Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-02-28 - Agenda Packet Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS February 28, 2024 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 7:00 PM A. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Chair Morales Vice Chair Boling Commissioner Dopp Commissioner Daniels Commissioner Diaz B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Planning/Historic Commission (“Planning Commission”) on any Consent Calendar item or any item not listed on the agenda that is within the Commission’s subject matter jurisdiction. The Planning Commission may not discuss any issue not included on the agenda, but may set the matter for discussion during a subsequent meeting. C. CONSENT CALENDAR C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of January 24, 2024. D. PUBLIC HEARINGS D1. TIME EXTENSION -– MANNY BADIOLA – A request for a one-year time extension of Tentative Map SUBTT18305 to subdivide a 4-acre parcel of land into 6 residential lots within the Very Low Residential (VL) Zone and the Equestrian Overlay District on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; APN 1074-201-01 and 02. Staff finds the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Mitigated Negative Declaration approved by the Planning Commission on January 13, 2021, through Resolution 21-07 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Time Extension DRC2024-00017). D2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – KIMLEY HORN - A request to continue to operate an existing warehouse, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing and assembly facility within two existing industrial/warehouse buildings totaling 302,861 square-feet within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on Milliken Avenue between Arrow Route and Jersey Boulevard at 8595 Milliken Avenue and 11340 Jersey Boulevard; APN: 0229-111-62, -63. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15301 – Existing Facilities (Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00212, DRC2023-00213). D3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to continue to operate an existing warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility within an existing industrial/warehouse building totaling 124,328 square-feet within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on White Oak Avenue south of Arrow Route at 10955 Arrow Route; APN: 0209-145-02. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15301 – Existing Facilities (Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00382). D4. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW & VARIANCE – SAURABH PATEL - A request for site plan and architectural review of a three-story 4,216 square foot mixed-use building on a 3,145 square parcel of land including a request to reduce the required onsite parking by two spaces, reduce the rear yard setback by 5 feet and increase the height by 4 feet, for a site in the Corridor 1 (CO1) Zone located on the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Estacia Court; APN: 0208-152-18. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Sections 15303, which covers the construction of a limited number of structures in an urbanized area, and Section 15305, which covers minor alterations in land use limitations (Minor Design Review DRC2023- 00053 and Variance DRC2024-00044). D5. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. Consideration to amend Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to amend requirements for Density Bonus applications and agreements, Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s), update administrative review of specified modifications to historic structures, and update allowed use descriptions for Microbrewery and Light Warehouse and Distribution uses. This project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. This item will be forwarded to City Council for final action (DRC2024-00047). E. DIRECTOR ANNOUNCEMENTS F. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS G. ADJOURNMENT TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's office at (909) 477-2700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please complete a speaker card located next to the speaker’s podium. It is important to list your name, address (optional) and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 3 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under “Public Communications.” As an alternative to participating in the meeting you may submit comments in writing to Elizabeth.Thornhill@cityofrc.us by 12:00 PM on the date of the meeting. Written comments will be distributed to the Commissioners and included in the record. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are available at www.CityofRC.us. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission’s decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk’s Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $3,365 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cell phones while the meeting is in session. I, Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted at least Seventy-Two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the City's website. HPC/PC MINUTES – January 24, 2024 Page 1 of 5 Draft 2 8 3 1 Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda January 24, 2024 Draft Minutes Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 7:00 p.m. The regular meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on January 24, 2024. The meeting was called to order by Chair Dopp at 7:00 p.m. A. Roll Call Planning Commission present: Chair Dopp, Vice Chair Morales, Commissioner Boling, Commissioner Daniels, and Commissioner Diaz. Staff Present: Serita Young, Assistant City Attorney; Jennifer Nakamura, Deputy Director of Planning; Bond Mendez, Assistant Planner; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Sean McPherson, Principal Planner; Stacy Lee, Assistant Planner; Sophia Serafin, Assistant Planner; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant. B. Public Communications Chair Dopp opened the public communications. The following individuals commented on the Grove/Foothill development: Sarah Edelmaier, Don Horvatich, Dr. Sharon Lyn Stein, Jason Caldwell. The comments included the following: •Traffic/congestion •Preserve history of the site No other comments, Chair Dopp closed public communications. C. General Business C1. Annual Selection of Officers for the Commission and Appointments to other Committees. Commissioner Boling was appointed unanimously as member of Design Review Committee, 1 year term. Motion by Commissioner Boling, second by Commissioner Morales. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Commissioner Daniels was appointed unanimously as member of Design Review Committee, 1-year term. Motion by Commissioner Morales, second by Commissioner Daniels. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Commissioner Diaz was appointed unanimously as Alternate for the Design Review Committee. Motion by Commissioner Dopp, second by Commissioner Boling. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote.    Page 4 HPC/PC MINUTES – January 24, 2024 Page 2 of 5 Draft 2 8 3 1 Commissioner Boling was appointed unanimously as member of Trails Advisory Committee, 1-year term. Motion by Commissioner Daniels, second by Commissioner Dopp. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Commissioner Diaz was appointed unanimously as member of Trails Advisory Committee, 1-year term. Motion by Commissioner Daniels, second by Commissioner Morales. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Commissioner Boling was appointed unanimously as Vice-Chair, 1-year term. Motion by Commissioner Daniels, second by Commissioner Dopp. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Commissioner Morales was appointed unanimously as Chair, 1-year term. Motion by Commissioner Boling, second by Commissioner Dopp. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Chair Dopp stated that he is still on the Public Arts Committee until next year. Chair Dopp expressed his appreciation to the Commissioners for stepping up into various positions. D. Consent Calendar D1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of November 8, 2023. Motion to adopt minutes as presented by Commissioner Daniels; second by Commissioner Boling; Motion carried 4-0-1. (Commissioner Diaz abstaining) E. Public Hearings E1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – ROCKSTARS OF TOMORROW - A request to establish a specialized education and training school for a music school in an existing industrial building within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on the northeast corner of 7th Street and Hellman Avenue at 9350 7th Street, Units B & C; APN: 0209-171-57. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15301 – Existing Facilities (Conditional Use Permit DRC2021-00332). Bond Mendez, Associate Planner, provided Commissioners with Staff Report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). She mentioned the Conditions of Approval was revised to enforce the rules and regulations. She explained that original 2 and 3 were modified and conditions 4 and 5 where added. Copies were placed on the dais. Chair Dopp opened public hearing. Alan Benson, Applicant, was present and available for questions. Commissioner Dopp asked if the revised conditions of approval are acceptable. Alan Benson replied yes. Commissioner Daniels asked if they are currently located at the site. Alan Benson replied yes. Commissioner Daniels asked about the sound during practice lessons and if there have been any concerns by nearby property owners.    Page 5 HPC/PC MINUTES – January 24, 2024 Page 3 of 5 Draft 2 8 3 1 Alan Benson replied no problems received and that it is controlled. Commissioner Boling asked how long they have been in operation. Alan Benson answered they started July 2020 and began operations October 2020. Commissioner Boling asked to describe day to day operations that takes place. Alan Benson replied students take ½ hour lesson and work with instructor to become a better musician. Commissioner Boling confirmed the occupancy; 6 employees, 5 students at any one time. Alan Benson answered yes. Commissioner Boling asked if they are comfortable with the conditions of approval as follows: •Hours of operation •Days of operation •Any potential restrictions on live entertainment Alan Benson answered yes, they are comfortable with it. Commissioner Boling asked if they held any live entertainment in the past. Alan Benson replied that they do most of their performances outside of the studio at different locations. He said they look for venues and places within the community. Commissioner Boling asked if they had live shows at their facility. Alan Benson answered yes, they have when other venues have to cancel, and stated they were told they are not allowed, and he is good with that. With no comments from the public, Chair Dopp closed public hearing. Commissioner Boling asked to explain the potential ratification if the business fails to comply with the conditions of approval. Jennifer Nakamura, Deputy Director of Planning, explained that the city would first wait for a complaint, then involve community improvement and if needed, start citation process. If compliance is not achieved through the citation process, it’s possible we could recommend the conditional use permit come back to the commission for modification. She mentioned that the applicant could apply to modify the permit at any time, including applying for an entertainment permit. Jennifer Nakamura stated if they were to charge for tickets, admission tax would need to be collected and an entertainment permit would be required. Alan Benson stated that they do not charge for their performances. No selling of tickets. Commissioner Boling indicated for clarity that it is not being requested or considered tonight. Jennifer Nakamura replied that is correct. Clarification was added to the conditions. This was not part of an entertainment permit and would need to be filed separately.    Page 6 HPC/PC MINUTES – January 24, 2024 Page 4 of 5 Draft 2 8 3 1 Serita Young, Assistant City Attorney, added that the initial goal in code enforcement is voluntary compliance through that process. She said a process of coming back to the commission due to a replication of a CUP would be a last resort due to consistent violations over a period of time in the event there is no compliance. Commissioner Boling asked the applicant if there is any need to consider expanding hours of operation. Alan Benson stated it was recommended to start the process rather than delay it any further and revisit if there is a need to expand. Chair Dopp stated that he appreciates the applicant working through the elements of the conditional use permit. Motion to adopt Resolution 24-02 Conditional Use Permit DRC2021-00332, with the revision to the Conditions of Approval, by Commissioner Daniels; Second by Commissioner Boling. Motion carried 5-0. E2.TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP – PATRIOT PARTNERS – A request to consolidate five (5) parcels of land into one (1) parcel totaling 5.2 acres within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on the south side of Whittram Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and Hickory Avenue at 13045 Whittram Avenue; APNs: 0229-162-04, -05, -11, -12, and -13. SUBTPM20642; Related files: Design Review DRC2022-00156 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00142. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15315 – Minor Land Divisions. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, provided Commissioners with Staff Report and PowerPoint Presentation (copy on file). Chair Dopp opened public hearing. Joe Deverian, representing Gary Walker (owner of the adjacent property). They had the following questions: •Would like to know about the build ups and its uses. •What will happen behind the train tracks. Jennifer Nakamura responded that a staff member will reach out to them regarding existing projects that are currently in the process. Motion to adopt the proposed Resolution 24-01, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM20642; by Commissioner Boling; Second by Commissioner Morales. Motion carried 5-0. F. Director Announcements - None G. Commission Announcements Commissioner Boling expressed his appreciation towards Chair Dopp navigating interesting meetings over the last couple of years. He looks forward to Commissioner Morales taking responsibility of future meetings. Commissioner Daniels expressed his appreciation for Chair Dopp and how he did a tremendous job in the last few years. Commissioner Morales concurs with his fellow Commissioners and thanked Chair Dopp for his service. Chair Dopp thanked his fellow Commissioners for their comments and expressed how much he enjoyed being Chair.    Page 7 HPC/PC MINUTES – January 24, 2024 Page 5 of 5 Draft 2 8 3 1 H. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Boling, second by Commissioner Morales to adjoin the meeting. Hearing no objections, Chair Dopp adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant Planning and Economic Development Department Approved:    Page 8 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION -– MANNY BADIOLA – A request for a one-year time extension of Tentative Map SUBTT18305 to subdivide a 4-acre parcel of land into 6 residential lots within the Very Low Residential (VL) Zone and the Equestrian Overlay District on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; APN 1074-201-01 and 02. Staff finds the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Mitigated Negative Declaration approved by the Planning Commission on January 13, 2021, through Resolution 21-07 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Time Extension DRC2024-00017). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: •Approve DRC2024-00017 for a one (1) year time extension of Tract Map SUBTT18305 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with attached conditions of approval. Background: On January 13, 2021, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 for the subdivision of a 4-acre parcel of land into 6 residential lots. That approval included Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 for wall height and Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 for the removal of onsite trees. Per Municipal Code Section 16.16.150 (Expiration), the approval of tentative maps shall expire in three (3) years, in this case SUBTT18305 would expire on January 13, 2024. The applicant submitted the one-year time extension request on January 10, 2024, prior to the expiration date. The related Minor Exception and Tree Removal Permit were approved for a 5-year period and will expire on January 13, 2026. The Design Review (DRC2021-00227) application for the related six single-family residences is under review. Site Description: The 4-acre project site is located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue, at the western terminus of Vista Grove Street. The project site is generally rectangular in shape with a 50-foot-wide strip of land connecting the main project site to Hermosa Avenue. The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feet along the south property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the east property line (plus the 50-foot-wide flag). The site generally slopes from north to south, with an elevation change of approximately 24 feet from the DATE:February 28, 2024 TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM:Matt Marquez, Planning and Economic Development Director INITIATED BY:Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner    Page 9 2 2 2 1 north property line (1,927 feet) to the south property line (1,903 feet). An existing single-family residence and accessory structure are located at the southeast corner of the project site. The remainder of the project site is undeveloped and covered with native and non-native grasses and multiple trees. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcels) are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Partially developed with Existing Residence Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) North Single-Family Residences Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) South Single-Family Residences Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) East Single-Family Residence Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) West Single-Family Residences Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) ANALYSIS: This time extension request is to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 for a one (1) year period to complete the final map process with the Engineering Department. The applicant anticipates resolving the outstanding issues, including submitting draft CC&Rs and posting bonds, within the coming months. No changes to the approved tentative map are proposed with this request and no new conditions relative to the project are proposed other than those which affect the expiration date. Municipal Code Section 16.16.107 (Extensions) permits up to 5 one-year times extensions of tentative maps and that the approving authority of tentative maps is the Planning Commission. The applicant submitted the one-year time extension request on January 10, 2024. The approval timeline Tentative Parcel Map SUBTT18305 is provided below: Conformance with Development Code: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 was designed to meet or exceed all development standards applicable to subdivisions in the Very Low Residential (VL) Zone and the Equestrian Overlay District as shown in the table below: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 Approving Authority Approval/Extension Type Approval Period Approval Date Expiration Date Planning Commission Original Approval 3 Years 01/13/21 01/13/24 Planning Commission Time Extension DRC2024-00017 1 Year (Proposed)02/28/24 01/13/25    Page 10 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2024-00017 – TENTATIVE MAP TIME EXTENSION - MANNY BADIOLA February 28, 2024 Page 3 2 2 2 1 Required Provided Compliant? Lot With 90 Feet Interior Lots/100 Feet Corner Lots Over 90 Feet Interior Lots and 100 Feet Corner Lots Yes Lot Depth 200 Feet Over 200 Feet Yes Lot Area 20,000 Min./22,500 Avg.20,005 - 26,858 SF 23,843 Avg.Yes Density .1-2 Units per Acre .66 Units per Acre Yes Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the City certified a Mitigated Negative Declaration on January 13, 2021, in connection with the City’s approval of SUBTT18305, Minor Exception (DRC2020-00217 and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2020-00218). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicates new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered, or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Staff has evaluated the time extension for SUBTT18305 and concludes that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previously certified Mitigated Negative Declaration. The subject time extension is being requested to provide additional time for the applicant to work with the Engineering Department to complete the final map process. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. The applicant does not propose any changes to the previously approved tentative tract map. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City’s consideration of the time extension for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with a request for time extension. However, the project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. If the extension is granted and the project developed, the proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the City’s annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services.    Page 11 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2024-00017 – TENTATIVE MAP TIME EXTENSION - MANNY BADIOLA February 28, 2024 Page 4 2 2 2 1 COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Although a specific current City Council goal does not apply to time extensions, if the extension is approved and the project developed, the project furthers the City’s core value of building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere. The proposed single-family residential lots will enhance the residential development in the surrounding neighborhood. The project is also consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code. The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Semi-Rural Neighborhood, and the Development Code zoning designation for the subject property is Very Low Residential (VL) Zone. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper on February 16, 2024, the property was posted on February 15, 2024, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on February 13, 2024. No comments have been received in response to these notifications. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Time Extension Request Letter Dated January 10, 2024 Exhibit C - Planning Commission Staff Report, Resolution of Approval and Conditions of Approval for Tentative Map SUBTT18305 dated January 13, 2021 Exhibit D - Draft Resolution of Approved 24-04 for Time Extension DRC2024-00017    Page 12 Exhibit A    Page 13 Manuel Badiola 10803 Foothill Blvd Suite 212 Rancho Cucamonga CA (909)518-1576 Manny@trinitya7.com 10th January 2024 Dear City of Rancho Cucamonga, We are asking for an Extension on our Tract map on 5360 Hermosa Ave in Rancho Cucamonga.We are hoping to finalize the final steps the city needs in this approval process in these next upcoming months.We are estimating to have all necessary information the city needs to schedule a city hearing meeting by the end of January and having approval by the end of February or beginning of March 2024. Thank you for your understanding and patience with our project.It has taken a very long time to get to this point of this project,almost lapsing three generations within our family.We are working very diligently on this project to complete this in a timely manner. Sincerely, Manuel Badiola Exhibit B    Page 14 STAFF REPORT DATE:January 13, 2021 TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning DirectorFROM: INITIATED BY: Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner SUBJECT:TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305, MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2020- 00217, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA – A request for site plan review to subdivide a 4-acre parcel of land into 6 residential lots for the future development of 6 single-family residences within the Very Low (VL) Residential District and the Equestrian Overlay District on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; APN 1074-201-01 and 02. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: •Approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305, Minor Exception DRC2020-00217, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with attached standard conditions. Site Description: The 4-acre project site is located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue, at the western terminus of Vista Grove Street. The project site is generally rectangular in shape with a 50-foot-wide strip of land connecting the main project site to Hermosa Avenue. The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feet along the south property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the east property line (plus the 50-foot-wide flag). The site generally slopes from north to south, with an elevation change of approximately 29 feet from the north property line (1,932 feet) to the south property line (1,903 feet). An existing single-family residence and accessory structure are located at the southeast corner of the project site. The remainder of the project site is undeveloped and covered with native and non-native grasses and multiple trees. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcels) are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre)Partially developed with Existing ResidenceSite Very Low Exhibit C 012    Page 15 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18305, ME DRC2020-00217 & TRP DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 2 Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) North Single-Family Residences South Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low Very Low Very Low East Single-Family Residence Single-Family ResidencesWest ANALYSIS: A.General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the 4-acre project site into six (6) lots for the future development of six (6) single-family residences. Each lot complies with the development standards for the Very Low (VL) Residential District. The project includes walls up to 8 feet in height for which the applicant has submitted a Minor Exception application (DRC2020-00218) for the additional wall height. Individual lot areas range between 20,005 square feet and 26,858 square feet, which are over the minimum of 20,000 square feet that is required. The average lot size is 23,843 square feet, over the required 22,500 square foot average lot size. Required Provided Over 90 Feet Interior Lots and 100 Feet Corner Lots Compliant? 90 Feet Interior Lots/100 Feet Corner LotsLot With Yes Lot Depth Lot Area 200 Feet Over 200 Feet 20,005 - 26,858 SF 23,843 Avg. .66 Units per Acre Yes Yes Yes 20,000 Min./22,500 Avg. .1-2 Units per AcreDensity The project site is within the Equestrian Overlay District, which necessitates the installation of a 15-foot wide local feeder trail to provide trail access to the rear yard of each lot and the larger trail network. Accordingly, a 15-foot-wide equestrian trail is proposed to be located adjacent to the south, west, and east property lines of the project site along with a 15-foot- wide trail connection to Hermosa Avenue. The trail will also connect to the existing private trail network to the west. The private equestrian trail will include the required trail access gates with horse step-throughs adjacent to Parcels #1 and #6 along with a 4-inch cover of decomposed granite. Corner cutoffs to aide vehicle navigation are provided adjacent to Parcels #3 and #4 along with vehicle turnarounds at Parcels #1 and #6. Each lot also provides a flat area for a 24-foot by 24-foot flat area for an equestrian corral that is a minimum of 70 from the building pad on the adjacent parcel. B.Minor Exception DRC2020-00217: The applicant submitted a Minor Exception to allow the construction of combination walls (garden walls/open fencing on top of retaining walls) with a maximum calculated height up to 8 feet. The additional wall height is necessary due to a grade change between the project site and the existing single-family residence at 5344 Hermosa, located to the east of the project site. The subject wall will be located along the south property line of the 50-foot-wide flag connecting the project site to Hermosa Avenue and along the east property line of Lot #6. The additional wall height will be most visible from the existing residence to the east. Staff has been in contact with this property owner who has stated that 013    Page 16 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18305, ME DRC2020-00217 & TRP DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 3 they do not want stepped retaining walls or sloped grades along their property line, necessitating the proposed retaining walls. The findings of facts below support the necessary Minor Exception findings, which are required by the City's Development Code: Finding: The Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan. Fact/s: The General Plan designation of the project site is Very Low (VL) Residential and the zoning of the property is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The Minor Exception does not affect the General Plan designation, zoning designation, or the residential purpose of the project site. Finding: The Minor Exception is compatible with the existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. Fact/s:The Minor Exception will not result in a substantially larger house, an increase in lot coverage, an increase in density, or adjustments to the physical lot area of the subject lots. Finding: The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary to allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or to accommodate unique site conditions. Fact/s: The proposed walls will be located generally where there are grade differences that warrant retaining walls. The retaining walls are required to construct a property line adjacent equestrian trail and to reduce grading on the adjacent lot. The adjacent property owner has stated that they prefer increased wall heights over slopes on their property. Finding: The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, and will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious properties or improvements in the vicinity. Fact/s: The Minor Exception will allow the applicant to construct walls that will provide a flat graded area to construct an equestrian trail adjacent to the property line. The walls will be consistent with the standards and guidelines of the City. C. Tree Removal Permit (DRC2020-00218): The project includes Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 for the removal of 52 trees. An Arborist Report (Laurel F. Everett, Jr., Arborist) was submitted that reviews the health and condition of the 52 onsite trees. The report concludes that based on poor health and improper pruning all the onsite trees are recommended for removal. The project is conditioned to replace the removed trees on a one-for-one basis including replanting the existing eucalyptus windrow; and D. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted to gather input and comments from the owners of the surrounding properties within 660 feet of the project site. This meeting was held via a Zoom video conference on June 30, 2020. Several property owners from the surrounding community attended. Although none of them had any specific 014    Page 17 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18305, ME DRC2020-00217 & TRP DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 4 objections to the project, there were questions relating to the drainage, equestrian trails, traffic, and wall height. The applicant addressed the questions and there were no additional concerns. E.Trails Advisory Committee: The project was reviewed by the Trails Advisory Committee on August 12, 2020. The Committee raised the following issues related to the proposed private equestrian trails: •That the plans show trail adjacent walls encroaching into the 15-foot-wide trail easement. • • • That a wider step-through gate design should be used for easier equestrian access. That the plans should show the double trail access gates at the rear of each lot. That the proposed wall along the west property line should be replaced with trail fencing with openings to access the existing trail network to the west. The applicant agreed to make the above changes which are reflected in the attached set of plans (Exhibit A). F.Design Review Committee: The project was not required to be reviewed by the Design Review Committee as the project scope does not include the single-family residences on the lots. The house product for the proposed lots will be reviewed by the Committee when it is submitted to the City. G. AB52 Tribal Consultation: Notification in accordance with AB52 was sent on June 11, 2020, to tribal communities from a list of six tribes that have requested notification by the City. Two tribes responded (San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kitz Nation). The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians requested in writing that language be incorporated into the final CEQA document requiring notification if cultural resources are found. The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kitz Nation requested that mitigation measures be included in the CEQA documents requiring an onsite tribal monitor during earthmoving actives. The CEQA document prepared for the project reflects the requested language/mitigation measures. H. Public Art: The public art provision of the Development Code (Chapter17.124) requires that public art be provided at the design review stage of the project. When the related residences are submitted for review, they will be required to provide art or pay an in-lieu fee of $750 per unit. I.Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the project was prepared by Ecorp Consulting, Inc. and reviewed by staff. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, it was determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. The mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to less than significant. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was 015    Page 18 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18305, ME DRC2020-00217 & TRP DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 5 prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. FISCAL IMPACT: The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the City’s annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Although a specific current City Council goal does not apply to the application, the project furthers the City’s core value of building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere. The proposed single-family residential lots will enhance the residential development in the surrounding neighborhood. The project is also consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code. The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Very Low Residential, and the Development Code zoning designation for the subject property is Low Residential (VL) Residential District. The proposed subdivision will create 6 single-family residential lots consistent with the underlying land use designations and compatible in size and configuration with neighboring residential lots. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper on date on December 9, 2020, the property was posted on date, and notices were mailed to 86 property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on date. No comments have been received in response to these notifications. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Complete Set of Plans Exhibit B - Trails Advisory Committee staff report dated August 12, 2020, along with TAC Minutes Exhibit C - Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Draft Resolution 21-01 of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 Draft Resolution 21-02 of Approval for Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 Draft Resolution 21-03 of Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 016    Page 19 VISTA GROVE ST.LOT "A"LOT "A" Exhibit A 017    Page 20 VISTA GROVE ST.LOT "A"LOT "A" 018    Page 21 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLANTRACT NO. 18305 DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATECITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGACONCEPTUAL GRADING PLANTRACT NO. 18305DESIGNJ.B.M. DRAWNJ.B.M. CHECKEDB.K.M. RECOMMENDED SHEET1 OF 4 DRAWING NO. 019    Page 22 LOT "A"LOT "A" DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATECITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGACONCEPTUAL GRADING PLANTRACT NO. 18305DESIGNJ.B.M. DRAWNJ.B.M. CHECKEDB.K.M. RECOMMENDED SHEET2 OF 4 DRAWING NO. 020    Page 23 LOT "A"LOT "A" DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATECITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAFINISH CONTOURSTRACT NO. 18305DESIGN DRAWN RECOMMENDEDJ.B.M.SHEETJ.B.M. CHECKEDB.K.M. 3 OF 4 DRAWING NO. 021    Page 24 LOT "A"LOT "A" DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATECITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGACUT/FILL MAPTRACT NO. 18305DESIGN DRAWN RECOMMENDEDJ.B.M.SHEETJ.B.M. CHECKEDB.K.M. 4 OF 4 DRAWING NO. 022    Page 25 023    Page 26 024    Page 27 025    Page 28 TRACT NO. 18305TREE REMOVAL SITE PLAN DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATECITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TREE REMOVAL SITE PLANTRACT NO. 18305DESIGN DRAWN RECOMMENDEDJ.B.M.SHEETJ.B.M. CHECKED B.K.M. 1 OF 1 DRAWING NO. 026    Page 29 TRACT MAP NO. 18305 LOT "A"LOT "A" DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATECITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGATRACT NO. 18305DESIGN DRAWN RECOMMENDEDJ.B.M.SHEETJ.B.M. CHECKEDB.K.M. 1 OF 1 DRAWING NO. 027    Page 30 028    Page 31 029    Page 32 030    Page 33 031    Page 34 032    Page 35 033    Page 36 034    Page 37 035    Page 38 036    Page 39 037    Page 40 038    Page 41 039    Page 42 040    Page 43 041    Page 44 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTS7:00 p.m.Tabe van der Zwaag August 12, 2020 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305 – MANNYBADIOLA – A request for site plan review to subdivide a 4-acre parcel of land into 6 residentiallots for the future development of 6 single-family residences within the Very Low (VL) ResidentialDistrict and the Equestrian Overlay District on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista GroveStreet; APN 1074-201-01 and 02. Related File: Minor Exception DRC2020-00217, and TreeRemoval Permit 2020-00218. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts wasprepared for consideration. Site Characteristics and Background:The 4-acre project site is located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue, at the western terminusof Vista Grove Street. The project site is generally rectangular in shape with a 50-foot-wide stripof land connecting the project site to Hermosa Avenue. The project site is approximately 630 feetalong the north property line, 505 feet along the south property line, 309 feet along the westproperty line, and 280 feet along the east property line (plus the above noted 50-foot-wide strip).The site generally slopes from north to south, with an elevation change of approximately 24 feetfrom the north property line (1,927 feet) to at the south property line (1,903 feet). There is anexisting single-family residence and an accessory structure at the southwest corner of the projectsite. The remainder of the project site is undeveloped and covered with native and non-nativegrasses and multiple trees. The existing Land Uses on, and General Plan land use and Zoning designations for, the projectsite and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted lot) are as follows:GeneralPlan Land Use ZoningSingle-Family ResidencePartially VacantNorth Single-Family Residences Site Very Low Very LowVery Low Very Low (VL) Residential District Very Low (VL) Residential DistrictVery Low (VL) Residential District Single-Family ResidenceSouthEquestrian FacilitySingle-Family ResidenceSingle-Family Residences EastWest Very LowVery Low Very Low (VL) Residential DistrictVery Low (VL) Residential DistrictProject Overview:The applicant is requesting to subdivide the 4-acre project site into 6 lots for the futuredevelopment of 6 single-family residences. The existing single-family and accessory structure onthe project will be demolished with the development of the project site. The proposed lots will beaccessed by a private street off of Hermosa Avenue. Each lot complies with the development standards for the Very Low (VL) Residential District. A 6-foot-tall retaining wall with a 5-foot wrought iron fence is required along the south property line ofthe 50-foot-wide flag due to a grade difference between the project site and an existing single-family lot to the east. The applicant has submitted a Minor Exception application (DRC2020-00218) for the additional wall height.Exhibit B 042    Page 45 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTSTENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305 – MANNY BADIOLAAugust 12, 2020Page 2The project site is within the Equestrian Overlay District, which necessitates the installation of a15-foot wide local feeder trail to provide trail access to the rear yard of each lot and the larger trailnetwork. Accordingly, a proposed 15-foot-wide trail will be located adjacent to the south, west,and east property lines of the project site with a 15-foot-wide trail connection to Hermosa Avenue.The trails will connect to the existing private trail network to the west and will include a 4-inchcover of decomposed granite along with required access gates and equestrian step-throughs.Corner cutoffs to aide vehicle navigation are provided adjacent to Parcels #3 and #4 along withVehicle turn-arounds at Parcels #1 and #6. Each lot also provides a flat area for a 24-foot by 24-foot flat area for an equestrian corral that is a minimum 70 from the building pad on the adjacentparcel. Staff Comments:Staff is in support of the proposed equestrian trail alignment for Tentative Tract MapSUBTT18305, which provides local feeder trail access to the rear yard area of each of the 6proposed lots, and to the wider equestrian trail system, in conformance with the TrailsImplementation Plan. The proposed lots also provide two convenient vehicle turnarounds as wellas corner cutoffs to aid vehicle movement. The plans on file show a conceptual location for a 24-foot by 24-foot corral location on each lotthat is a minimum 70 feet from a residence on an adjacent lot. Each lot will also include an accessgate to the equestrian trail along with the required trail gates, equestrian step-throughs, and 4-inch cover of decomposed granite. A three-foot-wide drainage easement will be providedadjacent to the equestrian trail to convey runoff from each lot. Major Issues: NoneSecondary Issues: NoneStaff Recommendation:Staff recommends the Trails Advisory Committee approve the proposed equestrian trail designas presented and to recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 to the PlanningCommission as presented. 043    Page 46 044    Page 47 045    Page 48 DRAFTInitial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 18305 PROJECT November 2020 Lead Agency: 10500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Prepared for:Trinity Alliance10803 Foothill Boulevard Suite 212Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Prepared by: 215 North Fifth StreetRedlands, California 92374 Exhibit C 046    Page 49 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 047    Page 50 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectDRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONTENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 18305 PROJECTLead Agency:City of Rancho CucamongaProject Proponent: Project Location: Trinity AllianceThe Proposed Project is located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga insouthwest San Bernardino County. The project site consists of anapproximately 4-acre area containing undeveloped land, a single-familyhome, and detached garage building (APN 1074-201-01,02). The site islocated southwest of the intersection of Vista Grove Street and HermosaAvenue. The project site is approximately 1.5 miles north of the FoothillFreeway (I-210). Project Description:The Project proposes to subdivide the existing 4.0-acre parcel into six single-family residential lots. Thedevelopment would include extending Vista Grove Street west, across Hermosa Avenue, for approximately380 feet, which would turn south into a cul-de-sac surrounded by the proposed single-family residences.Construction of the Vista Grove Street extension would result in removal of the San Bernardino CountyFire District access gate, which would be replaced just to the west of the road extension. A 15-foot wideequestrian trail easement would be created along the eastern and southern boundaries of the project site,connecting to the existing equestrian trail west of the project site. Access to the equestrian trail wouldcome from the southwest corner of the new Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove Street intersection. Public Review Period: November 16, 2020 to December 15, 2020 Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Project to Avoid Significant Effects: Biological ResourcesBIO-1: Pre-Construction Burrowing Owl Survey: A pre-construction survey for burrowing owls shall becompleted within the Project site between 14 and 30 days prior to construction activities inaccordance with the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012). A second pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than 24 hours prior to the start of construction. Ifburrowing owls are observed during either of the preconstruction surveys, implementation ofadditional measures may be necessary to reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant,including seasonal work restrictions, no-work buffers established around active burrows, passiverelocation of burrowing owls, and/or a specific mitigation methodology determined incoordination with CDFW. BIO-2: Pre-construction Nesting Bird Survey: If construction or other Project activities are scheduledto occur during the bird breeding season (February through August for raptors and Marchthrough August for most migratory bird species), a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall beNovember 2020 1-1 Draft MND048    Page 51 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectconducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that active bird nests will not be disturbed ordestroyed. The survey shall be completed no more than three days prior to initial grounddisturbance. The nesting bird survey shall include the project site and adjacent areas whereProject activities have the potential to affect active nests, either directly or indirectly due toconstruction activity or noise. If an active nest is identified, a qualified biologist shall establish anappropriate disturbance limit buffer around the nest using flagging or staking. Constructionactivities shall not occur within any disturbance limit buffer zones until the nest has fledged or hasbeen deemed inactive by the qualified biologist. Cultural ResourcesCUL-1: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered duringconstruction, all work must halt within a 60-foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professionalarchaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards forprehistoric and historic archaeologist, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find,and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professionaljudgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find: •If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a culturalresource, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required.•If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resourcefrom any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify theCEQA lead agency, and applicable landowner. The agencies shall consult on a finding ofeligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to beeligible for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR. Work may not resume within the no-work radiusuntil the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1)is not eligible for the NRHP or CRHR; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completedto their satisfaction. •If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, the archaeologistshall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery fromdisturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner (asper § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of § 7050.5 of the CaliforniaHealth and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. Ifthe Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene,the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most LikelyDescendant (MLD) for the Project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerningtreatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of theMLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, thelandowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of thePRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Draft MND 1-2 November 2020(2020-173)049    Page 52 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectinformation center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; orrecording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (AB2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, throughconsultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed totheir satisfaction. SMBMI CUL-1: In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in theimmediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologistmeeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the otherportions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period.Additionally, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI)shall be contacted, as detailed within SMBMI TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact finds and beprovided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of the nature of thefind, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. SMBMI CUL-2: If significant pre-contact cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), arediscovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring andTreatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to SMBMI for review and comment, asdetailed within SMBMI TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project andimplement the Plan accordingly. SMBMI CUL-3: If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associatedwith the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall ceaseand the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 andthat code enforced for the duration of the project.Geology and SoilsGEO-1: Unanticipated Discovery – Paleontological Resource. If paleontological resources (i.e., fossilremains) are discovered during excavation activities, the contractor will notify the City and ceaseexcavation within 100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontological professional can provide anevaluation of the site. The qualified paleontological professional will evaluate the significance ofthe find and recommend appropriate measures for the disposition of the site (e.g. fossil recovery,curation, data recovery, and/or monitoring). Construction activities may continue on other partsof the construction site while evaluation and treatment of the paleontological resource takesplace. NoiseNOI-1: The following best management practices shall be incorporated during Project construction:•In order to reduce construction noise, a temporary noise barrier or enclosure shall be usedalong the property lines of adjacent residences to break the line of sight between theconstruction equipment and the adjacent residences. The temporary noise barrier shallDraft MND 1-3 November 2020(2020-173)050    Page 53 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectconsist of a solid plywood fence and/or flexible sound curtains attached to chain linkfencing.• • • Barriers such as flexible sound control curtains shall be erected around stationary heavyequipment to minimize the amount of noise on the surrounding land uses to the maximumextent feasible during construction.Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Mondaythrough Saturday and prohibited at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. The Project’simprovement and building plans shall specify this requirement.Equipping of all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaustmufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.• • Prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.Locating stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors or portable powergenerators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Constructing temporary noisebarriers to screen stationary noise-generating equipment when located near adjoiningsensitive land uses.• • • • Utilization of "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technologyexists.Control of noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible atexisting residences bordering the Project site.Notification of all adjacent residences of the construction schedule, in writing, and providea written schedule of “noisy” construction activities to the adjacent and nearby residences.Designation of a "disturbance coordinator" who shall be responsible for responding to anycomplaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall determine thecause of the noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonablemeasures be implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone numberfor the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent toneighbors regarding the construction schedule. Tribal Cultural ResourcesGabrieleño Band of Mission Indian – Kizh Nation (GBMIKN) Mitigation MeasuresGBMIKN TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor/Consultant. The Project Applicant shall berequired to retain and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is bothapproved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listedunder the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the project location. This list is provided bythe NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the construction phasesthat involve ground disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by theGabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limitedto, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, Draft MND 1-4 November 2020(2020-173)051    Page 54 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectexcavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant willcomplete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, includingconstruction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoringshall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when theTribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential forimpacting Tribal Cultural Resources. GBMIKN TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural and Archaeological Resources. Upondiscovery of any archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinityof the find until the find can be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by projectconstruction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If theresources are Native American in origin, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shallcoordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, theTribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes. Work may continue on otherparts of the project while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA GuidelinesSection15064.5 [f]). If a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a“historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient toallow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available.The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA GuidelinesSection 15064.5(f) for historical resources and Public Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) forunique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner oftreatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation ofarchaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequentlaboratory processing and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not NativeAmerican in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest inthe materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum,if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeologicalmaterial, they shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educationalpurposes. GBMIKN TCR-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects.Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation,and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associatedgrave goods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and SafetyCode 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediatelyreported to the County Coroner and excavation halted until the coroner has determined thenature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a NativeAmerican or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shallcontact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) andPRC 5097.98 shall be followed. Draft MND 1-5 November 2020(2020-173)052    Page 55 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectGBMIKN TCR-4: Resource Assessment & Continuation of Work Protocol. Upon discovery, the tribaland/or archaeological monitor/consultant/consultant will immediately divert work at minimum of150 feet and place an exclusion zone around the burial. The monitor/consultant(s) will then notifythe Tribe, the qualified lead archaeologist, and the construction manager who will call thecoroner. Work will continue to be diverted while the coroner determines whether the remains areNative American. The discovery is to be kept confidential and secure to prevent any furtherdisturbance. If the finds are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHCas mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). GBMIKN TCR-5: Kizh-Gabrieleño Procedures for burials and funerary remains. If the Gabrieleño Bandof Mission Indians – Kizh Nation is designated MLD, the following treatment measures shall beimplemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. Inancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the burial offunerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains. These remainsare to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funeraryobjects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believedto have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; otheritems made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be consideredas associated funerary objects. Treatment Measures:•Prior to the continuation of ground disturbing activities, the landowner shall arrange adesignated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial ofthe human remains and/or ceremonial objects. In the case where discovered humanremains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will becovered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipmentplaced over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate isnot available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe willmake every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situand protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will beremoved. The Tribe will work closely with the qualified archaeologist to ensure that theexcavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved bythe Tribe, documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptivenotes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by the Tribe fordata recovery purposes. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means asnecessary to ensure completely recovery of all material. If the discovery of human remainsincludes four or more burials, the location is considered a cemetery and a separatetreatment plan shall be created. Once complete, a final report of all activities is to besubmitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific studyor the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains. •Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored usingopaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects ofDraft MND 1-6 November 2020(2020-173)053    Page 56 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectcultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These itemsshould be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site ofreburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon betweenthe Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be nopublicity regarding any cultural materials recovered. GBMIKN TCR-6: Professional Standards: Archaeological and Native American monitoring andexcavation during construction projects will be consistent with current professional standards. Allfeasible care to avoid any unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of humanremains and associated funerary objects shall be taken. Principal personnel must meet theSecretary of Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years of experience asa principal investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in southern California.The Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained andqualified. San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Mitigation MeasuresSMBMI TCR-1: The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall becontacted, as detailed in SMBMI CUL-1, of any pre-contact cultural resources discovered duringproject implementation, and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as toprovide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemedsignificant, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources Monitoring andTreatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI, and allsubsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be presentthat represents SMBMI for the remainder of the project, should SMBMI elect to place a monitoron-site. SMBMI TCR-2: Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolaterecords, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant andLead Agency for dissemination to SMBMI. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith,consult with SMBMI throughout the life of the project. Draft MND 1-7 November 2020(2020-173)054    Page 57 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Draft MND 1-8 November 2020(2020-173)055    Page 58 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectCONTENTSDraft Mitigated Negative Declaration – Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project.......................................................1Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Project to Avoid Significant Effects .......................................................2SECTION 1.0 Background ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-1Summary............................................................................................................................................................ 1-1Introduction...................................................................................................................................................... 1-1Surrounding Land Uses/Environmental Setting................................................................................. 1-2Project Description........................................................................................................................................ 2-1Project Characteristics.................................................................................................................................. 2-1Project Timing ................................................................................................................................................. 2-2Regulatory Requirements, Permits, and Approvals.......................................................................... 2-2Consultation With California Native American Tribe(s) .................................................................. 2-2Environmental Factors Potentially Affected and Determination................................................. 3-1Environmental Factors Potentially Affected......................................................................................... 3-1Environmental Checklist and Discussion .............................................................................................. 4-1Aesthetics.......................................................................................................................................................... 4-1Agriculture and Forestry Resources........................................................................................................ 4-3Air Quality ......................................................................................................................................................... 4-6Biological Resources...................................................................................................................................4-18Cultural Resources.......................................................................................................................................4-24Energy...............................................................................................................................................................4-27Geology and Soils........................................................................................................................................4-30Greenhouse Gas Emissions ......................................................................................................................4-34Hazards and Hazardous Materials.........................................................................................................4-39Hydrology and Water Quality.................................................................................................................4-42Land Use and Planning..............................................................................................................................4-47Mineral Resources........................................................................................................................................4-49Noise.................................................................................................................................................................4-50Population and Housing ...........................................................................................................................4-58Public Services...............................................................................................................................................4-59Recreation.......................................................................................................................................................4-61Transportation...............................................................................................................................................4-62Tribal Cultural Resources ..........................................................................................................................4-65Utilities and Service Systems...................................................................................................................4-70Wildfire.............................................................................................................................................................4-75 1.11.21.3SECTION 2.02.12.22.32.4SECTION 3.03.1SECTION 4.04.14.24.34.44.54.64.74.84.94.104.114.124.134.144.154.164.174.184.194.20 Table of Contents i November 2020(2020-173)056    Page 59 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project4.21SECTION 5.05.1 Mandatory Findings of Significance.....................................................................................................4-77List of Preparers.............................................................................................................................................. 5-1City of Rancho Cucamonga ....................................................................................................................... 5-1ECORP Consulting, Inc. ................................................................................................................................ 5-1Bibliography..................................................................................................................................................... 6-1List of Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 7-1 5.2SECTION 6.0SECTION 7.0Appendix A – Air Quality/Climate Change Technical ReportAppendix B – Biological Resources AssessmentAppendix C – Cultural Resources Assessment MemoAppendix D – Noise Impact AssessmentLIST OF TABLESTable 1.3-1. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use Designations........................................................................... 1-2Table 4.3-1. Unmitigated Construction-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis)...............4-11Table 4.3-2. Construction-Related Emissions (Localized Significance Analysis) ........................................4-12Table 4.3-3. Operational-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis) ...........................................4-13Table 4.6-1. Non-Residential Electricity Consumption in San Bernardino County 2014-2018 ............4-28Table 4.6-2. Non-residential Natural Gas Consumption in San Bernardino County 2014-2018.........4-28Table 4.6-3. Automotive Fuel Consumption in San Bernardino County 2015–2019................................4-29Table 4.8-1. Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions........................................................................4-36Table 4.8-2. Operational-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions..........................................................................4-37Table 4.11-1. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use Designations ......................................................................4-48Table 4.13-1. Existing (Baseline) Noise Measurements .......................................................................................4-52 Table 4.13-2. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels by Receptor Distance and Construction Phase– Unmitigated......................................................................................................................................................................4-53Table 4.13-3. Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment....................................................4-56LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1. Project Vicinity.................................................................................................................................................... 1-3Figure 2. Project Location.................................................................................................................................................. 1-4Table of Contents ii November 2020(2020-173)057    Page 60 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectFigure 3. Project Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................. 2-3Figure 4. Water Quality Management Plan..............................................................................................................4-44 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONSABAssembly BillAQMPBMPsCalEEModCaltransCARBCDFWCEQACH4 Air Quality Management PlanBest Management Practices California Emissions Estimator ModelCalifornia Department of TransportationCalifornia Air Resources BoardCalifornia Department of Fish and WildlifeCalifornia Environmental Quality Actmethane CO carbon monoxideCO 2 carbon dioxideCO2eCO PlanCRHRCWADTSCEIREPAFEIRFEMAFIRMGHG carbon dioxide equivalentFederal Attainment Plan for Carbon MonoxideCalifornia Register of Historic PlacesClean Water ActDepartment of Toxic Substances ControlEnvironmental Impact ReportU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyFinal Environmental Impact ReportFederal Emergency Management AgencyFlood Insurance Rate Map Greenhouse GasLSTMBTAMLD Localized Significance ThresholdMigratory Bird Treaty ActMost Likely Descendent MMTMNDMTCO2eNAHCND Million Metric TonsMitigated Negative Declarationmetric tons of carbon dioxide equivalentNative American Heritage CommissionNegative Declaration NPDESN2O National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systemnitrous oxideNO x nitrogen oxidesNRCSNRHPOPR Natural Resources Conservation ServiceNational Register of Historic PlacesCalifornia Office of Planning and ResearchParticulate Matter Less than 2.5 Microns in Diameter PM2.5 Table of Contents iii November 2020(2020-173)058    Page 61 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectPM10RCPGROG Particulate Matter Less than 10 Microns in DiameterRegional Comprehensive Plan and GuideReactive Organic GasesRTPRegional Transportation PlanRWQCBUSACESCAGSCAQMDSCS Regional Water Quality Control BoardUnited States Army Corps of EngineersSouthern California Association of GovernmentsSouth Coast Air Quality Management DistrictSustainable Communities StrategyState Implementation Plan SIPSP Service PopulationSoCABSR South Coast Air BasinState RouteSRASensitive Receptor AreaSWPPPSWRCB Storm Water Pollution Prevention PlanState Water Resources Control Board Table of Contents iv November 2020(2020-173)059    Page 62 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectSECTION 1.0 BACKGROUND1.1 SummaryProject Title:Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project City of Rancho Cucamonga10500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Lead Agency Name and Address: Contact Person and Phone Number: Tabe Van der ZwaagAssociate Planner(909) 477-2450Project Location:The Proposed Project is located within the City of RanchoCucamonga in southwest San Bernardino County (Figure 1).The project site consists of an approximately 4-acre areacontaining undeveloped land, a single-family home, anddetached garage building (APN 1074-201-01,02). The site islocated southwest of the intersection of Vista Grove Streetand Hermosa Avenue (Figure 2). The project site isapproximately 1.5 miles north of the Foothill Freeway (I-210). General Plan Designation: Zoning: Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL)1.2 IntroductionThe City of Rancho Cucamonga is the Lead Agency for this Initial Study. The Initial Study has beenprepared to identify and assess the anticipated environmental impacts of the Tentative Tract Map 18305.This document has been prepared to satisfy the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Res.Code, Section 21000 et seq.) and State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.). CEQA requires that allstate and local government agencies consider the environmental consequences of projects over whichthey have discretionary authority before acting on those projects. A CEQA Initial Study is generally used to Background 1-1 November 2020(2020-173)060    Page 63 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectdetermine which CEQA document is appropriate for a Project (Negative Declaration [ND], MitigatedNegative Declaration [MND], or Environmental Impact Report [EIR]).1.3 Surrounding Land Uses/Environmental SettingThe Proposed Project is located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga in southwest San BernardinoCounty (Figure 1). The project site consists of an approximately 4-acre area containing undeveloped land,a single-family home, and detached garage building (APN 1074-201-01,02). The project site is locatedsouthwest of the intersection of Vista Grove Street and Hermosa Avenue (Figure 2). As shown on the U.S.Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Cucamonga Peak, California topographic quadrangle map (1996),the Project Area is located in the northeastern quarter of Section 28 of Township 1 north, Range 7 west ofthe San Bernardino Base and Meridian (Figure 2). The project site is approximately 1.5 miles north of the Foothill Freeway (I-210). The project site isbounded by residential properties to the east and west, an existing SBCFCD access road to the north, andan equestrian boarding and training facility to the south. The elevation of the project site ranges from1,915 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) to 1,944 feet AMSL. It is located approximately 364 feet southeastof a drainage, which emanates from the San Gabriel Mountains 0.55 mile to the north. The project site isvery disturbed, with most of the vegetation on the project site consisting of non-native grasses and forbsknown to persist in disturbed areas. Surrounding land uses are described in the table below. Table 1.3-1. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use DesignationsLand Use Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land UseProject Site North Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL)Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) SBCFD Access RoadVery Low Residential (VL)East Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Equestrian Boarding and Training Facility Very Low Residential (VL) South WestSource: City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a Background 1-2 November 2020(2020-173)061    Page 64 Edwards AirForce Base OORR IIDD !"^$L o s A n g e l e s Reno UUTT AAZZ Lancaster £¤395 !"c$C o u n t y Carson CitySacramento NNVVOaklandÄÆSanFrancisco14San Jose!"^$Fresno Las VegasCCAABakersfield!"a$Palmdale !"b$ÄÆ P a c i f i cO c e a n Los Angeles138Santa Ana !"`$!"_$Long BeachSan Diego ÄÆ138 AngelesNationalForest ¨¦§15 San BernardinoNational Project Location ForestÄÆ^_Pasadena San BernardinoRancho Cucamonga ÄÆ ÄÆ134Äƨ¦§ ¨¦§ ÄÆ 66 210 330ÄÆ11060521066FontanaEl Monte OntarioEast Los West CovinaAngeles ÄÆ60 Pomona ÄÆ 60 ¨¦§215ÄÆ83 ¨¦§10Äƨ¦§5 RiversideÄÆÄÆ71 ÄÆ427260¨¦§ÄÆNorwalkÄÆ10557 Moreno Valley90ÄÆCoronaÄÆÄÆR i v e r s i d eC o u n t y 911991 ÄÆFullertonLongBeach 79AnaheimOrange GardenGrove ÄÆÄÆÄÆ261¨¦§22 55 ÄÆ405Santa Ana 74Huntington ¨¦§¨¦§215 5 ClevelandNationalForest Beach ÄÆ ÄÆIrvineosta Mesa 133 241ÄÆ1O r a n g eIC o u n t yS ÄÆÄÆ7473Miles0510 Map Date: 10/22/2018Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Figure 1. Regional Location2020-173 Tentative Track Map No. 18305 Project062    Page 65 Map Contents Project Boundary I Feet 0 1,000 2,000 Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubedMap Date: 10/31/2018Base Source: USGS Topographic Quadrangle Cucamonga Peak Figure 2. Project Location2020-173 Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project063    Page 66 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectSECTION 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION2.1 Project CharacteristicsThe Proposed Project would subdivide the existing 4.0-acre parcel into six single-family residential lots foran overall density of 1.5 lots per acre. The proposed lots range in size from 20,000 square feet (SF) to26,858 SF with an average size of 23,843 SF. The Proposed Project would demolish the existing single-family home and detached garage building. No change in land use designation or zoning are proposed.Please see Figure 3 for the proposed site plan. Access and CirculationThe Proposed Project would construct approximately 630 lineal feet of new private street within thedevelopment. The development would include extending Vista Grove Street west, across HermosaAvenue, for approximately 380 feet, which would turn south into a cul-de-sac surrounded by theproposed single-family residences. Construction of the Vista Grove Street extension would result inremoval of the San Bernardino County Fire District (SBCFD) access gate, which would be replaced just tothe west of the road extension. LandscapingThe Project would remove the existing eucalyptus, elm, and palm trees on site and replace them with newCity-approved trees along the south right-of-way of Vista Grove Street. No regulated trees or plants areexpected to be removed as part of the Project. Any proposed removal of trees is subject to review by theCity of Rancho Cucamonga.Equestrian and Community TrailsA 15-foot wide equestrian trail easement would be created along the eastern and southern boundaries ofthe project site, connecting to the existing equestrian trail west of the project site. Access to theequestrian trail would come from the southwest corner of the new Hermosa Avenue and Vista GroveStreet intersection, as well as private gates for each of the six lots. The trail would be covered withdecomposed granite. In addition, the Proposed Project includes a community trail pass-through alongVista Grove Street. Storm DrainageThe Proposed Project would construct stormwater drainage improvements including the construction of awater quality basin at the south-central portion of the site between Lot 3 and Lot 4 (see Figure 3). Runofffrom the proposed residential lots would be conveyed to the water quality basin. The Proposed Projectwould also construct two 4 by 4 foot’ catch basins at the southern end of the cul-de-sac, and a third catchbasin in the southwest corner of the site. Septic SystemEach of the six lots would be provided with a private septic system, seepage pit, and expansion area.Specific location and capacity of the septic systems would be determined at the time of construction andProject Description 2-1 November 2020(2020-173)064    Page 67 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projecta percolation report would be completed prior to final design. The Proposed Project would maintain a 25-foot minimum setback from the septic system to all property lines and the drainage basin.2.2 Project TimingProject construction is expected to begin in March 2021 for a duration of approximately 10 months.2.3 Regulatory Requirements, Permits, and ApprovalsThe following approvals and regulatory permits would be required for implementation of the ProposedProject:•City of Rancho Cucamonga Grading Permit, Building Permit2.4 Consultation With California Native American Tribe(s)The following California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project areahave been notified of the project: San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians; San Manuel Band of MissionIndians; Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians; Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians; Gabrieleño Band ofMission Indians – Kizh Nation; and Morongo Band of Mission Indians. The San Manuel Band of MissionIndians and Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation have requested consultation pursuant toPublic Resources Code section 21080.3.1. A summary of the consultation process, including thedetermination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, is provided in Section 4.18 of thisInitial Study. Project Description 2-2 November 2020(2020-173)065    Page 68 VISTA GROVE ST. LOT "A"LOT "A" Figure 3. Site Plan2020-173 Tentative Tract Map No. 18300656 Project    Page 69 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Project Description 2-4 November 2020(2020-173)067    Page 70 068    Page 71 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Environmental Factors and Determination 3-2 November 2020(2020-173)069    Page 72 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectSECTION 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION4.1 Aesthetics4.1.1 Environmental SettingRegional SettingMajor scenic resources in the City of Rancho Cucamonga include the San Gabriel and San BernardinoMountains and foothills, vistas of the City from hillside areas, and other views of special vegetation andpermanent open space features. These north-south views are particularly prominent along the straightalignments of Archibald, Haven, and Etiwanda Avenues. Views of the mountains are available from mostareas in the City and provide a visual backdrop for the Project site and surrounding communities. State Scenic HighwaysThe California Scenic Highway Program protects and enhances the scenic beauty of California’s highwaysand adjacent corridors. A highway can be designated as scenic based on how much natural beauty can beseen by users of the highway, the quality of the scenic landscape, and if development impacts theenjoyment of the view (Caltrans 2019). No officially designated state scenic highways are located in ornear the City of Rancho Cucamonga (Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). The nearest designated scenic highwayis State Route (SR) 138, located in the San Gabriel Mountains approximately 11.5 miles north of theproject site. Visual Character of the Project SiteThe 4-acre site is relatively flat and consists of a vacant undeveloped lot, single family home, anddetached garage building.4.1.2 Aesthetics (I) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section21099, would the Project: PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactIncorporateda)have a substantial adverse effect on a scenicvista?Less than significant.The dominant scenic views from the project site and the surrounding area include the San GabrielMountains to the northwest and the San Bernardino Mountains to the north and northeast. Themountains are clearly visible from Hermosa Avenue (east of the project site) but these views would not beobstructed by the Proposed Project.Short-term construction activities could potentially temporarily degrade the existing visual character andquality of the site and surroundings. In all, the Proposed Project would involve grading activities andEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-1 November 2020(2020-173)070    Page 73 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectconstruction of streets, sidewalks, fencing, storm drainage infrastructure, utility installation, andlandscaping. During the construction phase, various equipment, vehicles, building materials, stockpiles,disposal receptacles, and related activities could be potentially visible from several vantage points nearthe project site. However, construction-related activities would be short-term and temporary in nature.Once completed, all general construction activities would cease, along with any construction-relatedaesthetic impacts. Upon completion, the proposed improvements would be consistent and compatible with the existingresidential uses in the project area. Impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant.Less thanSignificant withMitigation Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section21099, would the Project: PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactIncorporatedb)Substantially damage scenic resources, including,but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, andhistoric buildings within a state scenic highway?No impact.The Project would remove the existing eucalyptus, elm, and palm trees on site and replace them with newCity-approved trees along the south right-of-way of Vista Grove Street. No regulated trees or plants areexpected to be removed as part of the Proposed Project. Any proposed removal of trees is subject toreview by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no rock outcroppings present on the site.Furthermore, the project site is not located within a state scenic highway. No impact would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigation Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section21099, would the Project: PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactIncorporatedc)In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade theexisting visual character or quality of public viewsof the site and its surroundings? (Public views arethose that are experienced from publiclyaccessible vantage point). If the project is in anurbanized area, would the project conflict withapplicable zoning and other regulationsgoverning scenic quality? Less than significant.The project site is located in an urbanized area with residential development to the north, south, and west.The project site is zoned Very Low Density Residential. The proposed development of single family lotswould be a compatible development in the project area, which is developed with single-family homes tothe north, south, east and west. Impacts would be less than significant.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-2 November 2020(2020-173)071    Page 74 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section21099, would the Project: PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactIncorporatedd)Would the project create a new source ofsubstantial light or glare, which would adverselyaffect day or nighttime views in the area?Less than significant.The Proposed Project would create new light or glare sources typical of single-family residentialdevelopment and would be similar to the light and glare sources from the existing residentialdevelopment to the north, south, east and west. The Proposed Project’s lighting plan would be subject toreview and approval by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to ensure compliance with the City’s General Plan.Development of each individual lot would also be subject to City review which would ensure light or glaredo not adversely affect day or nighttime views. Glare impacts from the proposed structures are notanticipated. Architectural glass with low glare characteristics would be used to minimize glare impacts onsurrounding properties. Compliance with City Municipal Code Chapter 17.58 Outdoor Lighting Standardswould ensure that impacts would be less than significant. 4.1.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources4.2.1 Environmental Setting“Forest land” as defined by Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) is “…land that can support 10-percentnative tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows formanagement of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity,water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.”“Timberland” as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526 means “…land, other than land owned bythe federal government and land designated by the board as experimental forest land, which is availablefor, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of a commercial species used to produce lumber and otherforest products, including Christmas trees. Commercial species shall be determined by the board on adistrict basis.” “Timberland zoned Timberland Production” is defined by Public Resources Code Section 51104(g) as “..anarea which has been zoned pursuant to Section 51112 or 51113 and is devoted to and used for growingand harvesting timber, or for growing and harvesting timber and compatible uses, as defined insubdivision h.”Although the entire City of Rancho Cucamonga was once an agricultural area, few large areas remain inactive production today. Much of the City is characterized by industrial, residential, and commercial landuses. Farmland in eastern Rancho Cucamonga is concentrated in Etiwanda; these farmland areas were Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-3 November 2020(2020-173)072    Page 75 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectdesignated by the Department of Conservation due to their local historical importance. However, most ofthe Etiwanda area is planned for development, and is not intended to be retained as farmland (City ofRancho Cucamonga 2010a).The Proposed Project would be located in a developed residential area which does not contain anyagricultural uses or areas designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of StatewideImportance. The project site is located on Urban and Built-up Land and is not under a Williamson ActContract (CDC 2017). Therefore, there are no local policies for agricultural resources that apply to theproject site. 4.2.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources (II) Environmental Checklist and DiscussionLess thanSignificantWithMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: a) IncorporatedConvert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, orFarmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), asshown on the maps prepared pursuant to theFarmland Mapping and Monitoring Program ofthe California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No impact. The project site is currently zoned for residential uses and does not contain any agricultural land.According to the California Department of Conservation (CDC) the site is designated Urban and Built-UpLand (CDC 2017). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in a conflict with an agricultural zoningdesignation. No impact would occur.Less thanSignificantPotentiallySignificantImpact WithMitigationIncorporated Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a Williamson Act contract?No impact.As discussed above, no land on or near the project site is currently under agricultural production, nor areany parcels zoned for agricultural uses. The site is not designated for agricultural use nor is it listed undera Williamson Act contract (CDC 2017). No impact would occur. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-4 November 2020(2020-173)073    Page 76 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificantPotentiallySignificantImpact WithMitigationIncorporated Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or causerezoning of, forest land (as defined in PublicResources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (asdefined by Public Resources Code section 4526),or timberland zoned Timberland Production (asdefined by Government Code section 51104(g))? No impact. The project site is currently developed and is not zoned for forest land, timberland, or timberlandproduction. There is no forestland or timber in the vicinity, nor are there any parcels zoned for forestlandor timberland. No impact would occur.Less thanSignificantWithMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of Incorporatedforest land to non-forest use?No impact.As discussed above, the project site is currently developed and does not contain forestland or timberland,thus it would not convert forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur.Less thanSignificantWithMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: e) Involve other changes in the existing Incorporatedenvironment, which, due to their location ornature, could result in conversion of Farmland tonon-agricultural use or conversion of forest landto non-forest use?No impact.The project site and the surrounding properties are not currently used for agriculture. As discussed above,the Proposed Project would not result in the conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact wouldoccur.4.2.3 No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4-5 Mitigation Measures Environmental Checklist and Discussion November 2020(2020-173)074    Page 77 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project4.3 Air Quality4.3.1 Environmental SettingThe California Air Resources Board (CARB) divides the state into air basins that share similarmeteorological and topographical features. Rancho Cucamonga lies in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB),which includes the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties and all ofOrange County. The air basin is on a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills and isbounded by the Pacific Ocean on the southwest, with high mountains forming the remainder of theperimeter (SCAQMD 1993). Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the CARB have established ambient airquality standards for common pollutants. These ambient air quality standards are levels of contaminantsrepresenting safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each pollutant. Theambient air quality standards cover what are called “criteria” pollutants because the health and othereffects of each pollutant are described in criteria documents. The six criteria pollutants are ozone (O3) (O3precursor emissions include nitrogen oxide (NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROG)), carbon monoxide(CO), particulate matter (PM), nitrogen dioxide (NO ), sulfur dioxide (SO ), and lead. Areas that meet 2 2ambient air quality standards are classified as attainment areas, while areas that do not meet thesestandards are classified as nonattainment areas. The Los Angeles County portion of the SoCAB region isdesignated as a nonattainment area for the federal O , fine particulate matter (PM ), and lead standards 3 2.5and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for O , coarse particulate matter (PM ), and 3 10PM2.5. (It is noted that lead is not emitted from standard land use developments, such as that proposed bythe Project.)The local air quality agency affecting the SoCAB is the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD), which is charged with the responsibility of implementing air quality programs and ensuringthat national and state ambient air quality standards are not exceeded and that air quality conditions aremaintained in the SoCAB. In an attempt to achieve national and state ambient air quality standards andmaintain air quality, the air district has completed several air quality attainment plans and reports, whichtogether constitute the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the portion of the SoCAB encompassing theProject. The SCAQMD has also adopted various rules and regulations for the control of stationary and areasources of emissions. Provisions applicable to the Proposed Project are summarized as follows:•Rule 402 (Nuisance) – This rule prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever suchquantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, orannoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger thecomfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have anatural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. This rule does not apply toodors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising offowl or animals. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-6 November 2020(2020-173)075    Page 78 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project•Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) – This rule requires fugitive dust sources to implement best availablecontrol measures for all sources, and all forms of visible particulate matter are prohibited fromcrossing any property line. This rule is intended to reduce PM10 emissions from anytransportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generatefugitive dust. PM10 suppression techniques are summarized below: a) Portions of a construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will beseeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized.b) All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemicallystabilized.c) All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered toprevent excessive amounts of dust.d) The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations will beminimized at all times.e) Where vehicles leave a construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will beswept daily or washed down at the end of the workday to remove soil tracked onto the pavedsurface.•Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) – This rule requires manufacturers, distributors, and end-users of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce reactive organic gas (ROG)emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the ROG content ofvarious coating categories.4.3.2 Air Quality (III) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificantWithMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporateda)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of theapplicable air quality plan?Less than significant. As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the EPA requires each state with nonattainment areas toprepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates the means to attain the federalstandards. The SIP must integrate federal, state, and local plan components and regulations to identifyspecific measures to reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performancestandards and market-based programs. Similarly, under state law, the California Clean Air Act requires anair quality attainment plan to be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment with regard to thefederal and state ambient air quality standards. Air quality attainment plans outline emissions limits andcontrol measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-7 November 2020(2020-173)076    Page 79 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectAs previously mentioned, the project site is located within the SoCAB, which is under the jurisdiction ofthe SCAQMD. The SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act, to reduce emissions ofcriteria pollutants for which the SoCAB is in nonattainment. In order to reduce such emissions, theSCAQMD drafted the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP). The 2016 AQMP establishes aprogram of rules and regulations directed at reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving state(California) and national air quality standards. The 2016 AQMP is a regional and multi-agency effortincluding the SCAQMD, CARB, SCAG, and the US EPA. The plan’s pollutant control strategies are based onthe latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including SCAG’s 2016 RegionalTransportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, updated emission inventory methodologies forvarious source categories, and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. (SCAG’s latest growth forecasts weredefined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans.) The ProposedProject is subject to the SCAQMD’s Air Quality Management Plan. According to the SCAQMD, in order to determine consistency with SCAQMD’s air quality planning twomain criteria must be addressed.Criterion 1:With respect to the first criterion, SCAQMD methodologies require that an air quality analysis for a projectinclude forecasts of project emissions in relation to contributing to air quality violations and delay ofattainment.a) Would the project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air qualityviolations or cause or contribute to new air quality violations?As shown in Table 4.3-1, Table 4.3-2, and Table 4.3-3, the Proposed Project would result in emissions thatwould be below the SCAQMD regional and localized thresholds during both construction and operations.Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing airquality violations and would not have the potential to cause or affect a violation of the ambient air qualitystandards. b) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissionsreductions specified in the AQMP?As shown in Table 4.3-1 and Table 4.3-3 the Proposed Project would be below the SCAQMD regionalthresholds for construction and operations. Because the Proposed Project would result in less thansignificant regional emission impacts, it would not delay the timely attainment of air quality standards orAQMP emissions reductions.Criterion 2:With respect to the second criterion for determining consistency with SCAQMD and SCAG air qualitypolicies, it is important to recognize that air quality planning within the SoCAB focuses on attainment ofambient air quality standards at the earliest feasible date. Projections for achieving air quality goals arebased on assumptions regarding population, housing, and growth trends. Thus, the SCAQMD’s secondcriterion for determining Project consistency focuses on whether or not the Proposed Project exceeds theassumptions utilized in preparing the forecasts presented its air quality planning documents. Determining Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-8 November 2020(2020-173)077    Page 80 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectwhether or not a project exceeds the assumptions reflected in the 2016 AQMP involves the evaluation ofthe three criteria outlined below. The following discussion provides an analysis of each of these criteria.a) Would the project be consistent with the population, housing, and employment growthprojections utilized in the preparation of the 2016 AQMP?A project is consistent with regional air quality planning efforts in part if it is consistent with thepopulation, housing, and employment assumptions that were used in the development of the SCAQMDair quality plans. Generally, three sources of data form the basis for the projections of air pollutantemissions in Rancho Cucamonga: 2010 General Plan (General Plan), SCAG’s Growth Management Chapterof the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG), and SCAG’s 2016 Regional TransportationPlan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The RTP/SCS also provides socioeconomic forecastprojections of regional population growth. The Proposed Project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented inthe City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. As previously stated, the project site is designated by theCity of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan as “Very Low Residential”, which allows for detached, very low-density single residential units on 0.5-acre lots or larger, with private yards and private parking. As aresult, the Proposed Project does not involve any uses that would increase population beyond what isconsidered in the General Plan and, therefore, would not affect City-wide plans for population growth atthe project site. Thus, the Proposed Project is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land useenvisioned for the site vicinity in the General Plan and RCPG. As a result, the Proposed Project would notconflict with the land use assumptions or exceed the population or job growth projections used bySCAQMD to develop the 2016 AQMP. The City’s population, housing, and employment forecasts, whichare adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council, are based on the local plans and policies applicable to the City;and these are used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review. Additionally, as the SCAQMD hasincorporated these same projections into their air quality planning efforts, it can be concluded that theProposed Project would be consistent with the projections. SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined inconsultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. Therefore, the ProposedProject would be considered consistent with the population, housing, and employment growthprojections utilized in the preparation of SCAQMD’s air quality plans. b) Would the project implement all feasible air quality mitigation measures?In order to further reduce emissions, the Proposed Project would be required to comply with emissionreduction measures promulgated by the SCAQMD, such as SCAQMD Rules 402, 403, and 1113. SCAQMDRule 402 prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or othermaterial which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons orto the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public,or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. SCAQMDRule 403 requires fugitive dust sources to implement Best Available Control Measures for all sources, andall forms of visible particulate matter are prohibited from crossing any property line. SCAQMD Rule 403 isintended to reduce PM10 emissions from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activitythat has the potential to generate fugitive dust. SCAQMD 1113 requires manufacturers, distributors, andend-users of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce ROG emissions from the use of Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-9 November 2020(2020-173)078    Page 81 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectthese coatings, primarily by placing limits on the ROG content of various coating categories. As such, theProposed Project meets this consistency criterion.c) Would the project be consistent with the land use planning strategies set forth by SCAQMD airquality planning efforts?The AQMP contains air pollutant reduction strategies based on SCAG’s latest growth forecasts, andSCAG’s growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to localgeneral plans. The Proposed Project is consistent with the land use designation and development densitypresented in the City’s General Plan and therefore would not exceed the population or job growthprojections used by the SCAQMD to develop the AQMP. In conclusion, the determination of AQMP consistency is primarily concerned with the long-term influenceof a project on air quality. The Proposed Project would not result in a long-term impact on the region’sability to meet State and Federal air quality standards. The Proposed Project’s long-term influence wouldalso be consistent with the goals and policies of the SCAQMD’s 2016 AQMP. No impact would occur. Less thanSignificantPotentiallySignificantImpact WithMitigationIncorporated Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increaseof any criteria pollutant for which the projectregion is non-attainment under an applicablefederal or state ambient air quality standard?Less than significant.Project Construction-Generated Criteria Air Quality EmissionsRegional Construction Significance AnalysisConstruction-generated emissions are temporary and short term but have the potential to represent asignificant air quality impact. Three basic sources of short-term emissions would be generated throughconstruction of the Proposed Project: operation of the construction vehicles (i.e., excavators, trenchers,dump trucks), the creation of fugitive dust during clearing and grading, and the use of asphalt or otheroil-based substances during paving activities. Construction activities such as excavation and gradingoperations, construction vehicle traffic, and wind blowing over exposed soils would generate exhaustemissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that affect local air quality at various times duringconstruction. Effects would be variable depending on the weather, soil conditions, the amount of activitytaking place, and the nature of dust control efforts. The dry climate of the area during the summermonths creates a high potential for dust generation. Construction activities would be subject to SCAQMDRule 403, which requires taking reasonable precautions to prevent the emissions of fugitive dust, such asusing water or chemicals, where possible, for control of dust during the clearing of land and otherconstruction activities. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-10 November 2020(2020-173)079    Page 82 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectConstruction-generated emissions associated the Proposed Project were calculated using the CARB-approved CalEEMod computer program, which is designed to model emissions for land use developmentprojects, based on typical construction requirements.Predicted maximum daily construction-generated emissions for the Proposed Project are summarized inTable 4.3-1. Construction-generated emissions are short term and of temporary duration, lasting only aslong as construction activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volumeof pollutants generated exceeds the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance.Table 4.3-1. Unmitigated Construction-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis)Pollutant (pounds per day)Construction YearROG 4.51 4.14 NOX 45.64 33.55 CO SO 2 0.05 0.05 PM10 9.56 2.22 PM2.5 6.10 1.86 Construction in 2019 Construction in 2020 33.57 32.99SCAQMD RegionalSignificance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceed SCAQMDThreshold? No No No No No No Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2, ECORP 2020a. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model DataOutputs.Notes: Emission reduction/credits for construction emissions are applied based on the required implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403.The specific Rule 403 measures applied in CalEEMod include the following: sweeping/cleaning adjacent roadway access areasdaily; washing equipment tires before leaving the construction site; water exposed surfaces three times daily; water all haul roadstwice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. Reductions percentages from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook(Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied. Emissions estimates account for the demolition of 4,200 square feet of structures. Building construction, paving, and paintingassumed to occur simultaneously.As shown in Table 4.3-1, emissions generated during Proposed Project construction would not exceed theSCAQMD’s regional thresholds of significance. Impacts would be less than significant.Localized Construction Significance AnalysisThe nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are residences in all directions. In order to identifyimpacts to sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing Localized Significance Thresholds(LSTs) for construction. LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' EnvironmentalJustice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The SCAQMD provided the Final Localized Significance ThresholdMethodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agenciesin analyzing localized impacts associated with project-specific level proposed projects. For this Proposed Project, the appropriate source receptor area (SRA) for the localized significancethresholds is the Southwest San Bernardino Valley source receptor area (SRA 33) as this source receptorarea includes the project site. The Proposed Project would disturb approximately 4-acres duringconstruction. As previously described, the SCAQMD has produced look-up tables for projects that disturbEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-11 November 2020(2020-173)080    Page 83 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectless than or equal to five acres daily. Thus, the LST threshold value for a 4-acre construction wasinterpolated from the LST lookup tables. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are directlyadjacent to the site. LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200,and 500 meters. Notwithstanding, the SCAQMD Methodology explicitly states: “It is possible that a projectmay have receptors closer than 25 meters. Projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to thenearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters.” Therefore, LSTs for receptorslocated at 25 meters were utilized in this analysis. The SCAQMD’s methodology clearly states that “off-site mobile emissions from a project should not beincluded in the emissions compared to LSTs.” Therefore, for purposes of the construction LST analysis,only emissions included in the CalEEMod “on-site” emissions outputs were considered. Table 4.3-2,presents the results of localized emissions during the grading and construction phases, which areconstruction activities that disturbs the most acreage daily. The LSTs reflect a maximum disturbance of 4acres daily at 25 meters for the Proposed Project. Table 4.3-2. Construction-Related Emissions (Localized Significance Analysis)Pollutant (pounds per day)Activity NOX 35.78 45.57 CO PM10 1.87 9.43 PM2.5 1.68 6.07 Demolition 22.06 22.06 Project SitePreparationProject Site Grading 28.34 16.29 3.95 2.59SCAQMD LocalizedSignificance Threshold 240.00 1,513.80 11.90 6.80Exceed SCAQMDThreshold? No No No No Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model Data Outputs.Notes: Emission reduction/credits for construction emissions are applied based on the required implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403.The specific Rule 403 measures applied in CalEEMod include the following: sweeping/cleaning adjacent roadway access areasdaily; washing equipment tires before leaving the construction site; water exposed surfaces three times daily; water all haul roadstwice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. Reductions percentages from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook(Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied. Emissions estimates account for the demolition of 4,200 square feet of structures. Building construction, paving, and paintingassumed to occur simultaneously.Table 4.3-2 shows that the emissions of these pollutants on the peak day of construction would not resultin significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, significant impactswould not occur concerning LSTs during construction activities. Impacts would be less than significant. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-12 November 2020(2020-173)081    Page 84 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectProject Operations Criteria Air Quality EmissionsRegional Operational Significance AnalysisImplementation of the Proposed Project would result in long-term operational emissions of criteria airpollutants such as PM , PM , CO, and SO as well as ozone precursors such as ROG and NO . Project- 10 2.5 2 Xgenerated increases in emissions would be predominantly associated with motor vehicle use.Long-term operational emissions attributable to the Project are identified in Table 4.3-3 and compared tothe regional operational significance thresholds promulgated by the SCAQMD.Table 4.3-3. Operational-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis)Pollutant (pounds per day)Emission SourceROG NO X CO SO 2 PM10 PM2.5Summer EmissionsArea0.27 0.00 0.14 0.42 0.09 0.04 0.91 1.05 0.53 0.01 1.76 2.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.13 Energy Mobile TotalSCAQMD RegionalSignificance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceed SCAQMDThreshold? No No No No No No Winter EmissionsArea0.27 0.00 0.12 0.40 0.09 0.04 0.92 1.06 0.53 0.01 1.54 2.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 Energy Mobile TotalSCAQMD RegionalSignificance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceed SCAQMDThreshold? No No No No No No Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model Data Outputs.Notes: Emissions projections account for a trip generation rate identified ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017).As shown in Table 4.3-3, the Proposed Project’s emissions would not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds forany criteria air pollutants. Impacts would be less than significant.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-13 November 2020(2020-173)082    Page 85 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectLocalized Operational Significance AnalysisAccording to the SCAQMD localized significance threshold methodology, LSTs would apply to theoperational phase of a proposed project only if the project includes stationary sources or attracts mobilesources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., warehouse or transfer facilities).The Proposed Project does not include such uses. Therefore, in the case of the Proposed Project, theoperational phase LST protocol does not need to be applied. Cumulative Air Quality ImpactsThe cumulative setting for air quality includes Rancho Cucamonga and the SoCAB. The SoCAB isdesignated as a nonattainment area for state standards of ozone, PM , and PM . The region is also 10 2.5designated as a nonattainment area for federal standards of ozone and PM2.5 (CARB 2017b). Cumulativegrowth in population, vehicle use, and industrial activity could inhibit efforts to improve regional airquality and attain the ambient air quality standards. Thus, the setting for this cumulative analysis consistsof the SoCAB and associated growth and development anticipated in the air basin. The SCAQMD’s approach to assessing cumulative impacts is based on the AQMP forecasts of attainmentof ambient air quality standards in accordance with the requirements of the federal and California CleanAir Acts. As discussed earlier, the proposed Project would be consistent with the 2016 AQMP, which isintended to bring the SoCAB into attainment for all criteria pollutants. In addition, the SCAQMDrecommends that any given project’s potential contribution to cumulative impacts be assessed using thesame significance criteria as for project-specific impacts. Therefore, individual projects that do notgenerate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s daily thresholds for project-specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for thosepollutants for which the air basin is in nonattainment and therefore would not be considered to have asignificant, adverse air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project-related construction andoperational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project-specific impacts would be consideredcumulatively considerable. As previously noted, the Proposed Project would not exceed the applicableSCAQMD regional thresholds for construction or operational-source emissions. As such, the ProposedProject would result in a cumulatively less than significant impact. Less thanSignificantPotentiallySignificantImpact WithMitigationIncorporated Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantialpollutant concentrations? Less than significant. Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air ContaminantsSensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population that areparticularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses.Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB hasEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-14 November 2020(2020-173)083    Page 86 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectidentified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderlyover 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases suchas asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis.Construction-Generated Air ContaminantsConstruction-related activities would result in temporary, short-term project-generated emissions ofdiesel particulate matter (DPM) from the exhaust of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for sitepreparation (e.g., clearing, grading); soil hauling truck traffic; paving; application of architectural coatings;and other miscellaneous activities. For construction activity, DPM is the primary toxic air contaminants(TAC) of concern. Particulate exhaust emissions from diesel-fueled engines (i.e., DPM) were identified as aTAC by the CARB in 1998. The potential cancer risk from the inhalation of DPM, as discussed below,outweighs the potential for all other health impacts (i.e., non-cancer chronic risk, short-term acute risk)and health impacts from other TACs. Accordingly, DPM is the focus of this discussion. Based on the emission modeling conducted the maximum construction-related annual emissions of PM2.5exhaust, considered a surrogate for DPM, would be 2.20 pounds per day during construction activity.PM2.5 is considered a surrogate for DPM because more than 90 percent of DPM is less than 1 microgramin diameter and therefore is a subset of particulate matter under 2.5 microns in diameter (i.e., PM2.5),according to CARB. Most PM2.5 derives from combustion, such as use of gasoline and diesel fuels bymotor vehicles. Furthermore, even during the most intense month of construction, emissions of DPMwould be generated from different locations on the project site, rather than a single location, becausedifferent types of construction activities (e.g., demolition, site preparation, building construction) wouldnot occur at the same place at the same time. The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk (i.e., potentialexposure to TAC emission levels that exceed applicable standards). Dose is a function of the concentrationof a substance or substances in the environment and the duration of exposure to the substance. Dose ispositively correlated with time, meaning that a longer exposure period would result in a higher exposurelevel for any exposed receptor. Thus, the risks estimated for an exposed individual are higher if a fixedexposure occurs over a longer period of time. According to the Office of Environmental Health HazardAssessment (OEHHA), health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors toTAC emissions, should be based on a 70-, 30-, or 9-year exposure period; however, such assessmentsshould be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the Proposed Project. Consequently,an important consideration is the fact that construction of the Proposed Project is anticipated to last lessthan two years. Furthermore, the use of off-road heavy-duty diesel equipment would be limited to theperiods of construction for which most diesel-powered off-road equipment use would occur, which arethe site preparation and grading phases of construction, and these construction activities are anticipatedto last less than two months. Therefore, considering the relatively low mass of DPM emissions that wouldbe generated during even the most intense season of construction, the relatively short duration ofconstruction activities (one year) required to develop the site, including just two months of sitepreparation and grading activities, and the highly dispersive properties of DPM, construction-related TACemissions would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial amounts of air toxics. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-15 November 2020(2020-173)084    Page 87 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectFurthermore, the Proposed Project has been evaluated against the SCAQMD’s LSTs for construction. Aspreviously stated, LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental JusticeEnhancement Initiative (I-4) and can be used to assist lead agencies in analyzing localized impactsassociated with project-specific level proposed projects. As shown in Table 4.3-2, the emissions ofpollutants on the peak day of construction would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants atnearby sensitive receptors. Impacts would be less than significant. Operational Air ContaminantsThe Proposed Project involves the construction of six single family homes. The Proposed Project wouldnot include the provision of new permanent stationary or mobile sources of emissions, and therefore, byits very nature, would not generate quantifiable air toxic emissions from Proposed Project operations.Impacts would be less than significant.Carbon Monoxide Hot SpotsIt has long been recognized that CO exceedances are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idlingat intersections. Concentrations of CO are a direct function of the number of vehicles, length of delay, andtraffic flow conditions. Under certain meteorological conditions, CO concentrations close to congestedintersections that experience high levels of traffic and elevated background concentrations may reachunhealthy levels, affecting nearby sensitive receptors. Given the high traffic volume potential, areas ofhigh CO concentrations, or “hot spots,” are typically associated with intersections that are projected tooperate at unacceptable levels of service during the peak commute hours. However, transport of thiscriteria pollutant is extremely limited, and CO disperses rapidly with distance from the source undernormal meteorological conditions. Furthermore, vehicle emissions standards have become increasinglymore stringent in the last 20 years. Currently, the CO standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams permile for passenger cars (requirements for certain vehicles are more stringent). With the turnover of oldervehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities,CO concentrations in the project vicinity have steadily declined. Accordingly, with the steadily decreasing CO emissions from vehicles, even very busy intersections do notresult in exceedances of the CO standard. The analysis prepared for CO attainment in the South Coast AirQuality Management District 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan) in LosAngeles County can be used to demonstrate the potential for CO exceedances. The SCAQMD CO hot spotanalysis was conducted for four busy intersections in Los Angeles County during the peak morning andafternoon time periods. The intersections evaluated included Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway(Lynwood), Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue (Westwood), Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue(Hollywood), and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard (Inglewood). The busiest intersectionevaluated was at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has a traffic volume of approximately100,000 vehicles per day. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority evaluated thelevel of service in the vicinity of the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection and found it to belevel of service (LOS) E at peak morning traffic and LOS F at peak afternoon traffic (LOS E and F are thetwo least efficient traffic LOS ratings). Even with the inefficient LOS and volume of traffic, the CO analysisconcluded that there was no violation of CO standards (SCAQMD 1992). Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-16 November 2020(2020-173)085    Page 88 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectAccording to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017), the Proposed Project is anticipated togenerate 56 daily trips on average. Because the Proposed Project would not increase traffic volumes atany intersection to more than 100,000 vehicles per day, there is no likelihood of the Proposed Projecttraffic exceeding CO values. No impact would occur.Less thanSignificantWithMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading Incorporatedto odors) adversely affecting a substantialnumber of people?No impact.Typically, odors are regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However, manifestations of aperson’s reaction to foul odors can range from psychological (e.g., irritation, anger, or anxiety) tophysiological (e.g., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache).With respect to odors, the human nose is the sole sensing device. The ability to detect odors variesconsiderably among the population and overall is quite subjective. Some individuals have the ability tosmell minute quantities of specific substances; others may not have the same sensitivity but may havesensitivities to odors of other substances. In addition, people may have different reactions to the sameodor; in fact, an odor that is offensive to one person (e.g., from a fast-food restaurant) may be perfectlyacceptable to another. It is also important to note that an unfamiliar odor is more easily detected and ismore likely to cause complaints than a familiar one. This is because of the phenomenon known as odorfatigue, in which a person can become desensitized to almost any odor and recognition only occurs withan alteration in the intensity. According to the SCAQMD, land uses commonly considered to be potential sources of obnoxiousodorous emissions include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, foodprocessing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglassmolding. The Proposed Project would develop low density residential homes that could potentially househorses and other livestock. Animal waste would be required to be cleaned and disposed of on a monthlybasis, thereby, reducing odor impacts. This type of use would be compatible with the project area as italready includes equestrian. Impacts would be less than significant. 4.3.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-17 November 2020(2020-173)086    Page 89 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project4.4 Biological Resources4.4.1 Environmental SettingECORP Consulting, Inc. prepared a Biological Technical Report in 2018 and performed an updatedliterature review, database search, and biological reconnaissance survey of the project site in October2020 (ECORP 2020b; Appendix B). An updated literature review and database search was conducted usingCalifornia Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW’s) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB;CDFW 2020) and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Electronic Inventory (CNPS 2020) wasperformed before the survey was conducted to determine if any new special-status plant or wildlifespecies had been recorded on the property or surrounding area since the last survey. The current surveywas conducted by ECORP as an update to a previous biological reconnaissance survey conducted inOctober 2018, as requested by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Both reports are included in Appendix B. The project site consists of approximately 4.0 acres of mostly undeveloped former agriculture landimmediately southwest of the intersection of Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove Street. One structure, asmall house, was identified on the project site. The project site was bounded by residential properties tothe east and west, an existing SBCFCD access road to the north, and an equestrian boarding and trainingfacility to the south. The project site was very disturbed, with most of the vegetation on the project siteconsisting of non-native grasses and forbs known to persist in disturbed areas. Representative sitephotographs are presented in Appendix B. Vegetation CommunitiesNo native vegetation communities were present on the project site. The project site was generallyclassified as disturbed and developed. No special-status habitats or vegetation communities wereobserved on or near the project site.PlantsPlant species observed on the project site were typical of the disturbed and developed land present onthe project site. Plant species identified within the disturbed habitat on the project site included mustard(Brassica nigra), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), and jimsonweed (Daturawrightii). A row of eucalyptus (Eucalyptus Sp.) is present along the northern border of the project site. Treeof heaven (Ailanthus altissima) and oleander (Nerium oleander) are also present on the project site. A fulllist of plant species observed on or immediately adjacent to the project site is included in Appendix B. WildlifeDue to its disturbed/developed nature, the project site did not provide much habitat for wildlife species.However, some common wildlife species were observed during the survey, including house finch(Haemorhous mexicanus), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), pocket gopher (Thomomysbottae), and mourning dove (Zenaida macroura). A complete list of wildlife species observed on orimmediately adjacent to the project site is included in Appendix B.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-18 November 2020(2020-173)087    Page 90 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectSoilsAccording to the National Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey website (NRCS 2020), soil onthe project site consists of Soboba Gravely Loamy Sand. The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan EIRdescribes these soils as consisting of grayish-brown stony loamy sand on the surface, about 10 inchesthick, with underlying material of brown very stony loamy sand and very pale brown stony sand about 60inches thick. Potential Waters of the U.S.Although a formal jurisdictional delineation was not conducted, no jurisdictional drainages, streamcourses, and/or other water features were identified on the project site. No hydric soils or riparianvegetation were observed within the project site boundaries. A SBCFCD channel was identified along thewest border of the project site and is likely jurisdictional to the USACE, CDFW, and State Water ResourcesControl Board (SWRCB). Special-Status PlantsThe literature review and database searches identified 58 special-status wildlife species that occur near theproject site; however, due to the project site’s long history of being heavily disturbed and/or developed,and the current lack of suitable habitat for the special-status plant species identified in the literaturereview and database searches, all 58 species are presumed to be absent from the project site. Plantspecies with a CNPS Rare Plant Rank 3 or 4 were eliminated from the analysis because these rankings areconsidered a review list and a watch list, respectively. Descriptions of the CNPS designations and a list ofthe 55 special-status plant species identified in the literature review is presented in Appendix B. Special-Status WildlifeThe literature review and database searches identified 45 special-status wildlife species that occur near theproject site; however, based on the condition of the project site, the project site’s history of being heavilydisturbed, developed, disced, and the current lack of suitable habitat for special-status wildlife species onthe project site, all of the special-status wildlife species identified in the literature review were presumedabsent from the project site. A list of the 45 special-status wildlife species identified in the literature reviewis presented in Appendix B. Migratory Birds and RaptorsPotential nesting habitat for migratory birds and raptors protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (CDFG Code) was present on the project site within the largetrees on and adjacent to the project site. Although the trees were generally identified as being in poorcondition (TLC 2018), the trees are still considered suitable for nesting. Raptors typically breed betweenFebruary and August, and songbirds and other passerines generally nest between March and August. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-19 November 2020(2020-173)088    Page 91 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project4.4.2 Biological Resources (IV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: a) IncorporatedHave a substantial adverse effect, either directlyor through habitat modifications, on any speciesidentified as a candidate, sensitive, or specialstatus species in local or regional plans, policies,or regulations, or by the California Department ofFish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated.The literature review and database searches identified 58 special-status plant species that occur near theproject site; but due to elevational factors, the project site’s history of being heavily disturbed, developed,disked, and the current lack of suitable habitat for special-status plant species on project site, all of thespecial-status plant species identified in the literature review were presumed absent from the project site.Therefore, the removal of approximately 4 acres of disturbed and developed land on the project sitewould not contribute to the overall decline of any of the plant species identified in the literature reviewand database searches. No impacts to special-status plant species are anticipated to result from thedevelopment of the Proposed Project. The literature review and database searches identified 45 special-status wildlife species that occur near theproject site; however, based on the condition of the project site, the project site’s history of being heavilydisturbed, developed, disked, and the current lack of suitable habitat for special-status wildlife species onthe project site, all of the special-status wildlife species identified in the literature review were presumedabsent from the project site. Therefore, the removal of approximately 4.0 acres of disturbed anddeveloped land on the project site would not contribute to the overall decline of any of the wildlifespecies identified in the literature review and database searches. No impacts to special-status wildlifespecies are anticipated to result from the development of the Proposed Project. However, if theequestrian uses of the project site were to stop on all or portions of the project site and due to its highlymobile nature, there is potential for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) to use the site before the start ofconstruction due to the presence of open areas. If burrowing owls occupy the project site prior toconstruction potential impacts in the form of injury, mortality from entombing, and loss of habitat mayoccur. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 impacts to burrowing owl would be lessthan significant level. Migratory Birds and RaptorsThe trees on and immediately adjacent to the project site could provide nesting habitat for nesting birdsand raptors protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code. If construction of the proposedProject occurs during the bird breeding season (typically February 1 through August 31), ground-disturbing construction activities could directly affect birds protected by the MBTA and their neststhrough the removal of habitat on the project site and indirectly through increased noise, vibrations, and Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-20 November 2020(2020-173)089    Page 92 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectincreased human activity. Impacts to nesting birds would be less than significant with the implementationof Mitigation Measure BIO-2.No federally or state-listed species are expected to occur on the project site. Therefore, it is not likely thatthe Proposed Project would need to acquire a mechanism for “take” of federally or state-listed plant orwildlife species. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparianhabitat or other sensitive natural communityidentified in local or regional plans, policies,regulations, or by the California Department ofFish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No impact.In general, the project site consisted of disturbed/developed land that supported mostly non-native grassand forb species. The project site does not contain any riparian habitat or other sensitive naturalcommunities that would need to be preserved. No impacts to sensitive natural communities areanticipated to result from the development of the Proposed Project. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or Incorporatedfederally protected wetlands (including, but notlimited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)through direct removal, filling, hydrologicalinterruption, or other means? No impact.The project site does not contain any federally protected wetlands or Waters of the United States. Thedevelopment of the project site would not result in impacts to federally protected wetlands or Waters ofthe United States. No impact would occur. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-21 November 2020(2020-173)090    Page 93 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any Incorporatednative resident or migratory fish or wildlifespecies or with established native resident ormigratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use ofnative wildlife nursery sites? No impact.The concept of habitat corridors addresses the linkage between large blocks of habitat that allow the safemovement of mammals and other wildlife species from one habitat area to another. The definition of acorridor varies, but corridors may include such areas as greenbelts, refuge systems, underpasses, andbiogeographic land bridges. In general, a corridor is described as a linear habitat, embedded in adissimilar matrix, which connects two or more large blocks of habitat. Wildlife movement corridors arecritical for the survivorship of ecological systems for several reasons. Corridors can connect water, food,and cover sources, spatially linking these three resources with wildlife in different areas. In addition,wildlife movement between habitat areas provides for the potential of genetic exchange between wildlifespecies populations, thereby maintaining genetic variability and adaptability to maximize the success ofwildlife responses to changing environmental conditions. This is especially critical for small populationssubject to loss of variability from genetic drift and effects of inbreeding. The nature of corridor usage andwildlife movement patterns vary greatly among species. The project site is located within and adjacent to areas containing existing disturbances (e.g., paved roadsand residential). The project site is heavily disturbed and/or developed and contained very little vegetativecover that would facilitate wildlife movement. No migratory wildlife corridors or native wildlife nurserysites were identified within the project site. No impacts to wildlife corridors or nursery sites are expectedto occur during the development of the project site. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances Incorporatedprotecting biological resources, such as a treepreservation policy or ordinance?No Impact. In October 2018, Tree of Life Consulting (TLC) prepared an arborist report for the Proposed Project todocument the onsite trees’ current conditions, provide a digital map of their locations, and to recommendif they were suitable for preservation or relocation. Twenty-seven of the trees were eucalyptus sp. and satalong Vista Grove St. The trees were in various stages of decline and had rock and debris piled up aroundthe root flares limiting access. Many of these trees had previously failed and were adventitious root Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-22 November 2020(2020-173)091    Page 94 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectsprouts. The remaining trees were mostly in a fenced in area that was still occupied by residents andaccess was limited. A few trees sat in the vacant field and were likely previous failures or removals thathad re-sprouted. Other than two eucalyptus trees and one fan palm, no trees were suitable forpreservation or relocation. Due to the age of the trees, un-correctable structure, poor locations andvarying stages of decline, any preservation or relocation practices would largely be useless (TLC 2018). The City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance in the Municipal Code (Chapter 17.80 Tree Preservation) purpose isto protect trees, considered to be a community resource, from indiscriminate cutting or removal.Provisions within Chapter 17.80 are specifically intended to protect and expand the eucalyptus windrows.Heritage Trees, as defined in Municipal Code Section 17.16.080, are also protected are require a permitprior to removal. The Proposed Project would include removal of all onsite trees. Thus, the applicant would acquire a permitprior to the removal, relocation, or destruction of a Heritage Tree. All construction and grading activitieswould comply with City Municipal Code 17.16.080 and obtain a tree removal permit prior to the removalof the existing trees. No impact would occur.Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: f) Conflict with the provisions of an adoptedHabitat Conservation Plan, Natural CommunityConservation Plan, or other approved local,regional, or state habitat conservation plan?No impact.The project site is not located within an HCP or NCCP. Development of the project site will not conflictwith the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional or state HCP. No impactwould occur.4.4.3 Mitigation MeasuresBIO-1: Pre-Construction Burrowing Owl Survey: A pre-construction survey for burrowing owls shall becompleted within the Project site between 14 and 30 days prior to construction activities inaccordance with the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012). A second pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than 24 hours prior to the start of construction. Ifburrowing owls are observed during either of the preconstruction surveys, implementation ofadditional measures may be necessary to reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant,including seasonal work restrictions, no-work buffers established around active burrows, passiverelocation of burrowing owls, and/or a specific mitigation methodology determined incoordination with CDFW. BIO-2: Pre-construction Nesting Bird Survey: If construction or other Project activities are scheduledto occur during the bird breeding season (February through August for raptors and March Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-23 November 2020(2020-173)092    Page 95 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectthrough August for most migratory bird species), a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall beconducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that active bird nests will not be disturbed ordestroyed. The survey shall be completed no more than three days prior to initial grounddisturbance. The nesting bird survey shall include the project site and adjacent areas whereProject activities have the potential to affect active nests, either directly or indirectly due toconstruction activity or noise. If an active nest is identified, a qualified biologist shall establish anappropriate disturbance limit buffer around the nest using flagging or staking. Constructionactivities shall not occur within any disturbance limit buffer zones until the nest has fledged or hasbeen deemed inactive by the qualified biologist. 4.5 Cultural Resources4.5.1 Environmental SettingA Cultural Resources Inventory Report was prepared by ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP 2020c, AppendixC) for the Proposed Project to determine if cultural resources were present in or adjacent to the projectsite and assess the sensitivity of the project site for undiscovered or buried cultural resources. The culturalcontext of the project area including regional and local prehistory, ethnography, and regional and projectarea histories can be found in the report in Appendix C. In October 2018, a cultural resources records search was conducted at the South Central CoastalInformation Center at California State University, Fullerton. The purpose of the records search was todetermine the extent of previous cultural resources investigations and the presence of previously-recorded archaeological sites or historic-period (i.e., over 50 years in age) resources within a one-mile(1600-meter) radius of the project site. Materials reviewed included reports of previous cultural resourcesinvestigations, archaeological site records, historical maps, and listings of resources on the NationalRegister of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), California Points ofHistorical Interest, California Landmarks, and National Historic Landmarks. In addition to the records search, ECORP contacted the California Native American Heritage Commission(NAHC) on October 10, 2018, to request a search of the Sacred Lands File for the project area. The resultsof the search showed no Native American cultural resources in the project area; however, the absence ofspecific site information in the search does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any projectarea. 4.5.2 Cultural Resources (V) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporateda)Cause a substantial adverse change in thesignificance of a historical resource pursuant to§15064.5?No impact.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-24 November 2020(2020-173)093    Page 96 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectThe records search results indicated that no previous cultural resources study had been conducted withinthe project site, and 36 investigations have occurred within a one-mile radius of the project site between1975 and 2014. The records search also revealed that no previously recorded resources are located withinthe project site, and 14 previously recorded resources are located within a one-mile radius of the projectsite. The results of the search of the Sacred Lands File by the NAHC did not indicate the presence of anyNative American cultural resources within one mile of the project site. As a result of the field survey, an agricultural complex with two historic-age buildings and four featuresconsisting of building foundations (TR-001) was documented and evaluated using CRHR eligibility criteria.TR 001 was evaluated as not eligible for listing in the CRHR under any criteria and not eligible as a City ofRancho Cucamonga Historic Landmark. TR-001 is also not currently listed in a local register of historicalresources, as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) 5020.1(k), and has not been identified as significantin a historical resources survey, as defined in PRC 5024.1(g). Therefore, TR 001 is not considered anHistorical Resource as defined by CEQA. The Proposed Project would not result in any significant impactson known Historical Resources under CEQA. No impact would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the Incorporatedsignificance of an archaeological resourcepursuant to §15064.5?Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated.Archaeological resources are defined as the physical remains of past human activities and can be eitherprehistorical or historical in origin. Archaeological sites are locations that contain evidence of humanactivity. In general, an archaeological site is defined by a significant accumulation, or presence, of one ormore of the following: food remains, waste from the manufacturing of tools, concentrations or alignmentsof stones, modification of rock surfaces, unusual discoloration or accumulation of soil, or human skeletalremains. Geologic maps show that the project area contains early Holocene Quaternary alluvium. While thesesediments are contemporaneous with pre-contact human occupation of the area, the two pre-contactresources within the one-mile records search radius are both located at least ¾-mile from the project site,and are exclusively centered around bedrock outcrops near the mouths of canyons. The project site doesnot contain any bedrock outcrops and no surface-level artifacts were found that would indicate it hadbeen intensively used during the pre-contact period. Sediments within the project site have beendisturbed by use of the property as a citrus grove, removal of the citrus grove, construction and removalof several buildings, and the operation of the property as an agricultural complex through the years.Therefore, the archaeological sensitivity of the area is believed to be low (ECORP 2018c). Although the archaeological sensitivity is low, there is still a potential for ground-disturbing activities toexpose previously unrecorded cultural resources. CEQA requires the lead agency to address anyEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-25 November 2020(2020-173)094    Page 97 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectunanticipated cultural resources discoveries during project construction. Therefore, implementation ofMitigation Measures CUL-1, SMBMI CUL 1, and SMBMI CUL-2 would reduce potential adverse impactsto less than significant.Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: c) Disturb any human remains, including those Incorporatedinterred outside of dedicated cemeteries?Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated.No human remains or dedicated cemeteries were identified during the records search and field surveycompleted for the Proposed Project. However, the possibility exists that human remains could beuncovered during construction of the Proposed Project. Implementation of mitigation measures CUL-1and SMBMI CUL-3 would ensure that impacts to human remains are less than significant. 4.5.3 Mitigation MeasuresCUL-1: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered duringconstruction, all work must halt within a 60-foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professionalarchaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards forprehistoric and historic archaeologist, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find,and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professionaljudgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find: •If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a culturalresource, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required.•If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resourcefrom any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify theCEQA lead agency, and applicable landowner. The agencies shall consult on a finding ofeligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to beeligible for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR. Work may not resume within the no-work radiusuntil the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1)is not eligible for the NRHP or CRHR; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completedto their satisfaction. •If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, the archaeologistshall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery fromdisturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner (asper § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of § 7050.5 of the CaliforniaHealth and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. Ifthe Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-26 November 2020(2020-173)095    Page 98 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectthe Coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most LikelyDescendant (MLD) for the Project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerningtreatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of theMLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, thelandowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of thePRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriateinformation center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; orrecording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (AB2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, throughconsultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed totheir satisfaction. SMBMI CUL-1: In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in theimmediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologistmeeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the otherportions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period.Additionally, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI)shall be contacted, as detailed within SMBMI TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact finds and beprovided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of the nature of thefind, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. SMBMI CUL-2: If significant pre-contact cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), arediscovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring andTreatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to SMBMI for review and comment, asdetailed within SMBMI TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project andimplement the Plan accordingly. SMBMI CUL-3: If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associatedwith the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall ceaseand the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 andthat code enforced for the duration of the project.4.6 Energy4.6.1 Environmental SettingElectricity/Natural Gas ServicesSouthern California Edison provides electrical services to Rancho Cucamonga through State-regulatedpublic utility contracts. Southern California Edison, the largest subsidiary of Edison International, is theprimary electricity supply company for much of Southern California. It provides 14 million people withelectricity across a service territory of approximately 50,000 square miles.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-27 November 2020(2020-173)096    Page 99 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectThe Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas services to the Project area. SouthernCalifornia Gas services approximately 21.6 million customers, spanning roughly 20,000 square miles ofCalifornia.Energy ConsumptionElectricity use is measured in kilowatt-hours (kWh), and natural gas use is measured in therms. Vehicle fueluse is typically measured in gallons (e.g. of gasoline or diesel fuel), although energy use for electricvehicles is measured in kWh.The electricity consumption associated with all non-residential uses in San Bernardino County from 2014to 2018 is shown in Table 4.6-1. As indicated, the demand has increased since 2014.Table 4.6-1. Non-Residential Electricity Consumption in San Bernardino County 2014-2018 Residential Electricity Consumption Year (kWh)2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 10,189,923,519 10,079,280,332 9,972,705,757 9,826,231,162 9,998,887,200 Source: ECDMS 2019The natural gas consumption associated with all non-residential uses in San Bernardino County from 2014to 2018 is shown in Table 4.6-2. As indicated, the demand has increased since 2014.Table 4.6-2. Non-residential Natural Gas Consumption in San Bernardino County 2014-2018 Residential Natural Gas ConsumptionYear(therms)2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 268,614,328 257,879,077 259,752,692 245,499,027 238,061,850 Source: ECDMS 2019Automotive fuel consumption in San Bernardino County from 2015 to 2019 is shown in Table 4.6-3. Asshown, automotive fuel consumption has remained relatively constant in the county since 2015. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-28 November 2020(2020-173)097    Page 100 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectTable 4.6-3. Automotive Fuel Consumption in San Bernardino County 2015–2019 Automotive Fuel ConsumptionYear(gallons)2019 2018 2017 2016 3,334,922,526 3,385,160,075 3,427,137,695 3,469,323,122 3,336,730,022 2015Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB) 20174.6.2 Energy (VI) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporateda)Result in potentially significant environmentalimpact due to wasteful, inefficient, orunnecessary consumption of energy resources,during project construction or operation? Less than significant. Project construction is expected to have a nominal effect on local and regional energy supplies. Nounusual project characteristics would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be lessenergy-efficient than at comparable construction sites in the region or the state. Construction contractorswould purchase their own gasoline and diesel fuel from local suppliers and would conserve the use oftheir supplies to minimize costs to their profits. Additionally, construction equipment fleet turnover andincreasingly stringent state and federal regulations on engine efficiency combined with state regulationslimiting engine idling times and requiring recycling of construction debris, would further reduce theamount of transportation fuel demand during project construction. For these reasons, it is expected thatconstruction fuel consumption associated with the Proposed Project would not be any more inefficient,wasteful, or unnecessary than other similar residential development projects of this nature. The Proposed Project would not result in any unusual characteristics that would result in excessive long-term operational energy consumption. Energy consumption associated with the Proposed Project wouldnot be considered inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary in comparison to other similar residentialdevelopments in the region. For these reasons, this impact would be less than significant. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-29 November 2020(2020-173)098    Page 101 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?Less than significant.The Proposed Project would be designed in a manner that is consistent with relevant energy conservationplans designed to encourage development that results in the efficient use of energy resources. Theproject site is designated Very Low Residential by the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and as such, theProposed Project is consistent with the development projections for the area. The Proposed Project wouldcomply with relevant energy conservation policies included in the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan; manyof which are included in the Resource Conservation Goals and Policies section. A major overarching goalof this component of the General Plan is to ensure that development in the City aligns with the City’sresource conservation goals. The Propsoed Project would not conflict or obstruct any local or state plansfor renewable energy or energy efficiency. For these reasons, this impact would be less than significant. 4.6.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.7 Geology and Soils4.7.1 Environmental SettingRegional Seismicity and Fault ZonesAn “active fault,” according to California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, is afault that has indicated surface displacement within the last 11,000 years. A fault that has not showngeologic evidence of surface displacement in the last 11,000 years is considered “inactive.”A major earthquake (7.0 magnitude) on the Cucamonga Fault, located approximately 2.5 miles north ofthe project site, is assumed to be the worst-case earthquake scenario for the City. Ground displacementsof up to 9 feet could occur along the fault, intense ground shaking could last more than 30 seconds, andlosses could be extensive (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). The Etiwanda Avenue Fault Scarp (potentialfor 6.5 magnitude earthquake) is considered capable of ground shaking at an intensity that presentsunacceptable risks to proposed structures. This fault is located approximately one mile north of theproject site. SoilsThe elevation of the project site ranges from 1,915 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) to 1,944 feet AMSL.It is located approximately 364 feet southeast of a drainage, which emanates from the San GabrielMountains 0.55 mile to the north. According to the National Resources Conservation Service Web SoilSurvey website (NRCS 2020), soil on the project site consists of Soboba Gravely Loamy Sand. The RanchoEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-30 November 2020(2020-173)099    Page 102 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectCucamonga General Plan EIR describes these soils as consisting of grayish-brown stony loamy sand onthe surface, about 10 inches thick, with underlying material of brown very stony loamy sand and very palebrown stony sand about 60 inches thick. These soils are excessively drained and highly permeable. Runoffon these soils is slow and erosion hazard is slight. They have low shrink-swell potential (City of RanchoCucamonga 2010b). 4.7.2 Geology and Soils (VII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project:Incorporateda)Directly or indirectly cause substantial adverseeffects, including the risk of loss, injury, or deathinvolving:i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, asdelineated on the most recent Alquist-PrioloEarthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by theState Geologist for the area or based onother substantial evidence of a known fault?Refer to Division of Mines and GeologySpecial Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?iii) Seismic-related ground failure, includingliquefaction?iv) Landslides?Less than significant.i)According to the City’s General Plan, the nearest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone is theEtiwanda Avenue Fault Scarp, located approximately one mile north of the project site (City ofRancho Cucamonga 2010a). In the event of an earthquake, strong ground shaking wouldoccur. However, future construction of residential structures would be required to complywith current building codes and design standards which would reduce the risk of loss, injury,or death resulting from strong ground-shaking. Design of the Proposed Project would followthe recommendations of a registered civil, structural engineer and/or engineering geologistand at a minimum meet current building standards and codes including those associated withprotection from anticipated seismic events. As such, impacts would be less than significant. ii)As discussed above, in the event of an earthquake strong ground shaking is expected tooccur on the project site. The Proposed Project would not expose people or structures tostrong seismic ground shaking greater than what currently exists. Design and constructionEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-31 November 2020(2020-173)100    Page 103 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectwould comply with current building codes and standards which would reduce the risk of loss,injury, or death resulting from strong ground shaking. Impacts would be less than significant.iii)Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which water-saturated granular soil loses shear strengthduring strong ground shaking produced by earthquakes. The loss of soil strength occurswhen cyclic pore water pressure increases below the groundwater surface. Potential hazardsdue to liquefaction include the loss of bearing strength beneath structures, possibly causingfoundation failure and/or significant settlements. According to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, groundwater is generally 350 feet or morebelow the ground surface. The project site is not located in a zone of potential liquefaction(City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). For these reasons, the Proposed Project is not anticipatedto have adverse effects that could result in risk of loss, injury, or death due to liquefaction thatmay occur during a seismic event. Impacts would be less than significant. iv)Landslides refer to a wide variety of processes that result in the perceptible downward andoutward movement of soil, rock, and vegetation under gravitational influence. Commonnames for landslide types include slump, rockslide, debris slide, lateral spreading, debrisavalanche, earth flow, and soil creep. Landslides may be triggered by both natural- andhuman-induced changes in the environment resulting in slope instability. The project site and surrounding terrain are relatively flat and no hillsides exist in theimmediate vicinity. According to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Geologic Hazard Map,the project site does not lie in a region susceptible to landslides (City of Rancho Cucamonga2013a). As such, no impact would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project:Incorporatedb)Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss oftopsoil?Less than significant.The Proposed Project would require ground-disturbing activities, such as grading, that could potentiallyresult in soil erosion or loss of topsoil. These exposed soils could potentially cause erosion impacts duringwindy conditions and from construction vehicles traveling through the project site. Heavy rains couldcause the exposed soils to run off into public rights-of-way and/or storm drainage systems. Construction of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit,either through a waiver or through preparation and implementation of a Storm Water PollutionPrevention Plan (SWPPP). Best Management Practices (BMPs) included in the SWPPP would minimize soilerosion during construction. The Proposed Project’s grading plan and SWPPP would also ensure that theproposed earthwork and storm water structures are designed to avoid soil erosion. Impacts would be lessthan significant. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-32 November 2020(2020-173)101    Page 104 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is Incorporatedunstable, or that would become unstable as aresult of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?Less than significant. As discussed in the responses to questions a) i) through iv) of this section, hazards associated withliquefaction, lateral spread, and landslides are not expected. Compliance with City procedures for plancheck, permit issuance, and construction inspection ensure would ensure that the Proposed Project isappropriately designed to minimize potential hazards related to soil instability. Impacts would be lessthan significant. Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),creating substantial direct or indirect risks to lifeor property?No impact.According to the General Plan EIR, soboba soils that are stony loamy sand (SpC) are found are found atthe project site. These soils consist of grayish-brown stony loamy sand on the surface, about 10 inchesthick, with underlying material of brown very stony loamy sand and very pale brown stony sand about 60inches thick. These soils are excessively drained and highly permeable. Runoff on these soils is slow anderosion hazard is slight. They have low shrink-swell potential (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b).Therefore, no impact would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting Incorporatedthe use of septic tanks or alternative waste waterdisposal systems where sewers are not availablefor the disposal of waste water?Less than significant. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-33 November 2020(2020-173)102    Page 105 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectThe Proposed Project would install private septic systems for the six residential lots. As discussed in theresponses to questions a) i) through iv) of this section, geologic hazards associated with liquefaction,lateral spread, and landslides are not expected. Compliance with City procedures for plan check, permitissuance, and construction inspection ensure would ensure that the Proposed Project is appropriatelydesigned to minimize potential hazards associated with installation of the proposed septic system.Impacts would be less than significant. Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: f) Directly or indirectly destroy a uniquepaleontological resource or site or uniquegeologic feature?Less than significant with mitigation incorporated.According to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan EIR, no direct evidence of paleontological resourceshas been found as a result of surveys in the City (Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). Although nopaleontological resources are known to exist on site, there is a possibility that paleontological resourcesexist at sub-surface levels on the project site and may be uncovered during grading and excavationactivities. Implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1 would ensure that if any such resources are foundduring construction of the Proposed Project, they would be handled according to the proper regulationsand any potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. 4.7.3 Mitigation MeasuresGEO-1: Unanticipated Discovery – Paleontological Resource. If paleontological resources (i.e., fossilremains) are discovered during excavation activities, the contractor will notify the City and ceaseexcavation within 100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontological professional can provide anevaluation of the site. The qualified paleontological professional will evaluate the significance ofthe find and recommend appropriate measures for the disposition of the site (e.g. fossil recovery,curation, data recovery, and/or monitoring). Construction activities may continue on other partsof the construction site while evaluation and treatment of the paleontological resource takesplace. 