUILDING IV-3 (PHABE EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS SIDE IL AND SC APEI ELEVATION BUILDING IV- 3 (PHASE FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING IV-3 IPHASE I) EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS ~ ...... SIDE {STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING IV- 3 (pH ABE II) FRONT (STREETI ELEVATION BUILDING IV-3 (PHASE II) E M P I R E L A K E S p A R C E L 6 A p A R T M E N T S ~:~ SIDE )LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING IV-3 {PHASE II} FRONT )LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING IV-3 {PHABE II} E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A p A R T M E N T S ~.~.'.~ SlOE (STREET) ELEVATION BU LDIN G V- 3 (PHASE II FRONT (8TREET) ELEVATION BUILDING V-3 (PHASE I) E M P I R E L A K E 8 P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S i~:~:.: BIDE ILA NDBC APE } ELEVATION BUILDING V- 3 (PHA BE FRONT (LANDBCAPE] ELEVATION BUILDING V-3 (PHABE E M P I R E L A K E $ P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T SIDE (STRE E T) ELEVATION BUILDING V- 3 (PHASE [I) FRONT (STREET} ELEVATION BUILDING V-3 {PHASE Il) EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS '~ 81DE {LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING V-3 {PHASE II) FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING V- 3 )PHA 8E III E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ,:~..~:::::':~ BiDE (STREET) E LEV A TIO N R UILOING VII- 3 (PH ABE FRONT (STRE ETI ELEVATION BUiLDiNG Vii- 3 (PHASE SIDE (L A ND S C A PEI ELEVATION BUILDING Vii- 3 (PHASE II FRONT {LANDSCAPE} ELEVATION BUILDING VII- 3 {PH A 8E I) E M P I R E L A K E $ P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T $ SIDE ISTR E ET) ELEVATION BUILDING VII- 3 (PHASE Iii FRONT (STREET} ELEVATION BUILDING VII-3 (PHASE II) EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS SlOE (L A ND 8C APE] ELEVATION BUILDING VII- 3 (PHASE II] ..r.. FRONT (LANDSCAPE} ELEVATION BUILDING VII- 3 {PHASE I~) E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A p A R T M E N T S _ ,,. ~::.:; 81DE {STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING VIII-3 (PHABE FRONT {STREETI ELEVATION BUILD NG VIII-3 {PHASE E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S,. 81DE IL A ND 8 C APE} ELEVATION BUILDING VIII-3 IP H A SE I) FRONT (LANDB CAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING VIII-3 (PNA 8 E I! EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS SIDE (STREET) ELEVATION BUlL D~NG VIII- 3 (PHASE FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING VIII-3 {PHASE I ~.~-.-~ E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A p A R T M E N $ ~: ..... SIDE IL A ND8 C APE) ELEVATION BUlL DINO VIII-3 (PHASE ) FRONT (L A NDSC APE) ELEVATION BUILDINO VIII-3 [PH ABE II} E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T 8 ?.. RANCHO C UC AMON a A CALIFORNIA BIDE [STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING Xlll-3 {PHASE I) FRONT {STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING X 111-3 {PH A BE I) EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS 81DE {LANDSCAPE) EL E V ATrO N BU LOINS Xlll- 3 {PHASE I) FRONT (LAND 8C AP E) ELEVATION BUILDING Xlll-3 (PH A 8E I) E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S---~-- RIDE [LANDSCAPE] ELEVATION BUILDING Xlll-3 IPHAB E FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING Xlll-3 IPHASE II) EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS SIDE (B T R EE T) ELEVATION BUILDING XlI[- 3 [PHASE II] 0 FRONT (gTRE ETI ELEVATION BUILDING Xl~[-3 [PHAGE I E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N S i~: .... ELEVATION - CLUBHOUSE EMPIRE LAKES pARCEL 6 APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA ELEVATION - CLUBHOUSE ELEVATION - CLUBHOUSE IPHASE EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEl 6 APARTMENTS EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS ~?~ ..:: · , . ROOF PLAN '" ELEVATION - LEASING OFFICE EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL FLOOR PLAN - MAIL ROOM /'¥} ROOF PLAN - MAiL ROOM ELEVATIONS - MAIL ROOM PHASE I {3) ELEVATtONS - MAINTENANCE PHASE ELEVATIONS - MAIL ROOM PHASE Il (~ ,...,ELEVATIONS~ - MA~TENANCE PHASE E M P I R E L A K E S - p A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S if~'~::.' .......TYPICAL ELEVATION - CARPORT (~1~ I {~'~-~' ~-' L'~'~," ...... '~":~' ~ _.~_-:~'"~' ..... FLOO. PLA.- aARA~ ELEVATIO~ - G~A~  E M P I R E L A K E 8 - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T 8 E~- ........ TYPICAL SIDE ViEW TYPICAL FRONT VIEW PATIO AND BALCONY NOISE BARRIER - ELEVATIONS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP N0.15536 AEI-CASC ENGINE£RINGI ~ I%I,, JUNE, 2000 / ~:~*~ ,,., ~ .~ IRONWOOD/FAIRWAY PALMS PROJECT PLANNING AREA VI ADDENDUM TO RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR (SCH NO. 9310255) Prepared for: FF Development, L.P. 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92121 Prepared by: BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 Janua~ 15,2001 Ironwood/Fairway Palms AddendUm to a Previously, Certified Ell: TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Paqe No. 1. Purpose of Addendum .............................. · .................... 1 2. ProJect Location ....................................................... 2 2.1 Project Location .................................................. 2 2.2 Project Site Characteristics .......................................... 2 3. Project Description 3 3.1 Previously Approved Project ......................................... 3 3.2 Currently Proposed Project: Ironwood/Fairway Palms ..................... 3 4. Comparative Environmental Analysis ...................................... 7 4.1 Land Use ...................................................... 7 4.2 Traffic and C rculation .............................................. 8 4.3 Noise 4.4 AirQua~y' i i 'i ...................................... 10 4.5 Earth Resources 4.6 Hydrology/Drainage and Water Quality ................................ 21 4.7 Biological Resources ............................................. 22 4.8 Public Services and Utilities ........................................ 23 4.9 Energy Demand and Conservation ................................... 25 4.10 Hazardous Materials ........ · ..-... .... · ....· ....· ......... . ......27 5. Conclusions 6. References Appendices Appendix A Noise Study Appendix B Geotechnical Study Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously Certified EIR LIST OF EXHIBITS Follows Exhibit Page Number 1 Regional Location Map .................................................... 2 2 Site Vicinity Map ......................................................... 2 3 Site Plan ............................................................... 3 4 Conceptual Building Elevations .............................................. 5 LIST OF TABLES Table Page Number I Project Statistics ......................................................... 4 2 Planning Area VI: Existing Trip Generation ..................................... 8 3 Planning Area VI: Trip Rates and Trip Generation Summary ...................... 10 4 Existing Noise Levels .................................................... 13 5 Future Noise Level Increases .............................................. 14 6 Emission Thresholds of Significance ......................................... 15 · - 7 Energy Demand ........................................................ 26 IrenwooglO=airvvay Palms Addendum to a Previously Certified SECTION 1 PURPOSE OF ADDENDUM 1.1 PURPOSE OF ADDENDUM This Addendum to the certified final environmental impact report (EIR) for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 project was prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Public Resources Code §21000, et seq and the CEQA Guidelines California Code of Regulations §15000, et seq. The CEQA Guidelines §15164(a) state that 'the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred." Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15162, a subsequent EIR is only required when: a) substantial changes are proposed in the project.., or; b) substantial changes have occurred with respect to the cimumstances under which the project is undertaken.., which will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.., or; c) new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligenca at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete.., that shows that (i) the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; or ii) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more sever than shown in the previous EIR; or iii) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or iv) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative." This Addendum analyzes the differences between the project which was previously approved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga for Planning Area VI and which was studied under the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Araa 18 Specific Plan Final EIR (SCH No. 93102055), and the project for Planning Area VI which is currently being proposed by FF Development, L.P., which is known as Ironwood/Fairway Palms. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has determined that changes associated with the currently proposed project are minor and not substantial. There are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from these changes, nor is there any substantial increase in the sevedty of any previously identified environmental impacts. In addition, there are no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that would require any revisions to the previously certified final EIR. These conclusions have been reached based on the preparation of new technical studies, as necessary, to assess the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Ironwood/Fairway Palms project. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15164, an Addendum to the previously certified IASP Sub-Area 18 Final EIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the proposed Ironwood/Fairway Palms residential development project. Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously Certified EIR SECTION 2 PROJECT LOCATION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION The project site is located within the 380-acre Sub-Area 18 Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, as depicted in Exhibit 1. The IASP Sub-Area 18 is bounded on the south by Fourth Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the Rancho Cucamonga Metrelink Station, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Street. The project site is referred to as Planning Area VI of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. Planning Area VI is an irregularly-shaped parcel generally bordered by Planning Area VIII (vacant) to the north, Fourth Street to the south, Planning Area VII (vacant) to the east, and the Empire Lakes Golf Course to the north and west, as depicted on Exhibit 2. For the purpose of site development, the proposed Planning Area VI project site is comprised of two areas: Site I and Site II. Site I is 12.3 acres and is the southern portion of Planning Area VI. Site I is generally bounded by Site II and the Empire Lakes Golf Course to the north, Fourth Street to the south, Planning Area VII to the east, and Planning Area V to the west. Site II is 11.1acres and is the northern portion of Planning Area VI. Site II is bounded by Planning Area VIII to the north, Site I to the south, Planning Area VII to the east, and the golf course to the west. Fifth Street abuts the northern boundary of Site I1. 2.2 PROJECT SITE CHARACTERISTICS The 23.4-acre planning area has grape vineyards in the northern portion of the property; the southern portion of the property is vacant. Planning Area VI contains no existing onsite structures or has any predominant features. Onsite elevations range from approximately 1,055 feet above mean sea level (msl) to the north to 1,035 feet msl to the south. Regional Location Map Exhibit 1 IRONWOOD/FAIRWAY PALMS I'~, l) 5 (~'~ ~/~ CONSUJTING Not to Scale Source: AEI-CASC Vicinity Map Exhibit 2 IRONWOOD/FAIRWAY PALMS ~'{~ I) ~- ~S ~ CONS U!.TING Ironwood/Faint, ay Palms Addendum to a Previously Certified EIP, SECTION 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT In July 1994, the City of Rancho Cucamonga certified a final EIR (SCH No. 93102055) and approved the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan for the 380-acre site, inclusive of Planning Area VI, incorporating a mix of land uses. The intent of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan was to create a unique master planned project that integrated a broader mix of uses in this area, including office, light industrial, hotel/conference, retail, restaurant, entertainment, and research and development uses around a championship golf course. Planning Area VI is designated Mixed Use in the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan defines Mixed Use as follows: "The opportunity exists to mix different, but compatible, land uses and activities within mixed use developments. Mixed use developments are ideally suited for land within the downtown or adjacent to high activity nodes along major transportation corridors. The concept capitalizes on the ability of a mixed-use project to provide an integrated environment, to respond to evolving market conditions, to offer a variety of physical development types, and to create strong pedestrian orientation. Mixed use projects typically incorporate a mix of office, commercial, light industrial, and research oriented activities, and residential uses all clustered together into unified, highly identifiable developments. Entertainment, recreational, cultural, and convention uses may also be part of the mix. These projects bring an "urban scale' and are intended to become focal points within the community. Uses may be stacked within a single multi-use building or individually arranged together on a parcel. When built adjace, nt to, or in conjunction with, public transit facilities, a built-in ridership base is established. The adopted Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan assumed the development of Planning Area VI with up to 425,000 square feet of mixed use office/commercial uses. The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan currently permits residential development only in Planning Area IX. 3.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT: IRONWOOD/FAIRWAY PALM,,~ The project applicant, FF Development, L.P., is requesting an amendment to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to allow multiple-family residential uses as an additional permitted use in Planning Area VI. As previously noted, the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Mixed Use land use designat!on permits residential development. The proposed Ironwood/Fairway Palms project would allow the development of a 496-unit, multiple- family apartment community. The project applicant's objective for the inclusion of residences in the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan is to compliment the ongoing development of the Specific Plan area by providing additional residential opportunities in the predominately office/research and development, retail, and light industrial area and to help foster a jobs/housing balance in the southern portion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. As proposed, the Ironwood/Fairway Palms project would include 496 apartments units located on two sites which comprise the 23.4-acre Planning Area VI site. The proposed site plan is depicted on Exhibit 3; project statistics are presented in Table 1. Although comprised of two site areas, the project applicant proposes to implement Planning Area VI as a single phased development. However, no vehicular or pedestrian access would be provided between Sites I and II. Site Plan ^~-~ ............. .... Exhibit IRONWOOD/FAIRWAY PALMS ~ Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously Certified EIP. TABLE 1 PROJECT STATISTICS Unit Type/Land Use Units/Square Feet % of Net Area Spaces Site I One bedroom unit 156 Two bedroom unit 92 Three bedroom unit 12 Guest 0 Total 260 units 22% ' 488 spaces Clubhouse 5,364 sq.ft 1% Ancillary Facilities: 48,022 sq.ft. 10% Maintenance Buildings, etc. Swimming Pool . I pool - Landscaping 180,967 sq.ft. 35% Common and Pdvate Open 214,567 sq.fl. 45% Space ~ Site II One bedroom unit 132 Two bedroom unit 92 Three bedroom unit 12 Guest 0 Total 236 units 21% 464 spaces Clubhouse 5,397 sq.ft. 1% Ancillary Facilities: 43,300 sq.ft. 8% Maintenance Buildings, etc. ' Swimming Pool 1 pool Landscaping 162,163 sq .fl. 30% Common and Pdvate Open 192,963 sq.ft. 36% Space Site I and II Total 496 units - 990 spaces Clubhouse 2/10,761 sq.ft. 1% Ancillary Facilities: 91,322 sq.ft. 9% Maintenance Buildings, etc. Swimming Pool 2 pools - Total Landscaping 343,130 sq.ft 34% Total Common and Private 407,530 sq.ft 40% Open Space Source: FF Development, January 2001. Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously Certified EI~ 3.2.1 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS As depicted in Exhibit 4, the apartment complex would be contemporary Craftsman in style. Individual apartment buildings would be three stories in height. The primary exterior building materials are clapboard siding and cement plaster finish, with tile roofs. Architectural articulation would include the use of decorative railings, architectural elements housing stairwells, multi-parted windows, stone veneer accents, and gable brackets. A three-color scheme would be used to provide additional design detail. The apartment units would be located in 23 rectangular-shaped buildings containing either four or eight units, Site I containing 12 buildings and Site II containing 11 buildings. The individual three- story apartment buildings would have two or three levels of apartment units. There would be two levels of apartment units where enclosed, "tuck under" parking garages are provided. Site I is proposed for development with 260 apartment units, of which 156 are one bedroom units, 92 are two bedroom units, and 12 are three bedroom units. Site II is proposed for development with 260 apartment units, of which 132 are one bedroom units, 92 are two bedroom units, and 12 are three bedroom units, Each unit would have a patio or deck and laundry facilities (including a washer and dryer). 3.2.2 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE CHARACTERISTICS Each of the two sites would include an approximately 5,300-square-foot clubhouse, located near the project entrance in the northeastern comer of Site I, and in the southeastern corner of Site II, also near the project entrance. Each clubhouse would include a community room, lounge, business center, and exercise room. A swimming pool, spa, and barbecue and picnic areas would adjoin the clubhouse. Additionally, each of the two sites would have open lawn areas and seating areas near the golf course. 3.2.3 PARKING The proposed project requires 990 parking spaces, 488 spaces for Site I and 464 spaces for Site II. Resident parking would be provided in a combination of attached and detached garages, covered carports, and open stalls. 3.2.4 VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS Vehicular access to the project site would be provided from three locations. For Site I, the primary entry would be via a new access road from Fourth Street into the project site; this would be a gated -- entry. Secondary access for Site I would be directly off of Fourth Street and located at the southeastern corner of the site. Gated vehicular access for Site II would be from Fifth Street. For emergency purposes, sites I and II would be connected via a locked emergency access gate in the center of the two sites. Pathways through the project site would provide private pedestrian access within the individual sites. Public sidewalks are located along Fourth Street. Proiect Phasinq The project is intended to be implemented as a single phase development. 81DE IETBEET) ELEVATION - BUILDING I-$ (PHABE I) ~ce: ARK Arch#eClS FRONT 1STREET) ELEVATION . BUILDINQ I-8 (PHASE I) Conceptual Building Elevations Exhibit 4 IRONWOOD/FAIRWAY PALMS ~. Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to e Previously Certified EIR Approval Actions The following approval actions by the City of Rancho Cucamonga are expected to include, but may not be limited to the following: · IndustrialArea Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 Amendment. This amendment would expand the previously approved IASP Sub-Area 18, Planning Area ¥1 designation of Mixed- Use to allow for residential uses, in addition to the currently permitted office, industrial, and commercial uses for the planning area. · ConceptualStreetScapeMasterPlanAmendment???. Thisamendmentwouldremove the planned extension of Fifth Street from its existing terminus at the eastern boundary of Planning Area VI to Fourth Street. · Development/Design Review-Residential · Grading Permit · Building Permit Ironwoo~Fainvay Palms Addenc~um to a Pmviousl}~ Certified EIIV SECTION 4 COMPARATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The following provides a summary analysis of the environmental impacts previously identified in the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan certified final EIR which included development of Planning Area VI. A comparison of the identified impacts for the previously approved project to the potential impacts associated with the currently proposed Ironwood/Fairway Palms project is provided below. As set forth more fully herein, the changes to the project site are minor and non-substantial. There would be no new significant impacts resulting from these changes, nor would there be any substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified environmental impact that cannot be mitigated. In addition, there would be no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken which would require any revisions to the previously certified Final EIR. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15164, an Addendum to the previously certified IASP Final EIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the proposed Ironwood/Fairway Palms residential development project. 4.1 LAND USE 4.1.1 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT Planning Area VI contains active grape vineyards (productive agricultural land) in the northern portion of the site and a vacant field to the south. Development of this planning area would result in the conversion of farmland to urban land uses and remove all vineyards from the site. The loss of vineyards and the conversion of farmland were identified in the final EIR as significant unavoidable impacts associated with development of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan area, including Planning Area VI. The vineyards would be removed by development of the project site. These unavoidable impacts were overridden by City of Rancho Cucamonga in favor of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan development goals and objectives. As a part of certification of the IASP Sub-Area 18 final EIR and approval of the Sub-Area 18 project, Planning Area VI was designated Mixed Use and approved for development with up to 425,000 square feet of mixed use office/commercial development. These land uses were identified as being compatible with existing and planned onsite and offsite surrounding land uses. Adopted Mitiqation Proqram No feasible mitigation measures were available to mitigate the removal of active grape vineyards from Planning Area VI. No other mitigation was required. 4.1.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project would allow for the development of Planning Area VI with multiple-family residential housing. Although residential development was not specifically proposed by the project applicant when the IASP Sub-Area 18 final EIR was certified and the Specific Plan project approved, the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Mixed Use land use designation permits residential uses. The proposed project would conform the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to the General Plan land use designation of Mixed Use. As with the previously approved project, implementation of residential development on the Planning Area VI site would remove grape vineyards and result in the loss of farmland. These significant, unavoidable impacts were contemplate.d,by the'Cit~ of_R_ancho Cucamonga in their approval of the I~onweeci/Fairvvay Palms Addendum to a Previously Cert~ed EIR IASP Sub-Area 18 project; the currently proposed project would not result in any new significant impacts associated with the loss of vineyards and farmland. Existing and planned land uses surrounding the project site include the following: · To the north: Planning Area VIII and Empire Lakes Golf Course. · To the south: Fourth Street and vacant land outside of the Specific Plan area. · To the east: Planning Area VII and Milliken Avenue. · To the west: Empire Lakes Golf Course (Planning Area I) The proposed Ironwood/Fairway Palms high-density apartment project would allow for the continued integration of residences into the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. The project is intended to provide additional residential opportunities in this portion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Mixed Use land use designation includes residential uses as one of the typical land uses within a mixed use project. The Mixed Use designation states that "mixed use developments are ideally suited for land within the downtown or adjacent to high activity nodes along major transportation corridors." The proposed project site would provide residences within walking distance of the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station, employment centers, and planned retail uses (Planning Area VIII), and is in close proximity to major freeway corridors. The project site is also contiguous to the Empire Lakes Golf Course, which would provide residents of the proposed development with recreational opportunities and serves as an open space buffer. 4.2 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION 4.2.1 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan final EIR traffic analysis identified that the Specific Plan project would generate approximately 64,011 average daily trips (ADT), with 7,648 trips dudng the p.m. peak hour. Of these vehicular trips, the approved mix of land uses for Planning Area VI would generate 4,190 ADT (approximately 6.5 percent of the total project ADT), with 588 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 540 trips during the p.m. peak hour (approximately 7.1 percent of the total project p.m. peak trips). However, it should be noted that since certification of the final EIR and adoption of the Specific Plan, changes in the intensity of development and/or mix of land uses within some of the planning areas have occurred resulting in an overall reduction in the total vehicular trips associated with the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan area. Table 2 identifies the trip rates and tdp generation for the approved Planning Area VI land uses. TABLE 2 PLANNING AREA VI EXISTING TRIP GENERATION A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Land Use Size In Out Total in Out Total ADT Mixed Use 425 TSF 523 65 588 92 448 540 4,190 Office/Commercial ADT = Average Daily Trips TSF = thousand square feet Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previou$1~ Certified Eh ~ On a cumulative basis, the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan final EIR identified that, at project buildout, implementation of the Sub-Area 18 project would incrementally contribute to significant impacts to five intersections within the traffic study area: · Haven Avenue/Arrow Route · Archibald Avenue/Fourth Street · Milliken Avenue/Fourth Street Milliken Avenue/Foothill Boulevard · Milliken Avenue/Arrow Route The final EIR noted that the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan project would contribute to significant unavoidable impacts to the regional circulation system. These unavoidable impacts were overridden by City of Rancho Cucamonga in favor of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan development goals and objectives. Adopted Mitiqation Proqram Mitigation adopted as a condition of approval for the previously approved project is as follows: · The Sub-Area Specific Plan shall contribute a traffic fee in accordance with the City's adopted traffic impact fee program (Transportation Development Impact Fee Ordinance No. 445) as the project's fair share contribution to circulation improvements identified as necessary at the time of issuance of building permits. 4.2.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT Project Trip Generation Table 3 identifies the trip generation rate and the resulting trip generation for the proposed project and compares the trip generation to the previously approved land uses for the Planning Area. Based on these trip generation estimates, the proposed apartment project would generate 3,288 average daily trips (ADT), with 253 a.m. peak hour and 307 p.m. peak hour trips. The previously approved land uses for Planning Area VI were expected to generate 4,190 ADT, with 588 trips during the a.m: peak hour and 540 trips during the p.m. peak hour. Therefore, the proposed project represents the following reduction in total daily traffic and p.m. peak hour traffic when compared to the previously approved project: 902 ADT, 335 a.m. peak hour trips, and 233 p.m. peak hour trips, respectively. The proposed project represents approximately five percent of the total Sub- Area 18ADTand four percent ofthetotalSub-Area 18p.m. peak hourtrips. (Note:A.M. peak hour trips were not available for the Specific Plan Sub-Area 18.) As previously discussed, total vehicular trips associated with buildout of Sub-Area 18 are expected to be less than assumed in the final EIR. Site Access Access to the project site would be provided from Fourth Street (two access points) and Fifth Street (one access point). As a part of the proposed project, the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would be amended to eliminate the planned extension of Fifth Street from its existing terminus at the eastern boundary of Planning Area VI to Fourth Street. The reduction in traffic volumes associated with the proposed apartment project would not adversely impact the distribution of vehicular traffic; therefore, no impacts associated with the proposed roadway deletion is expected. Ironwood/Fairway Palms A~tden~lum to a Previously Certified EIR TABLE 3 TRIP RATE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Proposed Project Previously Approved Project Mixed Use 425 TSF 523 65 588 92 I 448 I 540 4,190 Office/Commercial I I Trip Rates Apartments du 0.08 0.43 0.51 0.42 0.20 I 0.62 6.63 Mixed Use TSF 1.23 0.15 1.38 0.22 1.05I 1.27 9.86 Office/Commercial alu: dwelling units TSF: thousand square feet For Site I, the primary access would be from Fourth Street, at the end of an access road/cul-de-sac which would serve the project site and the adjoining commercial site. This Fourth Street entrance is expected to accommodate approximately two-thirds of the project traffic and would provide a minimum of 110 feet of stacking distance between the cul-de-sac and the project ddve aisle. For Site II, primary access would be from Fifth Street at the north end of the project site and would provide a connection to Milliken Avenue. This entrance would serve approximately one-third of the project traffic and would provide a minimum of 75 feet of stacking between Fifth Street and the project drive aisle. Traffic movement at both of the access points would be controlled by stop signs. Mitiqation Pro,qram No new mitigation is required as a part of the proposed project because the amount of traffic generated by the proposed residential development is less than the amount of traffic that was expected to be generated by the previously approved land uses for Planning Area VI. The mitigation program adopted as conditions of approval for the Planning Area VI of IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan project and set forth in the Development Agreement Between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and General Dynamics Corporation Concerning Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, July 6, 1994, is applicable to the currently proposed project. The applicable condition is as follows: -' · The project applicant shall be responsible for the payment of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Transportation Development Fee (City Ordinance No. 445; City Council Resolution No. 91-092). The fee shall not exceed $1,710.05 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit including City overhead. 4.3 NOISE 4.3.1 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT The potential for noise impacts are typically evaluated for short-term construction noise and long- term operational noise. Construction noise generally represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels. Noise generated by construction equipment and construction activities can reach high levels, ranging from approximately 65 d~BA to 105 dBA a_J,t a distance of 50 feet from the source, A:~FF.~Ol.~(~enc~um.w~x~ I t ~/ I.J 1~7/ Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously Certified Ell ~ depending on the type of equipment being used. Pile driving noise levels are the highest noise levels associated with construction; however, pile drivers would not have been required for the Planning Area VI land uses. Grading activities generally have the next highest levels of noise. At 50 feet, grading activities commonly have average noise levels (e.g., Leq noise levels) of 85 dBA with maximum noise levels as high as 95 dBA. General construction is considered to be quieter than grading operations. The same peak noise levels are often reached during general construction as during grading, but the average noise levels are 5 to 10 dBA less. Because sensitive receptors are not present in the project vicinity, the final EIR did not identify any significant construction-related noise impacts. Several rating scales have been developed for the analysis of adverse effects of community noise on people. The potential for noise to impact people is dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the noise. A number of noise scales have been developed to evaluate noise impacts. These scales include the Equivalent Noise Level (LEQ) and the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Both of these scales are based upon the A-weighted decibel, which is abbreviated as dBA. The A-weighted decibel compensates specific frequencies to match the way in which the human ear perceives them. Simply stated, dBA is a description of how people judge the loudness of sound. Ldn is a day-night average sound level. The day-night sound level is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in the community. It results from the summation of an average noise level determined over a 24-hour time period with a weighing factor applied during the night time pedod (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.). The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Noise Element indicates that the "normally acceptable" exterior noise levels for office development and industrial development is 70 dBA CNEL or less, and "conditionally acceptable" noise levels are 70 to 75 dBA CNEL. The City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code states, with respect to office and commercial activities: · All.commercial and office activities shall not create any noise that wou d exceed an exterior no~se level of 60 dBA during the hours of 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., and 65 dBA during the hours -- -of 7 a;m:-and 10 p~m7 Loading and unloading activities are not allowed during the hours of . 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. if such activities would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area. (Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Section 17.10.050, Performance Standards in NOISE ZONE II.) Further, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has noise standards for land uses within the IASP area. Planning Area VI is designated a Class A area. Applicable Class A noise performance standards are as follows: · Noise: The maximum allowable noise level of any use shall not exceed 65 Ldn as measured at the lot line of the lot containing the use. Where a structure is occupied by more than one use, the noise level shall not be in excess of 60 dBA Ldn as measured within the interior space of the neighboring establishment. Noise caused by motor vehicles and trains are exempted from this standard. Community noise assessment changes in noise levels greater than 3 dBA are often identified as significant, while changes less than 1 dBA are not discernible. In the range of 1 to 3 dBA, people who are very sensitive to noise may perceive a slight change. No scientific evidence is available to support the use of 3 dBA as a significance threshold. In laboratory testing situations, humans are able to detect noise level changes of slightly less than I dBA. However, in a community noise Ironwood/Fairway Palms - Addendum to a Previously, Certified E# ~ situation, the noise exposure is over a long time period and changes in noise levels occur over years, rather than the immediate comparison made in a laboratory situation. Therefore, the level at which changes in community noise levels become discernible is likely to be some value greater than 1 dBA, and 3 dBA appears to be most appropriate for most people. The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan final EIR noted that vehicular traffic noise levels adjacent to Planning Area VI along Fourth Street would be significant for outdoor activity areas. All office, industrial, and/or retail outdoor activity areas within the 70 dBA Ldn noise contour would have to be shielded. Onsite operational noise associated with loading and unloading activities at the office, industrial, and/or commercial land uses was not identified as a significant impact. Adopted Mitiqation Proqram Mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval for the previously approved project, applicable to Planning Area VI, are as follows: · Construction equipment and trucks shall be properly muffled. · Development of the project site shall be in conformance with the Performance Standards identified in the proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan. · A detailed noise impact analysis shall be conducted for new onsite commercial or industrial development with the potential of generating high outdoor noise levels in outdoor areas of existing golf course areas. · Active outdoor use areas associated with office, commercial, and industrial activities shall be placed outside of the 70 dBA Ldn contours from vehicular and rail traffic, and industrial activities. Any active outdoor uses associated with office, commercial, and industrial activities within the 70 dBA Ldn area are required to be shielded from the dominant noise source, by using sound barrier walls or structures acting as effective sound barriers, to ensure conformance with the City's noise standard. · A detailed noise impact analysis shall be conducted for new onsite commercial or industrial development with the potential of generating high outdoor noise levels in outdoor areas of existing office, commercial, and industrial areas. · Prior to issuance of a building permit, all commercial and industrial structures shall be designed outside of the 70 dBA Ldn area. If such structures are designed within 70 dBA Ldn contour from any noise sources, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements - shall be made and needed noise insulation features shall be included in the design. 