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions4.8.1 Environmental SettingGreenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions are released as byproducts of fossil fuel combustion, waste disposal,energy use, land use changes, and other human activities. This release of gases, such as carbon dioxide(CO ), methane (CH ), nitrous oxide (N O), and chlorofluorocarbons, creates a blanket around the earth 2 4 2that allows light to pass through but traps heat at the surface, preventing its escape into space. While thisis a naturally occurring process known as the greenhouse effect, human activities have accelerated theEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-34 November 2020(2020-173)103    Page 106 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectgeneration of GHGs beyond natural levels. The overabundance of GHGs in the atmosphere has led to anunexpected warming of the earth and has the potential to severely impact the earth’s climate system.Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, ofthe gas molecule in the atmosphere. CH traps over 25 times more heat per molecule than CO , and N O 4 2 2absorbs 298 times more heat per molecule than CO2. Often, estimates of GHG emissions are presented incarbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e). Expressing GHG emissions in carbon dioxide equivalents takes thecontribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalentto the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted. The local air quality agency regulating the SoCAB is the SCAQMD, the regional air pollution control officerfor the basin. To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissionsin CEQA documents, SCAQMD staff convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. TheWorking Group was formed to assist the SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance threshold andis composed of a wide variety of stakeholders including the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR),CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of city and county planning departments in the Basin,various utilities such as sanitation and power companies throughout the Basin, industry groups, andenvironmental and professional organizations. On October 8, 2008, the SCAQMD released the DraftAQMD Staff CEQA GHG Significance Thresholds. On September 28, 2010, the SCAQMD recommended aninterim screening level numeric, bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually and anefficiency-based threshold of 4.8 metric tons of CO2e per service population (Project employees + patrons+ residents) per year in 2020 and 3.0 metric tons of CO2e per service population per year in 2035. Thesethresholds were developed as part of the SCAQMD GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group.The working group was formed to assist the SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance thresholdand is composed of a wide variety of stakeholders including the state Office of Planning and Research(OPR), CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of city and county planning departments in theSoCAB, various utilities such as sanitation and power companies throughout the basin, industry groups,and environmental and professional organizations. The numeric bright line and efficiency-basedthresholds were developed to be consistent with CEQA requirements for developing significancethresholds, are supported by substantial evidence, and provide guidance to CEQA practitioners and leadagencies with regard to determining whether GHG emissions from a proposed project are significant. ECORP prepared an Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Technical Report for the Proposed Project in October2018 (Appendix A). For the purposes of this evaluation, the Proposed Project is compared to the SCAQMDinterim screening level numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually. If it isdetermined that the Proposed Project is estimated to exceed this screening threshold, it will then becompared to the SCAQMD-recommended efficiency-based threshold of 4.8 metric tons of CO2e perservice population per year in 2020, and 3.0 metric tons of CO2e per service population per year in 2035. The Proposed Project is also evaluated for compliance with the City Sustainable Community Action Plan.As part of the Sustainable Community Action Plan, Rancho Cucamonga set a goal to reduce greenhousegas emissions 15 percent below 2008 levels by 2020. The Sustainable Community Action Plan alsoaddresses GHG emissions beyond 2020 as informed by the statewide post-2020 GHG reduction targets.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-35 November 2020(2020-173)104    Page 107 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectRancho Cucamonga will look to align greenhouse gas reduction goals with State targets for 2030 andbeyond.4.8.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (VIII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project:a)Generate greenhouse gas emissions, eitherdirectly or indirectly, that may have a significantimpact on the environment?No impact.ConstructionConstruction-related activities that would generate GHGs include worker commute trips, haul truckscarrying supplies and materials to and from the project site, and off-road construction equipment (e.g.,dozers, loaders, excavators). Table 4.8-1 illustrates the specific construction-generated GHG emissionsthat would result from construction of the Proposed Project.Table 4.8-1. Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas EmissionsEmissions Source Construction in 2019 Construction in 2020 Total CO2e (Metric Tons/ Year)510 108 618 Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model Data Outputs (ECORP2020a).Notes: Emissions estimates account for the demolition of 4,200 square feet of structures. Building construction, paving, and paintingassumed to occur simultaneously.As shown in Table 4.8-1, Proposed Project construction would result in the generation of approximately618 metric tons of CO2e over the course of construction. Once construction is complete, the generation ofthese GHG emissions would cease. Projected GHGs from construction have been quantified andamortized over the life of the Proposed Project (30 years). The amortized construction emissions areadded to the annual average operational emissions. OperationsOperation of the Proposed Project would result in GHG emissions predominantly associated with motorvehicle use. Long-term operational GHG emissions attributable to the Proposed Project are identified inTable 4.8-2 and compared to SCAQMD’s interim screening level numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000metric tons of CO2e annually.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-36 November 2020(2020-173)105    Page 108 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectTable 4.8-2. Operational-Related Greenhouse Gas EmissionsEmissions SourceConstruction Emissions (Amortized over 30 years) Area Source Emissions CO2e (Metric Tons/ Year)211Energy Source EmissionsMobile Source Emissions 2791Solid Waste Emissions 4Water Emissions 3Total Emissions 1473,000 No SCAQMD Screening ThresholdExceed SCAQMD Threshold? Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model Data Outputs (ECORP2020a).Notes: Emissions projections account for a trip generation rate identified ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017).SCAQMD thresholds were developed based on substantial evidence that such thresholds representquantitative levels of GHG emissions, compliance with which means that the environmental impact of theGHG emissions will normally not be cumulatively considerable under CEQA. These thresholds weredeveloped as part of the SCAQMD GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. The working groupwas formed to assist the SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance threshold and is composed of awide variety of stakeholders including the state OPR, CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of cityand county planning departments in the SoCAB, various utilities such as sanitation and power companiesthroughout the basin, industry groups, and environmental and professional organizations. As shown inTable 4.8-2, operational-generated emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s interim screening levelnumeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually. No impact would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or Incorporatedregulation adopted for the purpose of reducingthe emissions of greenhouse gases?Less than significant. City of Rancho Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action PlanThe Rancho Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action Plan (2017) is a strategic planning document thatidentifies sources of GHG emissions within the City’s boundaries, presents current and future emissionsestimates, identifies a GHG reduction target for future years, and presents strategic policies and actions toreduce emissions from the energy, transportation, land use, water use, and waste sectors. The GHG-reduction strategies in the Plan build on inventory results and key opportunities prioritized by City staffand members of the public. The Sustainable Community Action Plan strategies consist of strategies that Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-37 November 2020(2020-173)106    Page 109 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectidentify the steps the City will take to support reductions in GHG emissions. The City will achieve thesereductions in GHG emissions through a mix of voluntary programs and new strategic standards. Allstandards presented in the Sustainable Community Action Plan respond to the needs of developmentthough achieving more efficient use of resources. Both the existing and the projected GHG inventories in the Sustainable Community Action Plan werederived based on the land use designations and associated densities defined in the City 2010 GeneralPlan. The Proposed Project is consistent with the land use designation and development densitypresented in the 2010 General Plan. As previously stated, the project site is designated by the City’sGeneral Plan as “Very Low Residential”, which allows for detached, very low-density single residential unitson 0.5-acre lots or larger, with private yards and private parking. Since the Proposed Project is consistentwith the General Plan it is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for thesite vicinity in the General Plan. As a result, the Proposed Project would not conflict with the land useassumptions or exceed the population or job growth projections used by the City to develop theSustainable Community Action Plan. While the Sustainable Community Action Plan does not contain specific requirements for newdevelopments like that proposed by the Proposed Project, all development in Rancho Cucamonga,including the Proposed Project, is required to adhere to all City-adopted policy provisions, including thosecontained in the adopted Sustainable Community Action Plan. The City ensures all feasible GHG-reducingstrategies of the Sustainable Community Action Plan are incorporated into projects and their permitsthrough development review and applications of conditions of approval as applicable. The Proposed Project would not conflict with an adopted plan, policy, or regulation pertaining to GHGs.Thus, a less than significant impact would occur in this regard.Cumulative GHG ImpactsClimate change is a global problem and GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and toxicair contaminants, which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Whereas pollutants with localized airquality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (about 1 day), GHGs have much longeratmospheric lifetimes of 1 year to several thousand years that allow them to be dispersed around theglobe. It is generally the case that an individual project of this size and nature is of insufficient magnitude byitself to influence climate change or result in a substantial contribution to the global GHG inventory. GHGimpacts are recognized as exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative GHG emissionimpacts from a climate change perspective. The additive effect of project-related GHGs would not resultin a reasonably foreseeable cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change. In addition,the Proposed Project as well as other cumulative related projects would also be subject to all applicableregulatory requirements, which would further reduce GHG emissions. As previously discussed, theProposed Project would not conflict with the City CAP. As a result, the Proposed Project would not conflictwith any GHG reduction plans. Therefore, the Proposed Project’s cumulative contribution of GHG Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-38 November 2020(2020-173)107    Page 110 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectemissions would be less than significant and the Proposed Project’s cumulative GHG impacts would alsobe less than cumulatively considerable.4.8.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials4.9.1 Hazards and Hazardous Materials (IX) Environmental Checklist and DiscussionLess thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporateda)Create a significant hazard to the public or theenvironment through the routine transport, use,or disposal of hazardous materials?Less than significant.The construction phase of the Proposed Project may include the transport, storage, and short-term use ofpetroleum-based fuels, lubricants, pesticides, and other similar materials. These activities would be short-term and one-time events and would be subject to federal, state, and local health and safetyrequirements. The transport of hazardous materials by truck is regulated by federal safety standards underthe jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Additionally, the implementation of BMPsstipulating proper storage of hazardous materials and vehicle refueling would be implemented duringconstruction as part of the SWPPP. All transport, handling, use, and disposal of substances such aspetroleum products, paints, and solvents related to the operation and maintenance of the ProposedProject would comply with all Federal, State, and local laws regulating management and use of hazardousmaterials. Long-term operation of the Proposed Project would involve very little transport, storage, use, ordisposal of hazardous material. A less than significant impact related to the use or transport of hazardousmaterials is expected to occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Create a significant hazard to the public or theenvironment through reasonably foreseeableupset and accident conditions involving therelease of hazardous materials into theenvironment?Less than significant. On-site storage and/or use of large quantities of hazardous materials capable of affecting soil andgroundwater are not proposed. However, during construction some hazardous materials, such as dieselEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-39 November 2020(2020-173)108    Page 111 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectfuel and herbicides, would be used. A SWPPP, listing BMPs to prevent construction pollutants andproducts from violating any water quality standard or waste discharge requirements would be preparedfor the Proposed Project. The potential risk associated with accidental discharge during use and storage ofequipment-related hazardous materials would be low since the handling of such materials would beaddressed through the implementation of BMPs. With the implementation of BMPs, the Proposed Projectwould not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use,or disposal of hazardous material. Impacts would be less than significant. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or Incorporatedacutely hazardous materials, substances, or wastewithin one-quarter mile of an existing orproposed school?No impact.The nearest school to the project site is Hermosa Elementary School, approximately 0.4 mile south of thesite. As such, the Proposed Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materialswithin one-quarter mile of a school. No impact would occur.Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of Incorporatedhazardous materials sites compiled pursuant toGovernment Code Section 65962.5 and, as aresult, would it create a significant hazard to thepublic or the environment? No impact.A search of the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC) Hazardous Waste and Substances SiteList (Cortese List) and EnviroStor online database and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)GeoTracker online database was conducted for the Proposed Project area (DTSC 2020a and 2020b;SWRCB 2020). The searches revealed no known hazardous materials on the project site or immediatevicinity. No impact would occur. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-40 November 2020(2020-173)109    Page 112 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactIncorporatede)For a project located within an airport land useplan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public useairport, would the project result in a safety hazardfor people residing or working in the projectarea? No impact.The project site is not located within two miles of a public or private airport. The nearest airport is CableAirport, approximately 6.2 miles southwest of the project site. As such, the Project would not result in asafety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impact would occur.Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: f) Impair implementation of or physically interferewith an adopted emergency response plan oremergency evacuation plan?Less than significant.The City produced the Ready RC Guide in 2017, which provides essential tips on what to do before, duringand after a disaster. The guide focuses primarily on fire, flood, earthquake, and wind disasters. Thiscomprehensive booklet includes emergency kit checklists, evacuation route maps, shelter information andmore (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2017). The nearest designated emergency access route by the Ready RC Guide is Banyan Street, approximatelyone mile south of the project site. Emergency access to the site would be available via one entrance onHermosa Avenue, thereby facilitating emergency response and evacuation, if necessary. The City's projectreview process includes reviews by the City’s fire and police departments for consideration of emergencyaccess requirements. The Proposed Project’s design would meet City standards for required emergencyvehicle access and emergency egress of residents. Established City procedures including plan check,permit issuance, and construction inspection would ensure implementation of the Proposed Project isconsistent with the approved design. A less than significant impact would occur. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-41 November 2020(2020-173)110    Page 113 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: g) Expose people or structures, either directly or Incorporatedindirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury ordeath involving wildland fires?No impact.According to the CALFIRE Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map, the project site is located within aVHFHSZ (CALFIRE 2008). The project site is located on relatively flat a terrain and not in the vicinity of anylarge wildland areas. Emergency access to the site would be available via one existing entrance at theintersection of Vista Grove Drive and Hermosa Avenue. In addition, the Proposed Project would notsubstantially alter the slope, wind patterns, or other factors that could exacerbate wildfire risks. The City'sproject review process includes reviews by the City’s Fire, Building and Safety, and Planning Departmentsfor consideration of wildfire risk, emergency access requirements, and consistency with General Planpolicies. The Proposed Project’s design would meet City standards and the latest building constructioncodes. Established City procedures including plan check, permit issuance, and construction inspectionwould ensure implementation of the Proposed Project is consistent with the approved design. Impactswould be less than significant. 4.9.2 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality4.10.1 Environmental SettingRegional HydrologyThe City of Rancho Cucamonga is underlain by the Chino and Cucamonga groundwater basins, with theCucamonga basin underlying the area located generally north of the Red Hill inferred fault and the Chinobasin underlying the area south of the fault. The Red Hill Fault acts as a hydrological barrier between thetwo groundwater basins. The project site is located within the Cucamonga Basin (City of RanchoCucamonga 2010b). The alluvial fans underlying the City were created by several stream systems from the eastern San GabrielMountains. These fans and washes represent debris flow events in the recent geologic period. The SanBernardino County Flood Control District maintains debris basins and flood-control facilities in the area tocontrol debris flows and flooding hazards along the canyons, creeks and washes (City of RanchoCucamonga 2010b). Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-42 November 2020(2020-173)111    Page 114 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectSite Hydrology and On-Site DrainageThe elevation of the Project Area ranges from 1,915 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) to 1,944 feet AMSL.It is located approximately 364 feet southeast of a drainage, which emanates from the San GabrielMountains 0.55 mile to the north. For details of the proposed water quality management plans, please seeFigure 4.4.10.2 Hydrology and Water Quality (X) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporateda)Violate any water quality standards or wastedischarge requirements or otherwise substantiallydegrade surface or ground water quality?Less than significant.During construction of the Proposed Project water quality impacts could occur without proper controls.Soils loosened during grading, spills of fluids or fuels from vehicles and equipment or miscellaneousconstruction materials and debris, if mobilized and transported offsite in overland flow, could degradewater quality. Because the area of ground disturbance affected by construction of the Proposed Projectwould exceed one acre, the Proposed Project would be subject to the requirements of the statewideNPDES stormwater permit for construction activity (Order 98-08 DWQ). The proponent of the ProposedProject would implement a SWPPP listing BMPs to prevent construction pollutants and products fromviolating any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. During operations the Proposed Project would implement a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP).The WQMP details the Proposed Project’s stormwater management system to address post-constructionrunoff quality and quantity. The Proposed Project’s stormwater management system includes a waterquality basin at the southern end of the cul-de-sac, between Lot 3 and Lot 4 (Figure 4. Water QualityManagement Plan). Stormwater runoff from the proposed development would be directed to theproposed water quality basin. Impacts to surface or ground water quality during project operation wouldbe less than significant. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-43 November 2020(2020-173)112    Page 115 TRACT MAP NO. 18305 LOT "A"LOT "A" DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATECITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TRACT NO. 18305DESIGN DRAWN RECOMMENDEDJ.B.M.SHEET1J.B.M.CHECKEDB.K.M. OF 1DRAWING NO. Figure 4. Water Quality Management Plan2020-173 Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project113    Page 116 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or Incorporatedinterfere substantially with groundwater rechargesuch that the project may impede sustainablegroundwater management of the basin?Less than significant. The Proposed Project would include both pervious (water quality basin, drainage easement, andlandscape areas) and impervious (hardscapes, building footprints) surfaces. The Proposed Project wouldnot involve the withdrawal of groundwater. Water supply for the residential uses would be provided bythe Cucamonga Valley Water District. The Proposed Project’s stormwater management system includesthe use of a water quality basin, which would allow groundwater recharge. Therefore, the ProposedProject is not anticipated to substantially affect groundwater recharge. Impacts would be less thansignificant. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern Incorporatedof the site or area, including through thealteration of the course of a stream or river orthrough the addition of impervious surfaces, in amanner that would:i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- oroff-site;ii) substantially increase the rate or amount ofsurface runoff in a manner which wouldresult in flooding on- or offsite;iii) create or contribute runoff water whichwould exceed the capacity of existing orplanned stormwater drainage systems orprovide substantial additional sources ofpolluted runoff; or iv) impede or redirect flood flows?Less than significant. i)The Proposed Project would require grading of the project site which would result in localizedchanges in discharge patterns, which could result in erosion and/or siltation. Erosion and/orsiltation during construction would be minimized by implementation of BMPs included in theEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-45 November 2020(2020-173)114    Page 117 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectProposed Project’s SWPPP. Furthermore, the Proposed Project grading plan and stormwatermanagement system has been designed by a registered civil engineer to meet Citydevelopment standards and safely collect and convey runoff to on-site basins. Energydissipators, such as rip-rap, would be used at discharge locations within the proposed basinsto reduce the erosion potential. Impacts would be less than significant. ii)The Proposed Project’s WQMP details the project’s strategy to control the velocity andvolume of surface runoff originating from the project site. The Proposed Project’s WQMPincludes the use of a water quality basin and catch basins, which would accept runoff fromthe proposed development. The Proposed Project’s basins are designed to allow stormwaterto infiltrate into the ground reducing the velocity and volume of stormwater that isdischarged from the project site. As such, the potential for flooding on- or offsite is reduced.Impacts would be less than significant. iii) iv) The Proposed Project’s stormwater management system was designed by a registered civilengineer to ensure that the system’s components are sized to treat the runoff volumes thatare anticipated for the post-development condition. The system has also been designed totreat polluted runoff that is typical for residential development. Impacts would be less thansignificant. The proposed grading plan and stormwater management system are designed to preventflooding conditions. According to the General Plan EIR Figure 4.9-3 Flood Hazard Zones, theproject site is located outside of the 0.2 percent chance of annual flood zone. Runoff from theproposed residential lots would be conveyed to the water quality basin and various catchbasins throughout the site. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not impede or redirectflood flows. No impact would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project:Incorporatedd)In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, riskrelease of pollutants due to project inundation?No impact.According to the General Plan EIR Figure 4.9-3 Flood Hazard Zones, the project site is located outside ofthe 0.2 percent chance of annual flood zone. Additionally, the project site is located approximately 40miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean and not in the vicinity of a large body of water. Due to the distance tothe Pacific Ocean, the project site would not be subject to inundation from seiches or tsunamis. Theproject site is also located outside of an inundation area (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). No impactwould occur. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-46 November 2020(2020-173)115    Page 118 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a Incorporatedwater quality control plan or sustainablegroundwater management plan?Less than significant.The project site is located within the Cucamonga Groundwater Basin. According to the Cucamonga ValleyWater District (CVWD) 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), CVWD predicts that it would havesufficient supply to meet water demands in the foreseeable future. To meet demand, the difference fromreduced canyon flows, imported water restrictions and State mandated water reductions during a multi-dry year shall be made up from the district’s stored groundwater from the Chino Basin, tier II importedwater (if available), replenishment water (if available), and implementation of the water shortagecontingency plan (CVWD 2016). The Proposed Project would comply with the Water ShortageContingency Plan outlined in the UWMP, if implemented. For example, limits may be applied to thenumber of days, frequency and duration of outdoor watering. It is anticipated that the addition of sixresidential lots would not exceed the capacity of water supplies of the Cucamonga Basin. Furthermore, theProposed Project would comply with the NPDES stormwater permit for construction activity (Order 98-08DWQ), and as such would prepare a SWPPP to prevent groundwater contamination. By complying with allCity and regional water conservation policies and regulations, impacts to water quality control andgroundwater recharge would be less than significant. 4.10.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.11 Land Use and Planning4.11.1 Environmental SettingThe Proposed Project is located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga in southwest San BernardinoCounty (Figure 1). The project site consists of an approximately 4-acre area containing undeveloped land,a single-family home, and detached garage building (APN 1074-201-01,02). The site is located southwestof the intersection of Vista Grove Street and Hermosa Avenue (Figure 2). As shown on the U.S. GeologicalSurvey (USGS) 7.5-minute Cucamonga Peak, California topographic quadrangle map (1996), the ProjectArea is located in the northeastern quarter of Section 28 of Township 1 north, Range 7 west of the SanBernardino Base and Meridian (Figure 2). The project site is approximately 1.5 miles north of the Foothill Freeway (I-210). The project site isbounded by residential properties to the east and west, an existing SBCFCD access road to the north, andan equestrian boarding and training facility to the south. The project site is very disturbed, with most ofthe vegetation on the project site consisting of non-native grasses and forbs known to persist in disturbedareas. Surrounding land uses are described in the table below. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-47 November 2020(2020-173)116    Page 119 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectTable 4.11-1. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use DesignationsLand Use Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land UseProject Site North Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL)Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) SBCFD Access RoadVery Low Residential (VL)East Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Equestrian Boarding and Training Facility Very Low Residential (VL) South WestSource: City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010aThe project site has a City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation of Very Low Residential (VL).The VL General Plan designation provides for detached, very low-density single residential units on 0.5-acre lots or larger, with private yards and private parking. This designation generally applies to the foothillareas north of Banyan Street and north of the Pacific Electric Trail in the Etiwanda area. 4.11.2 Land Use and Planning (XI) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporateda)Physically divide an established community?No impact.While there are residential neighborhoods in the vicinity of the project site, no separation of uses ordisruption of access between land uses around the site would occur as a result of the Proposed Project.All development associated with the Proposed Project would be confined to the project site and wouldnot disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the established community. Therefore, the ProposedProject would not affect any established community. No impact would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: b) Cause a significant environmental impact due toa conflict with any land use plan, policy, orregulation adopted for the purpose of avoidingor mitigating an environmental effect? Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-48 November 2020(2020-173)117    Page 120 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectNo impact.The City’s 2010 General Plan Future assumes that future development and redevelopment in the Citywould lead to the conversion of vacant and undeveloped land to urban land uses and the redevelopmentof underutilized lots (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). The Proposed Project is located in a Very LowResidential (VL) land use designation and would result in six new residential lots, which aligns with theredevelopment goals outlined in the General Plan. Additionally, the Proposed Project would continue thesame recreational land uses within the project site; therefore, it would not conflict with the City’s land useplans. No impact would occur. 4.11.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.12 Mineral Resources4.12.1 Environmental SettingApproximately 2,422 acres of potential aggregate mineral resources are located within the City. Themajority of this acreage is planned for Open Space, Conservation, Flood Control/Utility Corridor, orHillside Residential, which represents a very low-density of development. As of 2009, approximately 437acres of the sectors in the City have been developed. Consequently, land use conflicts between residentialuses and possible aggregate extraction is likely to occur in the City, particularly as residential useincreases. The Sphere of Influence currently contains a rock crushing plant located within the Day Creekarea, which is the only active aggregate operation in the Planning Area. As such, aggregate depositsavailable for recovery within the City may be limited due to conflicts between urban development, access,and the nature of typical surface mining operations (Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). 4.12.2 Mineral Resources (XII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project:a)Result in the loss of availability of a knownmineral resource that would be of value to theregion and the residents of the state?No impact. According to the General Plan Mineral Land Classification Map, the project site is located in MineralResource Zone 2 (MRZ-2). MRZ-2 is defined as areas where geologic data indicate that significant PCC-Grade aggregate resources are present (CGS 2007). However, the Proposed Project consists of residentialdevelopment and does not include mining activities. No impact to mineral resources would occur. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-49 November 2020(2020-173)118    Page 121 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- Incorporatedimportant mineral resource recovery sitedelineated on a local general plan, specific planor other land use plan?No impact.There are four coalescing alluvial fans in or near the City, comprising a significant local sand and gravelresource. From west to east these alluvial fans are known as the San Antonio, Cucamonga, Deer Creek,and Day Creek fans (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). According to the City’s General Plan, the projectsite is not located in one of these regionally significant aggregate mineral resource areas. As discussedabove, the Proposed Project would prepare a 4-acre site for development of six residential lots. No miningactivities currently exist on the site, nor are any proposed. Therefore, no impact to locally importantmineral resources would occur. 4.12.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.13 Noise4.13.1 Environmental SettingNoise FundamentalsNoise is generally defined as sound that is loud, disagreeable, or unexpected. The selection of a propernoise descriptor for a specific source is dependent on the spatial and temporal distribution, duration, andfluctuation of the noise. The noise descriptors most often encountered when dealing with traffic,community, and environmental noise include the average hourly noise level (in Leq) and the average dailynoise levels/community noise equivalent level (in Ldn/CNEL). The Leq is a measure of ambient noise, whilethe Ldn and CNEL are measures of community noise. Each is applicable to this analysis and defined asfollows: •Equivalent Noise Level (Leq) is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated periodof time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if theydeliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts,this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night. •Day-Night Average (Ldn) is a 24-hour average Leq with a 10-dBA “weighting” added to noiseduring the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. Thelogarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurementof 66.4 dBA Ldn.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-50 November 2020(2020-173)119    Page 122 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project•Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a 24-hour average Leq with a 5-dBA weightingduring the hours of 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and a 10-dBA weighting added to noise during thehours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime,respectively.Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources, such as automobiles, trucksand airplanes, and stationary sources, such as construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations.Sound spreads (propagates) uniformly outward in a spherical pattern, and the sound level decreases(attenuates) at a rate of approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a stationary or pointsource. Sound from a line source, such as a highway, propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, oftenreferred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of approximately 3 dB for eachdoubling of distance from a line source, such as a roadway, depending on ground surface characteristics(Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2011). No excess attenuation is assumed for hard surfaces like aparking lot or a body of water. Soft surfaces, such as soft dirt or grass, can absorb sound, so an excessground-attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. For line sources, anoverall attenuation rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance is assumed (FHWA 2011). Vibration FundamentalsGround vibration can be measured several ways to quantify the amplitude of vibration produced. This canbe through peak particle velocity or root mean square velocity. These velocity measurements measuremaximum particle at one point or the average of the squared amplitude of the signal, respectively.Vibration impacts on people can be described as the level of annoyance and can vary depending on anindividual’s sensitivity. Generally, low-level vibrations may cause window rattling but do not pose anythreats to the integrity of buildings or structures. Noise-Sensitive Land UsesNoise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure couldresult in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of theirintended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased andprolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Additional land uses such asparks, historic sites, cemeteries, and recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noiselevels. Schools, churches, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential arealso considered noise-sensitive land uses. Nearby noise-sensitive land uses consist of single familyresidences to the north, east and west. The closest residences includes those directly adjacent to theproject site on the east and west. Existing Ambient Noise EnvironmentThe City of Rancho Cucamonga, which encompasses the project site, is impacted by various noise sources.It is subject to typical urban noise such as noise generated by traffic, heavy machinery, and day-to-dayoutdoor activities as well as noise generated from the various land uses (i.e., residential, commercial,institutional, and recreational and parks activities) throughout Rancho Cucamonga that generatestationary source noise. Mobile sources of noise, especially cars and trucks, are the most common source Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-51 November 2020(2020-173)120    Page 123 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectof noise in the community. The noise surveys conducted in 2009 for the City’s General Plan concluded thatthe ambient noise environment in Rancho Cucamonga is largely influenced by roadway noise.In order to quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project area, ECORP Consulting conducted twoshort-term noise measurements on October 10, 2018. The noise measurement sites were representative oftypical existing noise exposure within and immediately adjacent to the project site (see Appendix D forNoise Measurement Locations). The 10-minute measurements were taken between 10:55 a.m. and 11:24p.m. Short-term (Leq) measurements are considered representative of the noise levels throughout the day.The average noise levels and sources of noise measured at each location are listed in in Table 4.13-1. Table 4.13-1. Existing (Baseline) Noise MeasurementsSite Location Leq dBA Lmin dBA Lmax dBA TimeNumberCenter of Project Site; west of HermosaAvenue and South of Vista Grove Street 10:55 a.m. – 11:05a.m.1 2 43.2 38.5 34.6 37.8 61.3 46.7 At the Corner of Briartree Place &Bramblewood Drive 11:14 a.m. – 11:24a.m.Source: Measurements were taken by ECORP Consulting with a Larson Davis SoundExpert LxT precision sound level meter, which satisfiesthe American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for general environmental noise measurement instrumentation. Prior to themeasurements, the SoundExpert LxT sound level meter was calibrated according to manufacturer specifications with a Larson DavisCAL200 Class I Calibrator. See Appendix D for noise measurement outputs.As shown in Table 4.13-1, the ambient recorded noise levels ranged from 38.5 dBA to 43.2 dBA near theproject site (see Appendix D for noise measurement locations). The noise most commonly in the Projectvicinity is produced by automotive vehicles (cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles). Traffic moving along streetsproduces a sound level that remains relatively constant and is part of the Project area’s minimum ambientnoise level. Vehicular noise varies with the volume, speed and type of traffic. Slower traffic produces lessnoise than fast moving traffic. Trucks typically generate more noise than cars. Infrequent or intermittentnoise also is associated with vehicles, including sirens, vehicle alarms, slamming of doors, trains, garbageand construction vehicle activity and honking of horns. These noises add to urban noise and are regulatedby a variety of agencies. 4.13.2 Noise (XIII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project:Incorporateda)Result in generation of a substantial temporary orpermanent increase in ambient noise levels in thevicinity of the project in excess of standardsestablished in the local general plan or noiseordinance, or applicable standards of otheragencies?Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-52 November 2020(2020-173)121    Page 124 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectLess than significant with mitigation incorporated.Project Construction NoiseConstruction noise associated with the Proposed Project would be temporary and would vary dependingon the nature of the activities being performed. Noise generated would primarily be associated with theoperation of off-road equipment for on-site construction activities as well as construction vehicle trafficon area roadways. Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the natureor phase of construction (e.g., building construction, paving). Noise generated by construction equipment,including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach high levels. Typicaloperating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full poweroperation followed by 3 to 4 minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acousticaldisturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping largepieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). During construction, exterior noiselevels could negatively affect sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the construction site. Nearby noise-sensitive land uses consist of single family residences to the north, east and west. Asdescribed in Section 17.66.050 of the City’s Municipal Code, noise sources associated with construction,repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property or during authorized seismic surveys, are exemptprovided said activities:a.When adjacent to a residential land use, school, church or similar type of use, the noisegenerating activity does not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. onweekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday, andprovided noise levels created do not exceed the noise standard of 65 dBA whenmeasured at the adjacent property line. In order to estimate the worst-case construction noise levels that may occur at the nearest noise-sensitivereceptors in the Project vicinity, the combined construction equipment noise levels were calculated usingthe Roadway Noise Construction Model for the demolition, site preparation, grading, paving, building,and coating phases. The anticipated short-term construction noise levels generated during demolition,grading, paving, building, and coating activities are presented in Table 4.13-2. Table 4.13-2. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels by Receptor Distance and Construction Phase – Unmitigated Estimated Exterior Construction NoiseLevel @ Adjacent Residences to North,East and West (25’ Distance) Construction NoiseStandards (dBA Leq) Exceeds Standards?Description Demolition (mobile equipment) 84.6 78.8 80.7 84.5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Site Preparation (mobileequipment)65.0Grading (mobile equipment)Building Construction, Paving,& Painting (mobile equipment)Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-53 November 2020(2020-173)122    Page 125 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectTable 4.13-2. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels by Receptor Distance and Construction Phase – Unmitigated Estimated Exterior Construction NoiseLevel @ Adjacent Residences to North,East and West (25’ Distance) Construction NoiseStandards (dBA Leq) Exceeds Standards?Description Building Construction, Paving,& Painting (stationaryequipment) 76.5 Yes Source: Traffic noise levels were calculated by ECORP Consulting using the FHWA Roadway Noise Construction Model (FHWA 2006). Referto Attachment B for noise modeling assumptions and results.Notes: Construction equipment used during each phase derived from CalEEMod 2016.3.2.Distance between proposed demolition activities and receptors measured from the area of demolition.Leq = the equivalent energy noise level, is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of atime-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. Forevaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night.As shown, noise construction standards for all construction phases would be exceeded. Noise sourcecontrol is the most effective method of controlling construction noise. Source controls, which limit noise,are the easiest to oversee on a construction project. Mitigation at the source reduces the problemeverywhere, not just along one single path or for one receiver. Noise path controls are the second methodin controlling noise. Barriers or enclosures can provide a substantial reduction in the nuisance effect insome cases. Path control measures include moving equipment farther away from the receiver; enclosingespecially noisy activities or stationary equipment; erecting noise enclosures, barriers, or curtains; andusing landscaping as a shield and dissipater. Implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1 would reduce construction-generated noise levels.According to the Federal Highway Administration, a solid wall or berm generally reduces noise levels by10 to 20 dBA (FHWA 2011). However, noise barriers or enclosures specifically designed to reduce site-specific construction noise, such as can be accomplished when erecting flexible sound control curtainsaround stationary heavy equipment, can provide a sound reduction 35 dBA or greater (WEAL 2000). Noisebarriers or enclosures such as that required by mitigation measure NOI-1 can provide a sound reductionrobust enough to reduce construction noise to levels below the 65 dBA residential standard at theadjacent property lines. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Ambient Noise ImpactsProject ConstructionA 3-dBA change in the existing ambient noise environment is just-perceivable to the average human earoutside of the laboratory. A change in level of at least 5 dBA is required before any noticeable change incommunity response would be expected. A 10-dBA change is subjectively heard as an approximatedoubling in loudness and would almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response.Therefore, an increase in the ambient noise environment, even though temporary, would be considered asubstantial increase and mitigation measure NOI-1 is recommended. Mitigation measure NOI-1 containsbest management practices for reducing construction-generated noise. Impacts to ambient noise levelsduring construction would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-54 November 2020(2020-173)123    Page 126 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectProject OperationOperational noise sources associated with the Proposed Project include off-site mobile and stationary (i.e.,mechanical equipment, typical residential neighborhood activities, etc.) sources. Project operation wouldalso result in additional traffic on adjacent roadways, thereby increasing vehicular noise in the projectvicinity. According to the ITE’s Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition Data, the Proposed Project wouldgenerate an average of 56 automobile trips daily. According to the California Department ofTransportation (Caltrans) Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (2013),doubling of traffic on a roadway would result in an increase of 3 dB (a barely perceptible increase). TheProposed Project’s minimal daily trips (56 total) would be nominal compared to the current vehiclecapacity of Hermosa Avenue, Vista Grove Street, and Hillside Road and thus, would not result in aperceptible increase traffic noise levels. Traffic noise impacts associated with the Proposed Project wouldbe less than significant. Potential stationary noise sources related to long-term operation of future development of the projectsite would include mechanical equipment. Mechanical equipment (e.g., HVAC equipment) typicallygenerates noise levels less than 40 dBA at 40 feet, which is less than City daytime and nighttimethresholds for stationary sources. The Proposed Project places residential uses adjacent to otherresidential uses. As previously described, the most basic planning strategy to minimize adverse impactson new land uses due to noise is to avoid designating certain land uses at locations within the City thatwould negative affect noise sensitive land uses. The project site has a General Plan designation of VeryLow Residential, which provides for the development of conventional single-family detached houses andsuburban subdivisions, such as the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project is consistent with the types,intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for the project vicinity, and as previously described, theProposed Project is considered compatible with the existing noise environment. Operation of theProposed Project would not result in a significant noise-related impact. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Result in generation of excessive groundborne Incorporatedvibration or groundborne noise levels?Less than significant.Excessive groundborne vibration impacts result from continuously occurring vibration levels. Onceoperational, the Proposed Project would not be a source of groundborne vibration since projectoperations would not include the use of any stationary equipment that would result in excessive vibrationlevels. Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the Proposed Project would be primarilyassociated with short-term construction-related activities. Construction on the project site would have thepotential to result in varying degrees of temporary groundborne vibration, depending on the specificconstruction equipment used and the operations involved. Ground vibration generated by constructionequipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with increases in distance. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-55 November 2020(2020-173)124    Page 127 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectConstruction-related ground vibration is normally associated with impact equipment such as pile drivers,jackhammers, and the operation of some heavy-duty construction equipment, such as dozers and trucks.However, it is noted that construction of the Proposed Project would not require the use of pile driverssince a deep foundation is not included as part of the Proposed Project’s design and no subterraneanstructures are proposed. Vibration decreases rapidly with distance and it is acknowledged thatconstruction activities would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated at thepoint closest to sensitive receptors. Groundborne vibration levels associated with representativeconstruction equipment are summarized in Table 4.13-3. Table 4.13-3. Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction EquipmentEquipment TypeHoe Ram Peak Particle Velocity at 25 Feet (inches per second)0.0890.0420.0420.0350.0160.0010.042 Large BulldozerCaisson DrillingLoaded TrucksRock Breaker JackhammerSmall Bulldozer/TractorSource: FTA 2018The nearest off-site structures to the project site are approximately 25 feet distant. 0.2 in/sec PPV is thethreshold at which there is a risk of architectural damage to normal dwellings. Based on the vibration levelspresented in Table 4.13-3, ground vibration generated by heavy-duty equipment would not be anticipatedto exceed approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet. Furthermore, per Section 17.66.070 of the CityMunicipal Code, vibrations from temporary construction/demolition and vehicles that leave the subjectparcel (e.g., trucks, trains, and aircraft) are exempt from vibration standards. Therefore, groundbornevibration impacts would be considered less than significant during Proposed Project construction. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: c) For a project located within the vicinity of a Incorporatedprivate airstrip or an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted, withintwo miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project expose people residing orworking in the project area to excessive noiselevels? No impact.The Proposed Project is located just under seven miles north of Ontario International Airport. The projectsite is not located within a noise impact zone in the LA/Ontario International Airport Land UseCompatibility Plan (2011). Furthermore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not affect airportEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-56 November 2020(2020-173)125    Page 128 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectoperations nor result in increased exposure of noise-sensitive receptors to aircraft noise. Thus, no impactrelated to airport noise would occur with implementation of the Proposed Project.4.13.3 Mitigation MeasuresNOI-1: The following best management practices shall be incorporated during Project construction:•In order to reduce construction noise, a temporary noise barrier or enclosure shall be usedalong the property lines of adjacent residences to break the line of sight between theconstruction equipment and the adjacent residences. The temporary noise barrier shallconsist of a solid plywood fence and/or flexible sound curtains attached to chain linkfencing. • • • Barriers such as flexible sound control curtains shall be erected around stationary heavyequipment to minimize the amount of noise on the surrounding land uses to the maximumextent feasible during construction.Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Mondaythrough Saturday and prohibited at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. The Project’simprovement and building plans shall specify this requirement.Equipping of all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaustmufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.• • Prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.Locating stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors or portable powergenerators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Constructing temporary noisebarriers to screen stationary noise-generating equipment when located near adjoiningsensitive land uses.• • • • Utilization of "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technologyexists.Control of noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible atexisting residences bordering the project site.Notification of all adjacent residences of the construction schedule, in writing, and providea written schedule of “noisy” construction activities to the adjacent and nearby residences.Designation of a "disturbance coordinator" who shall be responsible for responding to anycomplaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall determine thecause of the noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonablemeasures be implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone numberfor the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent toneighbors regarding the construction schedule. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-57 November 2020(2020-173)126    Page 129 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project4.14 Population and Housing4.14.1 Environmental SettingThe City of Rancho Cucamonga incorporated in 1977 with a population of approximately 44,600 persons(Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). The City’s population has risen to over 177,000 persons as of 2017.According to the General Plan EIR, the City’s housing stock consisted of 42,134 housing units in 2000. InJanuary 2009, the housing stock increased to 55,716 housing units. Since 2000, the City and the Countyhave both experienced positive growth of their housing stock; however, the annual growth ratesexperienced between 2000 to 2006 were higher in the City than in the County and, in 2007 and 2008, thehousing stock in the County increased at a more rapid pace (Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). 4.14.2 Population and Housing (XIV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporateda)Induce substantial unplanned population growthin an area, either directly (for example, byproposing new homes and businesses) orindirectly (for example, through extension ofroads or other infrastructure)? Less than significant.The Proposed Project would result in the development of six residential lots, which would directly inducepopulation growth. However, the Proposed Project is consistent with the VL land use designationestablished under the City’s General Plan (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). Because the ProposedProject is consistent with the General Plan, the Proposed Project would not result in new impacts beyondthose previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Impacts would be less than significant. Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Displace substantial numbers of people orexisting housing, necessitating the constructionof replacement housing elsewhere?No impact.There is currently one habitable structure on site, which would be vacated and demolished as part of theProposed Project. Development activities would be contained within the project site and would notdisplace housing. No impact would occur. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-58 November 2020(2020-173)127    Page 130 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project4.14.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.15 Public Services4.15.1 Environmental SettingPolice ServicesSince incorporation of Rancho Cucamonga in 1977, law enforcement services in the City have beenprovided through a contract with the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department. The Department ismade of two divisions: the Traffic Division, which facilitates the safe and effective movement of traffic; andthe Patrol Division, which carries out basic law enforcement services (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2020a). Fire ServicesThe Rancho Cucamonga Fire District provides fire protection and emergency medical response services toapproximately 50 square miles in and around the City limits. The Fire District maintains seven fire stationsthroughout the City. The nearest fire station to the project site is East Avenue Fire Station 177, locatedapproximately one mile southwest of the project site (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2020b). SchoolsPrimary public education services are provided by the Alta Loma School District, which serves thenorthwestern section of the City; the Central School District, which serves the west-central portions; theCucamonga School District, which serves the southern portions; and the Etiwanda School District, whichserves the eastern portion of the City and a portion of the City of Fontana. The unincorporated SOI area tothe north is served by the Alta Loma School District and Etiwanda School District (Rancho Cucamonga2010b). The nearest school to the project site is Hermosa Elementary School, approximately 2,300 feet tothe south. ParksThe City owns and operates 30 public parks and seven recreational facilities, as well as 130 acres ofundeveloped parkland not including undeveloped trail acreage. Private recreational facilities complementthe City’s parks, trails, and bikeways and include the 128-acre Red Hill Country Club Golf Course andTennis Center and the 144-acre Empire Lakes Golf Course. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-59 November 2020(2020-173)128    Page 131 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project4.15.2 Public Services (XV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificantwithMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impactsassociated with the provision of new or physicallyaltered governmental facilities, need for new orphysically altered governmental facilities, theconstruction of which could cause significantenvironmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptableservice ratios, response times or other performanceobjectives for any of the public services: Fire Protection? Police Protection? Schools? Parks?Other Public Facilities?Fire ProtectionThe Proposed Project would develop six residential lots on a currently undeveloped parcel which wouldadd to the demand on fire protection services. However, the Proposed Project would be required toimplement all applicable California Fire Code Standards. The Proposed Project’s design and constructionplans would be reviewed by City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Fire and Building & Safety Departments toensure fire codes are met and that adequate fire protection services would be available to meet theProposed Project’s needs. The Applicant would pay the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development ImpactFees. The City imposes development impact fees on development projects to lessen the impact to publicservices, infrastructure and facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. Police ServicesAs previously stated, the Proposed Project would result in the development of six residential lots on acurrently undeveloped parcel. This development would result in an increase in demand for policeprotection services. The Applicant would pay the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees,which would cover the Proposed Project’s fair share on public services. Impacts would be less thansignificant. SchoolsThe Applicant would pay Alta Loma School District development impact fees to address impacts onschools as a result of the Proposed Project. As such, impacts would be less than significant.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-60 November 2020(2020-173)129    Page 132 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectParksThe Applicant would pay the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees, which would coverthe Proposed Project’s fair share on public services including parks. Impacts would be less than significant.Other Public FacilitiesThe Proposed Project is not anticipated to induce unplanned population growth; therefore, it would notcreate additional demand for other public facilities, such as libraries. The Applicant would comply with theCity of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees, which would lessen the Proposed Project’simpacts on public services, infrastructure and facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. 4.15.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.16 Recreation4.16.1 Environmental SettingThe City of Rancho Cucamonga has approximately 347.6 acres of parkland and recreational facilities.These include 25 neighborhood parks, three community parks, and eight special use facilities. In addition,the City’s Multi-Use Regional and Community Trails add approximately 295 acres of land for recreationaluse. The trails provide a network of interconnecting off-road, urban, and wilderness trails that allowhorseback riding, hiking, jogging, running, and walking into open space areas and connect the residentialareas to commercial activity centers (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). 4.16.2 Recreation (XVI) Materials Checklist Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and Incorporatedregional parks or other recreational facilities suchthat substantial physical deterioration of thefacility would occur or be accelerated?Less than significant.The Proposed Project would develop six residential lots on a currently undeveloped parcel which couldpotentially increase the use of existing recreational facilities. The Applicant would comply with the City ofRancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees, which would lessen the Proposed Project’s impacts onpublic services, infrastructure, and facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-61 November 2020(2020-173)130    Page 133 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: b) Include recreational facilities or require the Incorporatedconstruction or expansion of recreationalfacilities, which might have an adverse physicaleffect on the environment?Less than significant. The Proposed Project does not include recreational facilities. The Proposed Project would develop sixresidential lots on a currently undeveloped parcel. Due to the proposed scale of development it is notanticipated that the Proposed Project would require the construction or expansion of existing recreationalfacilities. The Applicant would comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees,which would lessen the Proposed Project’s impacts on public services, infrastructure, and facilities. Impactswould be less than significant. 4.16.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.17 Transportation4.17.1 Transportation (XVII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project:Incorporateda)Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, orpolicy addressing the circulation system,including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrianfacilities?Less than significant.Transit FacilitiesBus transit services are available in the City through fixed-route and demand-response services providedby Omnitrans. There are seven bus routes that run through the City, connecting to the neighboring citiesof Fontana, Upland, Ontario, Montclair, and Chino. The routes serve major destinations in the region, suchas Chaffey College, the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station, the Fontana Metrolink Station, the OntarioMills Mall, the LA/Ontario Airport, the Ontario Civic Center, the Pomona TransCenter, the MontclairTransCenter, the Chino Civic Center and Transit Center, and the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center (City ofRancho Cucamonga 2010a). Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-62 November 2020(2020-173)131    Page 134 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectWithin Rancho Cucamonga, the bus routes run on major roadways, including Haven Avenue, Day CreekBoulevard, Milliken Avenue, Carnelian Street/Vineyard Avenue, Base Line Road, Foothill Boulevard, andArrow Highway, and segments of Banyan Street, Victoria Park Lane, and 4th Street.The nearest bus route to the project site runs along Haven Avenue near Chaffey College, approximately1.2 miles southeast of the project site. No bus routes run in the vicinity of the project site. Thus, no impactto bus routes would occur.Bicycle and Pedestrian FacilitiesThe nearest bicycle facility to the Project is a Class III bike lane along Hillside Road, approximately 950 feetsouth of the project site. In addition, a community trail and equestrian trail run adjacent to the project sitealong Hermosa Avenue. A 15-foot wide equestrian trail easement would be created along the eastern andsouthern boundaries of the project site, connecting to the existing equestrian trail west of the project site.Access to the equestrian trail would come from the southwest corner of the new Hermosa Avenue andVista Grove Street intersection, as well as private gates for each of the six lots. In addition, the ProposedProject includes a community trail pass-through along Vista Grove Street. Project ImpactsThe Proposed Project would generate short-term construction related vehicle trips. However, trafficgenerated by construction of the Proposed Project would be temporary and would not conflict with theCity of Rancho Cucamonga’s Circulation Element, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrianfacilities. The Proposed Project would develop six residential lots, each of which would eventually beoccupied by single family homes. According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017), theProposed Project is anticipated to generate 56 daily trips on average. As such, the Proposed Project wouldnot generate a substantial increase in traffic, nor would it decrease the performance or safety of existingor planned public facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelinessection 15064.3, subdivision (b)?No impact.According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (2020), projects generatingfewer than 250 daily trips are screened out from a formal Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) analysis. Projectsin this category generally correspond to “typical” development potentials, including development of 25 orfewer single-family housing units (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2020). According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017), the Proposed Project is anticipated togenerate 56 daily trips on average. The Proposed Project is therefore screened out from a formal VMTanalysis in accordance with the City’s adopted thresholds of significance. No impact would occur.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-63 November 2020(2020-173)132    Page 135 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric Incorporateddesign feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerousintersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farmequipment)?No impact.The Proposed Project would construct approximately 630 lineal feet of new private street within thedevelopment. The development would include extending Vista Grove Street west, across HermosaAvenue, for approximately 380 feet, which would turn south into a cul-de-sac surrounded by theproposed single-family residences. Construction of the Vista Grove Street extension would result inremoval of the San Bernardino County Fire District access gate, which would be replaced just to the westof the road extension. Improvements would be reviewed by a registered civil engineer to meet the City ofRancho Cucamonga’s development standards. No impact would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporatedd)Result in inadequate emergency access?Less than significant.Vehicular access to the project site would be provided via an extension of Vista Grove Street. No offsiteroadway improvements would interfere with emergency access, response times, or impede circulation ofemergency vehicles on surrounding roadways. All construction vehicles and equipment would bestationed in a designated area on-site within the project site boundaries. Access along surroundingroadways would be maintained throughout Project construction activities. During the course of the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s required review of the Proposed Project’sapplications, the site plan has been reviewed to ensure that adequate access to and from the site andaround the proposed buildings is provided for emergency vehicles. Compliance with City approved siteplan and subsequent City reviewed and approved construction documents will ensure that potentialimpacts to emergency access would be less than significant. 4.17.2 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-64 November 2020(2020-173)133    Page 136 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources4.18.1 Regulatory SettingAssembly Bill 52Effective July 1, 2015, Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) amended CEQA to require that: 1) a lead agency providenotice to those California Native American tribes that requested notice of projects proposed by the leadagency; and 2) for any tribe that responded to the notice within 30 days of receipt with a request forconsultation, the lead agency must consult with the tribe. Topics that may be addressed duringconsultation include TCRs, the potential significance of project impacts, type of environmental documentthat should be prepared, and possible mitigation measures and project alternatives. Pursuant to AB 52, Section 21073 of the Public Resources Code defines California Native American tribesas “a Native American tribe located in California that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC for thepurposes of Chapter 905 of the Statutes of 2004.” This includes both federally and non-federallyrecognized tribes. Section 21074(a) of the Public Resource Code defines TCRs for the purpose of CEQA as:1. Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes (geographically defined in terms of the size and scope),sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are eitherof the following:a. included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of HistoricalResources; and/orb. included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section5020.1; and/orc. a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantialevidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for thepurposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of theresource to a California Native American tribe. Because criteria a and b also meet the definition of a historical resource under CEQA, a TCR may alsorequire additional consideration as a historical resource. TCRs may or may not exhibit archaeological,cultural, or physical indicators.Recognizing that California tribes are experts in their tribal cultural resources and heritage, AB 52 requiresthat CEQA lead agencies provide tribes that requested notification an opportunity to consult at thecommencement of the CEQA process to identify TCRs. Furthermore, because a significant effect on a TCRis considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA, consultation is used to developappropriate avoidance, impact minimization, and mitigation measures.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-65 November 2020(2020-173)134    Page 137 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project4.18.2 Summary of AB 52 ConsultationOn June 11, 2020 the City sent project notification letters to the following California Native Americantribes, which had previously submitted general consultation request letters pursuant to 21080.3.1(d) of thePublic Resources Code:• • • • • • San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Soboba Band of Luiseno IndiansTorres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation Morongo Band of Mission Indians Two responses were received in response to the City’s AB 52 letters.One June 23, 2020, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation (GBMIKN) provided a letter tothe City stating that the tribe is the direct lineal descendant of the project area. The letter provided thetribe’s suggested tribal cultural resource mitigation measures for the City to consider. The City consultedby phone with Andrew Salas of the GBMIKN on August 25, 2020. In that phone conversation, Mr. Salasstated that Tribe recommends the implementation the mitigation measures provided to the City. Thesemitigation measures are incorporated into this Initial Study as Mitigation Measures GBMIKN TCR-1through GBMIKN TCR-6. On [date], the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) e-mailed City staff to discuss the project. Theresponse stated that the proposed project area exists within Serrano ancestral territory and, therefore, isof interest to the Tribe. However, due to the disturbed nature of the project location, the SMBMI does nothave any concerns with the Proposed Project’s implementation. The response also included the tribe’ssuggested cultural resource and tribal cultural resource mitigation for the City to consider. Thesesuggestions were incorporated into Mitigation Measures SMBMI CUL-1, SMBMI CUL-2, SMBMI CUL-3,SMBMI TCR-1, and SMBMI TCR-2. 4.18.3 Tribal Cultural Resources (XVIII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporateda)Cause a substantial adverse change in thesignificance of a tribal cultural resource, definedin Public Resources Code Section 21074 as eithera site, feature, place, cultural landscape that isgeographically defined in terms of the size andscope of the landscape, sacred place, or objectEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-66 November 2020(2020-173)135    Page 138 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectwith cultural value to a California NativeAmerican tribe, and that is:i) Listed or eligible for listing in the CaliforniaRegister of Historical Resources, or in a localregister of historical resources as defined inPublic Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, inits discretion and supported by substantialevidence, to be significant pursuant tocriteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PublicResources Code Section 5024.1. In applyingthe criteria set forth in subdivision (c) ofPublic Resources Code Section 5024.1, thelead agency shall consider the significance ofthe resource to a California Native AmericanTribe. ai. No Impact.As discussed in the response to question a of Section 4.5, the records search revealed that no previouslyrecorded resources are located within the project site (ECORP 2020c). As a result of the field survey, anagricultural complex with two historic-age buildings and four features consisting of building foundations(TR-001) was documented and evaluated using CRHR eligibility criteria. TR 001 was evaluated as noteligible for listing in the CRHR under any criteria and not eligible as a City of Rancho Cucamonga HistoricLandmark. TR-001 is also not currently listed in a local register of historical resources, as defined in PRC5020.1(k), and has not been identified as significant in a historical resources survey, as defined in PRC5024.1(g). Therefore, TR 001 is not considered an Historical Resource as defined by CEQA. The ProposedProject would not result in any significant impacts on known Historical Resources under CEQA.Furthermore, no listed or eligible historical resources were identified by the tribes that consulted with theCity of Rancho Cucamonga under AB 52. No impact would occur. aii. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated.No TCRs were identified within the project area during AB 52 consultation. The Proposed Project wouldnot result in significant impacts to known TCRs. However, as a result of the AB 52 consultation the projectarea was identified as being sensitive and has the potential to contain unknown TCRs. Significant impactsmay occur from the disturbance of unknown TCRs during ground disturbing construction activitiesassociated with the Proposed Project. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures GBMIKN TCR-1through GBMIKN TCR-6 and SMBMI TCR-1, and SMBMI TCR-2, impacts would be less than significant. 4.18.4 Mitigation MeasuresGabrieleño Band of Mission Indian – Kizh Nation (GBMIKN) Mitigation MeasuresGBMIKN TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor/Consultant. The Project Applicant shall berequired to retain and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is bothEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-67 November 2020(2020-173)136    Page 139 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectapproved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listedunder the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the project location. This list is provided bythe NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the construction phasesthat involve ground disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by theGabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limitedto, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading,excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant willcomplete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, includingconstruction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoringshall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when theTribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential forimpacting Tribal Cultural Resources. GBMIKN TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural and Archaeological Resources. Upondiscovery of any archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinityof the find until the find can be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by projectconstruction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If theresources are Native American in origin, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shallcoordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, theTribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes. Work may continue on otherparts of the project while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA GuidelinesSection15064.5 [f]). If a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a“historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient toallow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available.The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA GuidelinesSection 15064.5(f) for historical resources and Public Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) forunique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner oftreatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation ofarchaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequentlaboratory processing and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not NativeAmerican in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest inthe materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum,if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeologicalmaterial, they shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educationalpurposes. GBMIKN TCR-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects.Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation,and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associatedgrave goods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and SafetyCode 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediatelyreported to the County Coroner and excavation halted until the coroner has determined the Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-68 November 2020(2020-173)137    Page 140 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectnature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a NativeAmerican or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shallcontact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) andPRC 5097.98 shall be followed.GBMIKN TCR-4: Resource Assessment & Continuation of Work Protocol. Upon discovery, the tribaland/or archaeological monitor/consultant/consultant will immediately divert work at minimum of150 feet and place an exclusion zone around the burial. The monitor/consultant(s) will then notifythe Tribe, the qualified lead archaeologist, and the construction manager who will call thecoroner. Work will continue to be diverted while the coroner determines whether the remains areNative American. The discovery is to be kept confidential and secure to prevent any furtherdisturbance. If the finds are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHCas mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). GBMIKN TCR-5: Kizh-Gabrieleño Procedures for burials and funerary remains. If the Gabrieleño Bandof Mission Indians – Kizh Nation is designated MLD, the following treatment measures shall beimplemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. Inancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the burial offunerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains. These remainsare to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funeraryobjects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believedto have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; otheritems made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be consideredas associated funerary objects. Treatment Measures:•Prior to the continuation of ground disturbing activities, the landowner shall arrange adesignated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial ofthe human remains and/or ceremonial objects. In the case where discovered humanremains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will becovered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipmentplaced over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate isnot available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe willmake every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situand protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will beremoved. The Tribe will work closely with the qualified archaeologist to ensure that theexcavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved bythe Tribe, documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptivenotes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by the Tribe fordata recovery purposes. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means asnecessary to ensure completely recovery of all material. If the discovery of human remainsincludes four or more burials, the location is considered a cemetery and a separatetreatment plan shall be created. Once complete, a final report of all activities is to be Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-69 November 2020(2020-173)138    Page 141 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectsubmitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific studyor the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains.•Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored usingopaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects ofcultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These itemsshould be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site ofreburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon betweenthe Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be nopublicity regarding any cultural materials recovered. GBMIKN TCR-6: Professional Standards: Archaeological and Native American monitoring andexcavation during construction projects will be consistent with current professional standards. Allfeasible care to avoid any unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of humanremains and associated funerary objects shall be taken. Principal personnel must meet theSecretary of Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years of experience asa principal investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in southern California.The Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained andqualified. San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Mitigation MeasuresSMBMI TCR-1: The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall becontacted, as detailed in SMBMI CUL-1, of any pre-contact cultural resources discovered duringproject implementation, and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as toprovide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemedsignificant, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources Monitoring andTreatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI, and allsubsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be presentthat represents SMBMI for the remainder of the project, should SMBMI elect to place a monitoron-site. SMBMI TCR-2: Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolaterecords, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant andLead Agency for dissemination to SMBMI. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith,consult with SMBMI throughout the life of the project. 4.19 Utilities and Service Systems4.19.1 Environmental SettingWater ServiceCVWD provides the City of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, with water services. CVWD’sservice area includes the City of Rancho Cucamonga, portions of the cities of Fontana, Ontario, andUpland and some unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County. The District has a diverse water supplyEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-70 November 2020(2020-173)139    Page 142 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectconsisting of the Cucamonga Basin and Chino Basin aquifers, four local canyon watersheds, and importedwater from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta through the State Water Project. The District’s watersystem consists of 711 miles of distribution lines, 28 groundwater wells, 34 storage reservoirs, three watertreatment plants, 48,516 meters of various sizes and the service lines associated with the meters. According to the CVWD 2018 Water Quality Report, 59 percent of the water delivered to CVWDconsumers in 2018 was imported from Northern California via the State Water Project. This water istreated at CVWD’s Lloyd W. Michael Water Treatment Plant. 37 percent of the water delivered to CVWDconsumers in 2018 was groundwater pumped from the Cucamonga Basin and Chino Basin aquifers. Fourpercent of the water delivered to CVWD’s consumers in 2018 was local canyon and tunnel water includingCucamonga Canyon, Deer Canyon, Day Canyon, East Etiwanda Canyon, and a number of tunnels in thelocal San Gabriel Mountains. This water is treated at CVWD’s Arthur H. Bridge or Lloyd Michael TreatmentPlants and then flows into storage reservoirs and then into the distribution system to consumers (CVWD2018). WastewaterWastewater services for the City of Rancho Cucamonga are also provided by CVWD. CVWD currentlyoperates and maintains approximately 421 miles of wastewater collection system ranging from 8 to 36inches in diameter. Wastewater that is generated by CVWD’s customers is transported through thiscollection system and sent to Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) Wastewater Treatment facilities whereit is processed into recycled water. The IEUA operates the wastewater Regional Plant No. 4 located at the intersection of 6th Street andEtiwanda Avenue in Rancho Cucamonga. This wastewater plant has been in operation since 1997 andtreats an annual flow of seven million gallons per day, with an ultimate build-out capacity of 28 milliongallons per day.Solid WasteBurrtec Waste Industries is the single franchised waste hauler for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and isresponsible for providing recycling, refuse, and green waste services for residents, commercial andindustrial customers. Burrtec Waste Industries is the only business permitted to haul solid waste in the Cityof Rancho Cucamonga.In July 2001, the County of San Bernardino contracted Burrtec to operate and maintain their solid wastedisposal facilities located throughout the County. This includes both active and closed landfills, transferstations and community collection centers. Solid waste generated in the City is transferred to Burrtec’sWest Valley Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), located immediately southeast of the City at 13373 NapaStreet in Fontana. Solid waste that is not diverted is primarily disposed at Mid-Valley Landfill, a CountyClass III (i.e., municipal waste) landfill located at 2390 North Alder Avenue in Rialto. It is permitted for7,500 tons per day (TPD) maximum with 67,520,000 cubic yards remaining. The landfill has enoughprojected capacity to serve residents and businesses until approximately 2053 (CalRecycle 2020). ElectricitySouthern California Edison provides electricity to over 15 million people in 50,000 square miles of servicearea, encompassing 15 counties in central, coastal, and southern California. SCE would extend electricEnvironmental Checklist and Discussion 4-71 November 2020(2020-173)140    Page 143 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectservice to the Project in accordance with rules and policies for extension of service on file with theCalifornia Public Utilities Commission.Natural GasThe Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas services to the area and would extend serviceto the project site at the time contractual arrangements are made in accordance with SoCalGas policiesand extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission.4.19.2 Utilities and Service Systems (XIX) Environmental Checklist and DiscussionLess thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project:Incorporateda)Require or result in the relocation or constructionof new or expanded water, wastewater treatmentor storm water drainage, electric power, naturalgas, or telecommunications facilities, theconstruction or relocation of which could causesignificant environmental effects? Less than significant.Water and WastewaterThe Proposed Project would result in the development of six residential lots, which would requireconnections to the City’s water system. The Proposed Project is below the 500 dwelling unit threshold fora Water Supply Assessment. Due to the scale of the proposed development it is not anticipated that sixnew connections for single-family homes would require the construction or expansion of water facilities.The six residential lots would be connected to private septic systems, and therefore no impact onwastewater treatment would occur. Impacts would be less than significant. Storm DrainageThe Proposed Project includes stormwater drainage improvements. Improvements include theconstruction of a water quality basin. Runoff from the proposed residential lots would be conveyed to thewater quality basin and catch basins throughout the site. Impacts would be less than significant.Electricity, Natural Gas, and TelecommunicationsAs discussed in Section 4.6 Energy, Proposed Project construction is expected to have a nominal effect onlocal and regional energy supplies. No unusual project characteristics would necessitate the use ofconstruction equipment that would be less energy-efficient than at comparable construction sites in theregion or the state. Construction contractors would purchase their own gasoline and diesel fuel from localsuppliers and would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize costs to their profits. Additionally,construction equipment fleet turnover and increasingly stringent state and federal regulations on engineefficiency combined with state regulations limiting engine idling times and requiring recycling of Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-72 November 2020(2020-173)141    Page 144 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Projectconstruction debris, would further reduce the amount of transportation fuel demand during projectconstruction. For these reasons, it is expected that construction fuel consumption associated with theProposed Project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than other similar residentialdevelopment projects of this nature.The Proposed Project would not result in any unusual characteristics that would result in excessive long-term operational energy consumption. Energy consumption associated with the Project would not beconsidered inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary in comparison to other similar residential developments inthe region. The Proposed Project is located adjacent to existing streets and existing development ofresidential land uses. As such, utilities are available in the immediate project area to serve the project site.All required improvements have been analyzed as part of the Proposed Project in this Initial Study.Overall, the proposed facilities are not expected to require relocation or reconstruction of existing utilities.Impacts would be less than significant. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve Incorporatedthe project and reasonably foreseeable futuredevelopment during normal, dry and multiple dryyears?Less than significant.The project site is located within the Cucamonga Groundwater Basin. According to the CVWD 2015 UrbanWater Management Plan (UWMP), CVWD predicts its water demands to be 58,900 acre-feet (AF) in 2020and 61,300 AF in 2025 during normal year conditions. Water supplies during normal years would be60,500 AF in 2020 and 63,100 AF in 2025. In single dry year and multiple dry year scenarios, water supplieswould also be 60,500 AF in 2020 and 63,100 AF in 2025 (CVWD 2016). In foreseeable multiple dry years, CVWD predicts that it would have sufficient supply to meet waterdemands. To meet demand, the difference from reduced canyon flows, imported water restrictions andState mandated water reductions during a multi-dry year shall be made up from the district’s storedgroundwater from the Chino Basin, tier II imported water (if available), replenishment water (if available),and implementation of the water shortage contingency plan (CVWD 2016). The Proposed Project wouldcomply with the Water Shortage Contingency Plan outlined in the UWMP, if implemented. For example,limits may be applied to the number of days, frequency and duration of outdoor watering. It is anticipatedthat the addition of six residential lots would not exceed the capacity of water supplies of CVWD. Bycomplying with all City and regional water conservation policies and regulations, impacts on watersupplies would be less than significant. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-73 November 2020(2020-173)142    Page 145 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: c) Result in a determination by the wastewater Incorporatedtreatment provider, which serves or may servethe project that it has adequate capacity to servethe project’s projected demand in addition to theprovider’s existing commitments? No impact. Each of the six lots would have a septic tank, seepage pit and expansion area. Specific location andcapacity of the septic systems would be determined at the time of construction and a percolation reportwould be completed prior to final design. The Proposed Project would maintain a 25-foot minimumsetback from the septic system to all property lines and the drainage basin. No impact to the wastewatertreatment provider would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpact Would the Project: d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or localstandards, or in excess of the capacity of localinfrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainmentof solid waste reduction goals?No impact.The Proposed Project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented inthe General Plan. As previously stated, the project site is designated by the City’s General Plan as Very LowResidential (VL). The Proposed Project proposes the development of six residential lots on what iscurrently four acres of vacant land and is therefore consistent with the City General Plan designation of VL.As such, the Proposed Project is within the growth contemplated by the General Plan. The addition of sixresidential lots is not anticipated to generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards or in excessof the capacity of local solid waste facilities. Furthermore, the Proposed Project would comply with allsolid waste reduction goals. Impacts would be less than significant. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactWould the Project: e) Comply with federal, state, and local Incorporatedmanagement and reduction statutes andregulations related to solid waste?No impact.Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-74 November 2020(2020-173)143    Page 146 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectWaste generated by the Proposed Project would comply with solid waste statues and regulations. TheProposed Project would be required to comply with all Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)Regulations, including Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), as well as City of RanchoCucamonga waste reduction programs. Additionally, the Proposed Project would comply with Cityrequirements for receptacles, solid waste collection, and provisions regarding service rates, fees, andcharges. The implementation of these programs would reduce the amount of solid waste generated bethe Proposed Project and diverted to landfills. No impact to waste management and reduction statuteswould occur. 4.19.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.20 Wildfire4.20.1 Environmental SettingGovernment Code 51175-89 directs the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)to identify areas of very high fire hazard severity zones within Local Responsibility Areas (LRA). Mappingof the areas, referred to as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ), is based on data and modelsof potential fuels over a 30 to 50-year time horizon and their associated expected fire behavior, andexpected burn probabilities to quantify the likelihood and nature of vegetation fire exposure to buildings.According to the CALFIRE Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map, the project site is located within aVHFHSZ (CALFIRE 2008). 4.20.2 Wildfire (XX) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less thanSignificant withMitigation If located in or near state responsibility areas orlands classified as very high fire hazard severityzones, would the Project: PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactIncorporateda)Substantially impair an adopted emergencyresponse plan or emergency evacuation plan?No impact.According to the CALFIRE Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map, the project site is located within aVHFHSZ (CALFIRE 2008). The Proposed Project would not substantially impair any adopted emergencyresponse plans. The City produced a Ready RC Guide which provides essential tips on what to do before,during and after a disaster. The guide focuses primarily on fire, flood, earthquake, and wind disasters. Thiscomprehensive booklet includes emergency kit checklists, evacuation route maps, shelter information andmore (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2017). The nearest designated emergency access route by the Ready RC Guide is Banyan Street, approximately5,000 feet south of the project site. Emergency access to the site would be available via one entrance on Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-75 November 2020(2020-173)144    Page 147 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectHermosa Avenue, thereby facilitating emergency response and evacuation, if necessary. No impact wouldoccur.Less thanSignificant withMitigation If located in or near state responsibility areas orlands classified as very high fire hazard severityzones, would the Project: PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactIncorporatedb)Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby exposeproject occupants to, pollutant concentrationsfrom a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of awildfire? No impact.The project site is located on relatively flat a terrain. Emergency access to the site would be available viaone existing entrance at the intersection of Vista Grove Drive and Hermosa Avenue. In addition, theProposed Project would not substantially alter the slope, wind patterns, or other factors that couldexacerbate wildfire risks. Thus, the Proposed Project would not expose project occupants to pollutantconcentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. No impact would occur. Less thanSignificant withMitigation If located in or near state responsibility areas orlands classified as very high fire hazard severityzones, would the Project: PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactIncorporatedc)Require the installation or maintenance ofassociated infrastructure (such as roads, fuelbreaks, emergency water sources, power lines orother utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk orthat may result in temporary or ongoing impactsto the environment? No impact.The Proposed Project is located within an urbanized area and would require utility connections to servethe proposed recreational use, however such connections would not exacerbate fire risk. The Projectwould construct supporting infrastructure to serve the future residential units. The project site issurrounded by residential development and would not exacerbate fire risk or impacts to the environment.As such, no impact would occur. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-76 November 2020(2020-173)145    Page 148 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigationIncorporated If located in or near state responsibility areas orlands classified as very high fire hazard severityzones, would the Project: PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactd)Expose people or structures to significant risks,including downslope or downstream flooding orlandslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slopeinstability, or drainage changes? No impact.The project site is relatively flat and is not likely to cause downstream flooding or landslides. The Projectwould not substantially alter the drainage patterns of the site, and thus would not expose people orstructures to significant risks from runoff or post-fire instability. No impact would occur.4.20.3 Mitigation MeasuresNo significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required.4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance4.21.1 Mandatory Findings of Significance (XXI) Environmental Checklist and DiscussionLess thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactDoes the Project:Incorporateda)Have the potential to substantially degrade thequality of the environment, substantially reducethe habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause afish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant oranimal community, substantially reduce thenumber or restrict the range of a rare orendangered plant or animal or eliminateimportant examples of the major periods ofCalifornia history or prehistory? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils (paleontological resources), andtribal cultural resources are discussed in the respective sections of this Initial Study. Impacts would be lessthan significant with Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, CUL-1, SMBMI CUL-1 to SMBMI CUL-3, GEO-1,GBMIKN TCR-1 to GBMIKN TCR-6, SMBMI TCR-1, and SMBMI TCR-2. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-77 November 2020(2020-173)146    Page 149 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactDoes the Project: b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but Incorporatedcumulatively considerable? (“Cumulativelyconsiderable” means that the incremental effectsof a project are considerable when viewed inconnection with the effects of past projects, theeffects of other current projects, and the effectsof probable future projects)? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated.Impacts from the Proposed Project on transportation, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and noise arediscussed in corresponding sections of this Initial Study. As discussed in their respective sections of thisInitial Study document, no significant impacts associated with air quality, greenhouse gas, or traffic havebeen identified. Cumulative impacts associated with noise would be less than significant withimplementation of mitigation measure NOI-1. Consequently, Project impacts when considered withidentified cumulative projects would not be cumulatively considerable. Less thanSignificant withMitigation PotentiallySignificantImpact Less thanSignificantImpact NoImpactDoes the Project: c) Have environmental effects that will cause Incorporatedsubstantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly?Less than significant with mitigation incorporated.Direct and indirect impacts to human beings would be less than significant with the implementation ofmitigation measures listed in this Initial Study. Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-78 November 2020(2020-173)147    Page 150 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectSECTION 5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS5.1 City of Rancho CucamongaLead AgencyTabe Van der Zwaag, Associate Planner5.2 ECORP Consulting, Inc.CEQA Documentation/Air Quality/Biological Resources/Cultural Resources/Greenhouse Gas/NoiseAlfredo Aguirre, Project ManagerLindsay Liegler, Associate Environmental PlannerSeth Myers, Senior Air Quality/GHG/Noise AnalystKristen Wasz, Senior Wildlife BiologistWendy Blumel, Senior Archaeologist List of Preparers 5-1 November 2020(2020-173)148    Page 151 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK List of Preparers 5-2 November 2020(2020-173)149    Page 152 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectSECTION 6 .0 BIBLIOGRAPHY[CALFIRE]2008 Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Available athttps://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5948/rancho_cucamonga.pdf. Accessed October 1, 2020.[CalRecycle]2020 SWIS Facility Detail Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill. Available athttps://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/36-AA-0055/Detail. Accessed October 11,2020.[Caltrans] California Department of Transportation2013 Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol.2019 List of eligible and officially designated State Scenic Highways. Available at:https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways. Accessed on September 30, 2020.CAPCOA2013 Health Effects. http://www.capcoa.org/health-effects/. 2017 California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2016.3.2. [CARB] California Air Resources Board2017 EMFAC2017 Web Database Emissions Inventory. https://www.arb.ca.gov/emfac/2017/. [CDC] California Department of Conservation2017 San Bernardino Important Farmland 2016: Sheet 2 of 2. Published August 2017. Available athttps://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/SanBernardino.aspx/. Accessed September 30,2020.City of Rancho Cucamonga2010a City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Available athttps://www.dropbox.com/sh/jq8ppqh277lswqq/AABgaDSgPfG8T9CC5_V3Ybbla/General%20Plan?dl=0&subfolder_nav_tracking=1. Accessed October 17, 2020.2010b City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan EIR. Available athttps://www.dropbox.com/sh/jq8ppqh277lswqq/AABgaDSgPfG8T9CC5_V3Ybbla/General%20Plan?dl=0&subfolder_nav_tracking=1. Accessed October 17, 2020.2017 Ready RC: Before, During and After a Disaster in Rancho Cucamonga. Available athttps://www.cityofrc.us/sites/default/files/2019-08/ReadyRCRevisedMarch2017.pdf. AccessedOctober 11, 2020. Bibliography 6-1 November 2020(2020-173)150    Page 153 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project2020a Police Department. Available at https://www.cityofrc.us/public-safety/police. Accessed October1, 2020.2020b Fire District. Available at https://www.cityofrc.us/public-safety/fire. Accessed October 1, 2020. 2020c Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines. June 2020.[CVWD] Cucamonga Valley Water District2016 Cucamonga Valley Water District 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Published June 2016.Available at https://www.cvwdwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/1955/2015-Urban-Water-Management-Plan---CVWD?bidId=. Accessed October 11, 2020. 2018 2018 Water Quality Report. Available at https://www.cvwdwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/3415/2018-Water-Quality-Report. AccessedOctober 11, 2020.[DTSC] Department of Toxic Substances Control2020a Hazardous Waste and Substances List (Cortese List). Available at:https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed October 1, 2020.2020b EnviroStor. Available at: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed on October 1, 2020. [ECDMS] California Energy Commission2019 California Energy Consumption Database. http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/Default.aspx. [ECORP] ECORP Consulting, Inc.2020a Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment. October 2020. 2020b Biological Resources Assessment. October 20202020c Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for Trinity Redevelopment Tract 18305Project. October 2020.2020d Noise Impact Assessment. October 2020. [FHWA] Federal Highway Administration 2006 Roadway Construction Noise Model.2011 Effective Noise Control During Nighttime Construction.Available online at:http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/workshops/accessible/schexnayder_paper.htm.[IPCC] International Panel on Climate Change2014 Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report: Approved Summary for Policymakers. http://www.ipcc.ch/. Bibliography 6-2 November 2020(2020-173)151    Page 154 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project2013 Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change. http://www.climatechange2013.org/ images/report/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf. [ITE] Institute of Transportation Engineers2017Trip Generation Manual.[NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service2019 "Web Soil Survey" from http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed October 1, 2020.[SCAG] Southern California Association of Governments2016 2016–2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Adopted April 2016.http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx.2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan.http://www.scag.ca.gov/NewsAndMedia/Pages/RegionalComprehensivePlan.aspx.[SCAQMD] South Coast Air Quality Management District2009 Localized Significance Threshold Appendix C – Mass Rate LST Look-Up Tables. Revised October 21,2009. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/LST/LST.html.2008 Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]).1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook.1992 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide.[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board2020 GeoTracker database. Available at: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/. Accessed on September 29, 2020.[TLC] Tree of Life Consulting2018 Everett, L. Arborist Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Tract # 18305 City of Rancho Cucamonga.Prepared for ECORP Consulting, INC.[USEPA] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency2020 EnviroMapper database. Available at https://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.home. Accessed on September 29, 2020.[WEAL] Western Electro-Acoustic Laboratory, Inc.2000 Sound Transmission Sound Test Laboratory Report No. TL 96-186. Bibliography 6-3 November 2020(2020-173)152    Page 155 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Bibliography 6-4 November 2020(2020-173)153    Page 156 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectSECTION 7.0 LIST OF APPENDICESAppendix A – Air Quality/Climate Change Technical Report Appendix B – Biological Resources Assessment Appendix C – Cultural Resources Assessment Memo Appendix D – Noise Impact Assessment 154    Page 157 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectAPPENDIX AAppendix A – Air Quality/Climate Change Technical Report 155    Page 158 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectAPPENDIX BAppendix B – Biological Resources Assessment 156    Page 159 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectAPPENDIX CAppendix C – Cultural Resources Assessment Memo 157    Page 160 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative DeclarationTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectAPPENDIX DAppendix D – Noise Impact Assessment 158    Page 161 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectMITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM1.Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting RequirementsPublic Resources Code (PRC) Section 21081.6 (enacted by the passage of Assembly Bill [AB] 3180) mandatesthat the following requirements shall apply to all reporting or mitigation monitoring programs:•The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the projector conditions of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment.The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during projectimplementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at therequest of a Responsible Agency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resourcesaffected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the Lead Agency or a Responsible Agency,prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program. •The Lead Agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material, whichconstitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based. A public agency shall providethe measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment that are fully enforceablethrough permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Conditions of project approval may be setforth in referenced documents which address required mitigation measures or in the case of theadoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other project, by incorporating the mitigation measures intothe plan, policy, regulation, or project design. •Prior to the close of the public review period for a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or MitigatedNegative Declaration (MND), a Responsible Agency, or a public agency having jurisdiction over naturalresources affected by the project, shall either submit to the Lead Agency complete and detailedperformance objectives for mitigation measures which would address the significant effects on theenvironment identified by the Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resourcesaffected by the project, or refer the Lead Agency to appropriate, readily available guidelines orreference documents. Any mitigation measures submitted to a Lead Agency by a Responsible Agencyor an agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project shall be limited tomeasures that mitigate impacts to resources, which are subject to the statutory authority of, anddefinitions applicable to, that agency. Compliance or noncompliance by a Responsible Agency oragency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project with that requirement shall notlimit that authority of the Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resourcesaffected by a project, or the authority of the Lead Agency, to approve, condition, or deny projects asprovided by this division or any other provision of law. 2.Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProceduresThe Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared in compliance with PRC Section21081.6. It describes the requirements and procedures to be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga toensure that all mitigation measures adopted as part of the Proposed Project will be carried out as described inthe Draft IS/MND. Table 1 lists each of the mitigation measures specified in the Draft IS/MND and identifiesthe party or parties responsible for implementation and monitoring of each measure.Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1 November 2020 159    Page 162 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectTable 1.Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectMitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party1. AestheticsThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to aesthetics. No mitigation would be required.2. Agricultural and Forestry ResourcesThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to agriculture and forestry resources. No mitigation would berequired.3. Air QualityThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to air quality. No mitigation would be required.4. Biological ResourcesBIO-1: Pre-Construction Burrowing Owl Survey: A pre-construction survey for burrowing owls shall be completedwithin the Project site between 14 and 30 days prior toconstruction activities in accordance with the CDFW StaffReport on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012). A second pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than 24hours prior to the start of construction. If burrowing owls areobserved during either of the preconstruction surveys,implementation of additional measures may be necessary toreduce impacts to a level that is less than significant,including seasonal work restrictions, no-work buffers Project Applicant, withverification by Directorof the City of RanchoCucamonga PlanningDepartment, or First survey between 14and 30 days prior toconstruction activities.Second survey no morethan 24 hours prior tothe start of designee construction. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 November 2020 160    Page 163 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Partyestablished around active burrows, passive relocation ofburrowing owls, and/or a specific mitigation methodologydetermined in coordination with CDFW. BIO-2: Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey: If construction orother Project activities are scheduled to occur during thebird breeding season (February through August for raptors Project Applicant, withverification by Directorof the City of Rancho Conduct survey nomore than three daysprior to initial grounddisturbance, ifconstruction is to occurduring breedingseason. and March through August for most migratory bird species), Cucamonga Planninga pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by Department, or a qualified biologist to ensure that active bird nests will notbe disturbed or destroyed. The survey shall be completed nomore than three days prior to initial ground disturbance. Thenesting bird survey shall include the project site andadjacent areas where Project activities have the potential toaffect active nests, either directly or indirectly due toconstruction activity or noise. If an active nest is identified, aqualified biologist shall establish an appropriate disturbancelimit buffer around the nest using flagging or staking.Construction activities shall not occur within any disturbancelimit buffer zones until the nest has fledged or has beendeemed inactive by the qualified biologist. designee 5. Cultural ResourcesCUL-1: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in Project Applicant, with During grounddisturbing constructionactivities. origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt verification by Directorwithin a 60-foot radius of the discovery. A qualifiedprofessional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the of the City of RanchoCucamonga PlanningInterior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric Department, orand historic archaeologist, shall be retained to evaluate thesignificance of the find, and shall have the authority to designee Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 November 2020 161    Page 164 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Partymodify the no-work radius as appropriate, usingprofessional judgment. The following notifications shallapply, depending on the nature of the find:•If the professional archaeologist determines that thefind does not represent a cultural resource, work mayresume immediately, and no agency notifications arerequired. •If the professional archaeologist determines that thefind does represent a cultural resource from any timeperiod or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shallimmediately notify the CEQA lead agency, andapplicable landowner. The agencies shall consult on afinding of eligibility and implement appropriatetreatment measures, if the find is determined to beeligible for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR. Work maynot resume within the no-work radius until the leadagencies, through consultation as appropriate,determine that the site either: 1) is not eligible for theNRHP or CRHR; or 2) that the treatment measures havebeen completed to their satisfaction. •If the find includes human remains, or remains that arepotentially human, the archaeologist shall ensurereasonable protection measures are taken to protect thediscovery from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologistshall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner (as per §7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 4 November 2020 162    Page 165 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party§ 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, §5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will beimplemented. If the Coroner determines the remains areNative American and not the result of a crime scene, theCoroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designatea Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) forthe Project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLDwill have 48 hours from the time access to the propertyis granted to make recommendations concerningtreatment of the remains. If the landowner does notagree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHCcan mediate (§ 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement isreached, the landowner must rebury the remains wherethey will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the PRC).This will also include either recording the site with theNAHC or the appropriate information center; using anopen space or conservation zoning designation oreasement; or recording a reinternment document withthe county in which the property is located (AB 2641).Work may not resume within the no-work radius untilthe lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate,determine that the treatment measures have beencompleted to their satisfaction. SMBMI CUL-1: In the event that cultural resources are discovered Project Applicant, with During grounddisturbing constructionactivities. during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of verification by Directorthe find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualifiedarchaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shallbe hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions ofthe project outside of the buffered area may continue of the City of RanchoCucamonga PlanningDepartment, ordesigneeMitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 November 2020 163    Page 166 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Partyduring this assessment period. Additionally, the San ManuelBand of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department(SMBMI) shall be contacted, as detailed within SMBMI TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact finds and be providedinformation after the archaeologist makes his/her initialassessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribalinput with regards to significance and treatment. SMBMI CUL-2: If significant pre-contact cultural resources, asdefined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered andavoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shalldevelop a Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts ofwhich shall be provided to SMBMI for review and comment,as detailed within SMBMI TCR-1. The archaeologist shallmonitor the remainder of the project and implement thePlan accordingly. Project Applicant, withverification by Directorof the City of RanchoCucamonga PlanningDepartment, or During grounddisturbing constructionactivities.designee SMBMI CUL-3: If human remains or funerary objects areencountered during any activities associated with theproject, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-footbuffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shallbe contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code§7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of theproject. Project Applicant, withverification by Directorof the City of RanchoCucamonga PlanningDepartment, or During grounddisturbing constructionactivities.designee6. EnergyThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to energy. No mitigation is required. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 6 November 2020 164    Page 167 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party7. Geology and SoilsGEO-1: Unanticipated Discovery – Paleontological Resource. If Project Applicant, withverification by Director During projectexcavation and gradingactivities paleontological resources (i.e., fossil remains) are discoveredduring excavation activities, the contractor will notify the City of the City of Ranchoand cease excavation within 100 feet of the find until aqualified paleontological professional can provide anevaluation of the site. The qualified paleontologicalprofessional will evaluate the significance of the find andrecommend appropriate measures for the disposition of thesite (e.g. fossil recovery, curation, data recovery, and/ormonitoring). Construction activities may continue on otherparts of the construction site while evaluation and treatmentof the paleontological resource takes place. Cucamonga PlanningDepartment, ordesignee 8. Greenhouse Gas EmissionsThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to greenhouse gas emissions. No mitigation would berequired.9. Hazards and Hazardous MaterialsThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to hazards and hazardous materials. No mitigation would berequired. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 November 2020 165    Page 168 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party10. Hydrology and Water QualityThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to hydrology and water quality. No mitigation would berequired.11. Land Use and PlanningThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to land use and planning. No mitigation would be required.12. Mineral ResourcesThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to mineral resources. No mitigation would be required.13. NoiseNOI-1: The following best management practices shall be Project Applicant, withverification by Directorof the City of Rancho During Projectconstruction. incorporated during Project construction:•In order to reduce construction noise, a temporary noise Cucamonga Planningbarrier or enclosure shall be used along the propertylines of adjacent residences to break the line of sightbetween the construction equipment and the adjacentresidences. The temporary noise barrier shall consist of asolid plywood fence and/or flexible sound curtainsattached to chain link fencing. Department, ordesignee •Barriers such as flexible sound control curtains shall beerected around stationary heavy equipment to minimize Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 8 November 2020 166    Page 169 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Partythe amount of noise on the surrounding land uses to themaximum extent feasible during construction.• • Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday andprohibited at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday.The Project’s improvement and building plans shallspecify this requirement. Equipping of all internal combustion engine-drivenequipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are ingood condition and appropriate for the equipment. • • Prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustionengines.Locating stationary noise-generating equipment such asair compressors or portable power generators as far aspossible from sensitive receptors. Constructingtemporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise-generating equipment when located near adjoiningsensitive land uses. • • Utilization of "quiet" air compressors and otherstationary noise sources where technology exists.Control of noise from construction workers’ radios to apoint where they are not audible at existing residencesbordering the Project site.Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 9 November 2020 167    Page 170 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party •Notification of all adjacent residences of theconstruction schedule, in writing, and provide a writtenschedule of “noisy” construction activities to theadjacent and nearby residences. •Designation of a "disturbance coordinator" who shall beresponsible for responding to any complaints aboutconstruction noise. The disturbance coordinator shalldetermine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., badmuffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measuresbe implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuouslypost a telephone number for the disturbancecoordinator at the construction site and include it in thenotice sent to neighbors regarding the constructionschedule. 14. Population and HousingThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to population and housing. No mitigation would be required.15. Public ServicesThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to public services. No mitigation would be required.16. RecreationThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to recreation. No mitigation would be required. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 10 November 2020 168    Page 171 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party17. TransportationThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to transportation. No mitigation would be required.18. Tribal Cultural ResourcesGabrieleño Band of Mission Indian – Kizh Nation (GBMIKN) Mitigation MeasuresGBMIKN TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor/Consultant.The Project Applicant shall be required to retain andcompensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultantwho is both approved by the Gabrieleño Band of MissionIndians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listed underthe NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the projectlocation. This list is provided by the NAHC. The Director of the City of Prior toRancho CucamongaPlanning Department,or designee commencement of anyground disturbingactivities/Duringproject excavation andgrading activities monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during theconstruction phases that involve ground disturbingactivities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by theGabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activitiesthat may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal,pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring,grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within theproject area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will completedaily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of theday’s activities, including construction activities, locations,soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-sitemonitoring shall end when the project site grading andexcavation activities are completed, or when the TribalRepresentatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 11 November 2020 169    Page 172 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Partythe site has a low potential for impacting Tribal CulturalResources.GBMIKN TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural andArchaeological Resources. Upon discovery of any Director of the City ofRancho CucamongaPlanning Department,or designee Prior tocommencement of anyground disturbingactivities/Duringproject excavation andgrading activities archaeological resources, cease construction activities in theimmediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed.All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualifiedarchaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved by theGabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If theresources are Native American in origin, the GabrieleñoBand of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate withthe landowner regarding treatment and curation of theseresources. Typically, the Tribe will request reburial orpreservation for educational purposes. Work may continueon other parts of the project while evaluation and, ifnecessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 [f]). If a resource is determined by thequalified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource”or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment andfunding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidancemeasures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. Thetreatment plan established for the resources shall be inaccordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) forhistorical resources and Public Resources Code Sections21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources. Preservationin place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatmentmay include implementation of archaeological data recoveryMitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 12 November 2020 170    Page 173 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Partyexcavations to remove the resource along with subsequentlaboratory processing and analysis. Any historicarchaeological material that is not Native American in originshall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with aresearch interest in the materials, such as the Natural HistoryMuseum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, ifsuch an institution agrees to accept the material. If noinstitution accepts the archaeological material, they shall beoffered to a local school or historical society in the area foreducational purposes. GBMIKN TCR-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains Director of the City of During projectand Associated Funerary Objects. Native American human Rancho Cucamonga excavation and gradingactivities (if humanremains are identified) remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumationor cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletalcompleteness. Funerary objects, called associated gravegoods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according tothis statute. Health and Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that anydiscoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediatelyreported to the County Coroner and excavation halted untilthe coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If thecoroner recognizes the human remains to be those of aNative American or has reason to believe that they are thoseof a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephonewithin 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission(NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed. Planning Department,or designee GBMIKN TCR-4: Resource Assessment & Continuation of WorkProtocol. Upon discovery, the tribal and/or archaeologicalmonitor/consultant/consultant will immediately divert work Director of the City ofRancho Cucamonga During projectexcavation and gradingactivities Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 13 November 2020 171    Page 174 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Partyat minimum of 150 feet and place an exclusion zone around Planning Department,the burial. The monitor/consultant(s) will then notify theTribe, the qualified lead archaeologist, and the constructionmanager who will call the coroner. Work will continue to bediverted while the coroner determines whether the remainsare Native American. The discovery is to be kept confidentialand secure to prevent any further disturbance. If the findsare determined to be Native American, the coroner willnotify the NAHC as mandated by state law who will thenappoint a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). or designee GBMIKN TCR-5: Kizh-Gabrieleño Procedures for burials and Director of the City of Prior tofunerary remains. If the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians Rancho Cucamonga commencement of anyground disturbingactivities/Duringproject excavation andgrading activities – Kizh Nation is designated MLD, the following treatmentmeasures shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term“human remains” encompasses more than human bones. Inancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included,but were not limited to, the burial of funerary objects withthe deceased, and the ceremonial burning of humanremains. These remains are to be treated in the samemanner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associatedfunerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite orceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have beenplaced with individual human remains either at the time ofdeath or later; other items made exclusively for burialpurposes or to contain human remains can also beconsidered as associated funerary objects. Planning Department,or designee Treatment Measures: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 14 November 2020 172    Page 175 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party•Prior to the continuation of ground disturbing activities,the landowner shall arrange a designated site locationwithin the footprint of the project for the respectfulreburial of the human remains and/or ceremonialobjects. In the case where discovered human remainscannot be fully documented and recovered on the sameday, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and asteel plate that can be moved by heavy equipmentplaced over the excavation opening to protect theremains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours.The Tribe will make every effort to recommend divertingthe project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may bedetermined that burials will be removed. The Tribe willwork closely with the qualified archaeologist to ensurethat the excavation is treated carefully, ethically andrespectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe,documentation shall be taken which includes at aminimum detailed descriptive notes and sketches.Additional types of documentation shall be approved bythe Tribe for data recovery purposes. Cremations willeither be removed in bulk or by means as necessary toensure completely recovery of all material. If thediscovery of human remains includes four or moreburials, the location is considered a cemetery and aseparate treatment plan shall be created. Once complete, a final report of all activities is to be submittedto the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 15 November 2020 173    Page 176 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Partyauthorize any scientific study or the utilization of anyinvasive diagnostics on human remains.•Each occurrence of human remains and associatedfunerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags.All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects andobjects of cultural patrimony will be removed to asecure container on site if possible. These items shouldbe retained and reburied within six months of recovery.The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the projectsite but at a location agreed upon between the Tribeand the landowner at a site to be protected inperpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding anycultural materials recovered. GBMIKN TCR-6: Professional Standards: Archaeological andNative American monitoring and excavation duringconstruction projects will be consistent with currentprofessional standards. All feasible care to avoid anyunnecessary disturbance, physical modification, orseparation of human remains and associated funeraryobjects shall be taken. Principal personnel must meet theSecretary of Interior standards for archaeology and have aminimum of 10 years of experience as a principalinvestigator working with Native American archaeologicalsites in southern California. The Qualified Archaeologist shallensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained andqualified. Director of the City ofRancho CucamongaPlanning Department,or designee Prior tocommencement of anyground disturbingactivities/Duringproject excavation andgrading activities Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 16 November 2020 174    Page 177 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible PartySan Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Mitigation MeasuresSMBMI TCR-1: The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians CulturalResources Department (SMBMI) shall be contacted, asdetailed in SMBMI CUL-1, of any pre-contact cultural Director of the City ofRancho CucamongaPlanning Department, Prior tocommencement of anyground disturbingactivities/Duringproject excavation andgrading activities resources discovered during project implementation, and be or designeeprovided information regarding the nature of the find, so asto provide Tribal input with regards to significance andtreatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as definedby CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by thearchaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI, and allsubsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shallallow for a monitor to be present that represents SMBMI forthe remainder of the project, should SMBMI elect to place amonitor on-site. SMBMI TCR-2: Any and all archaeological/cultural documentscreated as a part of the project (isolate records, site records,survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the Director of the City ofRancho CucamongaPlanning Department, Prior tocommencement of anyground disturbingactivities/Duringproject excavation andgrading activities applicant and Lead Agency for dissemination to SMBMI. The or designeeLead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consultwith SMBMI throughout the life of the project. 19. Utilities and Service SystemsThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to utilities and service systems. No mitigation would berequired. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 17 November 2020 175    Page 178 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramTentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ComplianceVerification (Dateand SignatureRequired) Timing for StandardCondition orMitigation Measure Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party20. WildfireThe proposed project would not result in significant adverse impactsrelated to wildfire. No mitigation would be required. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 18 November 2020 176    Page 179 RESOLUTION NO. 21-01A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACTMAP SUBTT18305, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 4 ACRES INTO SIX (6)PARCELS IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ON THEWEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE AT VISTA GROVE STREET; ANDMAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN: 1074-201-01 AND02. A.Recitals. 1. Manny Badiola filed an application for the issuance of Tentative Tract MapSUBTT18305, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subjectTentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application."2.On the 13th day of January 2021, the Planning Commission of the City ofRancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concludedsaid hearing on that date.3.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.B.Resolution.NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by thePlanning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:1.This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.2.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on January 13, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together withpublic testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:a.The application applies to a 4-acre parcel of land located on the west side ofHermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; andb.The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feetalong the south property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the eastproperty line (plus the 50-foot-wide flag); andc.The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for,the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcels) are as follows:Land Use General Plan ZoningPartially developed withExisting Residence Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre)Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre)Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre) Site Very Low Very Low Very Low North Single-Family Residences South Single-Family Residences 177    Page 180 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-01SUBTT18305 – MANNY BADIOLAJanuary 13, 2021Page 2 Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre)Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre) East Single-Family Residence Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low West d.The project is for the subdivision of a 4-acre parcel of land into six (6) parcels forthe future development of six (6) single-family residences; ande.Each lot complies with the development standards for the Very Low (VL)Residential District. Including lot dimensions, minimum lot size, and average lot size; andf.The project scope includes a Minor Exception (DRC2020-00217) to permit walls upto 8 feet in height, and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2020-00218) to remove up to 52 on-site trees.3.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above,this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:a.The proposed development is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of theDevelopment Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is tosubdivide a 4-acre parcel of land into six (6) lots for single-family residential development. Theunderlying General Plan designation is Very Low Residential.b.The proposed development, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will notbe detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties orimprovements in the vicinity. The proposed land use is consistent with the land uses within thevicinity where it is located and the expectations of the community. The zoning of the property andall surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District. c.The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of theDevelopment Code except the necessity for combination walls up to 8 feet in height. The applicanthas submitted Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 for consideration by the Planning Commission.The proposed development, otherwise, meets all standards outlined in the Development Code andthe design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 4.Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated NegativeDeclaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment forthe application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the projectwill have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration andMonitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon thefindings as follows: a.Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's localCEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the project wasprepared by Ecorp Consulting, Inc. and reviewed by staff. Based on the findings contained in thatInitial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would beno substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Basedon that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff 178    Page 181 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-01TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305 – MANNY BADIOLAJanuary 13, 2021Page 3provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the MitigatedNegative Declaration.b.The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and allcomments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole recordbefore it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA;and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence thatthe project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further findsthat the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of thePlanning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts theMitigated Negative Declaration. c.The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the MitigationMonitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of PublicResources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliancewith the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission thereforeadopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d.The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration,Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedingsupon which the Planning Commission’s decision is based is the Planning Director of the City ofRancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Departmentof the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 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 forthbelow and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.6.The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY:Tony Guglielmo, Chairman ATTEST:Anne McIntosh, AICP, SecretaryI, Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, andadopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of thePlanning Commission held on the 13th day of January 2021, by the following vote-to-wit:179    Page 182 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-01TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305 – MANNY BADIOLAJanuary 13, 2021Page 4AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS:ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: 180    Page 183 RESOLUTION NO. 21-03A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMITDRC2020-00218, A REQUEST TO REMOVE 52 TREES RELATED TO AREQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 4 ACRES OF LAND INTO SIX (6) PARCELS FORTHE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF 6 SINGLE-FAMILY IN THE VERY LOW (VL)RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE ATVISTA GROVE STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF –APN: 1074-201-01 AND 02. A.Recitals. 1. Manny Badiola filed an application for the approval of Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218,as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tree RemovalPermit request is referred to as "the application."2.On the 13th day of January 2021, the Planning Commission of the City ofRancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded saidhearing on that date.3.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.B.Resolution.NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission ofthe 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 theabove-referenced public hearings of January 13, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, togetherwith public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:a. The application applies to a 4-acre parcel of land located on the west side of HermosaAvenue at Vista Grove Street; andb. The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feet along thesouth property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the east property line (plusthe 50-foot-wide flag); andc.The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, theproject site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcels) are as follows:Land Use General Plan ZoningPartially developed withExisting Residence Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre) Site Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre)Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre) North Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low South Single-Family Residences 181    Page 184 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-03TRP DRC2020-00218 – Manny BadiolaJanuary 13, 2021Page 2 Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre)Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre) East Single-Family Residence Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low West d.Tentative Tract SUBTT18305 is for the subdivision of a 4-acre parcel of land into six (6)parcels for the future development of six (6) single-family residences; ande.Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 is for the removal of 52 trees. An Arborist Report(Laurel F. Everett, Jr., Arborist) was submitted that reviews the health and condition of the 52 onsitetrees. The report concludes that based on poor health and improper pruning all the onsite trees arerecommended for removal. The project is conditioned to replace the removed trees on a one-for-onebasis including replanting the existing eucalyptus windrow; and a. The project scope includes Minor Exception DRC2020-00218 for property line walls overthe permitted 6-foot height limit.3.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during theabove-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:a.The proposed Tree Removal Permit is consistent with the objectives of the GeneralPlan. The removal of the tress is related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 for the subdivision of theproject site into residential lots, which are consistent with the Very Low (VL) land use designation in theGeneral Plan; andb.The proposed Tree Removal Permit will be in accord with the objectives of the MunicipalCode and the purposes of the district in which permits the removal of heritage trees when associatedwith the development of the project site. In this case, removal of the trees is necessary due to the healthand condition of the trees; andc.The proposed Tree Removal Permit will be compliance with each of the applicableprovisions of the Development Code including replacement of the removed trees with trees of a speciesand quantity commensurate with the aesthetic value of the trees to be removed; andd.The proposed Tree Removal Permit, together with the conditions applicable thereto, willnot be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties orimprovements in the vicinity as the 52 removed trees will be replaced on a one-for-one basis as part ofthe overall landscape theme.4.Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all writtenand oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commissionfinds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application basedupon the following findings and determinations:182    Page 185 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-03TRP DRC2020-00218 – Manny BadiolaJanuary 13, 2021Page 3 a.Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's localCEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the project was prepared byEcorp Consulting, Inc. and reviewed by staff. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, it wasdetermined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence thatthe project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a MitigatedNegative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the publiccomment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b.The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and allcomments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record beforeit, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that,based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will havea significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the MitigatedNegative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission.Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt theMitigated Negative Declaration. c.The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation MonitoringProgram for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources CodeSection 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigationmeasures during project implementation. The Planning Commission, therefore, recommends that theCity Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d.The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, and allother materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission’srecommendation is based are the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Thosedocuments are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamongalocated at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5.Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, thisCommission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and inthe Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.Planning Department1)The approval of Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 is contingent uponPlanning Commission approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 andMinor Exception DRC2020-00217.The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13th DAY OF JANUARY 2021. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGABY:Tony Guglielmo, Chairman 183    Page 186 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-03TRP DRC2020-00218 – Manny BadiolaJanuary 13, 2021Page 4 ATTEST:Anne McIntosh, AICP, SecretaryI, Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, dohereby 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 PlanningCommission held on the 13th day of January 2021, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS:ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: 184    Page 187 RESOLUTION NO. 21-02A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOREXCEPTION DRC2020-00217, A REQUEST FOR AN INCREASE IN THEMAXIMUM WALL HEIGHT FROM 6 FEET TO 8 FEET RELATED TOTENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 4ACRES INTO SIX (6) PARCELS IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIALDISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE AT VISTAGROVE STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF –APN: 1074-201-01 AND 02. A.Recitals.1. Manny Badiola filed an application for Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 as describedin the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Minor Exception requestis referred to as "the application."2.On the 13th day of January 2021, the Planning Commission of the City ofRancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concludedsaid hearing on that date.3.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.B.Resolution.NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by thePlanning 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 theabove-referenced public hearing on January 13, 2021, including written and oral staff reports,together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:a.The application applies to a 4-acre parcel of land located on the west side ofHermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; andb.The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feetalong the south property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the eastproperty line (plus the 50-foot-wide flag); andc.The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designationsfor, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcels) are asfollows:ZoningLand Use General PlanPartially developed withExisting Residence Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre) Site Very Low 185    Page 188 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-02ME DRC2020-00217 – MANNY BADIOLAJanuary 13, 2021Page 2 Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre)Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre)Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre)Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 DU Per Acre) North Single-Family Residences South Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low Very Low Very Low East Single-Family Residence Single-Family Residences West d.The project is for the subdivision of a 4-acre parcel of land into six (6) parcels forthe future development of six (6) single-family residences; ande.Each lot complies with the development standards for the Very Low (VL)Residential District. Including lot dimensions, minimum lot size, and average lot size; andf.Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 will allow the construction of combination walls(garden/screen walls on top of retaining walls) with a height of up to 8 feet along the perimeter ofthe project site; andg.The project scope includes Tree Removal Permit (DRC2020-00218) to remove52 on-site trees.h.Per Table 17.48.050-1 of the Development Code, the maximum wall height offences and walls along the rear and interior property lines is 6 feet.3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during theabove-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:a.The Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan. The General Plandesignation of the project site is Very Low (VL) Residential and the zoning of the property is VeryLow (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The Minor Exception does not affect theGeneral Plan designation, zoning designation, or the residential purpose of the project site.b.The Minor Exception is compatible with the existing and proposed land uses inthe surrounding area. The Minor Exception will not result in a substantially larger house, anincrease in lot coverage, an increase in density, or adjustments to the physical lot area of thesubject lots.c.The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary toallow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or toaccommodate unique site conditions. The proposed walls will be located generally where thereare grade differences that warrant retaining walls. The retaining walls are required to construct aproperty line adjacent equestrian trail and to reduce grading on the adjacent lot. The adjacentproperty owner has stated that they prefer increased wall heights over slopes on their property. d.The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilegeinconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, and will not bedetrimental to public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious properties or improvements 186    Page 189 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-02ME DRC2020-00217 – MANNY BADIOLAJanuary 13, 2021Page 3 in the vicinity. The Minor Exception will allow the applicant to construct walls that will provide aflat graded area to construct a property line adjacent equestrian trail. The walls will be consistentwith the standards and guidelines of the City.4.Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with allwritten and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, thePlanning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document isrequired pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with thereview and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a.Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City'slocal CEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the project wasprepared by Ecorp Consulting, Inc. and reviewed by staff. Based on the findings contained in thatInitial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there wouldbe no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment.Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the Citystaff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the MitigatedNegative Declaration. b.The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration andall comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the wholerecord before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance withCEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantialevidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The PlanningCommission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independentjudgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the PlanningCommission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c.The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the MitigationMonitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of PublicResources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliancewith the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission thereforeadopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d.The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration,Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedingsupon which the Planning Commission’s decision is based is the Planning Director of the City ofRancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the PlanningDepartment of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, RanchoCucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 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 forthbelow. 187    Page 190 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-02ME DRC2020-00217 – MANNY BADIOLAJanuary 13, 2021Page 4 Planning Department1)The approval of Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 is contingent uponPlanning Commission approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305.6.The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY:Tony Guglielmo, Chairman ATTEST:Anne McIntosh, AICP, SecretaryI, Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of RanchoCucamonga, 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 regularmeeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of January 2021, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS:ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: 188    Page 191 Conditions of Approval Community Development DepartmentProject #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Planning DepartmentPlease be advised of the following Special Conditions1. The 52 trees to be removed as part of the project shall be replaced on a one-for-one basis includingreplanting the existing eucalyptus windrow.Standard Conditions of Approval2. The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approvalprovided by the Planning Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and Acceptance ofConditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning Department prior to the submittal ofgrading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license, and /or commencement ofthe approved activity. 3. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, itsagents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, torelinquish 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 berequired by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participateat its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieveapplicant of his obligations under this condition. 4. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s)are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are notrequired to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 5. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Mitigated Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,456.75. All checks are to bemade payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning CommissionSecretary prior to public hearing. 6. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the PlanningCommission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3years from the date of the approval.7. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood gates .Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC.8. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping the equineanimals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lotowners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity ofappealing to boards of directors of homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs.www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 189    Page 192 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Planning DepartmentStandard Conditions of Approval9. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of theHomeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering ServicesDepartment and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or priorto the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to theCity Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Department a list of thename and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and wheneversaid information changes. 10. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lotsfor Planning Director and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not limited to,public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours ofconstruction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 11. Provide a 24-foot by 24-foot or 12-foot by 48-foot corral area in the rear yard adjacent to the LocalFeeder Trail. Grade access from corral to trail with a maximum slope of 5:1 and a minimum width of10 feet.12. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which includeSite Plans and grading plans on file in file with the Planning Department, the conditions containedherein, and the Development Code regulations,13. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc ., shall belocated out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete ormasonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. For14. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk.The5-foot wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to therequired street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for PlanningDirector review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. The parkway landscapingincluding trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner. Thedeveloper shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenancerequirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Director, prior to accepting a cashdeposit on any property. 