4.3.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT A noise study was prepared for the proposed project by RKJK & Associates, Inc. The findings of the study are summarized below; the study is included in its entirety as Appendix A to this report. The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Noise Element indicates that the "normally acceptable" exterior noise level for multiple-family residential development is 60 dBA CNEL or less, and "conditionally acceptable" noise levels are 60 to 70 dBA CNEL. The City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Section 17.02.120 notes that all single-family and multi-family residential properties are categorized as NOISE ZONE I land uses: Itonwood, O=ainvay Palms AddenEum to a Previously, Certified · The maximum allowable exterior noise levels in residential areas shall be 55 dBA between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., and 60 dBA between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. The maximum allowable interior noise levels for residential uses are 40 dBA between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., and 45 dBA between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. (Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Section 17.10.080, Performance Standards in NOISE ZONE I.) · Interior noise levels for multi-family residences are regulated by Title 24 of the State Building Code. The maximum permissible interior noise level is 45 CNEL. The Building Code further specifies that when exterior noise levels exceed 60 CNEL, a detailed analysis must be performed to ensure that the interior noise levels meet the 45 CNEL interior standard. Project Generated Noise Ongoing activities associated with maintenance and occupation of the residential and open space areas would be subject to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Noise Ordinance (City Code Sections 17.10.050, 17.080, and 17.02.120). For residential land uses, the Noise Ordinance limits the one- hour average sound level at the property line to.60 dBA between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., and 55 dBA between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Noise levels generated by activities within the project site are not expected to exceed noise levels specified in the Noise Ordinance. Average noise levels would not exceed ordinance requirements; no significant impacts are expected. In order to determine the existing noise environment and determine the potential for noise impacts to residential development, noise measurements were taken at three locations. · Measurement Location 1: Adjacent to the proposed Clubhouse/Leasing building · Measurement Location 2: Near the second emergency entry to Site II · Measurement Location 3: Approximately 25 feet from the curb of Milliken Avenue Measurement Locations 1 and 2 are located on the proposed project site for Ironwood/Fairway Palms, while the third measurement location is located to the east on the adjacent Planning Area VII, proposed for commercial and retail development. In order to evaluate future onsite noise impacts, noise measurements were taken at facilities containing similar wholesale/retail uses as those proposed for Planning Area VII, adjacent to the project site. Future on-site automobile generated noise measurements were also taken at an equivalent facility. Existing noise levels plus project noise at these measurement locations are identified in Table 4. TABLE 4 EXISTING NOISE LEVELS Measurement Existing Existing + Location (dBA) Project (dBA) Increase 1 51.4 51.6 0.2 2 49.4 50.0 0.6 3 62.0 - Source: RKJK & Associates, inc.. August 2000; December 2000. Ironwood/Fai~vay Palms AddenEum to a Previou$1~ Certified Ell ~ Construction Generated Noi~,~ Short-term construction noise represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels. Noise generated by construction equipment, including trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers, and portable generators can reach high levels. Grading activities typically represent one of the highest potential sources for noise impacts. The most effective method of controlling construction noise is through local control of construction hours and by limiting the hours of construction to normal weekday working hours. Traffic-Generated Noi_~,~ Noise contours represent the distance to noise levels of a constant value and are measured from the center of the roadway. Table 5identifies the CNEL at 100 feet for existing and future (2010) conditions. TABLE 5 FUTURE NOISE LEVEL INCREASES CNEL at 100 feet (dBA) Roadway Existing Future (2010) Increase Fourth Street, west of Milliken Avenue 62.9 68.6 5.7 Fourth Street, east of Milliken Avenue 65.0 68.6 3.6 Milliken Avenue, north of Fourth Street 65.0 69.1 4.1 Milliken Avenue, south of Fourth Street 65.0 69.2 4.2 1-15, north of Fourth Street 84.2 86.4 2.2 1-15, south of Fourth Street 84.7 86.2 1.4 1-10, west of Fourth Street 85.5 86.4 0.9 Source: RKJK & Associates, August 2000; December 2000. Miff ation Pro ram ......... The mitigation program is proposed to mitigate potential noise impacts upon proposed residential uses to the maximum degree feasible. With implementation of the following mitigation, residences within Planning Area VI would be considered acceptable to conditionally acceptable land uses. · Construct a six-foot high sound barrier for all the first floor exterior patio areas and balconies on the second and third floors in buildings facing Fourth Street. Sound barriers shall be solid wall construction or a combination of solid wall and 1/4-inch glazing or lexan construction. · The interior noise exposure sta-~dards for the project will be met using the standard building shell construction and a "windows closed" condition for buildings facing Fourth Street requiring a means of mechanical ventilation per UBC requirements. This mechanical ventilation system shall supply two air changes per hour for each habitable room, with a minimum of 15 cubic feet per minute of outside air per occupant. The fresh air inlet duct shall be of sound attenuating construction and shall consist of a minimum of ten feet of straight or curved duct or six feet plus one sharp 90 degree bend. Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to e Previously, Ce~ified El~ · Provide upgraded windows with a minimum sound transmission class (STC) rating of 2g for all windows in buildings facing Fourth Street. For proper acoustical performance, all exterior windows, doors and sliding glass doors must have a positive seal, and leaks and cracks must be kept down to minimum. · During construction, the project shall comply with recommendations found in the sub-area Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report that includes the following noise mitigation measures: - Construction activity shall be limited to 6:30 a.m. to 8 p.m. MOnday through Saturday, unless a permit for each work areas has been issued by the Director of Public Works, or no noise-sensitive receptors would be exposed to the construction noise. - Mufflers on construction equipment and trucks shall meet the manufacturers recommended specifications for operation and maintenance. - Development of the project site shall be in conformance with the Pen'ormance Standards identified in the proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan. In summary, the proposed project is expected to exceed both the interior and exterior noise standards set forth by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The proposed project would achieve the 45 dBA CNEL limit for interior noise standards and the 65 dBA CNEL limit for exterior noise standards upon implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. 4.4 AIR QUALITY 4.4.1 PREVIOUS APPROVED PROJECT Potential short-term construction-related air qualityimpacts and long-term operational impacts were assessed in the IASP Sub-Area Specific Plan final EIR for the overall project. Construction and operational emissions are considered by the South Coast Air Quality Management Distdct (SCAQMD) to be significant if they exceed the thresholds shown in Table 6. In addition to the thresholds identified in the table, an increase in carbon monoxide concentrations in an area that already exceeds national or-state 'CO standards is also considered significant if the increase exceeds one part per million (ppm) for a 1-hour average or 0.45 ppm for an 8-hour average. TABLE 6 EMISSION THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE" Construction Operations Pollutant pounds/day tons/quarter pounds/day Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 24.75 550 Sulfur Oxides (SOz) 150 6.75 150 Nitrogen Oxides (NOz) 100 2.5 55 Particulate Matter (pM~0) 150 6.75 150 Reactive Organic Coropounds (ROC) 75 2.5 55 a. Toxic emissions are considered significant if they expose sensitive receptors to a cancer risk of 1 in I million or 10 in 1 million if best available control technology for toxics (T-BACT) is employed. Source: South Coast CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 1993. Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to e Previously Certified Ell ~ Construction Impact~ The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook estimates that each acre of disturbed soil creates 26.4 pounds/day of PM~o. On a worst-case basis of the entire 23.4-acre Planning Area VI site undergoing grading on one day, daily emissions were estimated to be 618 pounds of PM~o on the peak day, prior to mitigation. Employee vehicles and equipment emissions would have also resulted in carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, reactive organic compound, and sulfur oxide emissions. Construction-related carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide emissions would be significant. These unavoidable impacts were overridden by City of Rancho Cucamonga in favor of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan development goals and objectives. Operational Impacts Mobile sources of regional emissions associated with Planning Area VI would include employee and visitor vehicle use and the use of electricity and natural gas. Operational emissions from the proposed Planning Area VI would have been approximately 427 pounds per day (lbs/day) of carbon monoxide, 47 lbs/day of nitrogen oxides, 3.9 lbs/day of particulate matter, and 42 lbs/day of reactive organic compounds. The project's generation of these pollutants would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds. Localized carbon monoxide emissions at intersections (i.e., "hot spots") associated with the Sub- Area Specific Plan would be lower than baseline levels and would not result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to unhealthful concentrations of carbon monoxide. The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan final EIR noted that the project would help to implement the regional growth management policy through a reduction in vehicle trips, and an improved jobs/housing balance. Moreover, the impacts of the project are generally within those forecast in the Air Quality Management Plan for the subregion. Therefore, the project would not increase projected exceedances of air quality standards, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards. Implementation of office and/or commercial land uses on Planning Area VI was not expected to generate toxic pollutants. Moreover, the site is not located within 0.25 mile of a source of toxic --emissions.-- Adopted Mitiqation Proqram Mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval for the previously approved project, applicable to Planning Area VI, are as follows: _. · The following SCAQMD mitigation measures were incorporated into the project. To reduce particulate emissions from paved and unpaved roads, and construction activities, the project applicant shall: 1. Use Iow-emission altemative fuel (i.e., methanol, butane, or propane) as practicable in mobile construction equipment (e.g., tractor, scraper, dozer). 2. Develop a trip reduction plan to achieve 1.5 AVR for construction employees. 3. Water site and clean equipment morning and evening, at least twice daily. 4. Spread soil binders onsite, and on unpaved roads and parking areas. Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously/Cetlified EIR 5. Comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 concerning implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance offsite. 6. Employ construction activity management techniques, such as extending the construction period, reducing the number of pieces of equipment used simultaneously, increasing the distance between emission sources, reducing or changing the hours of construction, and scheduling activity during off-peak hours. ' 7. Sweep streets if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares. 8. Suspend grading operations during first and second stage smog alerts. 9. Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (las instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. 10. Wash off trucks leaving the site and cover all loads of loose material. 11. Maintain construction equiPment engines by keeping them adequately tuned. 12. Use Iow-sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment. 13. Use existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary power generators. 14. Use Iow-emission onsite equipment (e.g., methanol-, propane-, or butane-powered internal combustion engines) instead of diesel or gasoline. · To reduce automobile emissions by reducing the number of vehicles driven to a work site on a daily basis, the project applicant shall: 15. Provide local shuttle services, and access to regional transit systems and transit shelters. 16~ Work with the City of Rancho Cucamonga to develop and implement a TDM ordinance. The project shall also comply with the requirements of the TDM ordinance. 17. Ensure efficient parking management. 18. Provide preferential parking to high-occupancy vehicles and shuttle services. · To reduce vehicular emissions through traffic flow improvements, the project applicant shall: 19. Configure parking to minimize traffic interference. 20. Minimize obstruction of through-traffic lanes. 21. Provide a flagperson to guide traffic and ensure safety at construction sites. 22. Schedule operations affecting traffic for off-peak hours. 23. Develop a traffic plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of routing, use of public transportation, and satellite parking areas v~ ~h,u,,~ ~,~ce. IrenwooWFairway Palms Addendum to a Previously Certified EI~ 24. Schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours. 25. Provide dedicated turn lanes as appropriate. · To reduce stationary emissions of operation-related activities, the project applicant shall: 26.Require development practices that maximize energy conservation as a prerequisite to permit approval, 27.Improve the thermal integrity of buildings, and reduce the thermal load with automated time clocks or occupant sensors. 28. introduce window glazing, wall insulation, and efficient ventilation methods. 2g.introduce energy-efficient heating and cooling appliances, such as water heaters, cooking equipment, refrigerators, air conditioners, furnaces, and boiler units. 30. Incorporate appropriate passive solar design and solar heaters. 31. Use devices that minimize the COmbustion of fossil fuels. 32. Capture waste heat'and re-employ it in nonresidential buildings. - 33. Landscape building and median landscape areas with native drought-resistant species, as appropriate, to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. To protect sensitive land uses from major sources of toxic air pollution, the project applicant shall: 34. Require design features, operating procedures, preventive maintenance, operator training, and emergency response planning to prevent the release of toxic pollutants, as appropriate. --- 35. Ensure compliance with notification and asbestos removal procedures outlined in SCAQMD Rule 1403 to reduce asbestos-related air quality impacts and health hazards. 4,4.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT Construction Impacts The currently proposed project would have the same grading impacts as would the previously approved project. Under both development scenarios, the same amount of area would be graded. Operational Impacts The proposed Ironwood/Fairway Palms project would result in reduced but similar operational air quality emissions when compared to the previously approved project for Planning Area Vi. The proposed project would generate less vehicular traffic than the approved office, industrial, and commercial uses for the planning area. SCAQMD thresholds would not be exceeded. Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously, Certified EIP, Mifiqation Proqram The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VI would apply to the proposed project, where applicable for residential development. No additional mitigation is required. 4.5 EARTH RESOURCES 4.5.1 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT A strong seismically induced ground shaking event could affect the project site during the operational lifetime of the development. To reduce the potential impacts associated with seismically induced ground shaking on the project site to a level considered less than significant, structures would be designed in accordance with the seismic requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The potential for erosion on the project site is considered to be moderate where vegetation cover is present (i.e., existing grape vineyards) (source: Soil Conservation Service, 1980). Dust storms are known to occur within the region in which the project site is located. However, due to the high permeability and Iow shrink-swell potential associated with the soils present on the project site, significant erosion impacts are not expected. Root and stock material may'have been disposed of at shallow depths on the project site in the areas of the existing grape vineyard operations. The uncovering, collection, and disposal of these materials during grading activities from development of the project site would reduce the potential impacts from the settlement of these materials. Adopted Mitiqation Proqram Mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval for the previously approved project, applicable to Planning Area VI, are as follows: Similar to all development within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, structures to be constructed under the proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan would be required to comply with all local and state develop~nent standaTds (grading pei'mits, Alquist-Priolo Zone Act of 1972, Uniform Building Code, etc.). As typically required for individual developments within the IASP pdor to the issuance of a grading permit, the following is a mitigation measure to reduce the potential impact of seismic settlement and differential compaction in the project site under the development of the proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan to a level considered less that significant: - Pdor to the issuance of a grading permit, a subsurface geotechnical investigation shall be conducted to determine the likelihood of seismic settlement and differential compaction on the project site. Findings of this investigation shall be submitted to the City and grading operations shall adhere to the recommendations identified in the geotechnical report. 4.5.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT A geotechnical report was prepared for the project site by LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. in June 2000. The findings of the report are summarized below and the report is included in its entirety as Appendix B. Ironwood/Fair,ray Palms Addendum to a Previously Ce~fified EI~ Soils and Geoloqy Approximately 25 exploratory borings were drilled on Planning Area VI to depths ranging from 16.5 feet to 51.5 feet. Planning Area VI is underlain by relatively fine grained alluvial materials of silty sand, with some silt, clay, and coarser materials of sand and gravel. The northern portion of the site a thin surficial veneer of silty sand and organic materials; below the surficial topsoil is alluvial materials composed primary of silty sand with various amounts of fine gravel and silt and some sand with gravel (at depths ranging from 7 to 15 feet). Subsurface materials were damp and became denser with increasing depth. The most southern portion ofthe site contains fill materials, ranging in depth from two to five feet. Underlying the fill material is alluvial materials similar to that encountered in the northern portion of the planning area. In its present condition, onsite development could result in unacceptable differential and/or overall settlement. Recempaction of soil materials and adherence to geotechnical recommendations and state and local requirements would provide adequate support for building foundations. Groundwater was not present in borings to a depth of 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface. In the vicinity of the project site, groundwater was measured at a depth of 362 feet below the ground surface in a groundwater well. Based on site-specific subsurface geotechnical investigation of the project site, no new significant - impacts are anticipated. Seismicity The project site is located in southern California, a known seismically active area. No active faults pass beneath the site, nor is it located within a designated Alquist-Pdolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, there is little potential for surface fault rupture. However, the presence of regional faults within a 60-mile radius of the site creates a potential for strong ground motions at the site. The nearest known active fault is the Cucamonga Fault located approximately 5.6 miles to the north. The next closest fault is the San Jacinto Fault located approximately 11 miles to the northeast. No new significant impacts are anticipated. As stated 'before, the depth of groundwater on the project site is in excess of 50 feet below the existing ground surface. This factor indicates that the potential for liquefaction is virtually nonexistent. Mitiqation Program In addition to adopted mitigation in the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan EIR, the recommendations of the geotechnical investigation prepared for this Addendum shall be implemented as a part of the project to reduce any potential impacts to a level that is considered less than significant. Recommendations address: · Removaland recompaction of soils · Conformance to the Uniform Building Code · Foundation and pavement design · Construction monitoring · Building maintenance and site drainage Ironwood/Fairway Palm~ Aclden~lurn to a Previously, ~e~ified EI~,, 4.$ HYDROLOGY/DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY 4.6.1 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT HydroloCl¥ and Drainaae Existing surface water runoff drains to the south in a sheet flow effect. Development of the Sub- Area 18 Specific Plan project, inclusive of Planning Area VI, would inorease impervious sun'aces and surface water runoff. However, master planned downstream drainage facilities have been designed to accommodate the buildout of General Plan land uses, including the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan area. Groundwater The City of Rancho Cucamonga overlies two groundwater basins, the Cucamonga Basin and the Chino Basin. The Specific Plan area overlies the central portion of the Chino Basin. The basin is recharged primarily from rainfall and stormwater runoff. The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan EIR noted that overall development of the Specific Plan may include the use of groundwater resources. Withdraw of groundwater within the Chino'Basin would require a well permit from the Chino Basin Municipal Water District. - Water Quality -* Short-term water quality impacts could occur on the project site from grading operations dudng the rainy season and cause erosion and the transport of silt in downstream sur[ace water flows. Long- term impacts could occur from the transport of urban constituents (i.e., oil, grease, tire particles) within onsite surface flows. Due to the depth of groundwater in the area, no impacts to groundwater quality is expected. Adopted Miti,qation Proqram Mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval for the previously approved project, applicable to Planning Area VI, are as follows: Similar to development that would be allowed on the project site under the existing iASP, various storm drain improvements will be installed, as development of the proposed Sub- Area Specific Plan progresses, to convey the post-development onsite storm flows into the existing storm drain facilities adjacent to the site. The proposed storm drain facilities will be sized and located to conform to the City's current storm flow conveyance policy. No additional drainage measures are required. · Pdor to the issuance of a grading permit for development of structures, erosion control measures that include Best Management Practices (BMPs) and compliance with NPDES stormwater quality requirements shall be included within construction plans. 4.6.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT Runoff from the project site would continue to drain to the south, consistent with existing conditions. Improvements would consist of an onsite collection system that would divert the flows to the adjacent facilities. As with the previously approved land uses for Planning Area VI, the currently proposed project would result in the introduction of imper~iclus .surfaces to.the project site. Open space within the Ironwood/Fai~ay Palms Addendum to a Previousl~ Cel~ified EI~, proposed apartment complex would allow for continued percolation within the planning area. Development of this project would result in the same amount or a reduction in impervious surfaces as the approved Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan for the proiect site, and therefore the same amount of surface water flow. As with the previously adopted land uses for Planning Area VI, this project would result in a similar incremental decrease in the quality of surface water. Like the proposed Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, this project would not signifioantly affect downstream facilities. Groundwater quality would not be affected either by this project or the approved Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. Miff ation Pro ram The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VI is applicable to the proposed project. No additional mitigation is required. 4.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE,~ 4.7.1 PREVlOUSLYAPPROVED PROJECT implementation of urban land uses on Planning Area VI would result in the removal of grape vineyards, a non-native habitat. During biological surveys conducted for the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan EIR, two Category 2 candidate species for federal listing as threatened or endangered, the San Diego homed lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum blainville;~ and loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), were observed within Planning Area Vi. The removal of these species from the site was not considered significant because of the project site's isolation from important natural open space areas, high amount of human disturbance, and lack of native plant communities. The Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly (DSFLF) was not found on the site during focused surveys (BonTerra Consulting, 1998), and due to the lack of suitable soils (John A. Sayers and Associates, 1998) and the lack of plants that flower during the specie's flight period, Sub-Area 18 appears unsuitable for DSFLF. The site is regularly y disced to comply with San Bernardino County's weed abatement policies, thereby reducing this area's ability to support DSFLF. In summary, the lack of true Delhi series soils, the percent coverage of the vegetation as well as the regular weed -- abatementJdiscing-of the areas'between the grapevines, renders the site unsuitable for DSFLF habitation. Impacts to the DSFLF are therefore not expected from project implementation due to the lack of appropriate soils and vegetation conditions, as well as the adjacency of the existing golf course and commercial and industrial development. Adopted Mitiqation Proqram No significant impacts on biological resources would occur; no mitigation was required. 4.7.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT Implementation of the proposed apartment project would result in the same amount of habitat removal as would occur with the previously approved land uses for Planning Area VI. No significant impacts to biological resources are expected. Mitiqation Proqram No mitigation is required. Addendum to a Previously/Certified EIR 4.8 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 4.8.1 WATER SUPPLY Previously Approved Proiect Development of the 23.4-acre site with office, industrial, and commercial land uses was projected to generate a demand for approximately 70,200 gallons per day of water. Project water demand could be met by the Cucamonga County Water District. No significant impacts were anticipated. Adopted Mitigation Program No mitigation measures are required. However, incorporation of the following measures would conserve water supplies and reduce impacts to the region's water resources: · All toilet, shower, and faucet fixtures shall be of an Uultra Iow-flow" nature. · Onsite landscaping shall use water-conserving plant material. · Automatic landscaping irrigation systems shall be used. ...... ·Automatic shut-off faucets shall be used in offices/commercial/retail facilities. · Landscaping and irrigation systems shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Currently Proposed Project The project site lies within the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD). Development of Planning Area VI with residential uses would increase demand of water from approximately 70,200 gallons per day to approximately 94,329 gallons per day. The Water District has indicated its ability to serve the proposed project; there is adequate supply of water available to meet the needs of this proposed development, including fire flow requirements. Mitigation Program The adopted mitigation program for the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan project is applicable to the currently proposed Planning Area VI project, with the following deletion: · Automatic shut-off faucets shall be used in offices/commercial/retail facilities. 4.8.2 WASTEWATER Previously Approved Project Development of the 23.4-acre project site would generate approximately 74,880 gallons per day of wastewater. The Cucamonga County Water District indicated the existing wastewater system in the project area was adequate to serve the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan project. H;23! '5 A:~FFJ001 ~dendum.wiDd Irenwo~d/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously Certified EI~ Adopted Mitigation Program · Development of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would require payment of fees in accordance with the Cucamonga County Water District wastewater facility fee program. Currently Proposed Proiect The Cucamonga County Water District anticipates the existing sewer system and sewage treatment plant capacity to be adequate for the proposed housing project. This project would increase the generation of wastewater from approximately 74,880 gallons to 150,838 gallons per day because of higher generation rates associated with residential development when compared to office, industrial, and commercial development. This increase is not expected to significantly affect master planned wastewater facilities. Mitigation Program The adopted mitigation program for the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan project is applicable to the currently proposed Planning Area VI project. 4.8.3 SOLID WASTE Previously Approved Proiect Development of Planning Area VI with office, industrial, and commercial uses would result in the generation of approximately 6.05 tons per day of solid waste. While development of the planning area would increase existing solid waste generation, the development of the Sub-Area Specific Plan would be required to comply with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element and City-approved source reduction and recycling programs. No significant impacts were identified. Adopted Mitigation Program · The project applicant shall implement a source reduction and recycling program for the proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan which may include the following: - Provide recycling facilities that allow paper, metal, plastic and glass to be separated. - Compost green waste. - Use minimal maintenance plants for landscaping. Currently Proposed Project Development of Planning Area VI with residential uses would not significantly impact existing and future solid waste facilities. The proposed project would generate approximately 2.3 tons per day of solid waste, a 62 percent reduction when compared to approved land uses for Planning Area VI. Mitigation Program The mitigation program adopted as a condition of approval of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan project is applicable to the proposed Planning Area VI project. Ironwood/Fai~vay Palms Ad~endum to a Pmviousl~ Certified EIR 4.8.4 SCHOOLS Previously Approved Project The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan site is located within the boundaries of the Cucamonga School Distdct (CSD) and Chaffey Joint Union High School Distdct (CJUHSD). The EIR determined that project implementation would have indirect impacts. Future employees at the project site could create a demand for additional housing; these employees may have children who attend schools within the CSD and CJUHSD. Adopted Mitigation Program · Prior to occupancy, development impact fees in accordance with CSD and CJUHSD shall be paid. Currently Proposed Project Development of the project site would directly generate new students attending schools within the Cucamonga School District (CSD) and Chaffey Joint Union High School District (CJUHSD). Chaffey Joint High School District includes eight high schools with two additional school scheduled to open in September 2002. CJUHSD has a generation rate of 0.20 high school students per dwelling unit, a design capacity of 15,485, and a district enrollment of 19,853 students (as of October 2000) (CJUHSD, October 2000). The Cucamonga School District (CSD) operates five schools, three serving grades kindergarten through fifth grade, one serving grades sixth through eighth grade, and one serving kindergarten only. The CSD capacity is 2,854 students and current enrollment is 2,827 students (as of November 2000) (CSD). The generation rates for elementary school and middle school are 0.1673 and 0.0622, respectively (CSD, November 2000). The proposed Ironwood/Fairway Palms housing development would be required to pay school fees to mitigate for potential impacts to the school districts. Using the generation factors provided by the two affected school districts and applying it to the proposed project, based on 496 apartment units, the Ironwood/Fairway Palms project would generate 228 school-aged children, of which 114 students would be in grades kindergarten through eighth grade, and 99 students would be in high school. Because the project would be required to pay school fees, no significant impacts are anticipated. Mitigation Program As with the previously approved land uses for Planning Area VI, the proposed project would be required to pay school fees. 4.9 ENERGY DEMAND AND CONSERVATION 4.9.1 PREVlOUSLYAPPROVED PROJECT Development of Planning Area VI with office, industrial, and commercial uses would result in a demand of approximately 5.07 million kilowatt hours per year of electricity. Although the approved land uses would result in an increase in existing demand for electricity, project demand is within service projections of Southern California Edison. Fl, Ironwood/Fakway Palms Aclden~um to a Previously CertilTed EIR Development of the project site would demand approximately 99,827.8 therms of natural gas per year. While land uses proposed on the site would increase the existing demand for natural gas, the demand can be met by the Southern California Gas Company. Adopted Mifiqation Proqram No mitigation measures are required. However, the following measures are proposed to minimize overall energy consumption. · In order to conserve energy, individual developments on the project site shall incorporate energy efficient technologies, practices, and equipment to reduce the onsite demand of electricity, natural gas and fuel. ·Implementation of the project shall comply with Title 24 of the California Uniform Building Code 4.9.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT As shown in Table 7, implementation of tlie Ironwood/Fairway Palms project would decrease the annual demand of electricity to 2.79 million kwh and increase the annual demand of natural gas to 235,600 therms, when compared to approved land uses for Planning Area VI. The differences . in electricity~and natural gas demands in comparison to the demands of the approved Planning Area VI, Sub-Area Specific Plan would not significantly affect existing and planned facilities. TABLE 7 ENERGY DEMAND Energy Type I Dwelling Units I Demand Factor Annual Demand Natural Gas I~ 496 I 475 therms/uniFyear~. 235,600 therms Electricity I 496 5,626.5 kWh/unitJyear~ 2.79 million kWh kWh: Kilowatt Hours a. The Gas Company, September 1999. b. Appendix 9, SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality, aciopted April 1993. Demand factors are based on Southern California Edison and Los Angeles Deparlment of Public Works average usage rates. The Southern California Edison Company can install electric distribution facilities and provide electric service in accordance with its Tariff Schedules which are the effective rules and rates of the Southern California Edison Company on file with the Public Utilities Commission of the State - of California. The Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided from an existing main located in Milliken Avenue. The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension plans on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual agreements are made. Mitiqation Proqram No significant impacts have been identified; no mitigation is required. Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously Cedi§ed EIP, 4.10 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 4.10.1 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT Use of the project site for grape vineyards indicates the potential for herbicide residue in shallow site soils. Herbicides are not considered to be a public health threat and can be remediated, if necessary, using readily available techniques. Approved land uses on Planning Area VI could use and/or generate hazardous materials; however, local, state, and federal regulations/requirements and guidelines provide mechanisms to ensure proper storage and transport of hazardous materials and trained response to any potential hazardous material incidents. Adopted Mitiqation Proqram · Development currently being proposed, constructed, or completed under buildout of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan are required to comply with all existing local, state, and federal regulations/requirements and guidelines that provide for mechanisms to ensure proper storage and transport of hazardous materials and treatment of any potential hazardous material incidents. Therefore, no further mitigation measures are required. 4.10.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED PROJECT A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report was prepared for the project site by Gradient Engineers, Inc. in May 2000. According to the report, Planning Area VI does not contain any known hazardous materials facilities onsite. There are two facilities listed within ¼ mile of the project site. The first facility is a USGS water well located southeast of the site. The second listed facility is an underground storage tank (UST), maintained by the State of California Highway Patrol and located at 9530 Pittsburgh Avenue. Neither of the identified sites is anticipated to present an environmental concern to development of Planning Area VI. Similar to the approved Sub-Area Specific Plan, implementation of the proposed residential development would not result in a significant impact with regard to hazardous materials. Residential development would not be expected to generate or use hazardous materials. Mitiqation Proqram No mitigation is required. Ironwood/Fairway Palms Addendum to a Previously, Ce~ified EIR SECTION 5 CONCLUSIONS An Addendum to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan final EIR is the appropriate documentation because some changes or additions are necessary to describe the proposed residential project, but none of the conditions described in the CEQA Guidelines §15102 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The City of Rancho Cucamonga finds that: · there have not been substantial changes in the project that require major revisions to the previous EIR because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; · there have not been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or · there is no new informa!ion of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, that shows any of the following: a) the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR, b) significant effects previously examined will be substantially-more severe than shown in the previous EIR, c) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or d) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the final EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Itonwood~=aincay Palms A~,~=,dum to a Previously Certifie(~ SECTION 6 REFERENCES FF Development, L.P. (Ju~y 2000). Uniform Application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Gradient Engineers, Inc. (May 3, 2000). Phase / Environmental Site Assessment Report: 23.2 Acres North of Fourth Street and West of Milliken Avenue Located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Prepared for FF Development L.P., San Diego, California. LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. (June 22, 2000). Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Palmer Goff Course Apartments, Parcel 6, Parcel Map No. 14647. Prepared for FF Development, L.P., San Diego, California. Michael Brandman Associates. (Jan. 1 gg4). Draft Specific Plan forthe Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. Prepared for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Personal Communication. (Oct. 24, 2000). S. Sundell. Chaffey Joint Union High School District. Personal Communication. (Nov. g, 2000).' J. Morrison. Chaffey Joint Union High School District. Persona~ Communication, T. Selstad, Southern California Edison Company, June 15, 2000. RKJK & Associates, Inc. (Aug. 28, 2000, revised Dec. 26, 2000). Empire Lakes Planing Area 6 Apartments Preliminary Noise Study. APPENDIX A NOISE STUDY EMPIRE LAKES-PLANNING AREA ¥1 APARTMENTS PRELIMINARY NOISE STUDY Rancho Cucamonga, California . TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION ' ~ PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 1 On-Site Noise Exposure Analysis and Control .......................................................... 1 Off-Site Noise Exposure Analysis and Control .......................................................... 4 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................ 5 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 8 Project Location ......................................................................................................... 8 Project Description ....... ~ ............................................................................................. 8 NOISE STANDARDS ..................................................... , .............................................. 10 Noise Rating Scales .................................................................................................. 10 NOISE MONITORING ............................................................... ' ................................... 13 Measurement Procedure and Criteria ....................................................................... 13 Measurement Results ............................................................................................... 15 Project On-Site Generated Noise Impact Analysis ................................................... 18 ON-SITE NOISE EXPOSURE ANALYSIS AND CONTROL ........................................ 21 Roadway Noise Impacts ........................................................................................... 21 Exterior Area Noise Exposure Analysis and Control ................................................ 23 interior Area Noise Exposure Analysis and Control .................................................. 26 OFF-SITE NOISE EXPOSURE ANALYSIS AND CONTROL ...................................... 30 Short-Term Construction Noise ................................................................................ 30 Traffic Noise Contours .............................................................................................. 31 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................ 36 APPENDICES GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTICAL TERMS ........................................................................ A CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOISE STANDARDS ............................................ B NOISE PROJECTION WORKSHEETS ....................... .................................................. C CNEL COMPUTER PRINTOUTS .................................................................................. D CNEL NOISE CONTOUR PROJECTIONS ................................................................... E EXHIBIT B SITE PLAN LIST OF TABLES TABLE , PAGE 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOISE ORDINANCE STANDARDS 11 2 EXISTING (AMBIENT) NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS .......................... 16 3 REFERENCE NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS ........................................ 17 4 EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL PROJECTIONS AT OBSERVER LOCATION # 1 ............................ 19 5 EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL PROJECTIONS AT OBSERVER LOCATION # 2 6 ROADWAY AND SITE PARAMETERS ........................................................ 24 7 FUTURE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS (dBA CNEL) .................................... 25 8 FIRST FLOOR INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS (dBA CNEL) ....................... 27 9 SECOND FLOOR INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS (dBA CNEL) ................... 28 10 THIRD FLOOR INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS (dBA CNEL ..........................29 11 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (1000'S)~ 32 12 EXISTING NOISE CONTOURS ................................................................. 33 13 FUTURE YEAR 2010 NOISE CONTOURS ................................................ 34 14 FUTURE YEAR NOISE LEVEL INCREASES ............................................ 35 EMPIRE LAKES- PLANI~ING ARE~ 6 APARTMENTS PRELIMINARY NOISE STUDY RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: FF DEVELOPMENT, L,P, 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92121 Prepared by: RKJK & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1601 Dove Street, Suite 290 = .. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Bill Lawson, AICP Robert Kahn, P.E. July 6, 2000 August 28, 2000 (Revised) JN:1269-00-03 RK:BL:skf/11190 EMPIRE LAKES - PLANNING AREA 6 APARTMENTS PRELIMINARY NOISE STUDY '~' RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A preliminary noise study has been completed to determine the exterior/interior noise exposure and the necessary noise mitigation measures for the Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The proposed site is located north of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue and east of Haven as shown on Exhibit A. The results of this analysis indicate that future motor vehicle noise from 4th Street is the principal source of community noise that will impact the project. However, these noise impacts can be adequately mitigated with the appropriate noise control measures recommended in this report. The proposed project consists of 528 multi-family apartment units contained on 3 levels in a total of 23 buildings. The plan used for this analysis is shown on Exhibit B. The project was previously reviewed as part of a sub-area Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report prepared in 1994. The EIR project mitigation essentially outlined the City of Rancho Cucamonga exterior and interior noise standards for the proposed project. On-Site Noise Exposure Analysis and Control The results of this study indicate that the projected exterior noise levels for a worst-case situation, exceed the City of Rancho Cucamonga exterior noise standard of 60 dBA CNEL for residential uses. To reduce the projected exterior noise levels, a 6.0-foot high sound barrier will be required for the 1st floor patio areas on buildings 2-4 facing 4th Street. This can be accomplished using a continuous sound barrier or through the use of individual patio enclosures. The interior noise exposure standard of 45 dBA CNEL will 1 EXHrBIT A, LOCATION MAP' ONTARIO MILLS PKWY. INLAND ..- '~/.. EMPIRE BLVD. :~" ' ' 1-10 FWY ~'~ ~-~:.~ .. EXHIBIT B SITE PLAN FOURTH 3 LIST oF TABLES TABLE ~_ PAGE 1 CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOISE ORDINANCE STANDARDS .......................................................................... 11 2 EXISTING (AMBIENT) NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS 16 3 REFERENCE NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS ..................................... :.. 17 4 EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL PROJECTIONS AT OBSERVER LOCATION # 1 .......................................................................... 19 5 EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL PROJECTIONS AT OBSERVER LOCATION # 2 ......................................................................... 20 6 ROADWAY AND SITE PARAMETERS ........................................................ 24 7 FUTURE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS (dBA CNEL) .................................... 25 8 FIRST FLOOR INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS (dBA CNEL) ....................... 27 9 SECOND FLOOR INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS (dBA CNEL) ................... 28 10 THIRD FLOOR INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS (dBA CNEL ..........................29 11 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (1000'S)~ 32 12 EXISTING NOISE CONTOURS ................................................................. 33 13 FUTURE yEAR 2010 NOISE CONTOURS ................................................ 34 14 FUTURE YEAR NOISE LEVEL INCREASES ............................................ 35 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION ' ,~ PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 1 On-Site Noise Exposure Analysis and Control .......................................................... 1 Off-Site Noise Exposure Analysis and Control .......................................................... 4 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................ 5 INTRODUCTION 8 Project Location ......................................................................................................... 8 Project Description ....... ~ ............................................................................................. 8 NOISE STANDARDS .................................................................................................... 10 Noise Rating Scales .................................................................................................. 10 NOISE MONITORING .................................................................................................. 13 Measurement Procedure and Criteria ....................................................................... 13 Measurement Results ............................................................................................... 15 Project On-Site Generated Noise Impact Analysis ................................................... 18 ON-SITE NOISE EXPOSURE ANALYSIS AND CONTROL ........................................ 21 Roadway Noise impacts ........................................................................................... 21 Exterior Area Noise Exposure Analysis and Control ................................................ 23 Intedor Area Noise Exposure Analysis and Control .................................................. 26 OFF-SITE NOISE EXPOSURE ANALYSIS AND CONTROL ...................................... 30 Short-Term Construction Noise ................................................................................ 30 Traffic Noise Contours .............................................................................................. 31 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................ 36 APPENDICES GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTICAL TERMS ........................................................................ A CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOISE STANDARDS ............................................ B NOISE PROJECTION WORKSHEETS ......................................................................... C CNEL COMPUTER PRINTOUTS .................................................................................. D CNEL NOISE CONTOUR PROJECTIONS ................................................................... E EMPIRE LAKES- PLANI~IING ARC-~ 6 APARTMENTS ' PRELIMINARY NOISE STUDY RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: - · FF DEVELOPMENT, L.P. ~-.-.~ 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92121 '~.':".:' Prepared by: RKJK & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1601 Dove Street, Suite 290 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Bill Lawson, AICP Robert Kahn, P.E. July 6, 2000 August 28, 2000 (Revised) JN:1269-00-03 RK:BL:skf/11190 EMPIRE LAKES - PLANNING AREA 6 APARTMENTS PRELIMINARY NOISE STUDY .~- RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A preliminary noise study has been completed to determine the exterior/interior noise exposure and the necessary noise mitigation measures for the Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The proposed site is located north of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue and east of Haven as shown on Exhibit A. The results of this analysis indicate that future motor vehicle noise from 4th Street is the principal source of community noise that will impact the project. However, these noise impacts can be adequately mitigated with the appropriate noise control measures recommended in this report. The proposed project consists of 528 multi-family apartment units contained on 3 levels in a total of 23 buildings. The plan used for this analysis is shown on Exhibit B. The project was previously reviewed as part of a sub-area Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report prepared in 1994. The EIR project mitigation essentially outlined the City of Rancho Cucamonga exterior and interior noise standards for the proposed project. On-Site Noise Exposure Analysis and Control The results of this study indicate that the projected extedor noise levels for a worst-case situation, exceed the City of Rancho Cucamonga exterior noise standard of 60 dBA CNEL for residential uses. To reduce the projected exterior noise levels, a 6.0-foot high sound barrier will be required for the 1st floor patio areas on buildings 2-4 facing 4th Street. This can be accomplished using a continuous sound barrier or through the use of individual patio enclosures. The interior noise exposure standard of 45 dBA CNEL will 1 H, [;'T lc)'-/ EXHIBIT A, LOCATION MAP' · INLAND MILLS PKWY. .. EMPIRE BLVD. : ~' ~ EXHIBIT B SITE PLAN I ~ I be met using a "windows closed" condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (i.e. air conditioning) and upgraded windows with a minimum Sound Transmissi,on Class (~'TC) rating of 29 for buildings facing 4th Street. Off-Site Noise Exposure Analysis and Control The City of Rancho Cucamonga noise ordinance outlines noise requirements for the proposed Commercial Center located east of the Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 '- .._._Apartments. The primary noise source impacts associated with the planned commercial -).-; site for have been analyzed in this report. Any additional noise sources or "nuisance" type noise produced by the development must also comply with the stationary source ~: noise criteria. No additional noise mitigation is required for the Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartment project to meet the City of Rancho Cucamonga Noise Ordinance standards. For example delivery trucks or other on-site generated noise could occur at vadous hours- of the day. These on-site generated noise impacts would be controlled by the stationary source noise criteria. The standards are designed to protect residential neighborhoods from noise impacts for both the daytime hours of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM and nighttime hours of 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. The noise control mitigation measure details are presented in the "Summary of Recommendations" of this report.. 4 SUMMARY OF RE'COMMENDATIONS Exhibit C shows the Iocatior~f the building locations, including the recommended noise mitigation measures. The following recommendations are consistent with the noise mitigation measures found in the sub-area Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report ~repared in 1994. 1. Construct a 6.0-foot high sound barrier for all the first floor exterior patio areas in :=~ ': buildings facing 4th Street. This can be accomplished using a continuous sound ~..'_ barrier or through the use of individual patio enclosures. The designed noise '""~:;- ~ screening may only be accomplished if the barriers weight is at least 3.5 pounds per square foot of face area and with no decorative cutouts or line-of-site openings between shielded areas and the roadways. The recommended noise control barrier may be constructed using one of the following alternative materials: a. Masonry block; b. Stucco veneer over wood framing (or foam core), or 1 inch thick tongue and groove wood of sufficient weight per square foot; c. Glass (1/4 inch thick), or other transparent material with sufficient ~ ~.~.'~. weight per square foot; .T .- d. Earthen berm; e. Any combination of these construction materials The patio enclosure must present a solid face from top to bottom. Unnecessary openings or decorative cutouts should not be made. All gaps (except for weep holes) should be filled grout or caulking. The interior noise exposure standards for the project will be met using the standard building shell construction and a ndows closed condition for buildings facing 4th "wi - " 5 ' EXHIBIT C ' SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS PROVIDE UPGRADED WINDOWS : " WITH A MINIMUM SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS RATING (STC) OF 29 FOR ALL WINDOWS ' IN BUILDINGS FACING 4TH ST. ,,'" -'"' \ J PROVIDE A 'WINDOWS CLOSED' "' ~ \ / CONDmON REQUIRING A MEANS · ' ·: OF MECHANICAL VENTILATION PER UBC REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL UNITS IN BUILDINGS FACING 4TH ST. CONSTRUCT A 6.0-FOOT HIGH r SOUND BARRIER FOR THE 1ST FLOOR PATIO AREAS FOR BUILDINGS FACING 4TH ST. 6 Street requiring a means of mechanical ventilation per UBC requirements. This mechanical, ventilation system shall supply two air changes per hour for eac~ h~a'bitable room, with a minimum of 15 cubic feet per minute of outside air per occupant. The fresh air inlet duct shall be of sound attenuating construction and shall consist of a minimum of ten feet of straight or curved duct or six feet plus one sharp 90° bend. Provide upgraded windows with a minimum STC (sound transmission class) rating of 29 for all windows in buildings facing 4th Street. For proper acoustical -- performance, all exterior windows, doors and sliding glass doors must have a · _--~:.. positive seal, and leaks and cracks must be kept down to a minimum. During construction, the project shall comply with recommendations found in the sub-area Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report that includes the following noise mitigation measures: a. Construction activity shall be limited to 6:30 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Saturday, unless a permit for each work area has been issued by the Director of Public Works, or no noise-sensitive receptors would be exposed to the construction noise. b. Mufflers on construction equipment and trucks shall meet the manufacturers recommended specifications for operation and maintenance's. c. Development of the project site shall be inconformance with the Performance Standards identified in the proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan. Operations at the commercial center site must comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Noise Standards. 7 INTRODUCTION This study presents the results of a ~'eliminary noise analysis for the proposed Empire Lakes -- Planning Area 6 Apartments project to be located the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Included in this report is a discussion of expected community noise environment with the development of the proposed Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Noise requirements. ~ The project site is located north of 4n Street west of Milliken Avenue and east of Haven ~ in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Exhibit A illustrates the study area. The proposed ' Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments project site plan is shown on Exhibit B. The ~: project site is currently vacant. The proposed project consists of 528 multi-family apartment units contained on 3 levels in - a total of 23 buildings. Access to the site will be provided from Fourth Street and Fifth Street. Customer parking will occur primarily in the center of the commercial site east of the '" Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments building. Truck delivery noise will be generated in the loading areas shown on the site plan. Noise generated from truck deliveries includes the trucks themselves, noise generated from backup buzzers/bells, refrigeration units and the movement of goods along metal rollers at the loading dock. !n the following sections, noise exposures expected within the planned site are reviewed ]nd compared to the applicable noise control criteria. Design recommendations ~ecessary to comply with the noise control criteria are presented in the "Summary of 8 ' '~ = I 1 :~ecommenda;dons" section Of this report. A glossary of acoustical terms is included in 9 NOISE STANDARDS The City of Rancho Cucamonga uses the CNEL scale for land use/noise compatibility assessment. For residential land uses the City requires the intedor noise standard not to exceed 45 dBA CNEL and the exterior noise standard in outdoor living areas not to exceed 60 dBA CNEL. The CNEL noise standards are used to assess the noise impacts associated with the vehicle noise from 4~ Street. ;:~:he City of Rancho Cucamonga noise ordinance standards are designed to protect residential neighborhoods from stationary source noise impacts associated with the .~eighbodng commercial center for both the daytime hours of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM and ~_oighttime hours of 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Table 1 presents the cdteria used for assessing :~'the compatibility of residential land uses with respect to stationary noise sources. The City of Rancho Cucamonga Noise Standards are included in Appendix "B". Noise Ratinq Scales A number of noise rating scales are used in Califomia for land use compatibility assessment. These scales are: the Equivalent Noise Level (LEQ), the Day Night Noise Level (LDN), and the Community Noise Equivalent Noise Level (CNEL). These scales are described in the following paragraphs: · A-weighted decibels (dBA) are the most common units used for measuring the loudness of a noise event. The human ear has different sensitivity to different frequencies of sound (noise). A-weighting is an attempt to give the noise monitor the same frequency sensitivity as the human ear. Technically, it is the measurement of the energy being received when listening to (or monitoring) a source of noise. For example, the loudness of a highway may be 65 dBA when measured 50 feet away. The sound decreases as one moves away from the source, and the same highway would have a noise level of 62 dBA at 100 feet. 10 TABLE 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIV~NGA NOISE ORDINANCE STANDARDS NOT-TO-EXCEED EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS (dBA Leq) MAXIMUM CUMULATIVE 7:00 AM TO 10:00 PM 10:00 PM TO 7:00 AM DURATION / HOUR SYMBOL 75 70 0 Minutes L.~ 74 69 5 Minutes L8 65 60 10 Minutes LI? 60 55 15 Minutes L2s The relationship between how one perceives a sound anc~the actual 'sound energy emitted by the source of noise is very complex. However', a good rule of thumb is that if a noise increases 10 dBA, its apparent loudness will double.'~Therefore, a noise that is 70 dBA will appear twice as loud as a 60 dBA noise. i. · The LEQ scale represents the energy average noise level over a sample period of : time. It represents the decibel sound level that would contain the same amount of' energy as a fluctuating sound level over the sample time period. "'~ · · The LDN scale represents a time weighted 24 hour average noise level based on ,--~'.'~ the A-weighted decibel. Time weighted refers to the fact that noise occurs during certain sensitive time periods is penalized for occurring at these times. For the LDN scale the nighttime pedod (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) noises are penalized by 10 ':!' ''' dBA. ': .;,'.~ · The CNEL scale is similar to the LDN scale except that it includes an additional 5 dBA penalty for the evening time period (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.). ~IOI~E MONITORING vleasurement~Procedure and Criteda ,~ 'o determine the existing noise level environment and to assess potential noise impacts : m the adjacent residential areas, noise measurements were taken at three (3) locations. ~ :: .. Joise monitoring locations were selected based on their respective impact potential. Site was located adjacent to the proposed Clubhouse/Leasing Building. Site 2 was located :'~ ear the 2nd emergency entry to site 2. The third location, Site 3, was taken pproximately 25 feet from the curb of I~lilliken Avenue. Exhibit D illustrates the noise ~onitodng locations. Ambient noise measurements were taken on June 27, 2000 dudng ~e daytime hours of 12:00 PM to 1:00 PM. oise measurements were taken using a LARSON-DAVIS Model 700 precision tegrating sound level meter, programmed, in "slow" mode, to record noise levels in "A" 'hted form. The sound level meter was calibrated before and after the monitoring with DN-DAVIS calibrator, Model CA 250. The sound level meter and microphone ere mounted on a tdpod, five feet above the ground and equipped with a windscreen Jring all measurements. The above instrument automatically calculates the "percent ~ise levels" (Ln) for any specific time period. ~.:" ..,- ~e percent noise level "Ln" is useful to evaluate intermittent noise sources. The percent ~ise level is the level exceeded "n" percent of the time during the measurement period. ~ is the noise level exceeded 90 percent of the time measured, commonly used to timate the "ambient" noise level. Lso is the noise level exceeded 50 percent of the time -=asured and can be seen as the "average" noise level. L~0 is the noise level exceeded percent of the time measured, and represents the peak or intrusive noise level. 13 '- EXHIBIT D,1~ NOISE MONITORING LOCATIONS ~ F 0 U R T I-: T R E E T LEGEND: (~1 MONITORIN~ LOP_.~TION NOISE Measurement Results ~ ~ results'of the noise level measurements are presented in Table'2. Each site was monitored for a minimum time period of 10 minutes. Based on the noise measurement results presented in Table 2, the project site currently experiences ambient noise levels ranging from Leq = 49.4 dBA at Site 1 to Leq = 51.4 dBA at Site 2. A noise level 62.0 dBA Leq was measured at Site 3 on the proposed commercial center site. Noise levels at these locations were influenced primarily from the adjoining roadways. ~.. In order to evaluate future on-site stationary noise impacts, noise measurements were :~'-:"":: taken at facilities containing similar wholesale/retail uses as those proposed at 'the " commercial center. Truck delivery noise was estimated based on measurements taken -' on August 28, 1999 at the Hemet Walgreens store. The measurements include loading . and unloading of truck trailers, truck drive-by noise, truck engine noise, and the movement of goods on metal rollers. Without any mitigation, the loading dock noise will -' an estimated Leq of 66.3 dBA at a distance of 6 feet from the loading dock. While .. smaller local vendor trucks will contribute to the noise environment, the reference tractor-trailer truck noise measurements represents the "worst-case" noise impact. To evaluate on-site automobile generated noise impacts, additional field measurements i- '~';~':I' ' were taken at the Newport Beach Wells Fargo Bank ATM drive-thru by RKJK and Associates on June 3, 1999. Table 3 outlines the reference noise level measurements used for this analysis Based upon the reference noise levels provided on Table 3 and the ambient noise level 'neasurements shown on Table 2, it is possible to project noise levels from the :ommercial center. Noise level projection calculations are included in Appendix "C". 15 TABLE 2 ~ ' EX~STING (AMBIENT) NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS1 EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS (dBA Leq) I Adjacent to the proposed Clubhouse/Leasing building 51.4 58.5 53.5 52.5 52.0 2 Near the 2nd emergency entry to site 2. 49.4 56.5 51.7 50.7 50.0 3 Approximately 25 feet the curb of Milliken Avenue 62.0 71.5 66.0 64.0 63.0 -~s measured by RKJK & Associates, Inc. on 6/27/00 during the daytime hours of 12:00 pm to 1:00 pm. See Exhibit D for the location of the monitoring sites. TABLE REFERENCE NOISE LEVEL ME,a.~UREMENTS I EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS (dBA) Il DISTANCE II FROM DURATION SOURCE ~ SOURCE (MINUTES) (FEET) Lc, L,.a, L8 L~;, L25 ii Delivery Trucks~ 45 6 66.3 84.0 68.0 -- 61.5 iAutos-Engine Noise2 10 6 63.8 79.5 65.5 - 64.5 As measured by RKJK & Associates, Inc. on 8/28/99 y RKJK & Associates, Inc. on 6/3/99. ~(tables~kk 11100\~kkl 1190th ,~o-oo-o~ ~, \~ :3- ~ ~ ~ ._ Proi~ct On-Site Generated Noise Impact Analysis Tab~s 4 and 5 provide ~ summary of the daytime (7:00AM to 10:00PM) exterior, boise level impacts associated with the development of the commercial center. It should be noted the results presented in Tables 4 and 5 reflect a worst-case situation where all activities occur at once. The development of the proposed commercial is estimated to increase the existing exterior noise levels by approximately 0.2 dBA Leq at observer location 1 to 0.6 dBA Leq at observer location 2. in community noise assessment ~ changes in noise level greater than 3 dBA are often identified as significant, while _. changes less than 1 dBA will not be discernible to the human ear. r-The primary noise source impacts planned for the proposed Commercial Center have ~been':... analyzed in this report. Any additional noise sources or "nuisance" type noise produced by the development must also comply with the stationary source noise impacts ....~-,~sh°wn on Table 1. These standards are designed to protect residential neighborhoods from noise impacts from both the daytime hours of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM and nighttime hours of 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. 18 TABLE 4 'EXTERIOR,~/OISE LEVEL PROJECTIONS AT OBSERVER LOCATION #1 DISTANCE TO SOURCE FACADE ( N FEET) Leq Lmax La L~? L25 ~TERIOR NOISE LEVEL IMPACTS~ aalas-Engine~eq/TrucksNoise 1,120230 35.132'2 ~asb Compactor 1,120 15.8 29.1 20.6 - 11.1 ~ Only Noise 36.9 ' ~t~ng Arnbient Noise Level 51.4 58.5 53.5 52.5 52.0 ;.~lbined Project & Ambient 51.6 I 59.7 53.6 - 52,1 .~ect Contribution afar'ne Noise Standard 75.0 74.0 65.0 60.0 TABLE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL PI~OJECTIQI~S AT OBSERVER LOCATION #2 DISTANCE TO SOURCE FACADE (IN Le,a L~a., L8 L~;, L2s ~R NOISE LEVEL IMPACTR ; '-~' ' Trucks 640 35.9 53.6 37.6 .. 31.1 gine Noise 120 39.3 55.0 41.0 - 40.0 pactor 640 20.7 34.0 25.5 16.0 ~.~.r-..-:.. Project Only Noise 41.0 57.4 42.7 - 40.5 ~?':? ';". ' Ambient Noise Level 49.4 56.5 51.7 50.7 50.0 Combined & Ambient 50.0 60.0 52.2 50.5 ? ';i" ~roject Contribution 0.6 3.5 0.5 - 0.5 Noise Standard 75.0 74.0 65.0 60.0 ,~' · · ON-SITE .NOISE EXPOSURE ANALYSIS AND CONTROL '~1~ is expected that the pdmary soumes of noise impacts to the site will be traffic noise from`? 4th Street. Two buildings were selected for future noise impact analysis based on their proximity to 4th Streets. Other local roads are not expected to contribute substantially to the noise impacts for this project due to their lower volume/speed and shielding by building structures between the site and these streets. The proposed Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments residential project is located well outside the Ontado Airport ...... ~:.~ , noise contour boundaries. The City of Ontado General Plan identifies the Airport ~ boundaries which are shown on Exhibit E. Due to the distance and shielding from other .-,.,- ,·~ ,structures, it is expected that the Ontado Airport will not make a significant contribution to ~.:;: ..:. ~1~e'n ise iro ~' o env nment ..... ~..-.: Roadway Noise Impacts ...... I xpected the primary sources of off-site noise impacts to land uses in the vicinity of ~:- -:':.'.i'. th'E'site will be caused by project generated traffic. The expected roadway noise impacts ' '-' ': from vehicular traffic were projected using a computer program which replicates the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model- FHWA-RD-77- 108 (the "FHWA Model"), as modified for CNEL and "Calveno" energy curves. The key ~. input parameters include; the roadway classification (e.g., collector, secondary, major and prime arterial); the roadway active width (i.e., the distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway); the total average daily traffic (ADT), the travel speed; the percentages of automobiles; medium trucks and heavy trucks in the ' ' !raffic volume; the roadway grade; the angle of view (e.g., whether the roadway view is ~locked); the site conditions ("hard" or "soft" relates to the absorption of the ground, ~avement or landscaping), and the percentage of total average daily traffic (ADT) which lows each hour throughout a 24-hour period. 21 EXHIBIT E !ONTARIO AIRPORT NOISE CONTOUR BOUNDARIES .~1. SI. ., hn upa ~' ~ _ J Riw]~side I)~. I 5chaefe~ Ave , j ...... SOURCE: CITY OF ONTARIO GENERAL PLAN r KJK 2 2 · ,~'~,~_ .T~s The traffic volumes -and travel speeds used for this study are presented in Table 6. The volumes shown in Table 6 were obtained from the General Dynamics Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Impact Analysis dated January 1~, 1994. prepared by LSA & ASSOCIATES. These traffic volumes are conservatively high, because the proposed project will generate less daily traffic than the previously approved sub-area specific plan. The average travel speeds shown in Table 6 are expected to occur dudng smooth traffic flows on subject roadways. It should be noted that these speeds are used for comparison ' calculations and consequently their chanqe in value is more relevant than their absolute · ~..:..~-.- value. For the purpose of this study, all calculations were made with the speed values !~'~'~::' ': _~hown in Table 6. ' Exterior Area Noise Exposure Analysis and Control ; ::.'.:? :L. The City of Rancho Cucamonga standards for residential construction require that the noise exposures in all usable outdoor areas not exceed 60 dBA CNEL for residential f' Analysis and recommendations for control of motor vehicle noise impacts in outdoor living areas are presented in this section. Using'the FHWA traffic noise prediction model and the parameters outlined in Table 6, calculations of the potential worse case traffic noise impacts were completed. The computer printouts for the specific site impacts are included in Appendix "D". ~!~II~:-::' To meet the City of Rancho Cucamonga exterior noise standard of 60 dBA CNEL for " residential uses, a 6.0 foot high noise barrier is required for required for the 1st floor patio areas on buildings facing 4th Street. Table 7 presents a summary of the future extedor noise levels. Detailed recommendations for construction and placement of the noise control barrier are }resented in the Summary of Recommendations. Once the recommended barriers are 23 construct, ! : levels wil' ' ~ TABLE 6 I~OADWAy AND SITE PARAMETERs Interior / ~ We buil constn. minim~. ARTERIAL TRAFFIc FLOw DISTRIBUTION The n TYPE · ',' COnsE - dose amobiles FLOw ~urr facin~ ' 12.9 64.6 9.6 minir 4.9 )7.42 10.3 1.84 stan ~ 86.5 2.7 10.8 0.74 Trar 5ur, 77.5 12,9 9.6 4.9 ~7.go ~ 86.5 2.7 3.46 10.6 6.64 ~ium · inks 77.5 12.9 84.8 9.6 4.9 ]1.90 86.5 10.3 2.7 8.40 10.8 ~~_ JUre Year 2010 traffic volumes r, ed January 12, 1994. Were obtained from the General Dynamics Rancho :'-'ce: Caltrans 1997 Annual AVerage Daily Truck Cucamonga Traffic Impact Analysis Tra~c. '~LkktablesV4k 11100[~kkl 11 'N:1260-00.03 90lb TABLE 7 FUTURE E~3'ERIOR NOISE LEVEl'S (dBA CNEL) UNMITIGATED EXTERIOR MITIGATED EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL (dBA CNEL) NOISE LEVEL (dBA CNEL) FLOOR FLOOR' MINIMUM REQUIRED BARRIER HEIGHT BUILDING 1ST 2ND 3RD 1ST 2ND~ 3RD~ (IN FEET)2 2 67.8 70.7 70.6 57.6 70.7 70.6 6.0 ~.=. ~ ;', 4 68,7 71.2 71.1 58,4 71.2 71.1 6.0 City of Rancho Cucamonga does not require exterior noise mitigation for 2nd and 3rd floor balconies ,~:1260-00-03 25 constructed, it is expected that the usable outdoor residential space noise-exposure levels will be less than the 60 dBA CNEL. Intedor Area Noise Exposure Analysis and Control The interior noise exposure is the difference between the projected extedor exposure at the building facade and the calculated noise reduction of the building. Typical building construction will provide a minimum 12 dB noise reduction with windows open and a · minimum 20 dBA noise reduction with windows closed. The results of the analysis indicate that the residential lots facing 4th Street represent a ";':~0nservative situation with a 12.6 to 26.2 dBA CNEL noise reduction required for windows -dosed conditions. The data in Tables 8, 9 and 10 shows that the windows in buildings facing 4th Street will require a "windows closed" condition and upgraded windows with a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 29 to meet the interior noise standard of 45 dBA Ldn. Standard dual-pane windows will generally provide a Sound Transmission Class Rating of 28 to 29. 26 ~nt By: FF DEVELOPMENT; 819 457 1121; Jan-3-01 5:36PM; Page 7/10 PKOJECT: G~NEP,9~L DYNA~IC~ APARTMENTS .JOE %: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4T~ STK£ET 'DATR: 22-Dec-00 LOCATION: HLDG 4 - 2ND FLOOR . BY: A CADA¥ONA ADT = 4i,300 PK MB VOL · 4,130 SPE~D ~ 45 PK HR % - 10 CTL DIST= DIST N/F- 76 (M=76, P-$2,S-36,C-12) AUTO SLE3DISTANCE = 106.32 DT WALL- 1[0 MHD TRUCK SLE DIST= 105.99 DT W/OB- 0 HVY TRUCK SLE DIST= 105.45 OBS NTH= 15.0 AMBIENT- ROADWAy VIEW: LF ANGL~ -90 RT ANGLE- 90 DF ANGLE~ 180 S?T£ CONDITIONS {~0-HARD SITE, 15-SOFT SITE) AUTOMOR?LE$ MEDIU~ TRUCKS - 10 GBADE AOJUSTM~NT- 0.00 HEAVY TRUCK~ - 10 (ADJUSTMENT TO ~EAV¥ TRUCKS) HARRIEB ~ 0 {0-WALL, l=BEP44) PAD EL ~ 34.0 EL AUTOMOBILES ~ RO;%D EL ~ 3Q.3 £L MEOIUM TRUCK$~ 34.3 GRADE - 0.4 % EL w~AVy T~UCKS - 38.3 VE~ICLE TYPE DAY EVENING WIG~T DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 MEAVY TR~CKS 0,865 0.027 0.108 0.0074 NOIS~ IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING ~K ~R LBQ DAY LEQ ~VEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ AUTOMOBILES LEQ 70.Z 68.~ 66.~ 60.5 69.7 MEDIUM TRUCK~ LEQ ~1.3 59.8 5~..4 51.8 60.5 M~AVY TRUCKS LEQ 61.8 60.4 51.!4 5~.6 61.1 VEHICULAR WOIS~ 71.3 69.5 65.9 61.6' 70.7 NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK ~ L~Q DAY LZQ EVEN L~Q NIGHT LEQ CNEL VESICULAR NOISE 5~.6 57.8 55.~ ~9.9 59.0 N/O A~IENT W/ A~IENT ~K HR LEO WITHOUT TO~O OR B~I~R = 71.3 71.3 MIT PK HR LEQ WITH TOPO AND SARAIER - 59;6 .... *** ~9.6 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARKI~R = ~0~7 70.7 ~IT C~EL WITH TOPO ~D BARRIER ~ 5910 ~'***** 59.0 ent By: Fir DEVELOPMENT; 619 457 1131; Jen-3-01 i5:3HpU; Page 8/10 'PROJECT: GENEI~kL DYNAJ~IC$ APARTMENTS JOB %: '1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4TH STREET DATE: LOCATION: BLDG 4 - 2ND FLOOR BY: A CADAVONA ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL · 4,130 SPEED = 45 PK HR % = CTL DISTa 110 DEBT N/F-~ 76 {M--76,P~52,$-36, C~12) AUTO ShE DISTANCE - 105.73 DT WALL- 110 MED TRU0~ SLE DiST- 105.41 OT W/OB- 0 HVY TRuC~[ SLE DIST- 104.89 HTH WALL- 16.0 OBS NTH- 15.0 AMBIENT- 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: L~ ANGLE= -90 RT ANGLE~ 90 DF ANGLE= 180 SITE CDNDTTIONS (10-HARD SITE, 15aSOFT SITE) A~TOMOBI~ES MEDIUM TRUCKS - 10 GRADE ADJUSTMENT= 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS -- 10 (ADJUSTMENT TO HEAVY TR~]CKSI BAARiEK ~ C (0~WALL, 1-BERM) PAD EL ~ 34.0 EL AUTOMOBILES - 32.3 ROAD EL ~ 30.3 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS= GitADE 0.4 % ~ K~AVY TRUCKS - 38.3 VERICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGET DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0.77~ 0.129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 H~AVy T~UCKS 0.865 0.0~7 0.108 0.0074 'NOISE ' ' I~PACTS WITBOUT TOPO OR BAR~IER SNIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ ~VEN LEO NIGHT LEQ CN~L AUTOMOBILES LEQ 70.2 68.3 66.6 60.5 69.7 MEDIUM TRUCKS LEQ 61.3 59.8 53.'4 51.9 60.6 H~AVY T~0CKS LEQ 61.9 60.4 51.4 52.7 61,1 VEHICULAR NOISE 7].~ 69.5 66.:9 61.6 70.7 NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARP. IER ~K H~ LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ ~IGHT L~Q CNEL VEHICULAR NOIS[ 60.8 59.0 56.4 51.2 60.3 W/O AMBIENT W/ AI~IENT ~w HR LEQ WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER -- 71.3 71.3 MIT PK HR LEQ WITH TOPO AND BARRIER ~ 60~8 *'*'*'' 60.8 CNEL WITHOUT TO~O AND BARRIER - 70,7 70.7 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO AND BAJ[RTER ~ 60.3 **+**** 60.3 ent By: FF DEVELOPMENT; 81g 457 1121; Jan-3-01 5:37PM; Page 9/10 PROJECT: G£NERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB %: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4TH STREET DATE: 22-D~¢-00 LOCATION: HLDG 2 - 2ND Ft,OOR SY: A CAOAVONA ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL - 4,130 SPEED - 45 PK HR % ~ 10 CTL DIST= 113 DIST N/F~ 76 (M-76, P=52,S=~6,C-12) AUTO SLE DISTANCE - 108.14 DT W~LL- ~13 MED TRUCK SLE DIST- 108.86 DT W/OB-- 0 HV¥ TRUCK SLE DIST- 108.4t ETH WALL= 16.5 UBS HTH= 15.0 AMBZENT~ 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90 RT ANGLE= 90 DF ANGLE= 180 SITE CONDITIONS [10mHARO SITE, 15~SOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES - 10 MEDIUM TRUCKS - 10 GRADE ADJUSTMENT- 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS - 10 {ADJUSTMENT TO HEAVY TRUCKS) SARRIER - 0 (0=WALL, i-EEBM) PAD EL = 34.~ EL AUTOMOBILES = 34.8 ROAD EL = 32.8 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS~ ]6.8 GRADE ' 0.4 % EL HEAVY T~UCKS ' 40.8 VEHICLE TYPE DAY ~VENING NIGHT DAILY AUTOMO~?LES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.974~ MEDIUM TRUCK~ 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 HEAVY T~UC~ 0.865 0.02~ 0.108 0.0074 NOISE iMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEO DAY L~Q EVEN LEO NIGHT LEO CNEL -AUTOMOBILES LEO 70.1 68.2 66.4 60.4 ~9.6 MEDIUN TRUCKS L~Q 61.1 59.6 53J3 51.7 60.4 HEAVY TRUCKS LEO 61.7 60.3 51.3 5Z.5 61.0 VEHICULAR NOISE 71.1 '69.3 66.8 61.5 ?0.~ 'NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEO NIGHT LEO C~EL VEHICULAR NOISE 59.E 57.8 55.2 49.9 59.0 ~/0 AMBIENT W/ AMBIENT PK HR LEO WITHOUT TOPO UR BARRIER m 71.1 71.1 MIT PK HR LEO WITH TOPO AND BA~RIER - 59~6 ******* 59.6 CN~L WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER - 70.6 70.6 MIT CNEL WITH TO~O AND BAi~IER m 59.0 ~****** 59.0 ant By: FF DEVELOF:'IdENT; 619 457 1121; Jan-3-01 '5:37PM; Page 10/10 -- PROJECT: GENEP~D DYNAMICS APA~TH£NTS JOB $: 1269-00-03 ROADWAy: 4TH STREET ~ATE: 22-DeC-00 LOCATION: BLDG 2 - 2ND FLOOR BY; A CADAVONA ADT -- 41,300 PK a~ t'O~ - 4,130 SPEED -- 45 PK HR % ~ 10 CTL DIST- 113 DIST N/F- 76 (~=~6,~'52,S-36,C-]2) AUTO SLE~ DISTANCE ' 108.57 DT WALL= 113 MHD TRU~ SLE DIST- 108.30 DT W/OB= 0 HVY TRUOK SLE DIST~ 107.86 ORS HTH= 15.0 AMBIENT= 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGL~- -90 RT ANGLE- 90 DF ANGL~- 180 SITE CONDITIONS (10=HARD SITE, 15wSOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES = 10 M~DIUM TRUCKS - 10 =RADE ADJUSTMENT- 0.O0 HEAVY TRUCKS - 10 (ADJUSTMENT TO ~EAVY TRUCKS~ BARRIE~ = O (0-WALL, I~SERM) PAD EL m 34.b EL AUTomOBiLES - 34.8 ROAD EL = 32.$ EL MEDID~4 TRUCKS- 36.8 GRADE - 0.4 % EL H~AVY T~UCKS = 40.8 VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING N£GHT DAILY 0.775 0.129 0,096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 HEAVy TRUCKS 0.865 0.02~ 0.108 0.0074 ~OISE ~M?ACT$ WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING PK MR LED DAY LED EVEN L~ NIGRT LEQ CNEL AUTOMOBILES LEQ 70.1 68.2 66.:5 60.4 69.6 M~DIUM TRUCKS LEQ 61.~ 59.7 53.13 51.8 60.4 KEAVY TRUCKS LEQ 61.7 60.3 51.3 52.5 61.0 VEHICULAR NOISE 71.~ 69.4 66..8 61.5 70.6 'N8ISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LED DAY LEQ EVEN L~Q NIGHT LHQ CNEL VEHICULAR NOISE 80.8 59.0 56~ 51.1 60.2 W/O-~HIENT W/ AMBIENT ;K HR L~Q WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER 71.2 ?~.2 MIT PK HR ~EQ WITH TOPO AND ~R -- 60.~ **ww,** 60.8 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO A~D BA~RXER -- 70&6 70.6 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO ~D ~.IER 60.2 ******* $0.2 RKJK' & ASSOCIATES INC. July 6, 2000 August 28, 2000 (Revised) Ms. Genene Lehotsky FF DEVELOPMENT, L.P. 5510 Morehouse Ddve, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92121 Subject: Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments Preliminary Noise Study Dear Ms. Lehotsky: noise study for . RKJK & ASSOCIATES, INC. is pleased to submit the attached preliminary the proposed Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments, located at north of 4 Street and west of Milliken Avenue in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. The objective of this noise analysis is to evaluate the existing and future noise impacts associated With the development of the proposed Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments. Based upon this evaluation, no adverse noise impacts are to be expected if the recommended mitigation measures included in this report are implemented. RKJK & ASSOCIATES, INC. is pleased to assist FF DEVELOPMENT, L.P. on the Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments project and look forward to working with you in the future. If you have any questions regarding~ase do not hesitate to call at (949) 474-0809. RKJK & ASSOCIATES, INC. EX-?. '-.=~30101 ~,.,Jl Bill Lawson, AICP ~ Robert Kahn, P.E. Senior Planner Principal BL:RK:skf/11190 JN:1269-00-02 Attachments TRANSPORTATION PLANNING * GIS · TRAFFIC/ACOUSTICAL ENGINEERING 1601 Dove Street. Suite 290 · Newport Beach, CA 92660 · Phone: (949~ 474.0809 · Fax: 1949) 474-0902 Et By: FF DEVELOPMENT; 819 457 1121; Jan..3-01 5:35PU; Page 2 RK:J K & ASSOC~AT£S ~ iNC. December 26, 2000 Mr, Dan Milich FF DEVELOPMENT L.P. 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92121 Subject: Empire Lakes Planning Area 6 Apartments - Additional Noise Information Dear Mr. Milich: The firm of RKJK & ASSOCIATES, INC. (RKJK) has reviewed Comment 17 (see Appendix 'A') for the proposed Empire Lakes Planning Area 6 Apartments Project (DR 00-157, TPM 15536, ISPA 00-04) from the City of Rancho Cucamonga. I spoke to Mr. Brent LeConte from the City and he indicated that second and third floor balconies will have to have their outdoor areas mitigated, no matter what the size of the balconies. RKJK has re-run the noise model for apartment units along Fourth Street and have concluded that in order to achieve the City of Rancho Cucamonga's exterior noise standard of 60 CNEL, balcony enclosures will be required for those balconies facing Fourth Street. In order to accommodate this, it recommended that a minimum six (6) foot solid wall or combination of solid wall and quarter-inch grazing or lexan can be constructed to achieve the required noise reduction. The noise calculation wo~.sheets are included in Appendix 'B". RKJK appreciates this opportunity to provide this additional information to FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL LLC. If you require any additional information or need further review, please cio not hesitate to give me a cell at (949) 474-0809. Sincerely, RKJK & ASSOCIATES, INC, Robert Kahn, P.E. Principal RK:wg/10893 JN:1269-00-03 Attachments TRANSPC)RTATI(")N PLANNING · (~lS - TRAFFIC/ACOU.~TICAI FNC,,INFFRINC,, IJove Street, 5uile 2c)0 · New~ort Ueach, CA 92G60 · Phone: (949) 474-0809 - Fax: .tJ49~ 474-09U2 ~=,~ ant By.' FF DEVELOPMENT; 819 457 1121; Jan-3-01 5:3EP~I; Page 6/10 PROJECT: GENERAL DYN$fl4~CS AP~THENTS JOB #: [269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4TH STREET DATE= LOCATION: BLDG 2 - 3HO FLOOR BY= A CADAVONA ADT - 41,300 PK HR VOL - SPEED = 45 PK HR % ~ 10 CTL DIET- 113 DIET N/~- 76 (M--76,P-52,S=36, C=I2) AUTO SI~ DISTANCE ~ 110.48 DT WJtLL- 113 M~D TRUCK SLE UIST~ 110.03 DT N/OB~ 0 ~VY TRUCK BLE DIET- [09.23 ~TR WALL~ 26.0 ORS KTH= 25.0 A~BIENT= ROADWAY VIE~: LF A~GLE- -90 RT ANGLE= 9O DF ANGLE- 180 SITE CONDITIONS (i0=HARD BITE, 15-SOFT BITE) A~TOMOR?LES 10 ~EDIUM TRUCKS ~ 10 GRAD~ ADJUSTMENT~ 0.00 HEAVY TRUCF~ 10 (ADJusTHENT TO HEAVY TRUCK~) BARRIER ~ 0 (0-WALL, I~BERH) PAD EL - 34.5 EL AUTOMOBILES - 34.8 ROAD EL ~ 3~.8 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS- GRADE - 0.4 % EL HEAVY TRUCKS - 40.8 VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 [[~AVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.0074 NOISE IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OB BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL AUTOMOBILES LEQ 70.0 68.1 66.4 60.3 69.5 MEDIU~ TRUCKS LEQ 61.1 59.6 53.2 51.7 60.4 HEAVY TRUCK~ LEO 61.7 60.3 51.2 52.5 61.0 VEHICULAR NOISE 71.1 69.3 66.7 61.5 70.5 NOISE I~ACTS WITH TOP0 AND BARkIER SHIELDING ~K ER LEQ DRY LEQ EVEN I~EQ NIGHT LEQ CNBL VEHICUIJt~ NOISE 60.5 58.7 56.1 50.9 60.0 W/0 A~BIENT W/ At4~IENT PK HR LEQ ~ITHOUT TOFO OR BARRIER 71.1 71.1 HIT PK HR ~E0 WITH TOPO AND BARRIER ~ 60.5 ******* 60.5 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER 70.5 70.5 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO A~O BARRIER = 60.0 ******* 60.0 TABLE 8 · '~ FIRST FLOOR INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS (dBA CNEL) INTERIOR NOISE LEVEL FOR WINDOWS (dBA W/STD. CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS AT REQUIRED INTERIO~ ILDING FACADE (dBA CNEL) OPEN~ CLOSED~ NOISE REDUCTION 2 57.6 45.6 37.6 12.6 ,-4.- 58,4 46.4 38,4 13.4 ~um of 12 dBA noise reduction is assumed with a windows open condition num of 20 dBA noise reduction is assumed with a windows closed condition 27 -'. TABLE 9 SECOND FLOOR INTERIOR NCY~E IMPACTS (dBA CNEL) INTERIOR NOISE LEVEL FOR WINDOWS (dBA W/STD. CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS AT REQUIRED INTERIOR 31LDING FACADE (dBA_CNEL) OPEN~ CLOSED2 NOISE REDUCTION ~ 2 70.7 58.7 50.7 25.7 ~inimum of 12 dBA noise reduction is assumed with a windows open condition ~f 20 dBA noise reduction is assumed with a windows closed condition --~ktables~kk11100\~kk11190~ ~'--~ I i'~ /H ~ .N:1260-00-03 28 TABLE 10 THIRD FLOOR INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS (dBA C'NE:L} INTERIOR NOISE LEVEL FOR WINDOWS (dBA W/STD. CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS AT REQUIRED INTERIOR · :.DING FACADE (dBA CNEL) OPEN~ CLOSED2 NOISE REDUCTION 2 70.6 58.6 50.6 25.6 4 71.1 59.1 51.1 26.1 j~.. ~um of 12 dBA noise reduction is assumed with a windows open condition ~um of 20 dBA noise reduction is assumed with a windows closed condition )les~kkl 1100\~kkl 119Otb 29 H, t,-3' ~ OFI['-SITE NOISE EXPOSURE ANALYSIS AND CONTROL This section-~xamines the potential off-site noise impacts from the Empire Lakes - Planning Area 6 Apartments. Short-Term Construction Noise Short-term construction noise represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels. - Noise generated by construction equipment, including trucks, graders, bulldozers, ..:..concrete mixers and portable generators can reach high levels. Grading activities ~:typically represent one of the highest potential sources for noise impacts. The most '~effective method of controlling construction noise is through local control of construction .'_ hours and by limiting the hours of construction to normal weekday working hours. Construction noise is of short-term duration and will not have any long-term impacts on the project site or the surrounding area. To minimize noise impacts, the following mitigation measures are recommended: During construction the project should comply with the following requirements: a. All construction vehicles or equipment fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000 feet of a dwelling unit shall be equipped with propedy operating and maintained mufflers. b. All operations shall comply with City Ordinances with respect to hours of construction activity to minimize noise impacts. c. During construction best efforts should be made to locate stockpiling and/or vehicle staging areas as far as practicable from existing residential dwellings. 3O Traffic Noise"Contoum: Noise contours represent the d~tance to noise levels of a constant value and are measured from the center of the roadway. CNEL noise contours are determined below for the 60, 65 and 70 dBA noise levels. The CNEL computer printouts are included in Appendix "E". The average daily traffic volumes used to develop the CNEL noise contours are shown on Table 11. Table 12 identifies the existing noise contours in the vicinity of the project site. Table 13 presents the future noise contours for long-term build-out Year 2010 conditions. The distances shown (in feet) are measured from the centedine of the road to the contour value shown. Table 14 presents the future year noise level increase associated with the Year 2010 traffic conditions. It should be noted that the values given in Tables 12 through 14 do not take into account the effects of any noise barriers (i.e., walls, buildings, topography or landscaping) that may affect ambient noise levels. These factors will reduce noise levels and move the noise contours closer to the centedine of the roadway. 31 TABLE 11 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (1000's)~ .~- SPEED FUTURE ROADWAY SEGMENT (MPH) EXISTING YEAR 2010 4th Street w/o of Milliken Ave. 45 11.2 41.3 4th Street e/o of Milliken Ave. 45 18.2 41'.3 Milliken Ave. n/o of 4th Street 45 17.8 45.8 Milliken Ave. ;/o of 4th Street 45 17.8 ! 47.0 .. I-15 Freeway n/o of 4th Street 65 132.0 218.2 1-15 Freeway s/o of 4th Street 65 150.0 209.2 1-10 Freeway w/o 1-15 Freeway 65 218.0 268.1 TABLE 12 EXISTING NOISE CONTOURS , DISTANCE TO CONTOUR (FEET) CNEL AT 100 FEET 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA ROAD SEGMENT (dBA) CNEL CNEL CNEL CNEL 4th Street w/o of Milliken Ave. 62.9 34 73 157 338 4th Street e/o of Milliken Ave. 65.0 47 101 217 468 Milliken Ave. n/o of 4th Street 65.0 46 99 214 461 Milliken Ave. s/o of 4th Street 65.0 46 ~ 99 ! 214 461 1-15 Freeway n/o of 4th Street 84.2 881 1,898 4,089 8,808 1-15 Freeway ,s/o of 4th Street 84.7 959 2,067 4,452 9,592 1-10 Freeway w/o 1-15 Freeway 85.5 1,080 2,326 5,012 10,797 Measured from the centerline of the street JN:1260-00-03 3 3 TABLE 13 · FUTURE YEAR 20~0 NOISE CONTOURS ' ~] DISTANCE TO CONTOUR (FEET) CNEL AT ROAD SEGMENT (dBA) CNEL CNEL CNEL CNEL  4th Street w/o of Milliken Ave. 68.6 81 174 375 807 4th Street e/o of MiIliken Ave. 68.6 81 174 375 807 I Milliken Ave. n/o of 4th Street 69.1 86 186 401 865 Milliken Ave. s/o of 4th Street 69.2 88 190 408 880 I 1-15 Freeway n/o of 4th Street ' 86,4 1,231 2,653 5,716 12,315 1-15 Freeway s/o of 4th Street 86.2 1,197 2,580 5,558 11,974 1-10 Freeway w/o 1-15 Freeway 86.4 1,239 2,670 5,753 12,394 Measured from the centedine of the street ._' JN:1260-00-03 34 TABLE 14 FUTURE YEAR NOISE LEVEL INCREJ~,SES CNEL AT 100 FEET (dBA) ROAD SEGMENT EXISITING I FUTURE I INCREASE 4th Street w/o of Milliken Ave. 62.9 68.6 5.7 ~,th Street e/o of Milliken Ave. 65.0 68.6 3.6 Milliken Ave. n/o of 4th Street 65.0 69.1 4.1 Milliken Ave, s/o of 4th Street 65.0 69.2 4.2 1-15 Freeway n/o of 4th Street 84.2 86.4 2.2 1~15 Freeway s/o of 4th Street 84.7 86.2 1.4 I-10 Freeway w/o I-15 Freeway, 85.5 86.4 0.9 JN:1260-00-03 3 5 APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTICAL TERMS APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTICAL TERMS A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL. The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighted filter network. The A-weighting filter de- emphasizes the very Iow and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear. A numerical method of rating human judgment of loudness. AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL.. The composite of noise from all sources near and far. In this' context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location. COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVEL (CNEL). The average equivalent A- weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. and after addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7 a.m. and after 10 p.m. DECIBEL (dB). A unit for measuring the amplitude of a sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micro-pascals. dB(A). A-weighted sound level (see definition above). EQUIVALENT SOUND LEVEL (LEQ). The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time varying noise level. The energy average noise level during the sample period. HABITABLE ROOM. Any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code or other applicable regulations which is intended to be used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such enclosed spaces as closets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, laundries, unfinished attics, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms and similar spaces. L(n). The A-weighted sound level exceeded during a certain percentage of the sample time. For example, L10 in the sound level exceeded 10 percent of the sample time. Similarly L50, L90, L99 etc. NOISE. Any unwanted sound or sound which is undesirable because it interferes with speech and hearing, or is intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying. The State Noise Control Act defines noise as "...excessive undesirable sound...". OUTDOOR LIVING AREA. Outdoor spaces that are associated with residential land uses typically used for passive recreational activities or other noise-sensitive uses. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue areas, jacuzzi areas, etc. associated with residential uses; ol~tdoor patient recovery or resting areas associated with hospitals, ~-_ convalescent hospitals, or rest homes; outdoor areas associated with 'places of worship which have a significant role in services or other noise-sensitive activities; and outdoor school facilities routinely used for educational purposes which may be adversely impacted by noise. Outdoor areas usually not included in this definition are: front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, maintenance areas and storage areas associated with residential land uses; exterior areas at hospitals that are not used for patient activities; outdoor areas associated with places of worship and principally used for short-term social gatherings; . and, outdoor areas associated with school facilities that are not typically associated with educational uses prone to .adverse noise impacts (for example, school play yard areas). PERCENT NOISE LEVELS. See L(n). SOUND LEVEL (NOISE LEVEL). The weighted sound pressure level obtained by use of a sound level meter having a standard frequency-filter for attenuating part of the sound ·: spectrum. instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output SOUND LEVEL METER. An meter, and frequency weighting networks for the measurement and determination of noise and sound levels. ~ 't SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVEL (SENEL). The dB(A) level which, if it lasted for one second, would produce.the same A-weighted sound energy as the actual event. APPENDIX B CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOISE STANDARDS 17.02.120 Noise abatement.. Page I of 2 ! ) i Title 17 DEVELOPMENT CODE Chaotef 17.02 ADMINISTRATION 17.02.].20 Noise abatement. A. Purpose. In order to control unnecessary, excessive, and annoying noise and vibration in the city, it is declared to be the policy of the city to prohibit such noise generated from or by all sources as specified in this section. B. Decibel Measurement Criteria. Any decibel measurement made pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be based on a reference sound pressure of twenty micro- pascals as measured with a sound level m'eter using the "A" weighted network (scale) at slow response. C. Designated Noise Zones. The properties hereafter described are hereby assigned the following noise zones: Noise Zone h All single and multiple family residential properties. Noise Zone Ih All commercial properties. D. Exterior Noise Standards. 1. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise or allow the creation of any noise on the property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level when measured on the proPerty line of any other property to exceed the basic noise level as adjusted below: a. Basic noise level for a cumulative period of not more than fifteen minutes in any one hour; or b. Basic noise level plus five dBA for a cumulative period of not more than ten minutes in any one hour; or c. Basic noise level plus fourteen dBA for a cumulative period of not more than five minutes in any one hour; or d. Basic noise level plus fifteen dBA at any time. 2. If the measurement location is a boundary between two different noise zones, the lower noise level standard shall apply. 3. If the intruding noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise level can be determined, the measured noise level obtained while the noise is in operation shall be compared directly to the allowable noise level standards as specified respective to the measurement's location, designated land use, and for the time of day the noise level is measured. The reasonableness of temporarily discontinuing the noise generation by an intruding noise source shall be determined by the city planner for the purpose of establishing the existing ambient noise level at the measurement location. E. Special Provisions. The following activities shall be exempted from the provisions of this section: 1. City- or school-approved activities conducted on public parks, public playgrounds, and public or private school grounds including, but not limited to, athletic and school entertainment events between the hours of seven a.m. and ten p.m.; 17.02.120 Noise abatement. Page 2 of 2 2. Occasional outdoor gatherings, dances, sho~s, and spor. ting and entertainment events, provided said events are conducted pursuant to the approval of a temporary use permit issued by the city; 3. An), mechanical device, apparatus or equipment used, related to or connected with emergency machinery, vehicle, work or warning alarm or b'~ll, provided the sounding of any bell or alarm on any building or motor vehicle shall terminate its 6peration within thirty minutes in any hour of its being activated; 4. Noise sources associated with, or vibration created by, construction, repair, remodeling or grading of any real property or during authorized seismic surveys, provided said activities do not take place between the hours of eight p.m. and six-thirty a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday, and provided noise levels created do not exceed the noise standard of sixty-five dBA plus the limits specified in Section 17.02.120(DXl); 5. All devices, apparatus or equipment associated with agricultural operations provided: a. Operations do not take place between eight p.m. and seven a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday, or b. Such operations and equipment are utilized for protection or salvage of agricultural crops during periods of potential or actual frost damage or other adverse weather conditions, or c. Such operations and equipment are associated with agricultural pest control through pesticide application, provided the application is made in accordance with permits issued by, or regulations enforced by, the California Department of Agriculture; 6. Noise sources associated with the maintenance of real property, provided said activities take place between the hours of eight a.m. and eight p.m. on any day except Sunday or between the hours of nine a.m. and eight p.m. on Sunday; 7. Any activity to the extent regulation thereof has been preempted by state or federal law. F. Schools, Churches, Libraries, Health Care Institutions-Special Provisions. It is unlawful for any person to create any noise which causes the noise level at any school, hospital or similar health care institution, church, or library while the same is in use, to exceed the noise standards specified in this section and prescribed for the assigned noise zone in · which the school, hospital, church or library is located. G. Administration. Any act creating or permitting the creation of a noise disturbance as defined by this code, not otherwise excluded by the preceding section of this code, shall constitute a violation of this code and shall be abated as such. H. Prima Facie Violation. Any noise exceeding the noise level standards for a designated noise zone as specified in this section shall be deemed to be prima facie evidence of a violation of the provisions of this section. (Ord. 211 § 6 (part), 1983) Land Use Compatiblity - Noise Environments FIGURE V- 10 LAND.'USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNI'TY NOISE ENVIRONMF NTS COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE LAND USE CATEGORY L,~n or CNEL. db 60 65 70 75 80 Residential - Low Density Single Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes Residential- Multiple Family Transient Lodging - Motels, Hotels Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes Auditoriums, Concerl Halls Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries Office Buildings, Business Commercial and Prolessional Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture I INTERPRETATION I I rm A~: Specified land use ~ P n i II n I : New Con- is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any struction or development should generally be dis- buildings involved are of normal conventional con- couraged. If new construction or development does struction, without any special insulation requirements, proceed, a detailec, analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insu- ~ Conditionally Acceotable: New construc- lation features included in the design. Outdoor areas tion or development should be undertaken only after a must be shielded. detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features includ- ~ Normally Unacceptable,: New construc- ed in the design. Conventional construction, but with tion or development should generally not be under- closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air taken. Construction costs to make the indoor envi- conditioning will normally suffice. Outdoor environ, ronmenl acceptable would be prohibitive and the ment will seem noisy. - ;H; ~ .;"~" ~ .~" outdoor environment woUld not be usable. V-32 17.08.080 Performance standards. Page I 0.'3 Title 17 DEVELOPMENT CODE Chaoter 17.08 RESIDENTIAL DIS-TRICTS 17.08.080 Performance standards. A. Intent. The intent of this section is to protect properties in all residential districts and the health and safety of persons from environmental nuisances and hazards and to provide a pleasing environment in keeping with the nature of the residential character. The performance standards set maximum tolerance limits on adverse environmental effects created by any use or development of land. B. Administration and Measurement. The standards of this section shall be enforced by the city planner. Upon discovery of any apparent violation of these standards, the city planner shall investigate using such instruments as may be necessary. If a violation is found to exist;the violation shall be abated as a nuisance as prescribed in this code. C. Exemptions. The following sources of nuisances are exempt from the provisions of this section. 1. Emergency equipment, vehicles and devices; 2. Temporary construction, maintenance, or demolition activities between the hours of six- thirty a.m. and eight p.m., except Sundays and national holidays. D. Noise. No'operation or activity shall cause any source of sound at any location or allow the creation of noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the ambient base noise levels to exceed the following standards, and as contained in Section 17.02.120. Table 17.08.080(D) RESIDENTIAL NOISE STANDARDS(aXc) Location of Maximum Allowable Measurement 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. to 7 a,m. 10 p,m, 2. Interior ~,Od BA ¢5dBA Notes: (A) It is unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise or to allow the creation of any noise which causes the noise level when measured within any other fully enclosed (windows and doors shut) residential dwelling unit to exceed the interior noise standard in the manner described herein. (B) If the intruding noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise lever can be determined, the same procedures specified in Section 17.02.120 shall be deemed proper to enforce the http://ordlink.com/codes/ranchocu/ DATA/TITLE17/.../17 08 080 Performance standard.htm 7/5/00 7.08.080 Performance standards. Page 2 of 3 provisions of this section. (C) Es, ch of the noise limits above shall be reduced 5dBA for noise consisting of impulse or simpl~'tone noise. 1. Special Noise Provisions. a. Peddlers-Use of Loud Noise, etc., to Advertise Goods, etc. No peddler Or mobile vendor or any person in their behalf shall shout, cry out, or use any device or instrument to make sounds for the purpose of advertising in such a manner as to create a noise disturbance. b. Animal Noises. No person owning or having the charge, care, custody or control of any dog, or other animal or fowl shall allow or permit the same to habitually howl, bark, yelp, or make other noises, in such a manner as to create a noise disturbance. c. Radios, Television Sets, Musical Instruments, and Similar Devices. No person shall operate or permit the operation or playing of any device which reproduces, produces, or amplifies sound: such as a radio, musical instrument, phonograph, or sound amplifier, in such a manner as to create a noise disturbance as listed in Table t7.08.080(D): i. Across any real property boundary or within Noise Zone I, between the hours of ten p.m. and seven a.m. on the following day (except for activities for which a temporary use permit is needed as prescribed in Section 17.04.070; ii. At fifty feet (fifteen meters) from any such device, if ope~:ated on or over any public right.of-way. E. Vibration. No vibration shall be permitted which can be felt with or without the aid of instruments at or beyond the lot line. F. Heat or Cold. No operation or activity shall emit heat or cold which would cause a temperature increase or decrease on any adjacent property in excess of ten degrees Fahrenheit, whether the change is in the air, on the ground, or in any structure. G. Glare. No operation, activity, sign, or lighting fixture shall create illumination which exceeds five footcandles on any adjacent property, whether the illumination is direct or indirect light from the source. Glare levels shall be measured with a photoelectric photometer following standard spectral luminous efficiency curve adopted by the International Commission on Illumination. H. Odors. No operation or activity shall be permitted of odorous gases or other odorous matter in such quantities as to be dangerous, injurious, noxious, or otherwise objectionable which is detectable with or without the aid of instruments at or beyond the lot tine. I. Electrical or Electronic Disturbances. No operation or activity shall cause any source of electrical or electronic disturbance that adversely affects persons or the operation of any equipment on any other lot and is not in conformance with the regulations of the Federal Communication Commission. J. Air Quality. No operation or activity shall cause the emission of any smoke, fly ash, dust, fumes, vapors, gases, or other forms of air pollution which can cause damage to health, animals, vegetation, or other forms of property, or which can cause excessive soiling on any other lot. No emission shall be permitted whi~:h exceeds the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District or the requirements of any Air Quality Plan adopted by the city. K. Fire and Explosion Hazards. An operation or activity involving the storage of flammable or explosive materials shall be provided with adequate safety devices against the hazard of fire and explosion and adequate fire-fighting and fire suppression equipment and devices in accordance with the requirements of the Foothill Fire District Uniform Building Code, and Uniform Fire Code. Burning of waste materials in open fire is prohibited at any 17.08.080 Performance standards. Page 2 ur2 i ~ Page 3 0/'2 .L. F ssionable or Radioactive Materials. No operatio/~ or activities shall be permitted which result at any time in the release or emission of any fissionable or radioactive materials into the atmosphere, the ground, or sewerage systems. M. Liquid or Solid Waste. No operation or action shall discharge at any point into any public street, public sewer, private sewage-disposal system, stream, body of water, or into the ground of any materials of such nature or temperature as can contaminate any water supply, interfere with bacterial processes in sewage treatment, or otherwise cause the emission of dangerous or offensive elements, except in accord with Standards approved by the California Department of Public Health or such other governmental agency as shall have jurisdiction. (Ord. 21] § 6 (part), 1983) http://ordlink corrv'codeK/r.n~-h,~,-, ~. r~, ...... APPENDIX C NOISE PROJECTION WORKSHEETS NOISE BARRIER CALCULATIONS · BASED UPON FHWA - RD-77.108 PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 SOURCE: DELIVERY TRUCKS DAYE: . 07-Jul-O0 LOCATION: ] BY: ~I~. LAWSON OBS DIST= 1120.0 DT WALL= 0.0 DT W/OB= 1120.0 HTH WALL= 0.0 BARRIER = 0.0 (O=WALL,I=BERM) OBS HTH= 5.0 NOISE HTH= 8.0 BARRIER+ OBS EL = 0.0 TOPO SHIELDING = 0.00 NOISE EL = 0.0 NOISE HTH EL= 8.0 DROP-OFF= 15.0 (15 = 4.5 dBA PER DOUBLING OF DISTANCE) COFF NOISE LEVELS (dBA) DIST (FT) Leq Lmax L2 L8 L25 L50 rEf LEVEL 6 66.3 84.0 78.5 68.0 61.5 58.5 PROJ LEVEL 1120 32.2 49,9 44.4 33.9 27.4 24.4 SHIELDING 1120 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ADJ LEVEL 1120 32.2 49.9 44.4 33.9 27.4 24.4 NOISE BARRIER CALC. ULATIONS · BASED UPON FHWA - RD-77-108 ' ' PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269.00-03 SOURCE: AUTOS DATE: 07-Jul.00 LOCATION: 1 ~,' BY: B. LAWSON OBS DIST= 230.0 DT WALL= 0.0 DT W/OB= 230.0 HTH WALL: 0.0 BARRIER = 0.0 (O=WALL, I=BERM) OBS HTH= 5.0 NOISE HTH= 0.0 BARRIER+ OBS EL = 0.0 TOPO SHIELDING = -4.96 NOISE EL = 0.0 NOISE HTH EL= 0.0 DROP-OFF= 15.0 (15 = 4.5 dBA PER DOUBLING OF DISTANCE) COFF NOISE LEVELS (dBA) DIST (FT) Leq Lmax L2 L8 L25 L50 REF LEVEL 6 63.8 79.5 68.5 65.5 64.5 63.0 PROJ LEVEL 230 40.0 55.7 44.7 41.7 40.7 39.2 SHIELDING 230 .5.0 -5.0 -5.0 .5.0 -5.0 -5.0 ADJ LEVEL 230 35.1 50.8 39.8 36.8 35.8 34.3 NOISE BARRIER CALCULATIONS · BASED UPON P'-HWA - ~RD-~7-108 PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 SOURCE: TRASH COM.PACTOR DATE: 07-Jul-O0 LOC~'TIoN: 1 BY~ B. L~WSON CBS DIST= 1120.0 DT WALL= 0.0 DT W/OB= 1120.0 HTH WALL= 0.0 BARRIER = 0.0 (0=WALL, I=BERM) CBS HTH= 5.0 NOISE HTH= 0.0 BARRIER+ CBS EL = 0.0 TOPO SHIELDING = -4.96 NOISE EL = 0.0 NOISE HTH EL= 0.0 DROP-OFF= 20.0 (20 = 6 dBA PER DOUBLING OF DISTANCE) COFF NOISE LEVELS (dBA) DIST (FT) Leq Lmax L2 L8 L25 L50 REF LEVEL 3 72.2 85.5 82.5 77.0' 67.5 66.0 PROJ LEVEL 1120 20.8 34.1 31.1 25.6 16.1 14.6 SHIELDING 1120 -5.0 -5.0 -5.0 .5.0 -5.0 .5.0 ADJ LEVEL 1120 15.8 29.1 26.1 20.6 11.1 9.6 NOISE BARRIER CALCULATIONS - BASED UPON FHWA - RD'77-108 PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 SOURCE: DELIVERY TRUCKS DATE: 07-Jul.O0 LOCATION: 2 ~ BY: B. LAWSON OBS DIST= 640.0 DT WALL= 0.0 DT W/OB= 640.0 HTH WALL= 0.0 BARRIER = 0.0 (O=WALL, I=BERM) OBS HTH= 5.0 NOISE HTH= 8.0 BARRIER+ OBS EL = 0.0 TOPO SHIELDING = 0.00 NOISE EL = 0.0 NOISE HTH EL= 8.0 DROP-OFF= 15.0 (15 = 4.5 dBA PER DOUBLING OF DISTANCE) COFF NOISE LEVELS (dBA) DIST (FT) Leq Lmax L2 L8 L25 LSO REF LEVEL 6 66.3 84.0 78.5 68.0 61.5 58.5 PROJ LEVEL 640 35.9 53.6 48,1 37,6 31.1 28.1 SHIELDING 640 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ADJ LEVEL 640 35.9 53.6 48.1 37.6 31.1 28.1 NOISE BARRIER CALCULATIONS · BASED UPON F'HWA - R,D-77.108 PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 SOURCE:, AUTOS DATE: 07-Jul-O~ LOCATIO~ii 2 BY: B..LAWSON OBS DIST= 120.0 DT WALL= 0.0 DT W/OB= 120.0 HTH WALL= 0.0 :::::::: BARRIER = 0.0 (O=WALL, i=BERM) OBS HTH= 5.0 NOISE HTH= 0.0 BARRIER+ OBS EL =: 0.0 TOPO SHIELDING = -4.96 NOISE EL = 0.0 NOISE HTH EL= 0.0 DROP-OFF= 15.0 (15 = 4.5 dBA PER DOUBLING OF DISTANCE) COFF NOISE LEVELS (dBA) DIST (FT) Leq Lmax L2 L8 L25 L50 REF LEVEL 6 63.8 79.5 68.5 65.5 64.5 63.0 120 44.3 60.0 49.0 46.0 45.0 43.5 PROJ LEVEL SHIELDING 120 -5.0 .5.0 -5.0 -5.0 -5.0 -5.0 ADJ LEVEL 120 39.3 55.0 44.0 41.0 40.0 38.5 NOISE BA. RRIER CALCULATIONS. BASED.UPON FHWA. RD-77-108 PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00.03 SOURCE: TRASH COMPACTOR, DATE: 07.Jul-O0 LOCATION: 2 ~.- BY: B. LAWSON OBS DIST= 640.0 DT WALL= 0.0 DT W/OB= 640.0 HTH WALL= 0.0 BARRIER = 0.0 (O=WALL, I=BERM) OBS HTH= 5.0 NOISE HTH= 0.0 BARRIER+ 08S EL = 0.0 TOPO SHIELDING = -4.96 NOISE EL = 0.0 NOISE HTH EL= 0.0 DROP-OFF= 20.0 (20 = 6 dBA PER DOUBLING OF DISTANCE) COFF NOISE LEVELS (dBA) DIST (FT) Leq Lmax L2 L8 L25 LSO REF LEVEL 3 72.2 85.5 82.5 77.0 67.5 66.0 PROJ LEVEL 640 25.6 38.9 35.9 30.4 20.9 19.4 SHIELDING 640 -5.0 -5.0 .5.0 -5.0 -5.0 -5.0 ADJ LEVEL 640 20.7 34.0 31.0 25.5 ' 16.0 14.5 APPENDIX D CNEL COMPUTER PRINTOUTS FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NO~SE PREI~)ICTI~N MDDEL (CALVENO) PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4TH STREET DA?E; 05-Jul-00 LOCATION: BLDG_2 - 1ST FLOOR - NO WALL B~ B. LAWSON ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL = 4,130 SPEED = 45 PKHR%= 10 CTL DIST= 113 DIST N/F= 76 (M=76,P=52,S=36,C=12) AUTO SLE DISTANCE = 106.52 DT WALL= 113 MED TRUCK SLE DIST= 106.45 DT W/OB= 0 HVY TRUCK SLE DIST= 106.43 HTH WALL= 0.0 CBS HTH= 5.0 40 =DISTANCE TO TOE OF SLOPE AMBIENT= 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90 RT ANGLE= 90 DF ANGLE= 180 .SITE CONDITIONS (10=HARD SITE, 15=SOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES = 15 MEDIUM TRUCKS = 15 GRADE ADJUSTMENT= 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS = 15 (ADJUSTMENT TO HEAVY TRUCKS) BARRIER = . 0 (0=WALL,I=SERM) PAD EL = 34.5 EL AUTOMOBILES = 34.8 ROAD EL = 32.8 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS= 36.8 GRADE = 0.4 % EL HEAVY TRUCKS = 40.8 VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0,096 0.9742 IdEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.0074 NOISE IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL AUTOMOBILES LEQ 67.3 65.4 63.7 57.6 66.8 MEDIUM TRUCKS LEQ 58.4 56.9 50,5 49.0 57.6 HEAVY TRUCKS LEQ 58.9 57.5 48.5 49.7 58.2 VEHICULAR NOISE 68.4 66.6 64.0 58,7 67.8 NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELD!NG PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL VEHICULAR NOISE 68.4 66,6 64.0 58.7 67.8 W/O AMBIENT W/AMBIENT PK HR LEQ WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER = 68,4 68.4 MIT PK HR LEQ WITH tOPO AND BARRIER = 68.4 ' ...... 68.4 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER = 67.8 67,8 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 67.8 ....... 67.8 ~ FHWA*RD-77-1~ 08 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICT ON MODEL (CALVENO} PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 · ROADWAY~4TH STREET DATE: 05-Jul-00 LOCATION: BLDG_2 - 1ST FLOOR WiTH WALL BY: B. LAWSON .~' ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL = 4,130 SPEED = 45 PKHR%= 10 CTL DIST= 113 DIST N/F= 76 (M=76,P=52,S=36,C=12) AUTO SLE DISTANCE = 107.57 DT WALL= 113 MED TRUCK SLE DIST= 107.48 DT W/OB= 0 HVY TRUCK SLE DIST= 107.42 HTH WALL= 6.0 OBS HTH= 5.0 40 =DISTANCE TO TOE OF SLOPE AMBIENT= 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90 RT ANGLE= 90 DF ANGLE= 180 SITE CONDITIONS (10=HARD SITE, 15=SOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES = 15 MEDIUM TRUCKS = 15 GRADE ADJUSTMENT-- 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS = 15 (ADJUSTMENT TO HEAVY TRUCKS) BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) PAD EL = 34.5 EL AUTOMOBILES = 34.8 ROAD EL = 32.8 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS= 36.8 GRADE = 0.4 % EL HEAVY TRUCKS = 40.8 VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0,129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.0074 NOISE IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEO NIGHT LEO CNEL AUTOMOBILES LEQ 67.3 65.4 63.6 57.5 66,8 MEDIUM TRUCKS LEQ 58.3 56.8 50.4 48.9 57.6 HEAVY TRUCKS LEQ 58.9 57.4 48.4 49.7 58.t VEHICULAR NOISE 68.3 66.5 63.9 58.7 67,8 NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEO DAY LEO EVEN LEO NIGHT LEO CNEL VEHICULAR NOISE 58.1 56.3 53.7 48,5 57.6 W/O AMBIENT W/AMBIENT PK HR LEO WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER = 68.3 68.3 MIT PK HR LEO WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 58.1 ....... 58.1 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER 67.8 67.8 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 57.6 ....... 57.6 PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4TH STREET DAT¢:: 05-~ul-O0 LOCATION: BLDG_2-2ND FLOOR BY: B L~WSON ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL = 4,130 SPEED = 45 PK HR % = 10 CTL DIST= 113 DIST N/F= 76 (M=76,P=52,S=36,C=12) AUTO SLE DISTANCE = 107.43 DT WALL= 113 MED TRUCK SLE DIST= 107.17 DT W/OB= 0 HVY TRUCK SLE DIST= 106.77 HTH WALL= 0.0 OBS HTH= 15,0 40 =DISTANCE TO TOE OF SLOPE AMBIENT= 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90 RT ANGLE= 90 DF ANGLE-- 180 SITE CONDITIONS (10=HARD SITE. 15=SOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES = 10 MEDIUM TRUCKS = 10 GRADE ADJUSTMENT= 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS = 10 (ADJ'USTMENT TO HEAVY TRUCKS) BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) PAD EL = 34.5 EL AUTOMOBILES = 34.8 ROAD EL = 32.8 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS= 36.8 0.4 % EL HEAVY TRUCKS = 40,8 GRADE = VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0,775 0,129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0,049 0.103 0.0184 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.0074 ' NOISE IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL AUTOMOBILES LEQ 70.2 68.3 66.5 60,4 69.7 MEDIUM TRUCKS LEQ 61.2 59,7 53.3 51.8 60.5 HEAVY TRUCKS LEQ 61.8 60.4 51.3 52.6 61.1 VEHICULAR NOISE 71.2 69.4 86.8 61,6 70.7 -. NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT,LEQ CNEL VEHICULAR NOISE 71.2 69.4 66.8 61,6 70.7 W/O AMBIENT Wi AMBIENT PK HR LEQ WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER = 71.2 71.2 MIT PK HR LEQ WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 71.2 ....... 71,2 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER = 70.7 70.7 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 70.7 ....... 70.7 FHWA-RD-'~7-108 hIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: ~,TH STREET DATE: 05-Jul-00 LOCATION: I~DG_2- THIRD FLOOR BY: B. LAWSON ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL = 4,130 SPEED = 45 PKHR%= 10 CTL DIST= 113 DIST N/F= 76 (M=76,P=52,S=36,C= 12) AUTO SLE DISTANCE = 109.25 DT WALL= 113 MED TRUCK SLE DIST= 108.81 DT W/OB= 0 HVY TRUCK SLE DJST= 108.05 HTH WALL= 0.0 OBS HTH= 25.0 40 =DISTANCE TO TOE OF SLOPE AMBIENT= 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90 RT ANGLE= 90 DF ANGLE= 180 SITE CONDITIONS (lO=HARD SITE, 15=SOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES = 10 MEDIUM TRUCKS = 10 GRADE ADJUSTMENT= 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS = 10 (ADJUSTMENT TO HEAVY TRUCKS) BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) PAD EL = 34.5 EL AUTOMOBILES = 34.8 ROAD EL = 32.8 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS= 36.8 GRADE = 0.4 % EL HEAVY TRUCKS = 40.8 VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT DALLY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.0074 NOISE IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL AUTOMOBILES LEQ 70.1 68.2 66.4 60.4 69.6 MEDIUM TRUCKS LEQ 61.1 59.6 53.3 51.7 60.4 HEAVY TRUCKS LEQ 61.7 60.3 51.3 52.5 61.0 VEHICULAR NOISE 71.1 69.3 66.8 61.5 70.6 NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL VEHICULAR NOISE 71.1 69.3 66.8 61.5 70.6 W/O AMBIENT W/AMBIENT PK HR LEQ WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER = 71.1 71.1 MIT PK HR LEQ WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 71.1 ....... 71.1 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER 70.6 70.6 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 70.6 ....... 70.6 t FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION ~IODEL ~CALVENO) PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4TH ~TREET DATE: 05-Jul-B0 LOCATION: BLDG_4 - 1ST FLOOR - NO WALL BY: B. LA~VSON ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL = 4,130 SPEED = 45 PK HR % = 10 CTL DIST= 100 DIST N/F= 76 (M=76,P=52,S=36,C=12) AUTO SLE DISTANCE = 92.74 DT WALL= 100 MED TRUCK SLE DIST= 92~62 DT W/OB= 0 HVY TRUCK SLE DIST= 92.50 HTH WALL= 0.0 OBS HTH= 5.0 40 =DISTANCE TO TOE OF SLOPE AMBIENT= 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90 RT ANGLE= 90 DF ANGLE= 180 SITE CONDITIONS (10=HARD SITE, 15=SOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES = 15 MEDIUM TRUCKS = 15 GRADE ADJUSTMENT= 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS = 15 (ADJUSTMENT TO HEAVY TRUCKS) BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) PAD EL = 34.0 EL AUTOMOBILES = 32.3 ROAD EL = 30.3 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS= 34.3 EL HEAVY· TRUCKS = 38.3 GRADE 0.4 % VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0,103 0.0184 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.0074 NOISE IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL AUTOMOBILES LEQ 68,2 66.3 64.6 58.5 67.7 MEDIUM TRUCKS LEQ 59,3 57,8 51.4 49.9 58.6 HEAVY TRUCKS LEQ 59.8 58.4 4§.4 50.6 59.1 VEHICULAR NOISE 69.3 67.5 64.~ . 59.6 68.7 NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL VEHICULAR NOISE 69,3 67.5 64.9 59.6 68.7 W/O AMBIENT W/AMBIENT PK HR LEQ WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER = 69.3 69.3 MIT PK HR LEQ WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 69.3 ....... 69.3 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER = 68,7 68.7 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 68.7 ....... 68.7 i FHWA-Rp-77-108 HIGHWAY NOI~E PRE'DICTION MODEL (CALVENO) PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4TH STREET , . DATE: 05-Jul-00 LOCATION: BLDG_4 - 3RD FLOOR -~ BY: B. LAWSON ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL = 4,130 SPEED = 45 PK HR % = 10 CTL DIST= 100 DIST N/F= 76 (M=76,P=52,S=36,C= 12) AUTO BLE DISTANCE = 96.28 DT WALL= 100 MED TRUCK SLE DIST= 95.74 DT W/OB= 0 HVY TRUCK SLE DIST= 94.79 HTH WALL= 0.0 OBS HTH= 25.0 40 =DISTANCE TO TOE OF SLOPE AMBIENT= 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90 RT ANGLE= 90 DF ANGLE= 180 SITE CONDITIONS (10=HARD SITE, 15=SOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES = 10 MEDIUM TRUCKS = 10 GRADE ADJUSTMENT-- 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS = 10 (ADJUSTMENT TO HEAVY TRUCKS) BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) PAD EL = 34.0 EL AUTOMOBILES = 32.3 ROAD EL = 30.3 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS= 34.3 GRADE = 0.4 % EL HEAVY TRUCKS = 38.3 VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.0074 NOISE IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING .. PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL AUTOMOBILES LEQ 70,6 68.7 67.0 60.9 70.1 MEDIUM TRUCKS LEQ 61.7 60.2 53.8 52.3 61.0 HEAVY TRUCKS LEQ 62.3 60.9 51.9 53.1 61.6 VEHICULAR NOISE 71.7 69,9 67.3 62,1 71.1 NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL VEHICULAR NOISE 71.7 69.9 67.3 62.1 71.1 W/O AMBIENT W/AMBIENT PK HR LEQ WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER = 71.7 71.7 MiT PK HR LEQ WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 71.7 ....... 71.7 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER = 71.1 71 ~1 MiT CNEL WiTH TOPO AND BARRIER = 71.1 ....... 71.1 APPENDIX E CNEL NOISE CONTOUR PROJECTIONS FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICT ON MODEL (CNEL) PROJECT: GENERiAL DYNAMICS/PALMER GOLF CC~URSE APTS. JN: I 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: I-15 Freeway : DATE: 05-Jul-O0 SEGMENT: n/o of 4th Street BY: B. LAWSON · LOCATION: of Rancho City Cucamonga SCENARIO: EXISTING CONDITIONS ADT 132,000 ADT -~ PK HR VOL 13.200 SPEED 65 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 144 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) ALITO SLE DISTANCE 69.6 DIST WALL 0 FT MFD TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR · .- SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=lO, SOFT SITE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (O=WALL,I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 Fi' MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE aDJUSTM 0.0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: I DAY I EVE I N,GHTI DAILY I AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.819 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.084 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.097 UNATTENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQPKHRI LEQDAYI LEQEVE ILEQNIGHTI CNEL I AUTOMOBILES 78.0 76.1 74.3 68.3 77.5 MEDIUM TRUCKS 78.4 76.9 70.6 69.0 77.7 HEAVY TRUCKS 82.4 81.0 71.9 73.2 81.6 VEHICULAR NOISE 84.8 83.3 77.3 75.5 84,2 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 I 65 I 60 I 55 I DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 881 1898 4089 8808 . FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE :PREDICATION MODEL (CNEL) t " I:~ROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS/PALMER GOLF CO[JRSE APTS; JN: 1269-00-0~3 ROADWAY: 1-15 Freeway DATE: 0~-Jul-00 SEGMENT: s/o of 4th Street BY: . B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: ,EXISTING CONDITIONS '~DT 150,000 ADT PK .H~ VOL 15,000 SPEED 65 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 144 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 69.6 DIST WALL 0 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SlTE=15) ;' AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (O=WALL, I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0.0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: AUTOMOBILES I DAY I EVE t NIGHT I DALLY 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.819 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.084 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.097 UNATTENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQPKHRI LEQDAY J LEQEVE ILEQNIGHTI CNEL AUTOMOBILES 78.5 76.7 74.9 68.8 78.1 MEDIUM TRUCKS 79.0 77.5 71.1 69.6 78.3 -' HEAVY TRUCKS 82.9 81.5 72.5 73.7 82.2 VEHICULAR NOISE 85.4 83.9 77.9 76.0 84.7 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 I 65 I 60 I 55 I DISTANCE TO CNEL (ET) 959 2067 4452 9592 GERERAL DYNAMICS/PALMER GOL~F COURSE APTS. JN: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: Milliken Ave. : ' DATE: 05-Jul-00 sEGMENT: n/o of 4th Street BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: EXISTING CONDITIONS ADT 17,800 -ADT PK HR VOL 1,780 SPEED 45 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 Fi' DIST N/F 76 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 92.6 DIST WALL 0 FT' MED TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: Lf ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SlTE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL, I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT TRUCKS = 8.01 FT HEAVY GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0:0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: J DAY J EVE I NIGHT I DAILY I AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.972 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0,848 0.049 0.103 0.018 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0,027 0.108 0.007 UNATTENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQPKHRI LEQDAYI LEQEVE ILEQNIGHTI CNEL I AUTOMOBILES 63.7 61.8 60.0 54.0 63.2 MEDIUM TRUCKS 57.5 55.9 49.6 48.0 56.7 HEAVY TRUCKS 58.3 56.9 47.8 49.1 57.6 VEHICULAR NOISE 65.5 63.8 60.6 55.9 65.0 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 I 65 I 60 I 55 I DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 46 99 214 461 FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) PROJECT: G1ENERAL DYNAMICS/PALMER GO~.F COURSE AI~TS. JN: ~ 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: Milliken Ave. ~ DATE: 05-Jul-00 SEGMENT: s/o of 4th Street ' B~: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: EXISTING CONDITIONS , ADT 17,800 ADT I:~ HR VOL 1,780 SPEED 45 MPH PK HR 10 % DIET CTL 100 FT' DIET N/F 76 FT' (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 92.6 DIET WALL 0 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 DIET W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH ODS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE · -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL,1 =BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0.0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: I DAY I EVE I NIGHT I DALLY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.972 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.018 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.007 UNATTENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQ PK HR I LEQ DAY { LEQ EVE l LEO NIGHTI CNEL AUTOMOBILES 63.7 61.8 60.0 54.0 63.2 MEDIUM TRUCKS 57.5 55.9 49.6 48.0 56.7 HEAVY TRUCKS 58.3 56.9 47.8 49.1 57.6 VEHICULAR NOISE 65.5 63.8 60.6 55.9 65.0 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 I 55 I 60 I 55 DISTANCE TO CNEL (ET) 46 99 214 461 FH~,NA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) PROJEG~T': GENERAL DYNAMICS/PA~LMER GOLF COURSE APTS. 1 JN: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4th:Street DATE: 05-Jul-00 SEGMENT: w/o of Milliken 'Ave. BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: EXISTING CONDITIONS ADT 11,200 ADT~' PK HR VOL 1,120 SPEED 45 MPH Pk Hr 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 76 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 92.6 DIST WALL 0 F-i' MED TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SlTE=10, SOFT SlTE=I 5) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAR* 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8,01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0.'0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: I DAY I EVE I N~GHTI DA~LY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.972 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.018 HEAVY TRUCKS 0,865 0.027 0.108 0.007 UNA"C~'ENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQPKHRI LEQDAYI LEQEVE ILEQNIGHTI CNEL AUTOMOBILES 61.7 59.8 58.0 51.9 61.2 MEDIUM TRUCKS 55,4 53.9 47.6 46.0 54.7 HEAVY TRUCKS 56.3 54.9 45.8 47.1 55.6 VEHICULAR NOISE 63.5 61.8 58.6 · 53.9 62.9 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NO~SE LEVEL: I 70 I 65 I 60 I 55 DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 34 73 157 338 FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY=TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL ((~NEL) PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS/P,~LMER GOLF COURSE APTS. I JN: , 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4th Street ; I DATE: 05-Jul-00 SEGMENT: e/o of Milliken Ave. BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: EXISTING CONDITIONS /~J~T 18,200 ADT .~- PK HR VOL 1.820 SPEED 45 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 76 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 92.6 DIST WALL 0 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SlTE=10, SOFT SlTE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL, 1 =BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 9 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0~0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: AUTOMOBILES I DAY I EVE I NIGHT I DAILY I 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.972 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.018 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.007 UNA3-1'ENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQ PK Hr I LEQ DAY I LEQ EVE I LEQ NIGHTI CNEL J AUTOMOBILES 63.8 61.9 60.1 54.1 63.3 MEDIUM TRUCKS 57.5 56.0 49.7 48,1 56,8 HEAVY TRUCKS 58.4 57.0 47.9 49,2 57.7 VEHICULAR NOISE 65.6 63.9 60.7 56.0 65.0 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 I 6s I 80 I 55 I DISTANCE TO CNEL (ET) 47 101 217 468 H, i,'3-1-17 FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION NIODEL (CALVENO) I ' PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 4TH S~rREET DATE: 05-Jul-00 LOCATION: BLDG_4 - 1ST FL0~R WITH WALL BY: B. LAWSON ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL = 4,130 SPEED = 45 PKHR%= 10 CTL DIST= 100 DIST N/F= 76 (M=76,P=52,S=36,C=12) AUTO SLE DISTANCE = 93.82 DT WALL= 100 MED TRUCK SLE DIST= 93.67 DT W/OB= 0 HVY TRUCK SLE DIST= 93.51 HTH WALL= 6.0 OBS HTH= 5.0 40 =DISTANCE TO TOE OF SLOPE AMBIENT= 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE-- -90 RT ANGLE= 90 DF ANGLE= 180 SITE CONDITIONS (10=HARD SITE, 15=SOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES MEDIUM TRUCKS = 15 GRADE ADJUSTMENT= 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS = 15 (ADJUSTMENT TO HEAVY TRUCKS) BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) PAD EL = 34.0 EL AUTOMOBILES = 32.3 ROAD EL = 30.3 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS= 34.3 GRADE = 0.4 % EL HEAVY TRUCKS = 38.3 VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0,775 0.129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0,027 0.108 0.0074 NOISE IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL --" AUTOMOBILES LEQ 68,1 66.3 64.5 58.4 67.7 MEDIUM TRUCKS LEQ 59.2 57.7 51,3 49.8 58,5 HEAVY TRUCKS LEQ 59.8 58.4 49.3 50.6 59.0 VEHICULAR NOISE 69.2 67.4 64.~ 59.6 68.7 NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEO DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL VEHICULAR NOISE 58.9 57.1 54.5 49.3 58.4 W/O AMBIENT W/AMBIENT Pi( HR LEQ WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER = 69.2 69.2 MIT PK HR LEQ WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 58.9 ....... 58.9 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER = 68.7 68.7 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 58.4 ....... 58.4 i FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY ~NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVEN, O) PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS APARTMENTS JOB #: 1269-00-03 ~- ROADWAY: 4TH STREET DATE: 05-Jul-00 ' LOCATION: BLDG_4-2ND FLOOR BY: B. LAWSON ADT = 41,300 PK HR VOL = 4,130 SPEED = 45 PK HR % = 10 CTL DIST= 100 DIST N/F= 76 (M=76,P=52,S=36,C=12) AUTO SLE DISTANCE = 93.99 DT WALL= 100 MED TRUCK SLE DIST= 93:66 HVY TRUCK SLE DIST= 93.11 DT W/OB= 0 HTH WALL= 0.0 OBS HTH= 15.0 40 --DISTANCE TO TOE OF SLOPE AMBIENT= 0.0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90 RT ANGLE= 90 DF ANGLE= 180 SITE CONDITIONS (10=HARD SITE, 15=SOFT SITE) AUTOMOBILES = 10 MEDIUM TRUCKS = 10 GRADE ADJUSTMENT-- 0.00 HEAVY TRUCKS = 10 (ADJUSTMENT TO HEAVY TRUCKS) BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) PAD EL = 34.0 EL AUTOMOBILES = 32.3 ROAD EL = 30.3 EL MEDIUM TRUCKS= 34.3 GRADE = 0.4 % EL HEAVY TRUCKS = 38.3 VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT DAILY AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.9742 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.0184 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.0074 NOISE IMPACTS WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL AUTOMOBILES LEQ 70.7 68.8 67.1 61.0 70.2 MEDIUM TRUCKS LEQ 61.8 60.3 53.9 52.4 61.1 HEAVY TRUCKS LEQ 62.4 61.0 51.9 53.2 61.7 VEHICULAR NOISE 71.8 70.0 67.4 62.2 71.2 NOISE IMPACTS WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ CNEL VEHICULAR NOISE 71.8 70.0 67.4 62.2 71.2 W/O AMBIENT W/AMBIENT PK HR LEQ WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER = 71.8 71.8 MIT PK HR LEQ WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 71.8 ....... 71.8 CNEL WITHOUT TOPO AND BARRIER = 71.2 71.2 MIT CNEL WITH TOPO AND BARRIER = 71.2 ....... 71.2 FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY T~.~=FIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) PRDJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS/PALMER GpLF COURSE AP'~S. JN: 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: 1-10 Freeway ~ : DATE: .05-Jul-00 SEGMENT: w/o 1-15 Freeway BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: EXISTING CONDITIONS ADT 218,000 ADT '~ PK HR VOL 21,800 SPEED 65 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 144 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 69.6 DIST WALL 0 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=I 0, SOFT SITE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0.0 DB TO HEAVY TRucks VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.879 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.035 H NAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.086 UNA'C~'ENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEO PK HR AUTOMOBILES 80.5 78.6 76.8 70.8 80.0 MEDIUM TRUCKS 76.8 75.3 68.9 67.3 76.0 HEAVY TRUCKS 84.1 82.6 73.6 74.8 83.3 VEHICULAR NOISE 86.2 84.6 79.0 76.8 85.5 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 I 65 I 60 I 65 DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 1080 2326 5012 10797 ~~_E. PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) ROADV"',/A¥: 4th Street DATE: ~ 05-Ju~ SEGMENT: w/o of Milliken Ave. LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga BY: B. LAWSON SCENARIO: FUTURE CONDITIONS .~- ADT 41,300 ADT ,. SPEED 45 MPH PK HR VOL 4,~30 PK HR 10 % - DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 76 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) DIST WALL 0 FT AUTO SLE DISTANCE 92.6 DIST W/OS 100 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 NTH WALL 0 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 HTH CBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10. SOFT SITE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 Fr' ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS-- 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE; 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: AUTOMOBILES ~ DAY I EVE I NIGHTI DAILY MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.972 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.018 MEDIUM TRUCKS 67.3 65.4 63.7 57.6 66.8 HEAVY TRUCKS 61.1 59.6 53.2 51.7 60.4 62.0 60.5 51.5 52.7 61.2 VEHICULAR NOISE DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: ~ 70 I 85 I 60 I 55 ~ DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 81 174 375 807 FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY '~RAFFI ,C NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CI"JEL) PROJECT: · GEN£RAL DYNAMICS/PAI~MER GOLF!COURSE APTS. ~Jl__'~ N' · 1269-00-03 I ROADWAY: 4th Street : bATE: 05-Jul--00 SEGMENT: e/o of Milliken Ave. BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: · City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: FUTURE CONDITIONS ADT 41,300 ADT ~' PK HR VOL 4,130 SPEED 45 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 76 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 92.6 DIST WALL 0 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SlTE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT' MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0:0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: I DAY t EVE I N GHTI DA=LY I AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0. 29 0.098 0.972 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.018 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0,027 0.108 0.007 UNA3-1'ENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQ PK HR I LEQ DAY I LEQ EVE I LEQ NIGHTI CNEL I AUTOMOBILES 67.3 65.4 63.7 57.6 66.8 MEDIUM TRUCKS 61,1 59.6 53.2 51.7 60,4 HEAVY TRUCKS 62.0 60.5 51,5 52.7 61.2 VEHICULAR NOISE 69.2 67.4 64.3 59.6 68.6 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: ~. 70 L 65 L 60 j 55 J DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 81 174 375 807 ~ FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MdDEL ('C~NEL) ~PROJECT: GENERAL DYNAMICS/PALMER GOLF COURSE APTS. ~ JN:~ ~ 1269-00-03 ~ROADWAY:: Milliken Ave. - ~' DATE: : 05-Jul-00 SEGMENT: n/o of 4th Street BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga 'SCENARIO;" FUTURE CONDITIONS ADT 45,800 ADT PK HR VOL 4,5.~0 SPEED 45 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 76 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 92.6 DIST WALL 0 F-I' MED TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2,30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0.0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: I DAY I EVE I NIGHT t DAILY t AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.972 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.018 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.007 UNATTENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQ PK HR I LEO DAY I LEQ EVE I LEQ NIGHTI CNEL I AUTOMOBI LES 67.8 65.9 64,1 58,1 67.3 MEDIUM TRUCKS 61.6 60.0 53.7 52.1 60,8 HEAVY TRUCKS 62.4 61.0 51.9 53.2 61.7 VEHICULAR NOISE 69.6 67.9 64,7 60.1 69.1 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 J 65 I 60 I 55 I DISTANCE TO CNEL (ET) 86 186 401 865 FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) PROJECT: GEN_RAL~: DYNAMICS/PALMER GOLF'COURSE APTS. JN:' ~ 1269-00-03 ROADWAY: Milliken Ave. . ~ · DATE: 05-Jul-00 SEGMENT: s/o of 4th Street BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: FUTURE CONDITIONS " . ~. ADT 47.000 ADT PK HR VOL 4.700 SPEED 45 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 76 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 92.6 DIST WALL 0 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 92.5 hTh WALL 0 FT HTH CBS 5 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL, I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0,0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: I DAY I EVE J NIGHT J DALLY J AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.972 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.018 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.007 UNATi'ENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQ PK HR I LEQ DAY I LEQ EVE I LEQ NIGHTI CNEL I AUTOMOBILES 67,9 66,0 64.2 58.2 67.4 MEDIUM TRUCKS 61.7 60.2 53,8 52.3 60.9 HEAVY TRUCKS 62.5 61.1 52.1 53.3 61.8 VEHICULAR NOISE 69.7 68,0 64.8 60.2 69,2 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 I 65 I 60 I 55 I DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 88 190 408 880 ~ FHWA-RD-77-~08 RC~ADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) PROJECT: GENERAq DYNAMICS/PALMER GOLF COURSE APTS. JN: 1269-00-03 ROAI~WAY: I-15 Freeway DATE: 05-Jul-00 SEGMENT: n/o of 4th Street BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: FUTURE CONDITIONS ADT 218,200 ADT PK HR VOL 21,820 SPEED 65 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 144 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 69.6 DIST WALL 0 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0.0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: L DAY J EVE J NIGHT J DAILY J AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.819 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.084 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0.108 0.097 UNATTENUATED NOISE LEVELS: [LEQPKHRJ LEQDAY ~ LEQEVE [LEQNIGHTj CNEL j AUTOMOBILES 80.2 78.3 76.5 70.4 79.7 MEDIUM TRUCKS 80.6 79.1 72.7 71.2 79.9 H NAVY TRUCKS 84.6 83.1 74.1 75.4 83.8 VEHICULAR NOISE 87.0 85.5 79.5 77.7 86.4 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: [ 70 L 65 DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 1231 2653 5716 12315 FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NO SE P~ED CTI~)N M, ODEL (CNEL) i GENERAL DYNAMICS/PALMER GOLF COUF~E APTS. JN: 1269~00-03 PROJECT: ROADWAY: 1-15 Free~ay " : DATE: 05-Jut-00 SEGMENT: s/o of 4th Street BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: FUTURE CONDITIONS ADT 209,200 ADT PK HR ~OL 20,920 SPEED 65 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 144 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 69,6 DIST WALL 0 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT I-IVY TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL, I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PAD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0.0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.819 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0,049 0,103 0.084 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.865 0.027 0,108 0.097 UNATrENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEq PK Hr AUTOMOBILES 80.0 78.1 76.3 70,3 79.5 MEDIUM TRUCKS 80.4 78.9 72.6 71.0 79.7 HEAVY TRUCKS 84.4 83.0 73.9 75.2 83.6 VEHICULAR NOISE 86.8 85.3 79.3 77.5 · 86.2 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 I 65 I 60 I 85 DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 1197 2580 5588 11974 FHWA-RD-77-108 ~OADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) PROJECT: G~NERAL DYNAMICB/PALMER GOLF COURSE APTS. JN: 1269-{)0-03 ' ROADWAY: 1-10 Freeway : DATE: 05-Jul-00 SEGMENT: w/o 1-15 Freeway BY: B. LAWSON LOCATION: City of Rancho Cucamonga SCENARIO: FLC]'URE CONDITIONS ADT 268,100 ADT ' PK HR VOL 26.810 SPEED 65 MPH PK HR 10 % DIST CTL 100 FT DIST N/F 144 FT (M=76,P=52,S=36) AUTO SLE DISTANCE 69.6 DIST WALL 0 FT MED TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 DIST W/OB 100 FT HVY TRUCK SLE DIST 69.5 HTH WALL 0 FT HTH OBS 5 FT ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90 DGR RT ANGLE 90 DGR DF ANGLE 180 DGR SITE CONDITIONS: (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AUTOMOBILES 15 MED TRUCKS 15 HVY TRUCKS 15 BARRIER 0 (0=WALL,I=BERM) ELEVATIONS: PaD 0 FT AUTOMOBILES = 0.00 FT ROAD 0 FT MEDIUM TRUCKS= 2.30 FT HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 FT GRADE: 0 % GRADE ADJUSTM 0.0 DB TO HEAVY TRUCKS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION: I DAY I EVE I NIGHT I DAILY I AUTOMOBILES 0.775 0.129 0.096 0.879 MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.848 0.049 0.103 0.035 HEAVY TRUCKS 0,865 0.027 0.108 0.086 UNATTENUATED NOISE LEVELS: ILEQ PK HR I LEQ DAY I LEQ EVE I LEQ NIGHT AUTOMOBILES 81.4 79.5 77,7 71.6 80.9 '- MEDIUM TRUCKS 77.7 76.2 69.8 68.2 76.9 HEAVY TRUCKS 84.9 83.5 74.5 75.7 84.2 VEHICULAR NOISE 87.1 85.5 79.9 77,7 86.4 DISTANCES TO CONTOUR LINES: NOISE LEVEL: I 70 I 65 I 60 DISTANCE TO CNEL (FT) 1239 2670 5753 12394 APPENDIX B GEOTECHNICAL STUDY LOR Soil Engineering · Geology · Environmental PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PALMER GOLF COURSE APARTMENTS PARCEL 6, PARCEL MAP NO. 14647 4TM STREET AND EMPIRE LAKES GOLF COURSE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 60631.12 JUNE 22, 2000 Prepared For: FF Development, L.P. 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92121 Attention: Ms. Angela Renteria 6121 Quail Valley Court · Riverside, CA 92507 · (909) 653-1760 ~, Fax (909) 653-1741 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC. Soi'~'~ Engineerin~ '~- G--=~olog'~'; En"~i-~'onm---'~ntal June 22, 2000 FF Development, L.P. 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92121 Attention: Ms. Angela Renteria Gentlemen: Transmi~ed with this letter is our report entitled Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Palmer Golf Course Apartments, Parcel 6, Parcel Map No. 14647, 4th Street and Empire Lakes Golf Course, Rancho Cucamonga, California, prepared for FF Development, L.P., Project No. 60631.12. This report was based upon a scope of services generally outlined in our proposal letter April 6, 2000 and other written and verbal communications. It has been our pleasure assisting you on this project. If you have any questions or comments concerning the information in this report, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. JJJ:JPL:qam Distribution: Addressee {6) I,-5 Ifil 6121 Quail Valley Court · Riverside, CA 92507 · (909) 653-1760 · Fax (909) 653-1741 TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe No. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 1 PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ANALYSIS .................................. 3 SUBSURFACE FIELD INVESTIGATION .............................. 5 LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM ................................ 5 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS Regional Geologic C(~n'dit;o'n; .............................. 6 Site Geologic Conditions ................................ 6 Groundwater Hydrology Mass Movement ................................. 7 Faulting ......................... 8 Historical Seismicity ........ · · B Secondary Seismic Hazards . . . ~ ................... SOILS AND SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA {Uniform Building Code) ........... 10 UBC Divisions IV; Earthquake Design Criteria Selection ............. 10 UBC Division V; Soil Profile ................................ 12 UBC Earthquake Design Summary ............................ 12 CONCLUSIONS GeneraJ · · Foundati(~n' ~l~l~o'rt' i: ' ': ': .... : .......................... 12 Geologic Mitigations ................................. 1 3 Seismicity ..................................... 1 3 RECOMMENDATIONS General Site Grading . . ........ 14 initial Site Preparation ........................... Fill Areas' ~ ~ ~ ...... 15 Preparation of ......................... '' 15 Preparation of Foundation Areas Engineered Compacted Fill ............................ 16 Short Term Excavations .................................. 17 Soil Expansiveness ..................................... 17 Foundation Design ...................................... 17 Settlement ............................................ 18 Slabs-On-Grade Wall Pressures ......................................... 18 Preliminary Pavement Design ............................... 20 Sulfate Protection ....................................... 21 Construction Monitoring ................................... 21 LO~[~ G£OTECHN CAL GROUP. LIMITATIONS .............................................. 22 CLOSURE ................................................. 23 REFERENCES ............................................... 24 APPENDICES Appendix A - Index Map, Plats, and EPI Output Appendix B - Field Investigation Program and Boring Logs Appendix C - Laboratory Testing FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 INTRODUCTION During May of 2000, a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation was performed by LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. for the proposed Palmer Golf Course Apartments to be located on the north side of 4th Street west of Milliken Avenue in the city of Rancho Cucamonga, California. The purpose of this investigation was to provide a technical evaluation of the geologic setting of the site and to provide geotechnical design recommendations for the proposed development. The scope of our services included: · Review of available pertinent geotechnical literature, reports, maps, and agency information pertinent to the study area; · Interpretation of stereo aerial photograph pairs of the site and surrounding regions dated 1939 through 1996; · Geologic field reconnaissance mapping to verify the areal distribution of earth units and significance of surficial features as compiled from documents, literature and reports reviewed, · A subsurface field investigation to determine the physical soil conditions pertinent to the proposed development; · Laboratory testing of selected soil samples obtained during the field investigation; · Development of geotechnical recommendations for site grading and foundation design; and · Preparation of this report summarizing our findings, and providing conclusions and recommendations for site development. The approximate location of the site is shown on the attached Index Map, Enclosure A-1 within Appendix A. To orient our investigation at the site, a 100 - scale Site Study Map, prepared by Architects Orange, stamp dated April 4, 2000, was furnished for our use. Prior to finalization of our report, an 80-scale Site Plan prepared by ARK Architecture and Planning was also provided. The locations of buildings and number of units has changed from the original Site Study Map to the current Site Plan. However, this change has no significant impact on our geotechnical investigation. The proposed building locations were indicated on this plan. An 60-scale Topographic Map of the area, prepared by AEI-CASC Engineering, Inc., was also utilized. 1 I.OR FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS Information furnished this firm indicates the proposed project will consist of a two phase apartment complex to be developed on the 23.4 acre site. The individual site development information is presented in the following table: Site Number of Buildings: Number of Number of Parking Phase Apartments/Clubhouse Apartment Units* Spaces I 12/1 276 519 II 11/1 252 477 Totals 23/2 528 996 Based on matrix study 5. The structures are anticipated to be two and three-story of wood frame and stucco or similar type construction. Light to moderate foundation loads are anticipated with such structures. The proposed site layout is shown on the enclosed Plat 1, Enclosure A-2, within Appendix A. No grading plans were available for our use during this investigation. However, observation of the site topography and adjacent properties indicates site development will entail minimal cuts and fills. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS The subject site is an irregular shaped parcel of land located north of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and south and east of the Empire Lakes Golf Course in the city of Rancho Cucamonga, California. The topography of the site is generally planar, falling slightly to the south. At the time of our visit the northern portions of the site were utilized for the cultivation of grapes. These were in grapevines on lO-foot spacings in north-south and east-west rows. Every 200 feet or so the vineyards were cut by dirt roads. No structures were noted within the vineyard portion of the site. The far southern portion of the site appears to have at one time been partially developed with the construction of a small paved road and the grading of building pads along both sides of the road. The road enters the far southeast corner of the site then extends 2 FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 to the north a short way were it makes a sharp 90 degree turn and continues off the site. Underground utilities are evident along the road in the form of water hydrants and utility boxes. The far southern end of the site has been landscaped with grass and trees along 4th Street. The site is bordered on the west and northwest by the newly constructed Empire Lakes Golf Course~ To the northeast, the site is bordered by similar vineyards. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ANALYSIR TO obtain a comprehensive history of previous site usage, a search was conducted for available aerial photograPhs of the area on file at the San Bernardino County Transportation and Flood Control District collection, by a geologist from this firm. The search reviewed aerial photographs taken of the site and surrounding region in 1938, 1959, 1969, 1971, 1978, 1986, 1991, and 1996. The aerial photographs reviewed consisted of vertical aerial stereographic photograph pairs of varying scales. These photographs were viewed using stereoscopes with magnifications of 2X and 4X for three-dimensional enhancement. Due to the relatively large photographic scales involved, the analysis and subsequent interpretation of detail from aerial photographs sometimes requires a degree of subjective judgement. The degree of certainty on the interpretation of details depends upon such factors as the scale and the quality of the photograph. However, an analysis of aerial photographs will reveal the general site history as to the relative use of the land, possible ground disturbance, activities, etc. A brief summary of the site and surrounding conditions during the various times, as reflected in the photographs is given below. 1. 1938. Fliaht No. W-71', Photo Nos. E-2-3, Scale 1"= 1000'. The quality of this photograph is poor, and no stereo is available, however, during this time period the entire site is being utilized for agricultural crops. The southwest and northeast portions of the site contain grape vineyards. These are in narrow east-west and north-south rows approximately 10 feet or less apart. In the southeast corner there are groves of some type. These are located in a rectangular block approximately 600 feet by 1200 feet extending 1200 feet west of Milliken Avenue and 600 feet FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 north of 4th Street. A small well and reservoir is noted off site at the northeast corner of the groves, off Milliken Avenue. The site is bounded by 4m Street on the south, a small two lane dirt road, Milliken Avenue, also dirt, on the east, and similar vineyards on the north, west, and also beyond Milliken Avenue and 4m Street. 2. October 16.1959, Fliqht No. AXL-16W, Photo Nos. 170-171, Scale 1" = 1667' The groves have been removed and the entire site contains vineyards. 4m Street has been paved. 3. January 30, 1969, Fliqht No. 293, Photo Nos. 25-26, Scale 1"--2000'. The site appears described in the previous photographs. The Ontario 500 Motor Speedway is under construction just south of the site across 4~h Street. 4. October 8, 1971, Fliqht No. C-186, Photo Nos. 45-46, Scale 1" = 2000'. The site appears as described in the previous photographs. The speedway now appears completed. 4t~ Street has been widened. 5. January 21, 1978, Fliqht No. C-279, Photo Nos. 100-101, Scale 1" = 2000'. The site appears as described in the previous photographs. The southern most of the General Dynamics buildings has been constructed approximately 1,000 feet west of the site. Cleveland Avenue has been constructed approximately 400 feet west of the site. 6. February 25, 1986, Fliqht No. 450, Photo Nos. 97-98, Scale 1" = 2000'. The south end of the site has been graded. This area is a large rectangular block approximately 600 feet by 1200 feet located northeast of 4m Street and Cleveland Avenue. This includes a small street which leads north off 4th Street extends north approximately 400 feet then turns at a right angle to extend over to Cleveland Avenue. This street is paved and has been split into 16 or possibly 32 pads. Fills appear minimal perhaps mostly cut down I foot or so, with 3 to 5 feet of cut along the far northeast corner. The other two General Dynamics buildings are evident. FF Development, L.P. June 22, 2000 Project No. 60631.12 7. July 1, 1991, Fliqht No. 487, Photo Nos. 111-11~ 2, Scale 1 "--2000' The site and immediate surrounding region appear as described in the previous photographs, except the speedway is gone. 8. May 31, 1996, Fli(~ht No. 528, Photo Nos. 142-143, Scale 1"--2000'. The golf course has been constructed adjacent to and west of the site. This has left a small berm of fill, 5 feet in thickness or less, along the western perimeter. .SUBSURFACE FIELD INVESTIGATION Our subsurface field exploration program was conducted between May 4, 200 and May 11, 2000 and consisted of drilling 25 exploratory borings with a truck-mounted CME 55 drill rig equipped with an 8~inch diameter hollow stem auger. The borings were drilled to depths ranging from 16.5 feet to 51.5 feet. The approximate locations of our exploratory borings are presented on the enclosed Plats, Enclosures A-2 and A- 3, within Appendix A. Logs of the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings were maintained by a geologist from this firm. Relatively undisturbed and bulk samples were obtained at a maximum depth interval of 5 feet and returned to the laboratory in sealed containers for further testing and evaluation. A detailed description of the .-field_exploration program andthe~oring logs are presented in Appendix B. LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM Selected soil samples obtained during the field investigation were subjected to laboratory .testing to evaluate their physical and engineering properties. Laboratory testing included moisture content, dry density, laboratory compaction, direct shear, consolidation, sieve analysis, sand equivalent, R-value and soluble sulfate. A detailed description of the laboratory testing program and the test results are presented in Appendix C. 5 FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS Reqional Geoloqic Conditions The subject site is located near the northern end of a large geomorphic province of southern California characterized by the presence of numerous, northwestern trending, small mountains ranges and intervening plains and valleys, referred to in the geologic literature as the Peninsular Ranges (Norris and Webb 1988). The Peninsular Ranges province abuts to the north against a series of east-west trending mountain ranges, collectively referred to as the Transverse Ranges. The site lies approximately 9 km (5.5 miles) south of the base of the San Gabriel Mountains, which make up the center portion of the Transverse Ranges~ These mountains are composed predominately of a core of relatively old metamorphic rocks which have been pushed up by thrust movement along the Cucamonga fault zone which lies at the southern base of these mountains. This results from compressional forces as the northern end of the Peninsular Ranges is being thrust under the San Gabriel Mountains. The relatively rapid uplift of these mountains, combined periodic on-shore atmospheric conditions that drop moderate to large amounts of precipitation, results in a rapid erosion rates. The erosion of these ranges have deposited a very thick blanket of relatively recent, coarse grained alluvial sediments, consisting of boulders, cobbles, gravel, sand, silt and lessor clays in a series of coalescing alluvial fans which extend out from the mountains. These units tend to become finer grained away from the source, with the large boulder- gravel deposits confined to near the base of the mountains and the silty sandy units lying towards the far southern end of the basin. No active earthquake faults are known to exist at, or project into the subject site. The nearest known active earthquake fault is the Cucamonga fault which is located approximately 9 km (5.6 miles) to the north. The next closest fault in the region is the San Jacinto fault which lies approximately 18 km (11 miles) to the north east. Site Geolo(~ic Conditions As mentioned above, the subject site is situated upon a large alluvial fan complex emanating from the San Gabriel mountains to the north. As the site is not located near the base, but several miles away from the source, the subject site tends to be underlain by relatively fine grained alluvial materials of silty sand, with some lenses of 6 LO~ GEOTECHNICAL GROUP. INC. FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 silt, clay, and coarser materials of sand and gravel. The far southern portion of the site had from 2 to 4 feet of fill material associated with the grading of building pads on this portion. As noted in the exploratory borings the northern portion of the site contains a thin surficial veneer of silty sand which was loose and had a small portion of organic material mix in. This layer most likely is resultant from the mixture of wind blown sands and silts, along with fill, or possibly topsoil, from the cultivation of the vineyards. These materials were dry and loose at the surface, becoming damp and loose at of depth of a few inches. Below the surficial topsoil, typically at a depth of I foot or less, alluvial materials composed primarily of silty sand with various amounts of fine gravel, typically less than 10%, and silt content up to 30%, and some thin layers or lenses of poorly graded sand to well graded sand with gravel. In many of the borings of coarsening of the units was noted at depth ranging from 7 to 15 feet. In many of the borings at these depths well graded sand with up to 30% grave and some cobbles were noted. All of these materials were damp, typically brown to grayish tan, damp, and were loose near the surface becoming denser with depths. In the borings placed along the southern portion of the site fill materials ranging in depth from 2 to 5 feet were encountered. These were distinguished by there uniform moisture and density characteristics and lack of any soil structures or alluvial layering, such as lenses or thin layers. Underlying these units were alluvial materials as described above. A detailed description of the subsurface soil conditions as encountered within our exploratory trenches and borings is presented on the boring logs within Appendix B. Groundwater Hvdroloq¥ Groundwater was not encountered in any of our exploratory borings nor was any groundwater seepage observed during our site reconnaissance. The nearest known groundwater well in relation to the site is located just to the east, along the west side of Milliken Avenue. According to the Cooperative Groundwater Well Measuring program, coordinated by the Western Municipal Water Agency, groundwater in this well was measured March of 1999 at a depth of 362 feet below the ground surface. 7 [,OR ......... FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 Mass Movement The site is situated on a relatively flat plan. The occurrence of mass movement instabilities, such as rock falls, landslides, or soil creep, are typically not a factor on such sites. Faultinq There are no known active faults at or projecting into the site. In addition the site is not located within an State of California Earthquake Fault Zone, as defined by the Alquist-Priolo act. Therefore, the nearest known active fault in relation to the site is the Cucamonga fault. According to page N-32 of the 1997 UBC Maps of known active fault Near Soume zones, the Cucamonga fault is a "A" fault, located approximately 9 km (5.6 miles) to the southwest. The next nearest fault is the San Jacinto fault, shown as a "6" fault, located approximately 18 km (11 miles) to the northeast. Historical Seismicity In order to obtain a general perspective of the historical seismicity of the site and surrounding region a search was conducted for seismic events at and around the area within various radii. This search was conducted utilizing the historical seismic search program by EPI Software, Inc. This program conducts a search of a user selected cataloged seismic events database, within a specified radius and selected magnitudes, and then plots the events onto an overlay map of known faults. For this investigation the database of seismic events utilized by the EPI program was obtained from the Southern California Seismic Network (SCSN) available from the Southern California Earthquake Center, at http://WWW.Scecdc.scec.oro/ftolcataloqs/SCSN/ At the time of our search the data base contained data from January 1, 1932 through April 28, 2000. In.our first search the general seismicity of the region was analyzed by selecting an epicenter map listing all events of magnitude 4.0 and greater, recorded since 1932, within a 100 km radius of the site, in accordance with guidelines of the California Division of Mines and Geology. This map illustrates the regional seismic history of LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP. INC. FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 moderate to large events. As noted on Enclosure A-4, within Appendix A, the site lies within a relatively quite region lying southwest of thE; more active region to the northeast associated with the San Jacinto fault zone. The closest event recorded in that time period with a magnitude of 4.0 or greater was located approximately 7 kilometers (4-miles) northwest of the site. In the next map the micro seismicity of the area lying within a 10 km radius of the site was examined by selecting an epicenter map listing events on the order of 0.0 and greater since 1975. In addition, only the "A" events, or most accurate events were selected. Caltech indicates the accuracy of the "A" events to be approximately 1 km. The results of this search is a map that presents the seismic history around the area of the site with much greater detail, not permitted on the larger map. The reason for limiting the events to the last 25 years on the detail map is to enhance the accuracy of the map. Events recorded prior the mid 1970°s are generally considered to be less accurate due to advancements in technology. As noted on this map, Enclosure A-5, there is a zone located about 3k m (2 miles) southeast of the site that appears to be the source of numerous small events which trend to the northeast. While no surface breaks or faulting have been noted along this trend, this feature is also a source of groundwater offsets and has tentatively been called the Colton-Rialto fault. The closest event on this map to the site was a 2.3 magnitude event located .4 km (1 mile) south of the site. Secondary Seismic Hazard,~ Other secondary seismic hazards generally associated with severe ground shaking during an earthquake include liquefaction, seiches and tsunamis, earthqual(e induced flooding, landsliding and rockfalls, and seismic-induced settlement. Liauefaction. The potential ~or liquefaction generally occurs during strong ground shaking within fine-grained loose sediments where the groundwater is usually less than 50-feet. As the depth to groundwater is considered to be greater than 50 feet, the possibility of liquefaction within these units is considered nil. SeichesfTsunamis. Since the site is not located near any large bodies of water the potential for a tsunami is considered nil. 9 LOR GEOTE ..,OA. FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 FIoodino {Water Storaqe Facility Failure). There are no large water storage facilities located on or near the site which could possibly rupture during in earthquake and effect the site by flooding. Seismically-Induced Landslidinq and Rock falls. Since the site is situated on a relatively flat plain, the potential for seismically induced mass movement is considered nil. Seismically-Induced Settlement. Settlement generally occurs within areas of loose, granular soils with relatively Iow density. While the upper portions of the site is underlain by such units, the earthwork operations during the development of the site will mitigated any such loose conditions. SOILS AND SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA (Uniform Buildinq Code) Design requirements for structures can be found within Chapter 16 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) based on building type, use and/or occupancy. It should be noted that many residential structures are constructed in accordance with the conventional light-framing requirements specified in Chapter 23 of the code which are deemed to already meet the requirements of Chapter 16. However the classification of use and occupancy of all proposed structures at the site, and thus design requirements, shall be the responsibility of the structural engineer and the building official. For structures at the site to be designed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16, the subject site specific soils and seismic criteria are provided in the following sections. UBC Divisions IV; Earthquake Desiqn Criteria Selection Procedure and limitations for the earthquake design of applicable structures can be obtained from Division IV of Chapter 16 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). However, it should be noted that the building code requires the minimum design to allow a structure to remain standing after a seismic event, in order to allow for safe evacuation. As stated in section 1626.1,"The purpose of the earthquake provisions herein is primarily to safeguard against major structural failures and loss of life, not to limit damage or maintain function." Therefore a structure built to UBC code may still sustain damage which might ultimately result in the demolishing of the structure. 10 LOR FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 The UBC Division IV requires that all sites, unless exempted, be assigned a soil profile type and a regional seismic zone. The criteria for the selection of a site soil profile can be found in the 1997 UBC Division V, discussed in later' sections. Seismic Zone As shown on Figure 16-2 within Chapter 16 of the 1997 UBC, the site is located in seismic zone 4. Section 1629.4.2 of the 1997 UBC directs that all sites in Seismic Zone 4, unless exempted, shall have a near source factor determined. Near Source Factor. Near source factors are determined based on the distance to the nearest type A, or 8 seismic source (earthquake fault). Once these are determined near source values can be obtained, dependent on structure type, from tables 16-S or 16-T within the 1997 UBC. Seismic source types are classified as A, B, or C, based on description, maximum anticipated magnitude, and slip rate. Type C sources are not considered as they do not increase the standard near source factor value of 1 .O. The following table lists the seismic source type requirements. Table 16-U Seismic Source Typet Seismic Source Seismic Source Description Seismic Source Definitions Type Maximum Magnitude Slip Rate(mm/yr) A Faults capable of large magnitude M ~ 7.0 SR ~ 5 events, and have s high rate of seismic activ~y. B All faults other then A and C. M = 7.0 SR < 5 M <7.0 SR >5 M ~6.5 SR <2 C Faults that are not capable of U < 6.5 SE < 2 producing large magnitude ear~hqcakes and that have s relatively iow rate of seismic activity. ~= ...... ~7 UBC Specific parameters for earthquake faults within the state of California can be obtained form the State of California Division of Mines and Geology Open File Report 96-08 (DMG 1996). As noted in our Faulting section of this report, the nearest known active fault in relation to the site, is the Cucamonga fault, located approximately 9 km (5.§ 11 FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 miles) to the north. According to the DMG Open File Report 96-08 the Cucamonga fault has a slip rate of 5 mm/year, and an estimated magnitude event of 7. According to the UBC table above, this portion of the fault is therefore classified as a type A fault. The nearest known "B" classification fault is the San Jacinto fault located approximately 18 km (11 miles) northeast of the site. According to the DMG OFR 96-08 the San Jacinto fault has a slip rate of 12 mm/yr and an anticipate magnitude of 6.7 and is therefore a type "B" fault. UBC Division V; Soil Profile, As noted in our excavations at the site the subject site is underlain by a soil profile type of So. UBC Earthouake Desiqn Summary As determined in the previous sections, the following earthquake design criteria have been formulated for the site. However, these values should be reviewed and the final design should be preformed by a qualified structural engineer familiar with the region. Seismic and Soil Criteria Distance to A Distance to B Regional Soil Near source (km) source (km) Seismic Zone Profile Source Type Factor N. 9.0 18.0 4 So 1.2 *Distances rounded to nearest 0.5 km CONCLUSIONS General This investigation provides a broad overview of the geotechnical and geologic factors which are expected to influence future site planning and development. On the basis of our field investigation and testing program, it is the opinion of LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. that the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, 12 FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into design and implemented during grading and construction. The subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory borings are indicative of the locations explored. The subsurface conditions presented here are not to be construed as being present the same everywhere on the site. If conditions are encountered during the construction of the project which differ significantly from those presented in this report. This firm should be notified immediately so we may assess the impact to the recommendations provided. Foundation Support Based upon the field investigation and test data, it is our opinion that the upper native soils and existing fills will not, in their present condition, provide uniform and/or adequate support for the proposed structures. In-place density and Standard Penetration Test (SPT) data indicated variable in-situ conditions of the upper native and fill soils, ranging from loose to medium dense states. These conditions .may cause unacceptable differential and/or overall settlements upon application of the anticipated foundation loads. To provide adequate support for the proposed apartment structures, we recommend a compacted fill mat be constructed beneath footings and slabs. This compacted fill mat will provide a dense, high-strength soil layer to uniformly distribute the anticipated foundation loads over the underlying soils. In addition, the construction of this compacted fill mat will allow for the removal of existing old fill material, and recompaction of existing upper disturbed soils within building pad areas. Conventional spread foundations, either individual spread footings and/or continuous wall footings, will provide adequate-support for the anticipated downward and lateral loads when utilized in conjunction with the recommended fill mat. Geoloqic Mitiqations No special mitigation methods are deemed necessary at this time, other than the geotechnical recommendations provided in the following sections. 13 FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 Seismicit¥ Seismic ground rupture is generally considered most likely to occur along pre-existing active faults. Since no known faults are known to exist at, or project into the site, the probability of ground surface rupture occurring at the site is considered nil. Due to the site's close proximity to the Cucamonga fault, it is reasonable to expect a strong ground motion seismic event to occur during the lifetime of the proposed development on the site. Large earthquakes could occur on other faults in the general area, but because of their lesser anticipated magnitude and/or greater distance, they are considered less significant than the Cucamonga fault zone from a ground motion standpoint. The effects of ground shaking anticipated at the subject site, should be mitigated by the seismic design requirements and procedures outlined in Chapter 16 of the Uniform Building Code. However it should be noted that the current building code requires the minimum design to allow a structure to remain standing after a seismic event, in order to allow for safe evacuation. A structure built to code may still sustain damage which might ultimately result in the demolishing of the structure (Larson and Slosson 1992). RECOMMENDATIONS General Site Gradinq It is imperative that no clearing and/or grading operations be performed without the presence of a qualified geotechnical engineer. An on-site, pre-job meeting with the owner/developer, the contractor and soil engineer should occur prior to all grading related operations. Operations undertaken at the site without the geotechnical .- engineer present may result in exclusions of affected areas from the final compaction report for the project. Grading of the subject site should be performed in accordance with the following recommendations as well as applicable portions of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, and/or applicable local ordinances. FF Development, L.P. P'roject No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 All areas to be graded should be stripped of significant vegetation and other deleterious materials. All existing uncontrolled fills encountered during site preparation should be completely removed, cleaned of significant deleterious materials, and may be reused as compacted fill. It is our recommendation that all existing uncontrolled and/or undocumented fills under any proposed flatwork and paved areas be removed and replaced with engineered compacted fill. If this is not done, premature structural distress (settlement) of the flatwork and pavement may occur. However, the cost of complete fill removal should be compared to possible higher maintenance costs if only partial removal and recompaction is done. It is our opinion that decreased settlement will result from increasing the amount of existing fill removed. An economic analysis of the relationship between current construction costs and ongoing maintenance costs should be undertaken to evaluate the most cost effective amount of fill to be removed. Cavities created by removal of subsurface obstructions should be thoroughly cleaned of loose soil, organic matter and other deleterious materials, shaped to provide access for construction equipment, and backfilled as recommended in the following Enaineered Compacted Fill section of this report. Initial Site Preparation All existing fill and loose, compressible alluvial material should be removed from areas to receive engineered compacted fill. The data developed during this investigation indicates that removals on the order of 2 to § feet will be required from the anticipated fill areas. The actual depths of removal should be verified during the grading operation by observation and in-place density testing. PreParation of Fill Areas Prior to placing fill, after the removal of existing fill and any loose alluvial materials, the surfaces of all areas to receive fill should be scarified to a depth of at least 6-inches. The scarified soil should be brought to near optimum moisture content and recompacted to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent (ASTM D 1 §57). FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 Preparation of Foundation Areas All footings should rest upon at least 24 inches of properly compacted fill material. In areas where the required thickness is not accomplished by site rough grading, the footing areas should be further subexcavated to a depth of at least 24 inches below the proposed footing base grade, with the subexcavation extending at least five feet beyond the footing lines. The bottom of this excavation should then be scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches, brought to near optimum moisture content, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (ASTM D 1557) prior to refilling the excavation to grade as properly compacted fill. Enqineered Compacted Fill The on-site soils should provide adequate quality fill material, provided they are free from o[ganic matter and other deleterious materials. Unless approved by the geotechnical engineer, rock or similar irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than six inches should not be buried or placed in fills. Import fill should be inorganic, non-expansive granular soils free from rocks or lumps greater than six inches in maximum dimension. Sources for import fill should be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to their use. Fill should be spread in maximum eight inch loose lifts, each lift brought to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent in accordance with ASTM D 1557. Based upon the relative compaction of the near surface soils determined during this investigation and the relative compaction anticipated for compacted fill soil, we estimate a compaction shrinkage of approximately 10 to 15 percent. Therefore, 1.10 cubic yards to 1.15 cubic yards of in-place materials would be necessary to yield one cubic yard of properly compacted fill material. In addition, we would anticipate subsidence of approximately 0.20 feet. These values are for estimating purposes only, and are exclusive of losses due to stripping or the removal of subsurface obstructions. These values may vary due to differing conditions within the project boundaries and the limitations of this investigation. Shrinkage (bulking) should be monitored during 16 ~/O]~ GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC, FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 construction. If percentages vary, provisions should be made to revise final grades or adjust quantities of borrow or export. Short Term Excavations Following the California Occupational and Safety Health Act (CAL-OSHA) requirements, excavations deeper than five feet should be sloped or shored. All excavations and shoring should conform to CAL-OSHA requirements. Short term excavation greater than 5-feet deep shall conform to Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, Construction Safety Orders, Section 1504 and 1539 through 1547. Based on our exploratory trenches/borings it appears that type C soils are the predominant type of soil on the project and all short term excavation should be based on this type of soil. Deviation from the standard short term slopes are permitted using option 4, Design by a Registered Professional Engineer (Section 1541.1 ). Soil Exl3ansiveness The materials encountered during this investigation were granular and considered to have a very Iow expansion potential. Therefore, specialized construction procedures to specifically resist expansive soil activity are not anticipated at this time. In order to verify this, additional evaluation of on-site and imported soils for their expansion potential should be conducted following completion of the grading operation. Foundation Desiqn If the site is prepared as recommended, the proposed apartment structures may be safely founded on conventional spread foundations, either individual spread footings and/or continuous wall footings, bearing either on a minimum of 24 inches of engineered compacted fill. All foundations should have a minimum width of 12 inches and should be established a minimum of 12 inches below lowest adjacent grade. For the minimum width and depth, footings may be designed using a maximum soil bearing pressure of 1800 pounds per square foot (psf} for dead plus live loads. Footings at least 15 inches wide, placed at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade, may be designed for a maximum soil bearing pressure of 2100 (psf) for 17 LOR oEo'rEc..,cA, ,.. FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 dead plus live loads. This 15 inch wide by 18 inch deep footing acceptable for a three story structure where the foundation supports two floors and a roof. The recommended pressures apply for the total of dead plus frequently applied live loads, and incorporate a factor of safety of at least 3.0. The allowable bearing pressures may be increased by one-third for temporary wind or seismic loading. The resultant of the combined vertical and lateral seismic loads should act within the middle one-third of the footing width. The maximum calculated edge pressure under the toe of foundations subjected to eccentric loads or overturning should not exceed the increased allowable pressure. Resistance to lateral loads will be provided by passive earth pressure and base friction. For footings bearing against compacted fill, passive earth pressure may be considered to be developed at a rate of 350 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Base friction may be computed at 0.35 times the normal load. Base friction and passive earth pressure may be combined without reduction. These values are for dead load plus live load and may be increased by 1/3 for wind or seismic. - Settlement Total settlement of individual foundations will vary depending on the width of the foundation and the actual load supported. Maximum settlement of shallow foundations designed and constructed in accordance with the preceding recommendations are estimated to be on the order of 0.5 inch. Differential settlements between adjacent footings should be about one-half of the total settlement. Settlement of all foundations is expected to occur rapidly, primarily as a result of elastic compression of supporting soils as the loads are applied, and should be essentially completed shortly after initial application of the loads. Slabs-On-Grade To provide adequate support, concrete slabs-on-grade should bear on a minimum of 12 inches of compacted soil. The final pad surfaces should be rolled to provide smooth, dense surfaces upon which to place the concrete. 18 ,'5 J~O][~ GEOTECHNICAL GROUP. INC. FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 Slabs to receive moisture-sensitive coverings should be provided with a moisture vapor barrier. This barrier may consist of an impermeable membrane. Two inches of sand over the membrane will reduce punctures and aid in obtaining a satisfactory concrete cure. The sand should be moistened just prior to placing of concrete. The slabs should be protected from rapid and excessive moisture loss which could result in slab curling. Careful attention should be given to slab curing procedures, as the site area is subject to large temperature extremes, humidity, and strong winds. Wall Pressures The design of footings for retaining structures should be performed in accordance with the recommendations described earlier under Preparation of Foundation Areas and Foundation Desiqn. For design of retaining wall footings, the resultant of the applied loads should act in the middle one-third of the footing, and the maximum edge pressure should not exceed the basic allowable value without increase. For design of retaining walls unrestrained against movement at the top, we recommend an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) be used. This assumes level backfill consisting of recompacted native soils placed against the structures and within the back cut slope extending upward from the base of the stem at 35 degrees from the vertical or flatter. Walls below grade that are restrained against free movement at the top of the walls and that have level backfill should be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure between active and at-rest conditions. For this condition, we recommend an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pcf be used if recompacted native soil is used for backfill. To avoid over stressing or excessive tilting during placement of backfill behind walls, heavy compaction equipment should not be allowed within the zone delineated by a 45 degree line extending from the base of the wall to the fill surface. The backfill directly behind the walls should be compacted using light equipment such as hand operated vibrating plates and rollers. No material larger than three inches in diameter should be placed in direct contact with the wall. FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 Wall pressures should be verified prior to construction, when the actual backfill materials and conditions have been determined. Recommended pressures are applicable only to level, properly drained backfill with no additional surcharge loadings. If inclined backfills are proposed, this firm should be contacted to develop appropriate active earth pressure parameters. Toe bearing pressure for non-structural walls on soils, not prepared as described earlier under Preparation of Foundation Areas, should not exceed Uniform Building Code values, (UBC Table 16-1-A). Preliminary Pavement Design Testing and design for preliminary on-site pavement was conducted in accordance with the California Highway Design Manual. Based upon our preliminary sampling and testing, and upon Traffic Indices generally used for residential paving, it appears that the structural sections tabulated below should provide satisfactory pavements for the subject apartment complex: AREA T.I. PRELIMINARY SECTION Li~lht Vehicle Drive and Parkin~l 5.0 0.25'AC/0.35'AB AC - Asphalt Concrete AB - Class 2 Aggregate Base The above structural sections are predicated upon 90 percent relative compaction (ASTM 1557) of all utility trench backfills and 95 percent relative compaction (ASTM 1557) of the upper 12 inches of street subgrade soils and of any aggregate base utilized. In addition, the aggregate base should meet Caltrans specifications for Class 2 Aggregate Base. '-' In areas of the pavement which will receive high abrasion loads due to start-ups and stops, or where trucks will move ona tight turning radius, consideration should be given to installing concrete pads. Such pads should be a minimum of 0.5 foot thick concrete. Concrete pads are also recommended in areas adjacent to trash storage areas where heavier loads will occur due to operation of trucks lifting trash dumpsters. FF Development, L.P. June 22, 2000 Project No. 60631.12 The above pavement designs were based upon the results of preliminary sampling and testing, and should be verified by additional sampling and testing when the actual subgrade soils are exposed. Sulfate Protection The results of the sulfate tests conducted on selected subgrade soils expected to be encountered at foundation levels are presented in Appendix C. Based on the test results the Cement Industry Committee of California, recommends Type I or II cement be used for concrete elements in contact with such materials. Construction Monitorinq Post investigative services are an important and necessary continuation of this investigation. Project plans and specifications should be reviewed prior to construction to confirm that the intent of the recommendations presented herein have been incorporated into the design. Additional expansion testing and testing for on-site {street) pavement design should be performed after the site is rough graded. During construction, sufficient and timely geotechnical observation and testing should be provided to correlate the findings of this investigation with the actual subsurface conditions exposed during construction. Items requiring observation and testing include, but are not necessarily_limited to, the following: 1. Site preparation-stripping and removals. 2. Excavations, including approval of the bottom of excavation prior to backfilling. 3. Scarifying and recompacting prior to fill placement. 4. Subgrade preparation for pavements and slabs-on-grade. 5. Placement of engineered compacted fill and backfill, including approval of fill rnaterials and the performance of sufficient density tests to evaluate the degree of compaction being achieved. 21 FF Development, L.P. Project No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 LIMITATIONS This report contains geotechnical conclusions and recommendations developed solely for use by FF Development, L.P., and their design consultants, for the purposes described earlier. It may not contain sufficient information for other uses or the purposes of other parties. The contents should not be extrapolated to other areas or used for other facilities without consulting LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. The recommendations are based on interpretations of the subsurface conditions concluded from information gained from subsurface explorations, and a surficial site reconnaissance. The interpretations may differ from actual subsurface conditions, which can vary horizontally and vertically across the site. Due to possible subsurface variations, all aspects of field construction addressed in this report should be observed and tested by the project geotechnical consultant. If parties other than LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. provide construction monitoring services, they must be notified that they will be required to assume responsibility for the geotechnical phase of the project being completed by concurring with the recommendations provided in this report or by providing alternative recommendations. The report was prepared using generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices under the direction of a state licensed geotechnical engineer. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to conclusions and professional advice included in this report. Any persons using this report for bidding or construction purposes should perform such independent investigations as deemed necessary to satisfy themselves as to the surface and subsurface conditions to be encountered and the procedures to be used in the performance of work on this project. FF Development, L.P. Pr~ect No. 60631.12 June 22, 2000 ~LOSURE It has been a pleasure to assist you with this project. We look forward to being of further assistance to you as construction begins. Should conditions be encountered during construction that appear to be different than indicated by this report, please contact this office immediately in order that we might evaluate their effect. Should you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, LOR Geotechnical Group,.Inc. Engineering Geologist JJJ:JPL:qam 23 REFERENCES Blake, T.F., 1989, EQSEARCH, A computer program for the estimation of peak horizontal acceleration from southern California historical earthquake catalog,, ver. 2.01 (updates through 1996). Blake, T.F., 1989, EQFAULT, A computer program for the deterministic prediction of peak horizontal acceleration from digitized California faults, ver. 2.01. Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B., and Fumal T.E., 1993, Estimation of response spectra and peak accelerations from western North American earthquakes: An Interim Report, U.S.G.S. Open File Report 93-509. California Division of Mines & Geology (CDMG), 1997, Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation seismic hazards in California, Special Publication 117. California Division of Mines & Geology (CDMG), 1986, Guidelines to geologic/seismic reports, Note No. 42. California Division of Mines & Geology (CDMG), 1975, Recommended guidelines for determining the maximum credible and the maximum probable earthquakes. Note No. 43. Hart, E.W., 1994 :Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California: CDMG Special Publication ' ..... International Conference of Building Officials, 1994, Uniform Building Code, 1994 edition. Larson, R., and Slosson, J., 1992, The role of seismic hazard evaluation in engineering reports, in engineering geology practice in southern California, AEG Special Publication Number 4, pp191-194. Reeder, W., 1997, Earthquake Plotting Program, EPI Software. APPENDIX A ---~'~ ~,,1 ..~: ~.~l- l. ' ',~ ~ ~I 'r,- ~ ~ ~'=::-::-=:':::::=-"==--~ .......... ~:~ :~=:'::':-:' :~ ...... ~-~' II .... ',i.=-:=: ~ ........ _ ..... , ................. ==.~; .................. .:_~__ ~ ' Ol ~: !~=~:~;F. ~ . :' ~ ~ ~:=~:.:-~ ~.~.~;~= ~ : :..~. --: ~-~ ._:-,~: ~._.~. =,=~-:~{~:~,.~,~..:~A-, :~- ..... -.=.: ..... - _-=~'-w.=- .-~-- ..... --'; %~ I:',-~:' · ~.. ' I .2 ,- ....... - :" ': -" '" :' =:'* -:::::'::' : ~.- 2~ :- ::: :=-:~;: ......... ' .......... '--:~: ~:-~'/~ ' ~' : INDEX ~AP PROJECT: PAL~ GOLF COURSE APARTMENTS, RANCHO CUCA~ONGA, CA PROJECT NO: 60631.12 CLIENT: FF DEVELOPMENT, L,P. ENCLOSURE: A-1 LOR eeotechnical Group, Inc. DATE: JUNE 2000 ~, ~, ~ ~ sc~: ~s s.ow~ RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. DRCDR00-67, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 496 APARTMENTS ON 23 ACRES OF LAND IN PLANNING AREA 6 OF THE SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 4TH STREET, WEST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 210-082-46. A. Recitals. 1. Fairfield Development filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. 00-67, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 28th day of March 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites pdor to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. · B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby foun~, determined, and resolved bythe 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 headng on March 28, 2001, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the north side of 4th Street west of Milliken Avenue and the property is bounded by the Empire Lakes golf course to the west and north, vacant land to the east, and vacant land in the City of Ontado to the south across 4th Street. The subject site has an approximate street frontage of 850 feet along 4th Street; and b. Storm drain improvements necessary to accommodate the project are not in excess of that provided by the master plan of storm drainage; and c. The project, together with the recommended conditions of approval, complies with all minimum development standards for the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and d. The project has been designed with an urban architectural style, including stacked stone, horizontal siding, and stucco with articulation elements to create contrast. e. The buildings are oriented along 4th Street, with parking primarily to the rear to maximize screening from public view. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCDRO0-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng 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. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan. b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purpose of the Empire Lakes Subarea 18 Industrial Area Specific Plan in which the site is located. c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of' the applicable provisions of the Development Code, the Empire Lakes Subarea 18 Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the Development Agreements for the subject property recorded in the San Bemardino County Official Records as Document No. 94432407. d. 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. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified as a Master EIR (SCH#93102055) for the Subarea 18 Specific Plan. The Califomia Environmental Quality ACt (CEO. A) Section 21157.1 provides that the preparation and certification of aiMaster EIR allows for the limited review of subsequent projects that ~vere described in the Master EIR as being within the scope of the Master EIR. However, because of the changes that are submitted by this project, an Addendum was prepared for said project. An Addendum to the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan final EIR is appropriate documentation because some changes or additions are necessary to describe the proposed residential project, however none of the conditions described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the attached Addendum based on the following findings: a. There have not been substantial changes in the project that require major revisions to the previous EIR because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in severity of previously identified significant effects. b. There have not been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the sevedty of previously identified significant effects. c. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, that shows any of the following: 1) the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; 2) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; 3) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or, 4) mitigation measures or alternatives, which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Final EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or altemative. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 01-35 DRCDR00-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 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: General: 1) This approval is contingent upon approval of related Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment 00-04. Planning Division 1) This approval is contingent upon approval of related Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment No. 00-04 to allow multi-family residential land use. 2) Provide additional stacked stone elements and horizontal siding for all sides of all buildings within the project consistent with the intent to develop a high-end, luxury residential project. 3) Install continuous decorative wrought iron fencing along golf course consistent with Subarea 18 Specific Plan and Supplemental Design Guidelines. Provide stacked stone pilasters, maximum 150 feet on center, for the masonry/stucco walls along eastedy property line to match that proposed for the wrought iron fencing. The overall dimensions of the pilasters shall match that established by the Empire : Lakes golf course. 4) Provide stacked stone for the freestanding curved wall at the southeast entrance off of 4th Street. 5) Mail service structures shall be architecturally compatible with the project. 6) If the market dynamics change, and more than 3 percent of the renters are families with children, then immediate provisions must be made to provide additional outdoor recreational amenities for children. 7) All equipment, both ground and roof-mounted, shall be completely screened and architecturally compatible with the elevation design from view of surrounding properties and public rights-of-way. 8) Provide substantial berms along the 4th Street frontage and along the frontage of the cul-de-sac off of 4th Street. The berms shall be heavily landscaped. 9)Align dbbon gutters in parking areas with front or rear of parking spaces as opposed to centedine of drive aisles. 10)All surface drainage features shall be designed to avoid crossing over or conflicting with areas of decorative paving. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCDR00-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 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: Planning Division 1) This approval is contingent upon approval of related Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment No. 00-04 to allow multi-family residential land use. 2) Provide additional stacked stone elements and horizontal siding for all sides of all buildings within the project consistent with the intent to develop a high-end, luxury residential project. 3) Install continuous decorative wrought iron fencing along golf course consistent with Subarea 18 Specific Plan and Supplemental Design Guidelines. Provide stacked stone pilasters, maximum 150 feet on center, for the masonry/stucco walls along eastedy property line to match that proposed for the wrought iron fencing. The overall dimensions of the pilasters shall match that established by the Empire Lakes golf course. 4) Provide stacked stone for the freestanding curved wall at the southeast entrance off of 4th Street. 5) Mail service structures shall be architecturally compatible with the project. 6) If the market dynamics change, and more than 3 percent of the renters are families with children, then immediate provisions must be made to provide additional outdoor recreational amenities for children. 7) All equipment, both ground and roof-mounted, shall be completely screened and architecturally compatible with the elevation design from view of surrounding properties and public rights-of-way. 8) Provide substantial berms along the 4th Street frontage and along the frontage of the cul-de-sac off of 4th Street. The berms shall be heavily landscaped. 9) Align dbbon gutters in parking areas with front or rear of parking spaces as opposed to centedine of drive aisles. 10)All surface drainage features shall be designed to avoid crossing over or conflicting with areas of decorative paving. 11) Provide dense evergreen tree planting along the west property line to block stray golf balls from the Empire Lakes Golf Course. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCDR00-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS Mamh 28, 2001 Page 4 En,qineedn.q Division 1) Improve 4th Street to "Major Divided Arterial" standards, including curvilinear sidewalk, street trees, streetlights, ddve approach, traffic signs and striping: a) Since the proposed secondary access on 4th Street is for "Exit Only," the proposed 35-foot wide ddve approach is acceptable. If the said access becomes a two-way access a right turn lane will be required. In addition, it shall conform with the Gated Entrance Design Guide and "stacking distance" shall conform to the ddveway policy. The entrance shall have two 20-foot drive aisles separated by a 10-foot wide median. The median shall not extend into the public right-of-way. b) Conduit and pertinent structures for a fiber optic cable link shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. c) Provide traffic signal interconnect conduit along the 4th Street frontage. d) Provide a 200-foot d{)ht turn lane from 4th Street to "A" Street. 2) Improve 5th Street to "Local Industrial" standards, including sidewalk, street trees, drive approach, traffic signs and striping: a) The 5th Street entrance shall be in accordance with the Gated Entrance Design Guide and "stacking distance" shall conform to the Ddveway Policy. The entrance shall have two 20-foot ddve aisles separated bya 10-foot wide median. The median shall not extend into the public right-of-way. 3) Improve "A" Street to "Modified Local Industrial" standards, including sidewalk, street trees, ddve approach, traffic signs and striping (curb to curb 18' SB, 12' LT, 20' NB for truck turning), total of 72-foot street dedication. The cul-de-sac bulb shall require additional dedication per City Standards. There will be no sidewalk and street trees on the east side of "A" Street. a) The "A" Street entrance shall be in accordance with the Gated Entrance Design Guide and "stacking distance" shall conform to the Driveway Policy. The entrance shall have two 20-foot wide drive aisles separated by a 10-foot wide median. The median shall not extend into the public right-of-way. b) Align "A" Street with future Vincent Avenue in the City of Ontario (which will ultimately have a traffic signal and a median opening). Said alignment shall be sent to the City of Ontario for approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCDR00-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 5 4) This development will be conditioned to provide the following improvements per the improvement certificate for Parcel 6 on Parcel Map 14647, and Exhibit "C" of Development Agreement 94-01 (Ordinance 526): a) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical) on the project side of 4th Street shall be undergrounded from the first pole on the west side of the westedy project boundary to the first pole off site of the easterly project boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. Reimbursement ofone-halfof the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development as it occurs on the opposite side of the street is not feasible, because the property is in the City of Ontado. b) A contribution in lieu of construction for the future median island in 4th Street shall be paid to the City pdor to issuance of building permits or Final Parcel Map 15536 approval, whichever comes first. The amount of contribution shall be one-half the cost of the median times the length of the project frontage. c) Provide drainage facilities serving Parcels 6, 7, and 8, including the reconstruction of the golf course detention facility outlet control. Developer may submit a drainage study for alternative improvements subject to the City Engineer approval. 5) In reference to a storm drain requirement through this development: a) Provide easement for a minimum 12-foot dedication of a public storm drain and maintenance access through this parcel b) The existing Drainage Acceptance Agreement with the golf course must be amended for this storm drain facility. c) Obtain off-site drainage easement or realign the storm drain. 6) This development will be conditioned to pay the following fees, per Exhibit "D" of Development Agreement 94-01 (Ordinance 526), upon development: a) Transportation Development Fees. 7) Development shall make a fair share contribution for a traffic signal on 4th Street at project entrance in the amount of $55,000.00. Signal lights to be installed by the City of Ontado. 8) Provide suggested route to school study for the walking or bussing of all students to and from school. Provide bus stop locations and facilities as required. H, I,-3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCDR00-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 6 Fire Division 1) Prior to issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit a fire hydrant location plan for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. 2) Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. 3) Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications, flow test data, and calculations for the private water main system for review and approval by the Fire District. 4) Fire flow requirements for this project shall be 2500 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20 pounds per square inch. 5) All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible building materials on-site (i.e. lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Water District personnel shall witness hydrant flushing, and builder/developer shall submit documentation to the Fire Safety Division. 6) All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible building materials on-site (i.e. lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Fire Distdct representative shall witness hydrant flushing. The builder/developer shall submit documentation to the Fire Safety Division. 7) For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional test of the on-site fire hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and CCWD. The results shall be reported to the Fire Safety Division. 8) Existing fire hydrants within 600 feet of the project shall be shown on the water plan submitted for review and approval. 9) Pdor to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground. 10) If the system is private the applicant shall do the following prior to the issuance of the building permit: 1) Submit proof that provisions have been made for the annual testing, repair and maintenance of the system. A copy of the maintenance agreement shall be submitted to the District. 2) For developments with multiple owners, they shall establish a reciprocal maintenance agreement, which shall be submitted to the Fire District for acceptance. 11) Prior to the issuance of any certificate of use and occupancy, all fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or ddveway in accordance with Rancho PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCDR00-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 7 Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct and Water Distdct standards as approved by the Fire District. On pdvate property these markers are to be maintained in good condition by the property owner. 12) Pdor to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide evidence of adequate fire flow. The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct Water Availability for Fire Protection Form shall be signed by the water distdct and submitted for approval by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. If sufficient water to meet fire flow requirements is not available, an automatic fire extinguishing system may be required in each structure affected by the insufficient flow. 13) An automatic fire extinguishing system is required by RCFPD Ordinance 15 or other adopted code or standard. 14) Pdor to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit plans for any required automatic fire sprinkler system in any structure to the RCFPD for review and approval 15) Pdor to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, all fire protection systems shall be fully operational. The systems shall be tested and accepted by the Fire District'. 16) Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system. 17) Residential: Pdor to recordation of a subdivision map, the applicant shall obtain approval of the Fire District for all fire distdct access roadways and fire lanes. All roadways or fire lanes shall comply with RCFPD Ordinance FD32 and other applicable standards. 18) Residential & Commercial: Pdor to issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of plans for all roads, streets and courts, public or private, from the Fire District. The plans shall include the plan view, sectional view, and indicate the width of the street or court measured flow line to flow line. All proposed fire apparatus tumarounds shall be clearly marked when a dead-end street exceeds 150 feet orwhen othem/ise required. Applicable CC&Rs, or other approved documents, shall contain provisions that prohibit obstructions such as speed bumps, control gates, bollards, or other modifications within said easement without pdor approval of the Fire Distdct 19) Street Signs: A note shall be placed on the site plan indicating that all street/road signs shall be designed and maintained to be either intemallyor extemally illuminated in a manner meeting the approval of the Fire District. 20) The minimum width for a Fire District access road or fire lane is 26 feet. The minimum inside turn radius is 20 feet. The minimum outside turn radius is 50 feet. The minimum radius for cul-de-sacs is 50 feet. The minimum vertical clearance is 14 feet, 6 inches. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCDR00-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 8 21) All portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story shall be located within 150 feet of Fire Distdct vehicle access, measured by an unobstructed approved route around the extedor of the building. Approved access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to extedor building openings. 22) All buildings which have three or more stories or are 30 feet in height shall be provided with fire apparatus access on at least 2 sides. Access to exterior walls shall extend from 5 to 50 feet horizontally, with no vertical obstructions. 23) A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 24) Gated or restricted access requires the installation of a Knox rapid entry system. Additionally, for vehicle access gates, an approved, compatible traffic signal preemption device will be required to open the gate. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordedng information. 25) The installation of gates and restricted access to residential developments may necessitate installation'of approved automatic fire sprinkler systems. 26) 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 vehicles. 27) A building directory shall be required, as noted below: X_ Lighted directory within 20 feet of main entrance(s). 28) Emergency access, a minimum 26 feet in width, shall be provided and maintained free and clear of any obstructions at all times during constructions, in accordance with Fire Distdct Standards. 29) Amend Fire Distdct access to accommodate emergency vehicle access. 30) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit plans and obtain approval from the Fire Distdct for fire lanes on required fire district access roadway less than 40 feet in width. The plans shall indicate the locations of red curbing and signage. A drawing of the proposed which meets the minimum Fire Distdct Standard shall be submitted and approved. Contact the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct at (909) 477-2770 for a copy of the "FD Access - Fire Lanes" standard. 31) Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy, the fire lanes shall be installed in accordance with the approved fire lane plan. The CC&Rs or other approved documents shall contain a fire lane map and provisions that prohibit parking in the fire lanes. The method of enforcement shall be documented. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCDR00-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 9 32) Pdor to the issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit and obtain the Fire District's approval of the construction of any gate across required Fire Distdct access roads/drives. 33) Pdor to the issuance of a building permit for combustible construction, the builder shall submit a letter to the Fire Distdct on company letterhead stating that water for fire fighting purposes and the all weather fire protection access road shall be in place and operational before any combustible matedal is placed on-site. 34) Pdor to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit a detailed letter of intended use for each building on-site to the Fire Distdct for review and approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for the form. 35) Pdor to approval of a site development/use permit, or the issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit plans for the review and approval of the Fire District. Call the Fire Construction Unit at (909) 477-2713 for the Fire Safety Site/Architectural Notes to be placed on the plans pdor to submittal. 36) An automatic fire detection system is required by RCFPD Ordinance 15 or other adopted code or standard. 37) Pdor to issuance of a building permit, plans for the fire alarm system shall be submitted to the Fire Distdct for review and approval. 38) Pdor to the issuance of a cer[ificate of use and occupancy, this system shall be operational in a manner meeting the approval of the Fire District. 39) Fire Distdct fee(s), plus a $1.00 microfilm fee pet"plan page" will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Distdct as follows:** X $132 for CCWD Water Plan Review/underground water supply X $677 (per new building) for Multi-family Residential Development **Note: Separate plan check fees for tenant improvement work, fire protection systems (fire sprinklers, alarm systems, fire extinguishing systems, etc.), and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon separate submittals of plans. 40) Plans shall be submitted and approved pdor to construction in accordance with 1997/98 Building, Fire, Mechanical, and Plumbing Codes; 1999 Electrical; and RCFPD Standards and Ordinances FD15 and FD32. **Note: Separate plan check fees for tenant improvements, fire protection systems, and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed at time of submittal of plans. **Note: A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped and signed by a California Registered Professional Civil Engineer. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCDR00-67- FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 10 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES 1) The applicant shall implement all pertinent mitigation measures adopted in the Master Environmental Impact Report for the Empire Lakes Subarea 18 Industrial Area Specific Plan as certified by the City Council, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted by City Council Resolution No. 94-141. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2001. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Lar~y 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 28th day of March 2001, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-67 SUBJECT: 496-UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT APPLICANT: FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF 4TH STREET, WEST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: ~General Requirements ComDletion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its / agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. 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, amhitectural 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 Rancho Cucamonga Specific Plan 93-01. 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 SC-12-00 1 submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to / / show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 3. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be /__/ submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for __/ / consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 5. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code /__/ all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 6. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved /__/ by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 7. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and /_._/ the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 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. 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. 10. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, / / including proper illumination. 11. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property / / owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 12. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the easterly 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 multiple family development, laundry facilities shall be provided as required by the Development Code. 14. For multiple family development, a minimum of 125 cubic feet of exterior Iockable storage space __/__/__ shall be provided. 15. For residential development, recreation area/facility shall be provided as required by the / / Development Code. D. BUilding Design 1. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated sc. 2-o0 2 3 Project No. OR 00-67 Completion Date with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts __/__/ a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 2. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). 3. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across cimulation aisles shall be provided / / throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/ recreational uses. 4. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, __/__/__ and exits shall be striped per City standards. 5. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth / / from back ofsidewalk. 6. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and Rancho / / Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn-around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars stacking into the public right-of-way. 7. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in'all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily __/__./ residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. F. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in / / the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. A minimum of 50 trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the project: 10% - 48-inch box or larger 10% - 36-inch box or larger, 10% - 24-inch box or larger, 70% - 15-gallon. 3. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. 4. 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. 5.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 sc. 2.oo Project No. DR 00-6'~ Completion Date 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 cow~=r. 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. 6. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible for / / the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall ~be roplaced within 30 days from the date of damage. 7. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and .,~idewalks shall be included / / in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 8. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering / / sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along 4th Street frontage. 9. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the / / perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 10. Ail wails shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the ~ / design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 11. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for City Planner re~/iew and approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 12.Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of ×eriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. G. Signs 1. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or town homes prior / / to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. H. Environmental 1. A final acoustical report sha~l 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 $1,000.00 prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. sc- 2-o0 D 4 Project No. DR 00-67 Completion Date I. Other Agencies ~1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The finat location of the mail boxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject 'to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: J, General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: / / a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; c. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including iso.metrics, 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. 5.Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the Building and Safety Division. K, Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance. SC-12-00 5 Project No, DR 00-67 Comoietion Date 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and [ / / prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday / · /__ through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. 5. Construct trash enclosure(s) per City Standard (available at the Planning Division's public /.__/ counter). 6. Submit pool plans to the County of San Bernardino's Environmental Health Services Department /___/ for approval. L. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering __/ / use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for required occupancy separation(s). /.__ __ 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions. /.__ __ 4. Plans for food preparation areas shall be approved by County of San Bernardino Environmental / Health Services prior to issuance of building permits. 5. Provide draft stops in attics in line with common walls. / 6. Exterior walls shall be constructed of the required fire rating in accordance with UBC Table 5-A .~/ 7. Openings in exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with UBC Table 5-A. / / 8. If the area of habitable space above the first floor exceeds 3,000 square feet, then the / / construction type shall be V-1 Hour. 9. Walls and floors separating dwelling units in-the same building shall be not less than 1-hour __/__/__ fire-resistive construction. M. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City / / Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to / / perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the /___/ time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final greding 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 / / existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California Registered Civil Engineer. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: N. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. / / 2. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for / / approved openings: 4th Street. SC-12-00 6 Project No. DR 00-67 Cornoletion Date 3. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be ~ / dedicated to the City. 4. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes on 4th Street, to provide a / /__ minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. O. Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: __/ / StreetName Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. lLightslTreesI Trail I Island Trail I I I X X (c) X X J X (d) (e) 4th Street X X X X X I;I 5th Street "A" Street X X X X X X (f) Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item (e) Traffic Siqns (f) Access Ramps. 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights / / on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being pedormed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction / / project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer Notes: (1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2)Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City __/__/__ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with __/__/__ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be / / installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. / / SC-12-00 7 Project No. DR 00-67 Completion Date 3. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in /~ accordance with the City's street tree program. 4. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with /. / adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commemial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. P. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting / / Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne bythe developer. 2. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s), shall conform to the results of the respective / / Beautification Master Plan 4th Street. Q. Drainage and Flood Control 1. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map / / approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. R. Utilities 1. ' Provide separate utility services to each pamel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, / / electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the /.___/ Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bemardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. $. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all / / new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: T. Security Lighting 1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. /.__/__ These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo seneored cell. SC-12-00 H~ 8 ~ Project No. DR 00-67 Comptetion Date 2. All buildJngs shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with / / direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development. 3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. / / U. Security Hardware 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. /___/ 2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. If windows are within .~/ / 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 3. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. .~/ / 4. All roof openings giving access to the building shall be secured with either iron bars, metal gates, __/__/__ or alarmed. V. Security Fencing 1. All businesses or residential communities with security fencing and gates will provide the police ~/ / with a keypad access and a unique code. The initial code is to be submitted to the Police Crime Prevention Unit along with plans. If this code is changed due to a change in personnel or for any other reason, the new code must be supplied to the Police via the 24-hour dispatch center at (909) 941-1488 or by contacting the Crime Prevention Unit at (909) 477-2800 extension 2474 or 2475. 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. X. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime / / visibility. 2. At the entrances of commercial or residential complexes, an illuminated map or directory of / / project shall be erected with vandal-resistant cover. North shall be at the top and so indicated. Sign shall be in compliance with Sign Ordinance, including an application for a Sign Permit and approval by the Planning Division. 3. All developments shall submit a 8 Y2" x 11" sheet with the numbering pattern of all multi-tenant __/ / developments to the Police Department. sc- =-oo H' AZA 9 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 15536, A SUBDIVISION CREATING TWO PARCELS ON 23 ACRES OF LAND IN PLANNING AREA 6 OF SUBAREA 18, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 4TH STREET, WEST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 210-082-46. A. Recitals. 1. Fairfield Development filed an application for the approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 15536, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Parcel Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 28th day of March 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said 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 bythe 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 headng on March 28, 2001, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the north side of 4th Street west of Milliken Avenue and the property is bounded by the Empire Lakes golf course to the west and north, vacant land to the east, and vacant land in the City of Ontario to the south across 4th Street. The subject site has an approximate street frontage of 850 feet along 4th Street; and b. Storm drain improvements necessary to accommodate the project are not in excess of that provided by the Master Plan of storm drainage; and c. The project, together with the recommended Conditions of Approval, complies with all minimum development standards for the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and d. The project has been designed with an urban architectural style, including stacked stone, horizontal siding, and stucco with articulation elements to create contrast; and e. The buildings are odented along 4th Street, with parking pdmadly to the rear to maximize screening from public view. 3. Based upon the substantial 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: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 01-34 DRCTPM15536 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 2 b. The design or improvements of the Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Subarea 18 Specific Plan; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The Tentative Parcel Map is not likely to cause sedous public health problems; and f. The design of the Tentative Parcel Map will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the Staff Report of March 29, 2001, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental review for the application, the Planning Commission finds that this proposal complies with the Class 15 - Minor Land Divisions categorical exemption, as defined in Section 15315 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. 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: General: 1) This approval is contingent upon approval of related Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment 00-04. En.qineedn.q Division 2) Improve 4th Street to "Major Divided Arterial" standards, including curvilinear sidewalk, street trees, streetlights, drive approach, traffic signs and striping: a) Since the proposed secondary access on 4th Street is for "Exit Only," the proposed 35-foot wide drive approach is acceptable. If the said access becomes a two-way access, a dght turn lane will be required. In addition, it shall conform with the Gated Entrance Design Guide and "stacking distance" shall conform to the driveway policy. The entrance shall have two 20-foot ddve aisles separated by a 10-foot wide median. The median shall not extend into the public right-of-way. b)Conduit and pertinent structures for a fiber optic cable link shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. c) Provide traffic signal interconnect conduit along the 4th Street frontage. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCTPM15536 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 2 a. The Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Subarea 18 Specific Plan; and b. The design or improvements of the Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Subarea 18 Specific Plan; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The Tentative Parcel Map is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the Tentative Parcel Map will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the Staff Report of March 29, 2001, together with all wdtten and oral reports included for the environmental review for the application, the Planning Commission finds that this proposal complies with the Class 15 - Minor Land Divisions categorical exemption, as defined in Section 15315 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: En,qineerin,q Division 1) Improve 4th Street to "Major Divided Arterial" standards, including curvilinear sidewalk, street trees, streetlights, ddve approach, traffic signs and striping: a) Since the proposed secondary access on 4th Street is for "Exit Only," the proposed 35-foot wide drive approach is acceptable. If the said access becomes a two-way access, a dght turn lane will be required. In addition, it shall conform with the Gated Entrance Design Guide and "stacking distance" shall conform to the ddveway policy. The entrance shall have two 20-foot ddve aisles separated by a 10-foot wide median. The median shall not extend into the public right-of-way. b) Conduit and pertinent structures for a fiber optic cable link shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. c)Provide traffic signal interconnect conduit along the 4th Street frontage. d) Provide a 200-foot right.turn lane from 4th Street to "A" Street. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCTPM15536 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 3 2) Improve 5th Street to "Local Industrial" standards, including sidewalk, street trees, drive approach, traffic signs and striping: a) The 5th Street entrance shall be in accordance with the Gated Entrance Design Guide and "stacking distance" shall conform to the Driveway Policy. The entrance shall have two 20-foot ddve aisles separated by a 10-foot wide median. The median shall not extend into the public right-of-way. 3) Improve "A" Street to "Modified Local Industrial" standards, including sidewalk, street trees, ddve approach, traffic signs and stdping (curb to curb 18' SB, 12' LT, 20' NB for truck turning), total of 72-foot street dedication. The cul-de-sac bulb shall require additional dedication per City Standards. There will be no sidewalk and street trees on the east side of "A" Street. a) The "A" Street entrance shall be in accordance with the Gated Entrance Design Guide and "stacking distance" shall conform to the Driveway Policy. The entrance shall have two 20-foot wide ddve aisles separated by a 10-foot wide median. The median shall not extend into the public right-of-way. b) Align "A" Street with future Vincent Avenue in the City of Ontado (which will ultimately have a traffic signal and a median opening). Said alignment shall be sent to the City of Ontario for approval. 4) This development will be conditioned to provide the following improvements per the improvement certificate for Parcel 6 on Parcel Map 14647, and Exhibit "C" of Development Agreement 94-01 (Ordinance 526): a) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical) on the project side of 4th Street shall be undergrounded from the first pole on the west side of the westerly project boundary to the first pole off site of the easterly project boundary, pdor to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. Reimbursement of one-half of the City adopted cost for undergreunding from future development as it occurs on the opposite side of the street is not feasible, because the property is in the City of Ontado. b) A contribution in-lieu of construction for the future median island in 4th Street shall be paid to the City pdor to issuance of building permits or Final Parcel Map 15536 approval, whichever comes first. The amount of contribution shall be one-half the cost of the median times the length of the project frontage. c) Provide drainage facilities serving Parcels 6, 7, and 8, including the reconstruction of the golf course detention facility outlet control. Developer may submit a drainage study for alternative improvements subject to the City Engineer appreval. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DRCTPM15536 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 4 5) In reference to a storm drain requirement through this development: a) Provide easement for a minimum 12-foot dedication of a public storm drain and maintenance access through this parcel b) The existing Drainage Acceptance Agreement with the golf course must be amended for this storm drain facility. c) Obtain off-site drainage easement or realign the storm drain. 6) This development will be conditioned to pay the following fees, per Exhibit "D" of Development Agreement 94-01 (Ordinance 526), upon development: a) Transportation Development Fees. 7) Development shall make a fair share contribution for a traffic signal on 4th Street at project entrance in the amount of $55,000.00. Signal lights to be installed by the City of Ontario. 8) Provide suggested route to school study for the walking or bussing of all students to and from 'school. Provide bus stop locations and facilities as required. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF MARCH, 2001 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T, McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Bullet, Secretary I, Brad Bullet, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 28th day of March, 2001, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY' DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 15536 SUBJECT: 496 UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT APPLICANT: FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF 4TH STREET, WEST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its / / agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Approval of Tentative Pamel Map No. 15536 is granted subject to the approval of Development / / Review 67 and Industrial Area Specific Plan 00-04. 3. 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. 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. 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 Rancho Cucamonga Specific Plan 93-01. 2. 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. sc-,2-o0 ½,\ Project No. TPM 15536 Completion Date 3. 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. 4. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property / / owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710 FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: D. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to __/__./ perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the / / time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading 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 existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California Registered Civil Engineer. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR ICE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: E, Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. / /__ 2. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for / /__ approved openings: 4th Street. 3. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be .__/ / dedicated to the City. 4. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes on 4th Street, to provide a / / minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. F, Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail 4th Street X X (c) X X X (d) (e) 5th Street X X X X X "A" Street X X X X X X (f) Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item {e) Traffic Siqns {f) Access Ramps. SC-12-00 2 H, Project No, TPM 15536 Completion Date 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights /_ / on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being pedormed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction / / permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and / / interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction ~ / project along major or secondary streets and at intersections fol' future traffic signals and intemonnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of thE) street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer Notes: (1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless othenNise specified by the City Engineer. (2)Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all comers of intersections per City / / Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring constructior~ shall remain open to traffic at all times with / /.__ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be / / installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. /.__/__ 3. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in / / accordance with the City's street tree program. 4. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with / / adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commemial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. G. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting / / Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 2. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective /.__/__ Beautification Master Plan 4th Street. H, Drainage and Flood Control 1. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map / / approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. sc- -oo 3 1,3- Project No. TPM 15536 Completion Date I. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each pamel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, / __ electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. / / Approval of the final pamel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. J. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all __/____ new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved.  PLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, 9) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: K. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Fire flow requirement shall be: 2,500 gallons per minute, Per '97 UFC Appendix Ill-A, 3, (b) (Increase). -OR x A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. ..X 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. 4. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be / / submitted to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of the required fire protection system. SC-12-00 4 Project No. 'rPM 15536 Completion Date 5. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final / / inspection. 6. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: x Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. x Other: CBC. 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. 7. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of / / sprinkler system. 8. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: / / X California Code Regulations Title 24. 9. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: __/__ X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 32. X Other: Outside turning radius 50 feet, inside radius = 20 feet 10. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. A building directory shall be required, as noted below: / / X Lighted directory within 20 feet of main entrance(s). 14. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of pumhase shall be /___/ submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 15. Fire District fee(s), plus a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga / / Fire Protection District as follows: X $132 for CCWD Water Plan review/underground water supply. X $677 for New Commemial and Industrial Development (per new building).** **Note: Separate plan check fees for Tenant Improvement work, fire protection systems (sprinklem, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submJttal of plans. 16. 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-12-00 5 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-04, A REQUEST TO AMEND PLANNING AREA 6 TO ALLOW MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT A DENSITY RANGE OF 24 TO 30 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 4TH STREET WEST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF; APN: 210-082-46. A. Recitals. 1. Fairfield Development filed an application for Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 28th day of March 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public hearing on March 28, 2001, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property within the City; and b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment; and c. The proposed amendment is consistent with the flexible land use concept of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan or the General Plan, and will provide for the logical development of the Planning Area 6 and the General Plan and with related development; and b. The amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. SUBAREA 18 AMENDMENT 00-04 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 2 c. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in thp vicinity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan and the purposes of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan; and e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified as a Master EIR for the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan. The Califbmia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 21157.1 provides that the preparation and certification of a Master EIR allows for the limited review of subsequent projects that were described in the Master EIR as being within the scope of the reporting accordance with certain requirements. However, because of the changes that are submitted by this project, an Addendum was prepared for said project. An Addendum to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan Final EIR is apprcpdate documentation because some changes or additions are necessary to describe the proposed residential project but none of the conditions described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the attached Addendum based on the following findings: a. There have not been substantial changes in the project that require major revisions to the previous EIR because of new significant'environmental effects or a substantial increase in severity of previously identified significant effects. b. There have not been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. c. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified as a Master EIR (SCH#93102055) for the Subarea 18 Specific Plan. The California Environmental Quality ACt (CEQA) Section 21157.1 provides that the preparation and certification of a Master EiR allows for the limited review of subsequent projects that were described in the Master EIR as being within the scope of the Master EIR. However, because of the changes that are submitted by this project, an Addendum was prepared for said project. An Addendum to the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan final EIR is appropriate documentation because some changes or additions are necessary to describe the proposed residential project, however none of the conditions described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EI R have occurred. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the attached Addendum based on the following findings: 5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment No. 00-04, as shown in the Staff Report and attached Exhibit "A." 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. SUBAREA 18 AMENDMENT 00-04 - FAIRFIELD APARTMENTS March 28, 2001 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2001. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY:. Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Bullet, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 28th day of March 2001, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FF DEVELOPMENT L.P. Telephone(858)457-2123 Facsimile (858) 457-1121 September 26, 2000 City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Empire Lakes-Parcel 6 Project Description The beIow text describes the proposed amendments to the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18, Planning Area VI. This amendment is proposed to allow multiple family residential development in Planning Area VI as a permitted use. This amendment to Sub-Area 18, Planing Area VI has been prepared in conjunction with an Site Location Planning Area VI of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan is located north of Fourth Street, east oftbe Empire Lakes Golf Course, west ofl~lanning Area VII, and south of the Fifth Street extension. Amendments to IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan The following amendments are applicable to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to allow multiple family residential development as an additional permitted use within Planning Area VI. Section 1.4 PLANNING AREA VI - OFFICE USES/BUSINESS PARKIMULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL This planning area is approximately 23 acres and includes the greatest amount of golf course footage of any planning area within the Sub-Area 18. The summary land use matrix identifies a variety of uses that are compatible with the golf course including: indoor recreation/entertainment; restaurant; mixed use commercial; hotel/conference center; ofl~ce/commercial; multiple family residential; a,-d research and development/light industrial; and business park. TABLE 1 - 1 and TABLE 4-1 (SUMMARY OF LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM) are amended to include Multiple Family Residential for Planning Area VI with a Maximum Development Potential of 690 residential units and a density of 24-30 du/ac. Section 4.2 Land Use Plan SOUTttEASTERN ANCHOR (Fourth Street and Millicent Avenue) Planning Area VI: · Office/Commercial · Multiple Family Residential This p 'lanning area has both visibility from fourth Street and extensive golf course amenity frontage. It is envisioned to be a campus-style office/business park or a multiple family residential development capitalizin~ on tlae golf course amenity. This parcel is also a potential City of Rancho Cucamonga September 26, 2000 Page 2 TABLE 5-1 SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY PLANNING AREA is amended to include Multiple Family Residential as a Permitted (P) use in Planning Area VI. TABLE 5-2 LAND USE TYPE DEFINITIONS is amended to include RESIDENTIAL use types with the following sub-category: High Residential Density High density residential development With a density of up to 30 dwelling units per gross acre. Development shall be compatible with surrounding uses. Section 5.3 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS Planning Area VI High Density Residential Site Development Standards Residential uses in Planning Area VI shall comply with Chapter 17.08 of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code for the High Residential District (H) zone, except as modified below: A. Table 17.08.040-D - Street scape Setback Standards: Minimum building setback along Fourth Street for multiple family residential shall be 45 feet. FIGURE 5-1 CONCEPTUAL STREET SCAPE MASTER PLAN amend to remove the through street shown fi.om Fourth Street to Fifth Street along the eastern boundary of Planning Area VI. FIGURE 5-2 MAJOR ARTERIAL DIVIDED STREET CLASSIFICATION amend to allow linear sidewalks to create a more urban form. General Amendments 1. In instances in which the Development Guidelines are inconsistent with the implementation of an "urban" development theme for Planning Area VI, as well as the Site Plan specific for this area, minor departures fi.om the Design Guidelines are acceptable subject to the approval of the Planning Director. 1. In the event of a conflict between the amended Specific Plan and the Development Code, the amended Specific Plan shall govern. 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite200 · San Diego, California 92121 City of Rancho Cucamonga September 26, 2000 Page 3 Fairfield prides itself on the design and construction quality of its apartmem communities. This project will be a viable component to the surrounding uses, and will provide a quality living environment for our tenants. Please comet me if you have any questions or require additional information (858) 457-2123. Very *July yours, Ed McCoy Pre-developmem Manager 5510 Mor~house Drive, Suite 200 · San Diego, California 92121 1RO~,,'vI,VOOD / £AIRt?TA Y PALm,dS' APART,~ENT~ c£&IPIR£' LAK£'~, - PARCEL IRONWOOD / FAIR WA Y PALMS APARTMENTS (EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6) ~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA PARCEL MAP N0.15536 SHEET INDEX SHEET INDEX SITE DATA ...................................... DIRECTORY SHEET NO SMEET TITLE SHEET NO. SCALE SHEET TITLE SCALE ARCHITECTURAL: CIVIL ..... OA,T'~ .^.E, ~o~.~ .... T¥1:IO^L ISTF~:ETI ELEYA?,O.$ pF~ASE, OUILDING .... %1.0' LANDSCAPE ............... E M a: I R E L a, K E S P A R C F L 6 A P A R T M E N T S E M P i R ~ L ~, K E S P & R C E i 6 A P A R T M P N '~' S Fairway Palms at Empire Lakes Window Trim Fascia Roof 60/40 Blend Fascia Stucco Body Window Trim Siding Bod' Stucco Body Body Rock Rails Roof Iron Wood at Empire Lakes LIGHTFOOT GROUP II[t ~0~ I · . 4 4~ / t4~4-~'4~',~) ~ ]iffI git ', I ,' _ ~ ~ ~ / / . .,,,,.../~ ~ ~ ,~/ / ~ OOLF COU~S[ , /~,~ ~ ~ ~ / [ ..- ...//~~"~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,,~ / .... , -~~~~ SITE PLAN A1-1 ~='~:4~,~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ............ EMPIRE LAKES '~ ~ITE (11) SITE (11 "'"~ PHASE I SITE PLAN S I T E P L a N Al-la E)F; ........... 6 A P A R T M E N t S ~. ~. : EMPIRE LAKES I PARCEL I I I i 8lIE (I) ,~,r SITE PLAN E P L A N PHASE II /- A~ ~b EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS ............ i:i?i;.:::":::: I i A3__ __ A3 I A1 A1 I I A1 A1 I, A3 A3 I I I FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN BUILD NG I-3 I I '~'-'~' .... ~ F F D E V E L O P M E N T L . P . --"~c~7 I ~~a E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S I ~,~ .~....~.,. ~,,=,.~ ::::~ ............ ~ R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N I A _ I ! A1 A1 A1 A1 a 3 '~ ~ ~r. A3 I TYPiCal flOOR PLAN - BUILDING I-3 I E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C e I 6 a P A R T M E N T S SIDE (STREET) ELEVAT ON - BUILDING I-3 (PHASE I) FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING -3 (PHASE ) F F D E V E L O P M E N T L P * ~%o~,~ [] [~ ~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T U E N T S !.;.i~?:,!,; R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N ) A -- SIDE (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING I-3 (PHASE I) FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILD NG I-3 (PHASE I) E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S SIDE (S REET) ELEVATION BUILDING I-3 (PHASE II) FRONT STREET) ELEVATION - BUILDING I-3 (PHASE II) E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T U E U T S SIDE (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING I-3 (PHASE II) FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING I-3 (PHASE II) E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S / Cl B1 B1 Cl Cl B1 B1 C1 FiRS LEVEL FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING IV-3 F F DEVELOPMENT L. P. E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S :..-.'.::::::.' R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L C1 B1 B1 01 01 B1 B1 01 TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING IV-3 E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S !.i,i;!i:!.!.!:.:.; R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N I A ~.. SIDE (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING IV-3 PHASE I FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION - BUILDING V-3 (PHASE F F DEVELOPMENT L P. E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S SiDE (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING IV-3 (PHASE I) FRONT (LANDSCAPE ELEVATION - BUILDING IV-3 (PHASE I) F F D E V E L 0 P M E N T L . P . ---'~'~ [] [~ ~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S !i.;;i'i:!.!!~.:.; :::~: ............ SIDE [STREET) ELEVATION BU LDING IV-3 (PHASE II) FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING V-3 (PHASE II) F F DEVELOPMENT L P E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S SIDE (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING IV-3 PHASE II) FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILD NG IV-3 (PHASE I) EMPIRE LAKES _ PARCEL 6 A P AR TMEN S ............ A4 A4 I A1 A1 I I, I ' ', i A1 A1 I A4 A4 I, '1 I ~1 FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN BUILDING V- 3 I m ~,~,~,,, F F D E V E L O P M E N T L P ~-o,, ~1 ~ I ~=)[A~.~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S !.i.:,i!i:i:!!~,!.; I '~"~"~'~'~ ~'~' ~'~'~ ' ;i~:;: ........... A4 A4 A1 A1 A1 A1 A4 A4 TYPICAL FLOOR P AN - BUILDING V-3 E M P I R e L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S -"~ I I I I I I I I SIDE (STREET) ELEVATION - BUILDING V-3 [PHASE I, I I I I I FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING V-3 (PHASE I) ~¢-~ E M P I R E L A K E S- P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~'~. R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N I A SIDE ANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING V-3 (PHASE I FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING V-3 (PHASE ) EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS .............. SIDE (STREET ELEVAT ON BUILDING V-3 (PHASE I) FRONT (STREE ) ELEVA ION - BUILDING V-3 (PHASE E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S :..,.,.'.:;.::::' SIDE LANDSCAPE) ELEVAT ON BUILDING V-3 (PHASE II) FRON ILANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING V-3 {PHASE II) F F DEVELOPMENT L, P. E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S i!~"; ........... R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N I A B2 B2 ~ A2 A2 II GARAGE ~,GE GARAGE FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN GARAGE LEVEL) BUILDING VII-3 E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A C A L IF O R NJ A B2 B2 A2 A2 B4 A2 A2 B4 TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN - BU LDING VII-3 EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS .............. R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N I A _ !!i!?~!.!:~i!~!!' SIDE (STREET) ELEVATION - BUILD NG VII-3 (PHASE ) FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING Vll-3 (PHASE -- E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S :~ii:~.~:::.:: .... SIDE {LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BU LDING VII-3 (PHASE I) FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING VII-3 (PHASE I) F F D E V E L O P M E N T L P . ~"~-~? ~]'~ ~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S !.i.;;.~i::.:!!i.; SIDE (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING VII-3 (PHASE II) FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING VII-3 (PHASE II) E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ............... SIDE (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING VII-3 (PHASE II) FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING VII-3 (PHASE II) F F DEVELOPMENT L . P. --"~ [] [~ ~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S !.i.i;!i::.:.!~.:.: R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A C A L I F O R N I A ~ i! B2 B1 B1 B2 4= ~-~ I I ~ .... J F1 L ...... s I ~ l) II m'-m FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN (GARAGE LEVEL) - BUILDING VIII-3 F F DEVELOPMENT L P e M P I R e L a k E S P A R C e L 6 A P A R T M E N T S R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A C A L I F O R N I A B2 B1 B1 B2 -- B1 B1 -- B4 B4 TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING VIII-3 F F DEVELOPMENT L. P. E U P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N SIDE (STREET ELEVATION BUILDING VIII-3 (PHASE I) FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING V 11-3 {PHASE I) F F DEVELOPMENT L P EMPIRE LAKES PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS :'"~";:~:; R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N I A i~i:'~;;;';; .... SIDE (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING VIII-3 (PHASE I) I I, I I I I FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING VIII-3 (PHASE I) ~.~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~ ~:,~ ......... .,;~.~'~;~"~ .......... R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N ~ A C A L I F 0 R N I A ~ SIDE (STREET) ELEVATION - BUILDING VI(I-3 (PHASE II) FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING VIII-3 (PHASE II) ~'~ E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S BIDE (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING VII1-3 (PHASE It) FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING V 11-3 (PHASE F F D E V E L O P M E N T L . P . c_,_~_¢~ ~ [~ [] E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~,~. ~- ~.~ ~ ~ -=' __ GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE ~L~--=~' " " '~-~ ~ - R A N C H O C U C A M O N ~ A C A L I F O R N I A J;L.T,,.... .... TYPICAL LEVEL FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING XI F F DEVELOPMENT L P. E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S R A N C H O C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F O R N I A :~.~ I I I I I SIDE (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING Xlll-3 (PHASE I) I I I I I I I FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING XI I-3 (PHASE I) ~.,~. '!~ F F DEVELOPMENT L. P --'~-~7 [] ~ E~ ~:,~'-,~ E M P I R E L A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~'";"~:~;; ~?~.~"~, R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A C A L I F O R N I A ~ ! I SIDE (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING XIII-3 (PHASE I) I I i I I I I' I FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION - BUILDING XIII-3 (PHASE I) ~.~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S :...-.:'~:.::::' SIDE (STREET) ELEVATION BUILDING Xlll-3 (PHASE II) FRONT (STREET) ELEVATION - BUILDING XI I-3 (PHASE I) F F D E V E L O P M E N T L . P --'~o~-~ [] [~ ~ E U P IR E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T U E N m S ~ ii!:.~:::,: ...... RANCHO C U C A M 0 N GA CALIFORNIA ~ ............ SIDE (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING Xlll-3 (PHASE I FRONT (LANDSCAPE) ELEVATION BUILDING XlII-3 (PHASE E M P I R E I A k E S - P a R C E I 6 A P A R T M e N T S :'":":::':: I I ,,,..,.o.TYP' WALL SECTION · WINDOW WALL ~ TYP. SECTION AT PARTY WALL,,~.,, o- ~ TYP. SECTION AT BALCONY,~..,..o. ~¢¢&5 E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~.-.~%~ R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A C A L I F O R N I A-- ! ~, DETAIIL ! I TYPICAL SIDE VIEW TYPICAL FRONT VIEW I PATIO AND BALCONY NOISE BARRIER - ELEVATIONS ! SOUND WALL NOISE BARRIER ~ PATIO AND BALCONY NOISE BARRIER - FLOOR PLAN8 '"'"" TYPICAL SECTION PATIO AND BALCONY NOISE BARRIER STREET SIDE OF BUILDING8 FRONTING 4TH ST. I ~' ',;~ F F D E V E L O P M E N T L . P ~;~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N ~. R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L [ F 0 R N I A / ELEVATION - CLUBHOUSE ~/~3~ ~ ,~-,FLOOR.. PLAN - CLUBHOUSE (PHASE I} i~ ,~--,.-.-ROOF PLAN - CLUBHOUSE (PHASE l) ~' ,~ F F D E V E L O P M E N T L , P . ~ E M P I R e I A K E S P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ELEVATION - CLUBHOUSE F F DEVELOPMENT L. P. e M P I R E L a k e S - P a R C e I 6 a P A R T M E N T S ~:-~',¥::':: ...... ROOF PLAN ELEVATION- CLUBHOUSE ELEVATION- CLUBHOUSE EMPIRE LAKES - PARCEL 6 APARTMENTS .............. ~ A N Clio C UC ~UO N ~ A CA L~F OR N~A ~ ~.~.:~';~?~ ! ROOF PLAN I ~ ELEVAT,ON - LE^S'NG OFF,CE ! ~ ~LEVAT,O~- LEAS,N~ OFF, CE '1 FLOOR PLAN - LEASING OFFICE (PHASE II) I I I ~ ELEVATION - LEASING OFFICE ELEVATION - LEASING OFFICE ~J~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~ R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N I A FLOOR PLAN - MAIL ROOM ROOF PLAN - MAIL ROOM ~..),,.--,.-~FLOOR PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING ~ ,,.--~.-~ROOF PLAN - MAINTENANCE ,,.-,'--ELEVATIONS- MAIL ROOM PHASE' ~ ,,~-,.-.ELEVATIONS- MAINTENANCE PHASE I ELEVATIONS - MAIL ROOM PHASE Il ~ ELEVATIONS - MAINTENANCE PHASE II ~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ~ R A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A C A L I F 0 R N I A .................... ::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~'~"~ ? ~ TYPICAL ELEVATION- CARPORT ~ ..... ~,~ ..... lit Il ii Ii Ii Il Ik H II ~CO0~ DETAIL PLAN VIEW SECTION * DETAIL - CARPORT ,.-.~.-o- ELEVATION REFUSE ENCLOSURE ."~ F F D E V E L O P M E N T L. P . ~ E M P I R E L A K E S - P A R C E L 6 A P A R T M E N T S ............... ~, R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A C A L I F O R N I A -- '- CONCEPTUAL ROUGH GRADING PLAN °*1/~"~ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO '15536 AEI-CASC ENGINEERING dUNE. ?999 ,,,, ~' ' ~ ~t II /, I SECTION H-H ~*.~ ~o. ~ ~,~ ~ II, --~,~~~ ..... ~.~c~ SECTION ~.o ~ ~ ~,~ ~_~~ _~ ..................................... .......................... _ ........................... _ '~o~ ~o~ r,~,s~ INDEX MAP SECTION A-A ~,~,,~ 1"=20' ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ .... ~?~:~;,,~ ~,o~ ~-~ WPICA& S~CTION - 4th STREET SECTION B-B SECTION C-C SECTION D-D SECTION E-E SECTION F-F SECTION K-K ~ "=20' EASEMENT NOTE$~ ~ LEGEND: CONSTRUCTION NOTES: -. SHEET 2 OF 5 I ' - ' '~<- - /; ....... \ \ \\\ \ SHEET 5 OF 5 T HE CITY OF I~AN Cfi 0 CUCAMONGA Staff Report DATE: Mamh 28, 2001 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT BACKGROUND: On Mamh 21,2001, the City Council approved the Victoria Arbors Master Plan as a revision to the Victoria Community Plan. As you may recall, this master plan was submitted with the American Beauty proposal for a significant residential component as part of the Mixed Use concept for the area adjacent to the City's future Mall complex. A Victoria Community Plan Amendment was previously approved that incorporated the development/design features of the Master Plan into the greater community plan. With the American Beauty amendment now the guiding format for the Mixed Use section, it would be appropriate to consider "clean-up" amendments for the Victoria Community Plan. Staff is suggesting incorporating the Arbors Master Plan provisions, where appropriate, throughout the Victoria Lakes section, and also adjusting the policies and text for internal consistency. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission direct the Planning staff to initiate a Victoria Community Plan amendment to ensure internal consistency between the new Mixed Use master plan provisions and the Victoria Community Plan. Brad Buller City Planner BB:AW:gs ITEM K