15. 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 landscapemaintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department reviewand approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits.16. Local Feeder Trail entrances shall also provide access for service vehicles, such as veterinarians orhay deliveries, including a 12-foot minimum drive approach. Entrance shall be gated provided thatequestrian access is maintained through step-throughs in accordance with Engineering ServicesDepartment Standard Drawing 1006-B and 1007-B. 17. Local Feeder Trail grades shall not exceed 0.5 percent at the downstream end of a trail for adistance of 25 feet behind the public right-of-way line to prohibit trail debris from reaching the street.Drainage devices may be required by the Building and Safety Official.www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 190 Page 2 of 18    Page 193 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Planning DepartmentStandard Conditions of Approval18. Where corner side, interior side or rear yard property lines are adjacent to local equestrian trails,construct minimum 6-foot high decorative masonry walls.Decorative masonry shall mean split-facedouble sided block, ‘slump stone’ or an alternative material that is acceptable to the Design ReviewCommittee.19. For single-family residential development within the Equestrian/Rural Overlay District, at least onemodel home shall be provided with a constructed 24-foot by 24-foot corral with appropriate fencing.20. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated forconsistency 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 hascommenced, whichever comes first. 21. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter.condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoiningproperty owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property If a double wallowners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project perimeter.22. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry.23. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufacturedproducts.24. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval in accordance with theadopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map25. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and weedcontrol, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for Planning Directorreview and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and grading plans.Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, includingfencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements.26. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuouslymaintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold andoccupied by the buyer.Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall beconducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition.27. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping inthe case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect andsubmitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits for thedevelopment or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For developmentoccurring in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed byFire Construction Services. 28. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on theperimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 191 Page 3 of 18    Page 194 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Planning DepartmentStandard Conditions of Approval29. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1slope, 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 beinstalled by the developer prior to occupancy.30. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greaterslope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance asfollows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger sizeshrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks inexcess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or largersize tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clustersto soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanentirrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 31. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment.If located in public maintenance areas, thedesign shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department.32. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of waterefficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82.33. New windrow planting of Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum) is required.The size, spacing,staking, and irrigation of these trees shall be in conformance with the City's Development CodeChapter 17.80. Engineering Services DepartmentPlease be advised of the following Special Conditions1. Street improvement plans, prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to andapproved by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed in public rights-of-way, fees shallbe paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer’s office. Security shall beposted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorneyguaranteeing completion of the public improvements, prior to the issuance of a City constructionpermit. 2. Parkways shall slope at 2 percent from the top of curb to one foot behind the sidewalk along allstreet frontages.3. Driveways on corner lots shall be located at least 50 feet from the intersection BCR, or themaximum distance allowed by the lot size.4. Provide a residential drive approach for access to the private local trail on Vista Grove Street.5. Public improvement plans shall be 90 percent complete prior to the issuance of grading permits.Public improvement plans shall be 100 percent complete, signed by the City Engineer, and animprovement agreement and bonds executed by the developer, prior to building permit issuance. 6. Any existing overhead utilities along Hermosa Avenue shall be undergrounded along the projectfrontage per the requirements of City Resolution No. 87-96. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 192 Page 4 of 18    Page 195 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Engineering Services DepartmentPlease be advised of the following Special Conditions7. Off site street and drainage improvements shall be completed prior to approval of the final map oran improvement agreement, accompanied by appropriate improvement securities, shall be executedby the Developer and the City. This includes, but is not limited to, the private storm drain systemand all improvements along Hermosa Avenue. 8. All walls and fences along the public right of ways shall be privately maintained and shall be locatedoutside of the public right of way.9. A private storm drain is proposed. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shallsubmit CC&R's to the City Engineering Services Department for review. The CC&Rs' shall state thatthe storm drain shall be privately maintained. The CC&R's shall be recorded concurrently with thefinal map. The storm drain plans shall note which storm drain lines are private and which stormdrain lines are public. 10. Prior to approval of the grading plan (including the private storm drain plans) the applicant shallprovide a copy of any correspondence and/or approval letter from SBCFCD regarding the privatestorm drain plans. All private storm drain plans shall be a part of the rough or precise permittedgrading plan set, whichever permit is issued first. 11. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall comply with the following SanBernardino County Flood Control District requirement: Obtain Encroachment Permit:encroachment permit shall be obtained for any work within the San Bernardino County FloodControl District right-of-way or involving District facilities. No construction shall occur within the An District’s right-of-way without the encroachment permit being obtained. Contact Flood Control PermitSection for permit information, (909) 387-7995. A copy of the signed encroachment permit obtainedfrom the District shall be submitted to Land Development Division Land Use Services, and the Cityof Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department, prior to final grading permit issuance. 12. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy the applicant shall comply with the following SanBernardino County Flood Control District requirement: Encroachment Permit is finalized:FinalBuilding/Occupancy Permits for any buildings within the approved project will not be released priorto the San Bernardino County Flood Control District finalizing any and all encroachment permitsobtained by the developer for this project. The applicant shall submit an official letter issued by theSan Bernardino County Flood Control District, which states that all items under the issuedencroachment permit have been satisfied and the encroachment permit has been finalized andclosed, must be submitted to Land Use Services, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga EngineeringServices Department, prior to the Final Building/Occupancy Permits being issued.. 13. Prior to the recordation ofBernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) requirement: Public and Private StormDrainage Easements. Adequate San Bernardino County Drainage Easements (width of the the final map the applicant shall comply with the following San drainage easement to meet SBCFCD requirements) and based on recommendations of theapproved drainage study shall be provided over the natural drainage courses, drainage facilities /orconcentration of runoff from the site. Proof of recordation of the easement to SBCFCD shall beprovided to the Land Development Division, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga EngineeringServices Department prior to the recordation of the final map. This easement shall be alsoshown/referenced on the final map. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 193 Page 5 of 18    Page 196 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Engineering Services DepartmentPlease be advised of the following Special Conditions14. Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall comply with the following SanBernardino County of Public Works requirement: On-site Drainage Easement.be directed within a drainage easement. On-site flows shall15. Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall construct the proposed public and privatestorm drainage facilities, or shall post a Security and an agreement executed to the satisfaction ofthe City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the private improvements. 16. The conceptual grading plan and tentative map provide cross sections showing walls, and /or wallfootings, within the public street right of way. Prior to the approval of a ROW permit and theapproval of the street improvement plans, the applicant shall provide a grading plan (approved andpermitted through the Engineering Services Department) and a separate wall plan (approved andpermitted through the Building and Safety Services Department) showing cross sections in detailwith all walls and wall footings outside of the street public right of way. A slope is proposed withinthe public right of way of Hermosa Avenue. This slope shall be designed to be as flat as possiblewithin the design constraints. Any required surfacing of the slope shall be at the City Engineer'sdirection. 17. Along the north boundary of Tentative Tract Map 18305, the map shows an "Ex. County Road Rightof Way" of undetermined width. This County Road was transferred to the City during theincorporation of the City. This road right of way will be vacated on the final map. The SanBernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) requires legal and physical access throughTract 18305 to maintain the flood control basin west of this tract. The applicant shall apply throughSBCFCD to provide the District an easement along the northerly boundary of the tract, The width ofthe easement shall meet SBCFCD requirements. This easement shall be per a separate documentand recorded concurrently with the final map. This easement shall also be shown/referenced on thefinal map. The proposed SBCFCD easement will be over the proposed private street (Lot A) and Lot1. The applicant shall provide the City a copy of the correspondence with SBCFCD prior to theissuance of a grading permit, or recordation of the final map, whichever occurs first. 18. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall construct fencing/gate within theproposed San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) easement meeting SBCFCDrequirements. Prior to issuancecorrespondence with SBCFCD. a grading permit the applicant shall provide a copy of the19. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant shall coordinate with the City to reconstructfencing within the City Drainage easement north of the north line of the tract. This coordination maybe either by the applicant obtaining permission from the underlying land owner to construct theimprovements. Or, by entering into an agreement with the City to maintain, repair or reconstruct thefence within the City's easement with the applicant paying the costs to the City for the fencing. 20. San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) shall approve all plans that impact theireasement, including utilities, storm drain, slopes, and street trees and landscaping prior to issuanceof a grading permit. A note shall be included on all pertinent plans requiring San Bernardino CountyFlood Control District to be notified two working days prior to starting any work in the vicinity of theirfacilities.www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 194 Page 6 of 18    Page 197 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Engineering Services DepartmentPlease be advised of the following Special Conditions21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written comments from the SanBernardino County Flood Control District regarding site design restrictions within their easement andprovide a copy of said comments to the City Engineer, or his designee, for review.Standard Conditions of Approval22. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated ornoted on the final map.23. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards.24. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on thefinal map.25. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, communitytrails, public landscape areas, street trees, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plansand/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feedertrails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.26. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final mapapproval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall beinstalled as required by the City Engineer. 27. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering theproperty from adjacent areas.28. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measuredfrom the outer edge of a mature tree trunk.29. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shallbe paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if atleast 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, andappropriate documentation is provided to the City. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, mustcomplete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 daysfollowing the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. 30. Prior to approval of the final map, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated costof apportioning the assessments for the Assessment District, among the newly created parcels.31. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and LightingDistricts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval orissuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first.Formation costs shall be borne by thedeveloper. This project shall annex into the following districts: LMD 1, SLD 1 and SLD 2. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 195 Page 7 of 18    Page 198 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Engineering Services DepartmentStandard Conditions of Approval32. Hermosa Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City “Collector” standardsincluding:A. Protect or repair existing curb and gutter, signing, and striping as required.B. Provide access ramps in accordance with the latest ADA standards.C. Acquire right of way to be in accordance with City Standard Plan 100-B.Notes: (a) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. Visa Grove Street and "A" Court (Lot "A" private street) frontage improvements to be in accordancewith City “Local” standards including:A. Provide curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches, street lights, signing, and striping asrequired.B. Street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay allcosts to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design andinstallation requirements. C. Proposed driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy.33. Improvement Plans and Construction:a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, and street lights plans shall be prepared by aregistered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Securityshall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the CityAttorney guaranteeing completion of the public street improvements, prior to final map approval orthe issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first.b. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a constructionpermit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permitsrequired.c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, and street name signing shall be installed to thesatisfaction of the City Engineer.d. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per ADAregulations or as directed by the City Engineer. e. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequatedetours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall beprovided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of theconstruction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 34. All public improvements and private streets (interior streets, drainage facilities, landscaped areas,etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior streetimprovements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches,sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. The private streets shall be a separate set of street plansfrom the public street plans. 35. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards inaccordance with the City's street tree program. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 196 Page 8 of 18    Page 199 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Engineering Services DepartmentStandard Conditions of Approval36. 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. 37. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of theCucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and theEnvironmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first.Suchletter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in thecase of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects.38. Provide drainage devices so that no surface drainage shall enter trails from adjacent lots.39. An encroachment permit from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District is required for workwithin its right-of-way and must be obtained prior to grading permit issuance. An easement for theproposed storm drain must also be obtained prior to grading permit issuance. The encroachmentpermit must be finalized prior to occupancy. 40. Development Impact Fees are due prior to building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change.41. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees:“All improvementswithin the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvementplans.” If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement planswill govern. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 197 Page 9 of 18    Page 200 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Engineering Services DepartmentStandard Conditions of Approval42. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completedlegend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvementplans.Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating :“Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet ___ (typically Sheet 1).” Wherepublic landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the publiclandscape improvement plans.Street Name: Vista Grove Avenue (entire length of the proposed cul-de-sac)Botanical Name: Platanus acerifoliaCommon Name: London Plane TreeMin. Grow Space:Spacing: 40-feet on centerSize: 15 gallon minimumQty: determined during permitting processConstruction Notes for Street Trees:1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans.2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to theCity inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments,as determined by the City inspector.3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering ServicesDepartment. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only.43. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance withadopted policy.intersections, including driveways. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all projectLocal residential street intersections and commercial or industrialdriveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. Fire Prevention / New Construction UnitStandard Conditions of Approval1. Due to the type of construction, construction materials, the floor area of the project, and known risksassociated with projects of this nature, a Fire Protection and Site Safety plan is required to beimplemented when combustible construction materials are delivered to the site, with the exceptionof foundation form materials. The Fire Prevention and Site Safety plan is required to be incompliance with Fire District Standard 33-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documentssection. Review and approval of the fire prevention and site safety plan is a condition of constructionpermit approval. The fire prevention and site safety plan is required to be approved by the FireDistrict prior to construction permits being approved and issued. 2. Temporary fire apparatus access (fire lanes) and temporary fire hydrants, if needed, are required tobe in accordance with Fire District Standard 33-2. The Standard has been uploaded to theDocuments section.www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 198 Page 10 of 18    Page 201 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Fire Prevention / New Construction UnitStandard Conditions of Approval3. The site/project is located in the designated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. Constructionmaterials and methods and automatic fire sprinkler systems are to be in compliance with Chapter7A of the California Building Code, Section R337 of the California Residential Code, and Fire DistrictStandard 49-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 4. The site/project is located in the designated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. Landscaping,vegetation management, fuel reduction, and other wildland fire safety features and practices arerequired to comply with all applicable provisions of Fire District Standard 49-1. The Standard hasbeen uploaded to the Documents section. 5. The site/project is located in the designated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. A site-specific orproject-specific fire protection plan is required for this project. The fire protection plan is required tobe in accordance with Fire District Standard 49-1. The Standard has been uploaded to theDocuments section. 6. Gates installed across a residential emergency vehicle access road (fire lane) are required to be inaccordance with Standard 5-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.Building and Safety Services DepartmentPlease be advised of the following Special Conditions1. This site is located in the fire area designated VHFHSZ, all structures must be constructed withignition resistant or noncombustible materials in accordance with the approved Fire protection Planand/or the most current edition of the CA Building Code including all local ordinances andstandards. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawingsincluding energy and structural calculations to Building and Safety for plan review in accordancewith the stricter regulations of the approved Fire protection Plan (if applicable) for the developmentand current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards .The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report isrequired for new structures. Vegetation must be design and installed in accordance to the guidelinesfrom the RCFPD for sites located in the VHFHSZ fire area. Grading SectionStandard Conditions of Approval1. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall grade and construct the equestrian trailsto City standards. A grading permit shall be required from the City of Rancho Cucamonga.2. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map or issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first, thedeveloper/applicant shall prepare a final project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)for review and approval by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and shall record said WQMP document,including any Codes, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's), with the San Bernardino CountyRecorder's Office. Said CC&R's shall be recorded prior to the recordation of the WQMP. A copy ofthe recorded CC&R's shall be included in the WQMP document. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 199 Page 11 of 18    Page 202 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Grading SectionStandard Conditions of Approval3. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Codeand/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices.The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approvedconceptual Grading and Drainage Plan.4. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to performsuch work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review.shall implement design recommendations per said report. Plans5. The Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall becompleted, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance ofbuilding permits, and/or the limits of construction6. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projectsand for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or moreof combined cut and fill.The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wetsigned by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit.7. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place adust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s)shall be located outside of the public right of way.8. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Engineering ServicesDepartment for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit fromPrecise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit.9. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from theadjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing theperimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shallbe a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent privateproperty. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California BuildingCode. 11. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combinedexceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit.bond shall be approved by the City Engineer or his designee. The grading agreement and12. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyondproject boundary. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 200 Page 12 of 18    Page 203 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Grading SectionStandard Conditions of Approval13. Grading Inspections:a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request apre-grading meeting.grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventivemeasures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the operations, the grading permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector;b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and SafetyDepartment at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior tocontinuing grading operations:i) The bottom of the over-excavation;ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit;iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the PermitTechnicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications tobe prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer ofRecord;iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the AssociateEngineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 14. Prior to issuance of a wall permit, on engineered combination garden/retaining walls along theproperty boundary the structural calculations for the wall shall assume a level toe /heel at theadjacent off-site property (i.e. a manufactured slope is not present). This shall be shown in thetypical sections of the grading and drainage plan. 15. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural siteplan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separationsbetween the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of SectionsCBC1804.3/CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 ofthe current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 16. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a recorded easement(s) from theadjacent property owner(s) for ALL work proposed on the adjacent property(ies). The easement(s)shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set. The easement(s) shall show on adetail sheet of the grading and drainage plan set. 17. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits or street permits, the applicant shall obtain approval ofthe project-specific storm water quality management plan, and the applicant shall submit to the CityEngineer, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existingtopographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of conceptual structuresand future drainage of the site. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 201 Page 13 of 18    Page 204 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Grading SectionStandard Conditions of Approval18. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the followinginformation in the equestrian trails: – Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4” thickdecomposed granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the trail, provide a bridgeover the V ditch where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridgesshall be capable of carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S<5% the cross fall shall be 2%, if S>5% the cross fall may be 4% maximum. Where water barsrequired, the spacing for the water bars is: 50’ maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40’maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1% to 9%, 30’ maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to12%, 20’ maximum for longitudinal slopes greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shallalso be placed at the top and bottom of the trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i .e. a steepdownhill slope which will cause additional erosion to the trail. 19. A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall beprepared and submitted to the Engineering Services Department for review and approval for on -sitestorm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. The report shall contain water surfaceprofile gradient calculations for all storm drain pipes 12-inches and larger in diameter. All reportsshall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. In addition, the project specific drainagestudy shall provide inlet calculations showing the proper sizing of the water quality managementplan storm water flows into the proposed structural storm water treatment devices. 20. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements,and/or other easements on private property prior to the issuance of a grading permit.21. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage acceptanceeasements(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition(concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the City Engineer, or his designee, adrainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance ofa grading permit. 22. The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross-lot drainage, (except in approved facilitiesadjacent to private trails).All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall beinstalled prior to final map approval.23. Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lined guttersand swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent.This shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of a grading permit. 24. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall demonstrate that the storm water run -off willnot adversely affect the downstream properties and that the water may legally discharge to thedownstream properties. The engineer of record shall show on the final permitted grading anddrainage plan one (1) or more of the following items are met: a) There is sufficient downstreamcapacity to accept the proposed storm water flows and that the downstream property owner haveprovided permission to accept the upstream storm water flows; b) a legal document/entity existsallowing developed storm water flows to be discharged to the property lower in elevation; c) a stormdrain system to safely convey the storm water flows to a public storm drain system without causingflooding to adjacent property(ies). www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 202 Page 14 of 18    Page 205 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Grading SectionStandard Conditions of Approval25. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution92-17, if a lot may not directly drain off-site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device(such as a drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail), then: a) drainage may flow from only onelot onto only one other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting thedrainage; c) the drainage shall be contained within either a concrete/rock lined swale/channel or areinforced concrete pipe; and d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account forthe probable lack of necessary maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) timesthe runoff from a 100-year storm event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12-inches. 26. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adoptedCalifornia Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading anddrainage plan. 27. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector theengineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan(WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 28. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copyof the project Conditions of Approval.29. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s “Memorandum ofAgreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan” shall be submitted for review and approvalby the Engineering Services Department and recorded with the County Recorder’s Office. 30. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge IdentificationNumber (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plandocument.31. The homeowners association shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structuralstorm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho CucamongaEnvironmental Program Manager. The homeowners association shall maintain on a regular basis asdescribed in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costsassociated with the WQMP infiltration basin are the responsibility of the homeowners association. 32. The homeowners association shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of theapproved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of theinspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental ProgramManager.33. A final project-specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by theCity Engineer, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s “Memorandum of Storm WaterQuality Management Plan” shall be recorded prior to the recordation of the Final Map or issuance ofa grading permit whichever comes first. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 203 Page 15 of 18    Page 206 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Grading SectionStandard Conditions of Approval34. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or the recordation of the Final Map, whichever comes first, theFinal Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of“Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet” located in Appendix D “SectionVII – Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, …” of the SanBernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. Theinfiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer’s recommendations for Appendix D, Table VII.3:Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors”. 35. Prior to approval of the final project-specific water quality management plan the applicant shall havea soils engineer prepare a project-specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of stormwater quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in thecurrent adopted “San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water QualityManagement Plans”. 36. The final project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) may be prepared as a PhasedWQMP and shall include all phases of the project if it is prepared as a phased WQMP. Constructionof the storm water treatment structural devices may be constructed as construction progresses. 37. The subject project, shall accept all existing off-site storm water drainage flows and safely conveythose flows through or around the project site. If existing off-site storm water drainage flows mix withany on-site storm water drainage flows, then the off-site storm water drainage flows shall be treatedwith the on-site storm water drainage flows for storm water quality purposes, prior to discharging thestorm water drainage flows from the project site. 38. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civilengineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction StormWater Treatment Devices As-Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City ofRancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. 39. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the formatprovided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout “Information for Grading Plans and Permit”.40. The proposed tentative map is proposing a land division only and may include grading of lots perNote #8 shown on the preliminary water quality management plan. The USEPA regulations includethe term “common plan of development or sale” to ensure that acreage within a common projectdoes not artificially escape the permit requirements because construction activities are phased, splitamong smaller parcels, or completed by different owners/developers”. In keeping with the intent ofthis USEPA regulation the applicant as a condition of approval shall be required to submit a finalproject-specific water quality management plan to the City Engineer, or their designee, prior to therecordation of the final map. This final project-specific water quality management plan shall berecorded concurrently with the final map. As development of each lot is unknown at this time, theapplicant shall use the maximum allowed lot coverage per the zoning requirements to calculate thedesign capture volume (DCV) for each lot and provide a typical structural storm water treatmentdevice meeting low impact development (LID) principles for the entire tract as the lots develop in thefuture. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 204 Page 16 of 18    Page 207 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Grading SectionStandard Conditions of Approval41. Grading will be required for the construction of the street(s). Prior to the issuance of any permits forthe construction of the streets, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer, or his designee, agrading plan for grading permit purposes and private street plans for the construction of the privatestreets and the equestrian trails. 42. The City of Rancho Cucamonga does not allow on-site storm water quality treatment BMP deviceswithin the individual single-family lots which will be required to be inspected and maintained by eachindividual homeowner. As a condition of approval for this single-family residential project (includingtentative tract maps and parcel maps, and final tract maps and parcel maps of 2 parcels or more) a common storm water treatment system will be required which shall be maintained by ahomeowners’ association prior to the approval of a water quality management plan and issuance ofa grading permit.43. Prior to approval of the final project-specific water quality management plan the applicant shall havea soils engineer prepare a project-specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of stormwater quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in thecurrent adopted “San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water QualityManagement Plans”. Note: As this project is proposing surface basins after the project site has beenrough graded, the use of the Custom Soil Resource Report for San Bernardino CountySouthwestern Part by the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource ConservationService for natural soils is not acceptable for soil groundwater infiltration rates. 44. The project is proposing on-site waste water disposal (septic) systems for the individual lots. Theon-site waste water disposal systems shall meet the requirements of the current adopted City ofRancho Cucamonga Local Agency Management Plan (LAMP) for On-Site Wastewater TreatmentSystems (OWTS). A copy of the OWTS plan shall be submitted to the Building and Safety ServicesDepartment (B&S) for review. A copy of the B&S OWTS review comments shall be provided to theEngineering Services Department for review prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 45. As the developer is proposing to sell each lot individually and to provide a continuity of theequestrian trail along the boundary of the project, prior to the recordation of the final map thedeveloper shall pull a precise grading permit and construct the equestrian trail (s) per City of RanchoCucamonga standards and the private streets per a separate permit. 46. As shown on the preliminary water quality management plan, noted as "Preliminary - Acceptable" bythe City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department dated March 12, 2019, lots 1, 2,4, 5, and 6 shall drain to Vista Grove Street. Lot 3 is tabled to drain to the southwest corner of thelot. Lot 3 shall have a separate storm water treatment (BMP) for an equestrian use to be maintainedby the owner of Lot 3. 47. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading plan shall show all slopes outside of the 5-footcross lot drainage easement.48. Prior to recordation of the final map the developer shall pull a precise grading permit and constructthe proposed storm water quality treatment basins located at the south portion of the "A" Court(private street) cul-de-sac. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 205 Page 17 of 18    Page 208 Project #:SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305Location:5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:Grading SectionStandard Conditions of Approval49. Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan the developer shallprovide recorded CC&R's describing that the private storm water quality basins shall be maintainedby a homeowner's association.50. The proposed water quality basin located southerly of the cul-de-sac is proposing a water depth of2-feet. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show the construction of a60-inch guard (fencing) around the water quality basin. The fencing/gate shall be maintained by thehomeowner's association. www.CityofRC.usPrinted: 12/7/2020 206 Page 18 of 18    Page 209 RESOLUTION NO. 24-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TIME EXTENSION DRC2024-00017, A REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR A ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION OF TENTATIVE MAP SUBTT18305 TO SUBDIVIDE A 4- ACRE PARCEL OF LAND INTO 6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITHIN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL (VL) ZONE AND THE EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE AT VISTA GROVE STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN 1074-201-01 and 02 A. Recitals. 1. Manny Badiola filed an application for the extension of the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305, 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 January 13, 2021, this Commission adopted Resolution No. 21-01, thereby approving the application subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. On February 28, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on February 28, 2024, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 4-acre parcel of land located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; and b. The existing Land Use, General Plan and Zoning designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Exhibit D   Page 210 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-04 TIME EXTENSION DRC2024-00017– MANNY BADIOLA February 28, 2024 Page 2 4 3 5 2 Site Partially developed with Existing Residence Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) North Single-Family Residences Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) South Single-Family Residences Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) East Single-Family Residence Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) West Single-Family Residences Semi-Rural Neighborhood Very Low Residential (VL) a. The subdivision of the project site conforms to all applicable development standards for the Very Low Residential (VL) Residential Zone; and b. This application is a request to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 by one (1) additional year. The time extension is necessary to provide time to complete the final map process with the Engineering Department. 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 previously approved tentative tract map is consistent with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, Ordinances, plans, codes, and policies. The proposed project is for the subdivision of 4 acres of land for the future development of 6 single-family residences. The project is consistent with the related City requirements with the previous Planning Commission approval on January 13, 2021; and b. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed subdivision. The project site is well suited for the proposed project is surrounded by residential development at a similar density; and c. The proposed subdivision, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. An initial study was prepared for the original project that was approved by the Planning Commission on January 13, 2021, along with a Mitigated Negative Declaration, which reviewed potential environmental impacts created by the subdivision of the project site into 6 residential lots. Mitigation measures were included in the original approval reducing any potential impact to less than significant; and d. The proposed subdivision complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The proposed subdivision complies with all development standards outlined in the Development Code for the development of single-family residences within the Very Low Residenital (VL); and e. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance which allow for an additional one (1) year time extension. 4. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the City certified a    Page 211 4 3 5 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-04 TIME EXTENSION DRC2024-00017– MANNY BADIOLA February 28, 2024 Page 3 Mitigated Negative Declaration on January 13, 2021, in connection with the City’s approval of SUBTT18305, Minor Exception (DRC2020-00217 and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2020-00218). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Staff has evaluated the time extension for SUBTT18305 and concludes that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previously certified Mitigated Negative Declaration. The subject time extension is being requested in order to provide additional time for the applicant to work with Engineering Department to complete the final map process. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. The applicant does not propose any changes to the previously approved tentative tract map. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City’s consideration of the time extension for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305. 5..Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension. The new expiration date for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT8305 is January 13, 2025. 6.All applicable Conditions of Approval in Resolution No. 21-07 and incorporated Standard Conditions in Resolution 21-07 for SUBTT1305 and the attached Standard Conditions incorporated herein by this reference shall apply to Time Extension DRC2024-00017. 7.The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Morales, Chairman ATTEST: Matt Marquez, Secretary    Page 212 4 3 5 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-04 TIME EXTENSION DRC2024-00017– MANNY BADIOLA February 28, 2024 Page 4 I, Matt Marquez, 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 February 2024, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:    Page 213 DATE:February 28, 2024 TO:Chair and Members of the Planning Commission FROM:Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development INITIATED BY:Bond Mendez, Associate Planner SUBJECT:CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – KIMLEY HORN - A request to continue to operate an existing warehouse, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing, and assembly facility within two existing industrial/warehouse buildings totaling 302,861 square-feet within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on Milliken Avenue between Arrow Route and Jersey Boulevard at 8595 Milliken Avenue and 11340 Jersey Boulevard; APN: 0229-111-62, - 63. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15301 – Existing Facilities (Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00212, DRC2023-00213). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permits DRC2023-00212 and DRC2023-00213 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions. BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting to continue to operate an existing warehouse, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing and assembly facility within two existing industrial/warehouse buildings totaling 302,861 square- feet within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located along the east side of Milliken Avenue between Arrow Route and Jersey Boulevard at 8595 Milliken Avenue and 11340 Jersey Boulevard. The two adjacent properties, totaling about 15.87-acres, are generally rectangular in shape and are currently developed with the two referenced existing industrial buildings, plus parking lots, and landscaping improvements along Milliken Avenue, Arrow Route, and Jersey Boulevard. The applicant does not propose any exterior changes or alterations to the buildings or existing site improvements. The site is surrounded by various industrial uses (See Figure 1 below). The northerly building located at 8595 Milliken Avenue and totaling approximately 225,286 square feet, was most recently occupied by three separate tenants and the southerly building, located at 11340 Jersey Boulevard and totaling 77,575 square feet, was most recently occupied by one tenant in a single tenant space. The applicant proposes to combine the three tenant spaces within the northerly building into one single tenant space, and to maintain the single tenant space in the southerly building. Both buildings have been continuously occupied, but separately tenanted, with industrial uses including storage, wholesale and distribution, and manufacturing uses dating back to 1997 for the northerly building and 2003 for the southerly building as confirmed by the City business license records.    Page 214 Page 2 of 3 2 2 2 8 Figure 1: Aerial view of site located at southeast corner of the intersection at Milliken Avenue and Arrow Route. The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Table 1 – Land Use Information Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) North Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) South Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) East Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) West Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) PROJECT ANALYSIS: In 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance 982 which updated the City’s zoning standards in response to significant demand in industrial development. As a result of Ordinance 982, the Development Code now requires    Page 215 Page 3 of 3 2 2 2 8 a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or Minor Use Permit (MUP) for specific uses in the NI zone. For example, the Development Code requires a CUP for Wholesale and Distribution (Medium) uses, and Storage Warehouses uses pursuant to section 17.30.030 and a minor use permit is required for Distribution and Fulfillment Centers (Large) and Manufacturing, Light (Large) uses, all of which are existing uses at this site. As the subject properties were developed and in operation with the above listed uses prior to the adoption of Ordinance 982, they are considered to be legal uses, but nonconforming to current code standards as the required entitlements were never granted. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for these uses which now require entitlements. The requested CUP also includes those uses which require an MUP. To be clear, without the required CUP or MUP entitlements, any existing use may continue to operate without the necessity to obtain an entitlement as long as the use is not discontinued for a period of more than 180 days, consistent with the code requirements for non-conforming uses per section 17.62 (Nonconforming Uses and Structures). Despite this, and in this case, the applicant has simply elected to apply for the entitlements now required by the code in order to ensure that their operations are in full conformance with the code. CEQA DETERMINATION: The Planning and Economic Development Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities Projects which includes leasing of existing private structures and facilities. The General Plan Land Use and Zoning designation for the project site are Neo-Industrial Employment District and Neo-Industrial zone, respectively, which permits the operation of a warehouse, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing and assembly facility of the existing size and configuration. The project complies with the City’s development standards and design guidelines, including setbacks, height, lot coverage, and design requirements. The project site is located within the City limits and is surrounded by existing industrial development and City infrastructure. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 1,500-foot radius of the project site on February 13, 2024. To date, no comments have been received regarding the project. COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED: General Plan Policy LC-3.10 encourages businesses and development that will support and/or enhance the operations of existing businesses when complimentary to the General Plan Vision while discouraging new development and businesses that will have detrimental impacts to existing businesses and development. The existing industrial facility will continue to support our premier community status by continuing businesses that are complementary to the surrounding land uses and provide employment opportunities for City residents and the region. The project will fulfill the City Council goal of intentionally embracing and anticipating for our future by continuing to support well-developed warehouse distribution businesses in the City. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Project Plans Exhibit B – Draft PC Resolution 24-07 Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00212 Exhibit C – DRC2023-00212 Conditions of Approval Exhibit D – Draft PC Resolution 24-08 Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00213 Exhibit E – DRC2023-00213 Conditions of Approval    Page 216 ARROW ROUTE 8595 MILLIKEN AVENUEBLDG 225,286 S.F.MILLIKEN AVEEXISTING RETAINING WALL60 DOCK HIGH DOORS60 SHARED TRAILER STALLS±951.7'±259.1'25.0'PARKINGSETBACK45.0'BLDG &LANDSCAPESETBACK25.0'PARKINGSETBACK45.0'BLDG &LANDSCAPESETBACK±951.7'±259.1' 25.0'PARKINGSETBACK 45.0'BLDG &LANDSCAPESETBACK 25.0'PARKINGSETBA CK 45.0'BLDG &LAND SCAPE SETBACK EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE PLANNOTE: THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATUREDWG NAME K:\RIV_PLAN\195514001 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA WAREHOUSES BARINGS ENTITLEMENT\FIGURES\PROJECT PLANS\EXHIBITS\2023.10.10_SITE PLAN EXHIBIT\RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA - MILLIKEN EXISTING CONDITIONS EXHIBIT.DWGLAST SAVED 10/10/2023 8:21 AMRancho Cucamonga, CA3801 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 300RIVERSIDE, CA 92501951.543.9868JERSEY BLVDARROW ROUTEMILLIKEN AVEBOSTON PLSITENORTHLEGENDPROPERTY LINESITE UTILIZATION MAPADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY8595 MILLIKEN AVERANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA91730ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER022911162ZONINGNEO INDUSTRIAL (NI)APPLICANTKIMLEY-HORN3801 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 300RIVERSIDE, CA 92501CONTACT: MEGHAN D. KARADIMOSTEL: (469) 867-9119APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVERANCHO CUCAMONGA II, INC.SITE AREAPROJECT DATAIN S.F.IN ACRES477,41810.96BUILDING AREAOFFICEMEZZANINE15,254 S.F.7,096 S.F.WAREHOUSE 201,981 S.F.TOTAL 225,286 S.F.COVERAGE47.2%STAIRS 964 S.F.PARKING REQUIREDPARKING PROVIDEDSTANDARD (9' x 18')ADA STALLSTOTAL 185 STALLS177 STALLS8 STALLSTRAILER PARKING PROVIDEDSHARED TRAILER PARKING (12' x 60')60 STALLSLOADING DOCKS PROVIDEDDOCK HIGH DOORS (12' x 60')39 DOCKSSETBACKSMILLIKEN AVE - MAJOR ARTERIALARROW ROUTE - MAJOR ARTERIAL45 FT BLDG & LANDSCAPEMAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT ALLOWEDHEIGHT - 45 FTMAXIMUM FLOOR TO AREA RATIOFAR - 0.60LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTPERCENTAGE - 10%LANDSCAPE PROVIDEDPERCENTAGEIN S.F.14.3%68,389 S.F.OFFICE: 4 / 1,000 S.F. 62 STALLSWHSE: 1ST 20K @ 1 / 1,000 S.F. 20 STALLS2ND 20K @ 1 / 2,000 S.F.10 STALLSABOVE 40K @ 1 / 4,000 S.F.41 STALLSTOTAL 133 STALLS25 FT PARKING45 FT BLDG & LANDSCAPE25 FT PARKINGINTERIOR SIDE YARD5 FTREAR YARD0 FTGENERAL NOTES:1. PROPERTY LINES, BUILDINGS, PARKING, LANDSCAPING, AND SITEINFORMATION WAS DECIPHERED WITH DOWNLOADABLE GIS DATA ANDAERIAL IMAGING. ALL DATA IS APPROXIMATE AND SHOULD BE VERIFIEDWITH A PROFESSIONAL SURVEY.2. ALL REQUIRED PROJECT DATA CAME FROM THE CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE DATED JUNE 3, 2023. NOTE: SITE DATA MAYHAVE CHANGED SINCE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS SITE.8595 MILLIKEN AVENUEGROUND LEVEL DOORS (12' x 60') 6 DOCKSRESERVED TRAILER PARKING (12' x 60') 39 STALLSTOTAL 99 STALLSTOTAL 45 STALLSSETBACK LINEACTUAL HEIGHT ABOVE THE FINISHED FLOOR FOR THE CEILING/ROOFHEIGHT - 30 FTBUILDING IS EQUIPPED WITH AN AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM([KLELW$   Page 217 11340 JERSEY BLVDBLDG 77,575 S.F.JERSEY BLVD±273.2'±330.0'MILLIKEN AVE6 DOCK HIGH DOORSGRADE LEVELDOCK DOOR20.0' PARKING SETBACK 35.0' BLDG & LANDSCAPE SETBACK 25.0'PARKINGSETBACK45.0'BLDG &LANDSCAPESETBACK5.0'SETBACKGRADE LEVELDOCK DOOR6 TRAILERPARKING STALLSLEGENDEXISTING CONDITIONS SITE PLANPROPERTY LINENOTE: THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATUREDWG NAME K:\RIV_PLAN\195514001 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA WAREHOUSES BARINGS ENTITLEMENT\FIGURES\PROJECT PLANS\EXHIBITS\2023.10.10_SITE PLAN EXHIBIT\RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA - EXISTING CONDITIONS EXHIBIT.DWGLAST SAVED 10/10/2023 8:22 AMRancho Cucamonga, CA3801 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 300RIVERSIDE, CA 92501951.543.9868GENERAL NOTES:1. PROPERTY LINES, BUILDINGS, PARKING, LANDSCAPING, AND SITEINFORMATION WAS DECIPHERED WITH DOWNLOADABLE GIS DATA ANDAERIAL IMAGING. ALL DATA IS APPROXIMATE AND SHOULD BE VERIFIEDWITH A PROFESSIONAL SURVEY.2. ALL REQUIRED PROJECT DATA CAME FROM THE CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE DATED JUNE 3, 2023. NOTE: SITE DATA MAYHAVE CHANGED SINCE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS SITE.ARROW ROUTEJERSEY BLVDMILLIKEN AVEBOSTON PLSITESITE UTILIZATION MAPNORTHADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY11340 JERSEY BLVDRANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA91730ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER022911163ZONINGNEO INDUSTRIAL (NI)APPLICANTKIMLEY-HORN3801 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 300RIVERSIDE, CA 92501CONTACT: MEGHAN D. KARADIMOSTEL: (469) 867-9119APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVERANCHO CUCAMONGA II, INC.SITE AREAPROJECT DATAIN S.F.IN ACRES213,8804.91BUILDING AREANORTHWEST OFFICESOUTHWEST OFFICE9,537 S.F.3,411 S.F.WAREHOUSE 64,627 S.F.TOTAL77,575 S.F.COVERAGE36.3%PARKING REQUIREDPARKING PROVIDEDSTANDARD (9' x 18')ADA STALLSTOTAL 192 STALLS117 STALLS6 STALLSTRAILER PARKING PROVIDEDTRAILER (12' x 60') 6 STALLSLOADING DOCKS PROVIDEDDOCK HIGH DOORS (12' x 60')6 DOCKSSETBACKSMILLIKEN AVE - MAJOR ARTERIALJERSEY BLVD - COLLECTOR45 FT BLDG & LANDSCAPEMAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT ALLOWEDHEIGHT - 45 FTMAXIMUM FLOOR TO AREA RATIOFAR - 0.60LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTPERCENTAGE - 10%LANDSCAPE PROVIDEDPERCENTAGEIN S.F.25.1%53,579 S.F.OFFICE: 4 / 1,000 S.F.52 STALLSWHSE: 1ST 20K @ 1 / 1,000 S.F. 20 STALLS2ND 20K @ 1 / 2,000 S.F. 10 STALLSABOVE 40K @ 1 / 4,000 S.F.7 STALLSTOTAL 89 STALLS25 FT PARKING35 FT BLDG & LANDSCAPE20 FT PARKINGINTERIOR SIDE YARD5 FTREAR YARD0 FTGRADE LEVEL DOCKS (12' x 30')2 DOCKS11340 JERSEY BOULEVARDCOMPACT STALLS69 STALLSSETBACK LINEACTUAL HEIGHT ABOVE THE FINISHED FLOOR FOR THE CEILING/ROOFHEIGHT - 26 FTBUILDING IS EQUIPPED WITH AN AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM   Page 218 1OVERALL BUILDING FLOOR PLANConsultingSpace PlanningInterior & Industrial DesignConstruction Management8171 E Kaiser BoulevardAnaheim Hills, CA 92808714.685.7733pacdesign.comPACIFIC INTERIOR DESIGNA Division of PDD, Inc.AS-BUILTS8595 MILLIKEN AVE.RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730PROJECT:OWNER:RANCHO CUCAMONGA II INC.c/o CBRE, INC.3501 Jamboree Road, Suite 100Newport Beach, CA 92660949.809.3650OVERALL BUILDING FLOOR PLANA1.0   Page 219 1OVERALL BUILDING FLOOR PLANOVERALL BUILDINGFLOOR PLANA1.0ConsultingSpace PlanningInterior & Industrial DesignConstruction Management8171 E Kaiser BoulevardAnaheim Hills, CA 92808714.685.7733pacdesign.comPACIFIC INTERIOR DESIGNA Division of PDD, Inc.AS-BUILTS11340 JERSEY BLVD.RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730PROJECT:OWNER:RANCHO CUCAMONGA II INC.c/o CBRE, INC.3501 Jamboree Road, Suite 100Newport Beach, CA 92660949.809.3650   Page 220    Page 221    Page 222    Page 223    Page 224 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2023-00212 Project Name: CUP for Warehouse Facility Use Location: 8595 MILLIKEN AVE - 022911162-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions The Conditional Use Permit authorizes a warehouse, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing and assembly facility within an existing 225,286 square-foot industrial/warehouse building within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Arrow Route at 8595 Milliken Avenue; APN: 0229-111-62. 1. The Conditional Use Permit does not authorize outdoor storage of materials. Any future requests for outdoor storage shall be subject to review by the Planning and Economic Development Department. 2. Standard Conditions of Approval The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval provided by the Planning Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning Department prior to the submittal of grading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license, and/or commencement of the approved activity. 3. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 2/7/2024 Exhibit C    Page 225 Project #: DRC2023-00212 Project Name: CUP for Warehouse Facility Use Location: 8595 MILLIKEN AVE - 022911162-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval The applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City, and/or any of its officials , officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, those City agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials and instrumentalities thereof (collectively “Indemnitees”), from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other actions and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature ), and alternative dispute resolutions procedures (including, but not limited to, arbitrations, mediations, and other such procedures ) (collectively “Actions”), brought against the City, and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, the action of, or any permit or approval issued by, the City and /or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City ), for or concerning the project, whether such actions are brought under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivisions Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1085 or 1094.5, or any other state, federal, or local statute, law, ordinance, rule, regulation, or any decision of a competent jurisdiction. This indemnification provision expressly includes losses, judgments, costs, and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees or court costs) in any manner arising out of or incident to this approval, the Planning Director’s actions, the Planning Commission’s actions, and/or the City Council’s actions , related entitlements, or the City’s environmental review thereof. The Applicant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or the other Indemnitees in any such suit , action, or other legal proceeding. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve , which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City’s defense, and that the applicant shall reimburse City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate with applicant in the defense of the Action. In the event such a legal action is filed challenging the City’s determinations herein or the issuance of the approval, the City shall estimate its expenses for the litigation. The Applicant shall deposit said amount with the City or, at the discretion of the City, enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due. 4. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet (s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction /grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 5. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption fee in the amount of $50.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing or within 5 days of the date of project approval. 6. Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 2 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. 7. www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 3Printed: 2/7/2024    Page 226 Project #: DRC2023-00212 Project Name: CUP for Warehouse Facility Use Location: 8595 MILLIKEN AVE - 022911162-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval Any modification or intensification of the approved use, including revisions in the operations of the business including changes to the operating days /hours; change in the location on -site or within the building of the use /activity that is approved by this Conditional Use Permit; improvements including new building construction; and/or other modifications /intensification beyond what is specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit, shall require the review and approval by the Planning Director prior to submittal of documents for plan check /occupancy, construction, commencement of the activity, and/or issuance of a business license. The Planning Director may determine that modifications or intensifications of use require the submittal of an application to modify this Conditional Use Permit for review by the City. 8. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and /or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 9. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 10. www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 3Printed: 2/7/2024    Page 227    Page 228    Page 229    Page 230    Page 231 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2023-00213 Project Name: 11340 Jersey Blvd. CUP Request Location: 11340 JERSEY BLVD - 022911163-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions The Conditional Use Permit authorizes a warehouse, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing and assembly facility within an existing 77,575 square-foot industrial/warehouse building within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Jersey Boulevard at 11340 Jersey Boulevard; APN: 0229-111-63. 1. The Conditional Use Permit does not authorize outdoor storage of materials. Any future requests for outdoor storage shall be subject to review by the Planning and Economic Development Department. 2. Standard Conditions of Approval The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval provided by the Planning Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning Department prior to the submittal of grading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license, and/or commencement of the approved activity. 3. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 2/7/2024 Exhibit E    Page 232 Project #: DRC2023-00213 Project Name: 11340 Jersey Blvd. CUP Request Location: 11340 JERSEY BLVD - 022911163-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval The applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City, and/or any of its officials , officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, those City agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials and instrumentalities thereof (collectively “Indemnitees”), from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other actions and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature ), and alternative dispute resolutions procedures (including, but not limited to, arbitrations, mediations, and other such procedures ) (collectively “Actions”), brought against the City, and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, the action of, or any permit or approval issued by, the City and /or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City ), for or concerning the project, whether such actions are brought under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivisions Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1085 or 1094.5, or any other state, federal, or local statute, law, ordinance, rule, regulation, or any decision of a competent jurisdiction. This indemnification provision expressly includes losses, judgments, costs, and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees or court costs) in any manner arising out of or incident to this approval, the Planning Director’s actions, the Planning Commission’s actions, and/or the City Council’s actions , related entitlements, or the City’s environmental review thereof. The Applicant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or the other Indemnitees in any such suit , action, or other legal proceeding. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve , which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City’s defense, and that the applicant shall reimburse City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate with applicant in the defense of the Action. In the event such a legal action is filed challenging the City’s determinations herein or the issuance of the approval, the City shall estimate its expenses for the litigation. The Applicant shall deposit said amount with the City or, at the discretion of the City, enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due. 4. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet (s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction /grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 5. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption fee in the amount of $50.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing or within 5 days of the date of project approval. 6. Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 2 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. 7. www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 3Printed: 2/7/2024    Page 233 Project #: DRC2023-00213 Project Name: 11340 Jersey Blvd. CUP Request Location: 11340 JERSEY BLVD - 022911163-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval Any modification or intensification of the approved use, including revisions in the operations of the business including changes to the operating days /hours; change in the location on -site or within the building of the use /activity that is approved by this Conditional Use Permit; improvements including new building construction; and/or other modifications /intensification beyond what is specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit, shall require the review and approval by the Planning Director prior to submittal of documents for plan check /occupancy, construction, commencement of the activity, and/or issuance of a business license. The Planning Director may determine that modifications or intensifications of use require the submittal of an application to modify this Conditional Use Permit for review by the City. 8. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and /or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 9. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 10. www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 3Printed: 2/7/2024    Page 234 DATE:February 28, 2024 TO:Chair and Members of the Planning Commission FROM:Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development INITIATED BY:Bond Mendez, Associate Planner SUBJECT:CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to operate an existing warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility within an existing industrial/warehouse building totaling 124,328 square-feet within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on White Oak Avenue south of Arrow Route at 10955 Arrow Route; APN: 0209-145-02. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15301 – Existing Facilities (Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00382). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00382 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions. BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting to operate a new warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility within an existing industrial/warehouse building totaling 124,328 square-feet within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on White Oak Avenue approximately 280 feet south of Arrow Route at 10955 Arrow Route; APN: 0209-145-02. The building has been continuously occupied with various tenants operating industrial uses including manufacturing, storage, wholesale and distribution uses as confirmed by the City business license records. The most recent tenant was a furniture manufacturer who occupied a portion of the existing building and has since vacated. Now, a new tenant has applied for a business license to operate a warehouse, wholesale and distribution use within the entire building, however which will require a Conditional Use Permit. The 6.3-acre site is generally square in shape and currently developed with the referenced existing industrial building plus a parking lot and landscaping improvements along White Oak Avenue and along the perimeter of the building. The site is surrounded by various industrial uses. The building is currently built as one single tenant space and will remain as a single tenant space. The applicant does not propose any exterior changes or alterations to the buildings or existing site improvements. The Development Code currently requires a Conditional Use Permit for specific uses in the NI zone including Wholesale and Distribution (Medium) uses (when they exceed 50,000 square feet) and Storage Warehouse uses pursuant to sections Table 17.30.030-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements by Base Zone) and 17.32.020(H)(18) (Allowed Use descriptions, Industrial, manufacturing, and processing uses). Thus, as the applicant is proposing to operate their use beyond 50,000 square feet to tenant the entire building (124,328 square feet) and include a Storage warehouse use, a CUP is required.    Page 235 Page 2 of 5 2 2 2 9 Figure 1: Aerial view of site located southwest of the intersection at Arrow Route and White Oak Avenue. The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Table 1 – Land Use Information Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) North Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) South Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) East Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) West Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI)    Page 236 Page 3 of 5 2 2 2 9 PROJECT ANALYSIS: The business operations consist of transporting and/or delivery of cargo containers to the facility; transferring the various bulk packages, boxes, etc. from the containers to separate outbound truck trailers; and shipping them to their next destination for further processing and handling. Approximately 30 percent of the product leaving the facility is shipped directly to the consumer via UPS, FedEx, etc. The facility operates 24 hours per day in three shifts (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., 5:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m., and 1:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.) with approximately 50 personnel onsite during the largest shift (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). The number of trucks and trailers on site will never exceed the number of available dock doors and trailer parking spaces at the facility. Figure 2: Existing First Floor plan    Page 237 Page 4 of 5 2 2 2 9 Figure 3: Existing Second Floor plan Pursuant to Development Code Section 17.32.020.H, the City of Rancho Cucamonga defines such uses as “Wholesale and Distribution, Medium”, and “Storage Warehouses”. The definitions are as follows: Wholesale and distribution, medium. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, wholesale and distribution of finished goods and/or food products from the premises; including distribution facilities for large scale retail firms. Includes incidental storage and warehousing. Activities under this classification shall be conducted in enclosed buildings and occupy greater than 50,000 square feet of building space. Included are multi-tenant or speculative buildings with over 50,000 square feet of warehouse space. Storage warehouse. Facility for the storage of furniture, household goods, or other commercial goods of any nature. Includes cold storage and moving and storage services where no wholesale or distribution is conducted. Does not include mini-storage facilities offered for rent or lease to the general public (see "Storage, personal storage facility") or warehouse facilities in which the primary purpose of storage is for wholesaling and distribution. Parking: Per table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code, the parking requirement is based on the proposed mix of office and warehouse floor area in the building(s). Parking is located along the east and south property lines, interior to the site, and along the northern, eastern, and southern perimeter of the building. Truck loading and truck trailer parking areas are located away from public view. Based on the requirements for both office and warehouse use, the existing uses require a total of 118 vehicle parking stalls. The site provides 181 stalls, exceeding the minimum parking requirement. There is also a total of 8 dock doors along the south side of the building. A matching number of trailer parking stalls are also provided in compliance with Development Code requirements. The following table breaks down the parking calculation (see next page):    Page 238 Page 5 of 5 2 2 2 9 Table 2 – Parking Analysis CEQA DETERMINATION: The Planning and Economic Development Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities Projects which includes leasing of existing private structures and facilities. The General Plan Land Use and Zoning designation for the project site are Neo-Industrial Employment District and Neo-Industrial zone, respectively, which permits the operation of a warehouse, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing and assembly facility of the existing size and configuration. The project complies with the City’s development standards and design guidelines, including setbacks, height, lot coverage, and design requirements. The project site is located within the City limits and is surrounded by existing industrial development and City infrastructure. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 1,500-foot radius of the project site on February 13, 2024. To date, no comments have been received regarding the project. COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED: General Plan Policy LC-3.10 encourages businesses and development that will support and/or enhance the operations of existing businesses when complimentary to the General Plan Vision while discouraging new development and businesses that will have detrimental impacts to existing businesses and development. The existing industrial facility will continue to support our premier community status by continuing businesses that are complementary to the surrounding land uses and provide employment opportunities for City residents and the region. The project will fulfill the City Council goal of intentionally embracing and anticipating for our future by continuing to support well-developed warehouse distribution businesses in the City. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Project Plans Exhibit B – Draft PC Resolution 24-03 Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00382 Exhibit C – DRC2023-00382 Conditions of Approval Type of Use Square Footage Parking Ratio # of Spaces Required # of Spaces Provided Office 17,787 4/1,000 sf 71 - Warehouse 106,541 1 per 1,000 sf for first 20,000 sf; 1 per 2,000 sf for the next 20,000 sf; and 1 per 4,000 sf for the remaining sf 47 - Total 118 181    Page 239 10700 jersey blvd., suite 700 rancho cucamonga, ca 91730 phone 1.909.945.8437 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY JOB No SCALE SHEET NoPROJECTSHEET TITLE OWNERADDRESSTHESE DRAWINGS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE AND ARE PROPERTY OF BONALDO ENGINEERING. ALL DESIGNS AND OTHER INFORMATION ON THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR THE USE ON THE SPECIFIED PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE USED OTHERWISE WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF BONALDO ENGINEERING. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. CONTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON THE FIELD AND THIS OFFICE SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. www.bonaldodesigngroup.com AS NOTED OCT. 20, 2023 NATAL / S.L. T23-30-T1359EXISTING WAREHOUSE BUILDINGNON-CONSTRUCTION C.U.P.10955 ARROW ROUTE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 91730 AMIR DEVELOPMENT - C/O STEVEN JUHNKE8730 WISHIRE BLVD., STE. 300, BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90211PHONE 1.310.657.8987CASE Nodesign group bonaldo tenant improvement plans SITE SUM SITE UTILIZATION MAP SUBJECT SITE ( GI ) Arrow Route White Oak Ave.Red Oak St.Tacoma Dr.600' (TYP.)OFFICE /WAREHOUSE( GI ) OFFICE /WAREHOUSE ( GI ) OFFICE /WAREHOUSE ( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFACTURING ( GI ) OFFICE/MANU-FACTURING( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ( GI )OFFICE/MANUFACTURING( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE( GI ) OFFICE/MANU-FACTURING ( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFAC-TURING( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE( GI )OFFICE/WAREHOUSE( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFAC-TURING( GI ) OFFICEWAREHOUSE( GI ) PRINTSHOP( GI ) OFFICE( GI )SELF STORAGE( GI ) POST OFFICE( IP )MEDICAL( IP ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFACTURING( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFAC-TURING ( GI ) PRINTSHOP ( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFAC-TURING( GI ) OFFICE /MANUFACTURING/WAREHOUSE( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE( GI ) OFFICEMANUFAC-TURING( GI ) OFFICE ( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE( GI ) OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ( GI )White Oak AveRESTAURANT ( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFAC-TURING( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFAC-TURING( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFACTURING( GI ) OFFICE/MANUFAC-TURING( GI ) Exhibit A    Page 240 SP-1 EXISTING SITE PLAN AND SITE INFO. 10700 jersey blvd., suite 700 rancho cucamonga, ca 91730 phone 1.909.945.8437 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY JOB No SCALE SHEET NoPROJECTSHEET TITLE OWNERADDRESSTHESE DRAWINGS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE AND ARE PROPERTY OF BONALDO ENGINEERING. ALL DESIGNS AND OTHER INFORMATION ON THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR THE USE ON THE SPECIFIED PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE USED OTHERWISE WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF BONALDO ENGINEERING. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. CONTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON THE FIELD AND THIS OFFICE SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. www.bonaldodesigngroup.com AS NOTED OCT. 20, 2023 NATAL / S.L. T23-30-T1359EXISTING WAREHOUSE BUILDINGNON-CONSTRUCTION C.U.P.10955 ARROW ROUTE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 91730 AMIR DEVELOPMENT - C/O STEVEN JUHNKE8730 WISHIRE BLVD., STE. 300, BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90211PHONE 1.310.657.8987CASE Nodesign group bonaldo tenant improvement plans    Page 241 TI-1 EXISTING GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 10700 jersey blvd., suite 700 rancho cucamonga, ca 91730 phone 1.909.945.8437 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY JOB No SCALE SHEET NoPROJECTSHEET TITLE OWNERADDRESSTHESE DRAWINGS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE AND ARE PROPERTY OF BONALDO ENGINEERING. ALL DESIGNS AND OTHER INFORMATION ON THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR THE USE ON THE SPECIFIED PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE USED OTHERWISE WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF BONALDO ENGINEERING. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. CONTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON THE FIELD AND THIS OFFICE SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. www.bonaldodesigngroup.com AS NOTED OCT. 20, 2023 NATAL / S.L. T23-30-T1359EXISTING WAREHOUSE BUILDINGNON-CONSTRUCTION C.U.P.10955 ARROW ROUTE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 91730 AMIR DEVELOPMENT - C/O STEVEN JUHNKE8730 WISHIRE BLVD., STE. 300, BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90211PHONE 1.310.657.8987CASE Nodesign group bonaldo tenant improvement plans    Page 242 TI-2 EXISTING STORAGE MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN 10700 jersey blvd., suite 700 rancho cucamonga, ca 91730 phone 1.909.945.8437 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY JOB No SCALE SHEET NoPROJECTSHEET TITLE OWNERADDRESSTHESE DRAWINGS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE AND ARE PROPERTY OF BONALDO ENGINEERING. ALL DESIGNS AND OTHER INFORMATION ON THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR THE USE ON THE SPECIFIED PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE USED OTHERWISE WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF BONALDO ENGINEERING. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. CONTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON THE FIELD AND THIS OFFICE SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. www.bonaldodesigngroup.com AS NOTED OCT. 20, 2023 NATAL / S.L. T23-30-T1359EXISTING WAREHOUSE BUILDINGNON-CONSTRUCTION C.U.P.10955 ARROW ROUTE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 91730 AMIR DEVELOPMENT - C/O STEVEN JUHNKE8730 WISHIRE BLVD., STE. 300, BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90211PHONE 1.310.657.8987CASE Nodesign group bonaldo tenant improvement plans    Page 243 RESOLUTION NO. 24-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2023-00382, A REQUEST TO OPERATE AN EXISTING WAREHOUSE, WHOLESALE AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITY WITHIN AN EXISTING 124,328 SQUARE-FOOT INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING WITHIN THE NEO-INDUSTRIAL (NI) ZONE, LOCATED ON WHITE OAK AVENUE SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE AT 10955 ARROW ROUTE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN: 0209-145-02. A.Recitals. 1.The Applicant, Charles Joseph Associates, filed an application for Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00382, 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 February 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B.Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1.This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on February 28, 2024, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The project site consists of approximately 6.3 acres of developed land and is located on White Oak Avenue and approximately 280 feet south of Arrow Route; and b. The existing Land Use, General Plan and Zoning designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) North Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) South Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) Exhibit B   Page 244 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-03 DRC2023-00382 CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FEBRUARY 28, 2024 Page 2 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 use is consistent with the general plan designation, Neo-Industrial Employment (NI) District, which encourages low industrial uses with minimal impact and to support the growth of creative and new businesses. The site is developed with an existing industrial building, parking, and landscaping. A warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility will have minimal impact on adjacent uses and properties. The operations of the facility will take place indoors and the loading and off-loading of trucks will take place within the designated areas behind the buildings. The use is consistent with the general plan. b. The use is consistent with the purposes of the Development Code and purposes of the applicable zone as well as any applicable specific plans or city regulations and standards. A warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility is allowed in the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone upon the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The use is consistent with the zoning designation and development code in that the use does not propose any expansions or modifications which will not result in any new development and remains consistent with its current development pattern. The Development Code does not have specific regulations or standards to apply to the operations of a warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility however, included conditions of approval mitigate any potential impacts by prohibiting outdoor storage and requiring access to the facility. The site is not subject to any specific plans. c. The site is suitable for the type, density, and intensity of the use. The site is improved with an existing industrial building including access and circulation, parking, structures, utilities, and landscaping. No changes are proposed to the site except for possible associated tenant improvements and signage which may be proposed under a separate permit. The use is similar in intensity to existing uses in the immediate surrounding area. No additional physical constraints have been added that may impede the operation of the existing surrounding land use nor the proposed land use. Therefore, the project site is well-suited for the use. d. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the use would be compatible with the existing and other permitted uses in the vicinity including transportation and service facilities. The warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility will operate primarily within an existing building and will not operate beyond the project parcel nor onto the property of adjacent similar uses. The intensity of the use is not expected to exceed the intensity of adjacent similar uses. e. Granting the permit would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or materially injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity in which the project is located. The scale and operation of the use is similar to adjacent uses and will not negatively impact the normal operations of any of these surrounding uses. The use has been conditioned to meet performance criteria, safety standards, maintenance standards East Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI) West Industrial Neo Industrial Employment District Neo Industrial (NI)    Page 245 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-03 DRC2023-00382 CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FEBRUARY 28, 2024 Page 3 and all other Municipal Code standards to mitigate any potential impact related to the warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility. f. The use will not pose an undue burden on city services, including police, fire, streets, and other public utilities, such that the city is unable to maintain its current level of service due to the use. The use does not pose any undue burdens in that it will occupy an existing tenant space which will not require additional service from streets and utilities. The use does not authorize any operations which may result in additional service requests from Fire or Police that are not normally associated with similar adjacent existing uses. 4. The Planning and Economic Development Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities Projects which includes leasing of existing private structures and facilities. The Conditional Use Permit will authorize the use of a warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility within an existing structure. The General Plan Land Use and Zoning designation for the project site are Neo-Industrial Employment District and Neo-Industrial zone, respectively, which permits the operation of a warehouse, wholesale and distribution facility of the proposed size and configuration. The project complies with the City’s development standards and design guidelines, including setbacks, height, lot coverage, and design requirements. The project site is located within the City limits and is surrounded by existing industrial development and City infrastructure. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning and Economic Development Department’s determination of exemption, and based on its own independent judgement, concurs in the staff determination of exemption. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached standard conditions incorporated herein by this reference. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Morales, Chair ATTEST: Matt Marquez, Secretary    Page 246 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-03 DRC2023-00382 CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FEBRUARY 28, 2024 Page 4 I, Matt Marquez, 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 February 2024, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:    Page 247 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2023-00382 Project Name: Location: 10955 ARROW RTE 103 - 020914502-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions The Conditional Use Permit authorizes a wholesale and distribution facility within an existing industrial/warehouse building totaling 124,328 square-feet within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone, located on White Oak Avenue south of Arrow Route at 10955 Arrow Route; APN: 0209-145-02. 1. The Conditional Use Permit does not authorize outdoor storage of materials. Any future requests for outdoor storage shall be subject to review by the Planning and Economic Development Department. 2. Standard Conditions of Approval The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval provided by the Planning Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning Department prior to the submittal of grading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license, and/or commencement of the approved activity. 3. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 2/7/2024 Exhibit C    Page 248 Project #: DRC2023-00382 Project Name: Location: 10955 ARROW RTE 103 - 020914502-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval The applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City, and/or any of its officials , officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, those City agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials and instrumentalities thereof (collectively “Indemnitees”), from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other actions and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature ), and alternative dispute resolutions procedures (including, but not limited to, arbitrations, mediations, and other such procedures ) (collectively “Actions”), brought against the City, and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, the action of, or any permit or approval issued by, the City and /or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City ), for or concerning the project, whether such actions are brought under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivisions Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1085 or 1094.5, or any other state, federal, or local statute, law, ordinance, rule, regulation, or any decision of a competent jurisdiction. This indemnification provision expressly includes losses, judgments, costs, and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees or court costs) in any manner arising out of or incident to this approval, the Planning Director’s actions, the Planning Commission’s actions, and/or the City Council’s actions , related entitlements, or the City’s environmental review thereof. The Applicant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or the other Indemnitees in any such suit , action, or other legal proceeding. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve , which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City’s defense, and that the applicant shall reimburse City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate with applicant in the defense of the Action. In the event such a legal action is filed challenging the City’s determinations herein or the issuance of the approval, the City shall estimate its expenses for the litigation. The Applicant shall deposit said amount with the City or, at the discretion of the City, enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due. 4. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet (s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction /grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 5. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption fee in the amount of $50.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing or within 5 days of the date of project approval. 6. Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 2 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. 7. www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 3Printed: 2/7/2024    Page 249 Project #: DRC2023-00382 Project Name: Location: 10955 ARROW RTE 103 - 020914502-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval Any modification or intensification of the approved use, including revisions in the operations of the business including changes to the operating days /hours; change in the location on -site or within the building of the use /activity that is approved by this Conditional Use Permit; improvements including new building construction; and/or other modifications /intensification beyond what is specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit, shall require the review and approval by the Planning Director prior to submittal of documents for plan check /occupancy, construction, commencement of the activity, and/or issuance of a business license. The Planning Director may determine that modifications or intensifications of use require the submittal of an application to modify this Conditional Use Permit for review by the City. 8. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and /or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 9. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 10. Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval Exterior doors and doors providing access to fire protection and life safety systems and equipment are required to have identification signage in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-5. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 1. A Knox Box key box is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-9. Additional boxes may be required depending on the size of the building, the location of fire protection and life safety system controls, and the operational needs of the Fire District. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. If an installed Knox Box is available to this project or business, keys for the building/suite/unit are required to be provided to the Fire Inspector at the final inspection. 2. www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 3Printed: 2/7/2024    Page 250 DATE: February 28, 2024 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development INITIATED BY:Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner SUBJECT:MINOR DESIGN REVIEW & VARIANCE – SAURABH PATEL - A request for site plan and architectural review of a three-story 4,216 square foot mixed-use building on a 3,145 square parcel of land including a request to reduce the required onsite parking by two spaces, reduce the rear yard setback by 5 feet and increase the height by 4 feet, for a site in the Corridor 1 (CO1) Zone located on the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Estacia Court; APN: 0208-152-18. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Sections 15303, which covers the construction of a limited number of structures in an urbanized area, and Section 15305, which covers minor alterations in land use limitations (Minor Design Review DRC2023-00053 and Variance DRC2024-00044). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt resolutions approving Minor Design Review DRC2023-00053 and Variance DRC2024-00044 for a proposed mixed-use building at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Estacia Court, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A request to construct a 4,216 square-foot 3-story mixed-use building on a 3,145 square-foot parcel of land that includes 1,314 square feet of office area and two residential units along with a request for a related Variance to reduce the required onsite parking by two spaces, reduce the rear yard setback by 5 feet and increase the building height by 4 feet. SITE CHARACTERISTICS BACKGROUND: The undeveloped 3,145-square-foot site is located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Estacia Court and is directly adjacent to two commercial buildings that front Archibald Avenue. The approximate dimensions of the site are 93 feet from east to west and 33 feet from north to south. The current Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Undeveloped MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) North Commercial building MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) South Single-Family Residence MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) East Commercial Center MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) West Parking Lot MU City Corridor Moderate Flood Control/Utility Corridor (FC/UC)    Page 251 Page 2 2 2 3 9 PROJECT ANALYSIS: Project Overview: The project is for the development of a three-story 4,216 square-foot mixed-use building on a 3,145-square parcel of land. Per Development Code Section 17.16.130 (Minor Design Review) buildings under 10,000 square feet in area require approval of a Minor Design Review and Planning and Economic Director approval. The related variance application necessitates that the project be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Minor Design Review applications do not require Design Review Committee review. The project site is within the Corridor 1 (CO1) Zone which per Development Code Table 17.130.050-1 (Required Build-to Line, Height, and Frontage Area) is required to provide a minimum residential density of 24 units per acre and a minimum non-residential floor area ratio of 0.4 percent. Based on the lot size (3,145 SF), a minimum of 2 residential units and 1,258 square feet of non-residential land use are required. The project includes two residential units and 1,314 square feet of non-residential land use, conforming to residential and non-residential development requirements. Per Development Code Chapter 17.134 (Public Open Space), mixed-use projects under 10,000 square feet are not required to provide public open space.    Page 252 Page 3 2 2 3 9 Building Typology: Development Code Section 17.130.060 (Building Type Standards) outlines the permitted building types in each form-based zone and includes development standards for each building type. The proposed building was designed in compliance with the Main Street building typology. The Main Street building typology is a medium-sized structure that fosters a continuous walkable pedestrian environment. The form-based code does not include minimum lot sizes but rather includes site dimensions based on the building type. The minimum lot dimensions for the Main Street building typology are 25 feet wide and 65 feet deep. The building complies with the development requirements for Corridor 1 (CO1) outlined in Development Code Table 17.130.050-1 and the Main Street Development Type standards except for the rear yard setback and building height which are described in greater detail in this report in the section titled “Variance”. Building Entrances and Facades: Development Code Chapter 17.132 (Building Entrances and Facades) establishes standards for all building entrances and facades within the form-based zones. Building entrances and facades are the components of a building's private frontage that define the transition to the public frontage (i.e., the street and sidewalk). Development Code Table 17.132.030-1 (Allowed Building Entrance and Façade Types by Zone) outlines the façade types permitted by zone. The project was developed using the Shopfront façade type including the extensive use of street fronting storefront windows. Unit Composition and Floor Plans: The project is comprised of a 3-story walkup building with parking and commercial/office lease area on the first floor, office spaces and an open deck on the second story, and two residential units on the third story. The table below summarizes the number of residential units and square feet of commercial lease area: UNIT SUMMARY Residential Unit Type Unit Size (SF - Net)Number of Units 1 Bedroom 680 1 2 Bedroom 828 1 Total Number of Units 2 Commercial Total Area Commercial (SF)1,314 1,314    Page 253 Page 4 2 2 3 9 Design:    Page 254 Page 5 2 2 3 9 The project is designed to conform to Development Code Chapter 17.123 (Multi-Family and Residential Mixed Use). The proposed building has a contemporary design theme that includes the use of white- painted standing seam metal siding, flat sheet metal pop-out trim painted red, and metal awnings. The west and south elevations include open decks with metal railings. The materials are carried to each elevation except for the portion of the north elevation where the building buts up against the neighboring building. Recreational Amenities: Article VIII (Form-Based Code) of the Development Code does not include a requirement for mixed-use developments to include recreational amenities. Compliance with Development Standards: As shown in the following table, the project was designed in compliance with Article VIII of the Development Code except for building height and rear yard setback for which a Variance has been submitted: Development Standard Required Proposed Complies Density 24 to 42 DU/AC 28 DU/AC Yes Floor Area Ratio (Non-Residential)0.4 – 1.0 FAR .41 FAR Yes Setback – Archibald 0 to 15’0 – 1 Feet Yes Setback – Estacia 0 to 15’0 – 3 Feet Yes Setback – Interior None 0 Yes    Page 255 Page 6 2 2 3 9 Rear Yard 5’ min.0 Feet Yes* Building Height 4 Stories. 40 Feet Max 3 Stories 44 Feet Yes* *With Approval of Variance DRC2024-00044 Parking: On-site parking is provided in an enclosed garage which takes access from Estacia Court with 3 spaces located on the west side and 4 (including one tandem space) on the east side of the drive aisle. The seven (7) provided parking spaces are (2) parking spaces deficient of the required 9 parking spaces. Per Development Code Section 17.64.050 (Number of Parking Spaces Required), the gross floor area of the office has been reduced in the table below to reflect permitted reductions for parking calculation purposes of such areas as bathrooms, stairwells, storage closets, and employee break rooms: PARKING ANALYSIS Number of Units Square Footage Parking Ratio Required Parking Multi-family unit (one bedroom)1 N/A 1.5 per unit (1 in garage or carport)1.5 Multi-family unit (two bedrooms)1 N/A 2 per unit (1 in garage or carport) 2 Non-Residential N/A 925*1 per 250 SF for commercial units 4 Visitor parking 360 N/A 1 per 3 units 1 Total Garage Parking Required (Covered)2 Total Garage Parking Provided (Covered)7 Total Parking Spaces Required 9 Total Parking Spaces Provided 7** *With Permitted Deductions **Variance (DRC2024-00044) Submitted for Parking Reduction Variance: A Variance (DRC2024-00044) is being requested to (1) increase the building height by 4 feet, (2) reduce the required rear yard setback by 5 feet, and (3) reduce the required onsite parking by 2 spaces. The deviation from the related technical requirements is justified based on existing site constraints and to achieve the larger General Plan goal of activating existing corridors (including Archibald Avenue) by providing residential and non-residential land uses in mixed-use buildings. Providing additional housing units also assists the City in reaching its State housing Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) outlined in the Housing Element. Building Height: The three-story building layout is necessary to comply with the code-required residential density (24 units per acre), the non-residential floor area ratio (.4 - 1.0), and maximize vehicle parking. This translates into providing a minimum of two residential units, 1,258 square feet of non-residential office/commercial space, and the requisite vehicle parking. As designed, the building provides parking and a reception area on the first floor, an office area on the second floor, and two residential uses on the third floor. Technical    Page 256 Page 7 2 2 3 9 requirements such as mechanical systems, stairways/landings, and roof drainage all increase the overall height of the building, Additionally, Table 17.130-1 of the code requires that the ground-level non- residential unit have a ceiling height of 15 feet, increasing the overall building height. Building Setback: The project site (Lot 18 in Red) was designed to match the depth and rear yard setback of the building to the north (Lot 16 in Green), which was built with a zero-foot setback from the parcel to the west (Lot 22) which is used for required parking and access for that building (Lot 16 and 22 share ownership and lots 17 and 21 share separate ownership). The intent of the required 5-foot rear yard setback is to reduce any potential impacts on the adjacent property. In this case, as the adjacent parcels (Lots 21 and 22) to the west are entirely used for parking and access, the elimination of the setback requirement will not create an impact on the adjacent property. Adhering to the 5-foot rear yard setback would require the elimination of 3 onsite parking spaces and create an awkward 5-foot step in the depth of the proposed building in relationship to the existing building to the north. Parking: The project is required to provide 9 parking spaces based on the proposed land use mix. The applicant is    Page 257 Page 8 2 2 3 9 unable to provide additional onsite parking beyond the seven (7) provided without being out of conformance with the land use mix requirement. The project provides code-compliant parking for the two residential units (4 spaces). The parking deficiency is one space for the office area and one space for guest parking related to the two residential units. The adjacent public street, Estacia Court, does not include on-street parking restrictions. CEQA DETERMINATION: Planning and Economic Development Department Staff determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as Class 3 and Class 5 exemptions under State CEQA Guidelines. Section 15303 covers the construction and location of up to 4 residential units and up to 10,000 square feet of office/commercial development in an urbanized area. Section 15305 covers minor alterations in land use limitations The project is for the development of a 4,216 square-foot mixed-use building that includes 1,314 square feet of office area and two residential units along with a request for a Variance related to building height, rear yard setback, and reduced parking. The Planning and Economic Development Director has reviewed staff's determination of exemption, and based on their own independent judgment, concurs with staff's determination of exemption. Public Art: This project is required to comply with the public art ordinance as outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code. Based on the number of residential units and commercial square footage for this project, the total art value required per Section 17.124.020.C. (Public Art Required) is $2,814. A condition has been included pursuant to the Development Code that requires the public art requirement to be fulfilled prior to occupancy. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper on February 16, 2024, the property was posted on February 15, 2024, and notices were mailed to owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on February 14, 2024. To date, staff has not received any comments related to the project to date. COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The project supports several City Council core values by providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all, building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere, and promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all. The General Plan anticipates mixed-use land use areas becoming vibrant, walkable environments that include a variety of uses and activities for all to enjoy. The proposed project fits this vision of the General Plan. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Project Location Exhibit B – Project Plans Exhibit C – Draft Resolution of Approval for Minor Design Review DRC2024-00053 Exhibit D – Draft Resolution of Approval for Variance DRC2024-00044 Exhibit E – Conditions of Approval    Page 258    Page 259 VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX 2 3SCALE: 1" =20'-0" T.1 SITE PLAN Site Plan, Vicinity Map, Sheet Index Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Ontario, Ca. Location Site and Project 210 Alta Loma, Ca. TRUENORTHEuclid Ave.9th St.. 6th St..Vineyard St.Archibald Ave.Haven Ave.Milliken Ave. Baseline Rd. Foothill Blvd. Wilson Ave. Banyan St. Lemon Ave. Hillside Rd. Sapphire St.19th St..Cardnelian St.10 15Estacia Ct. SHEET INDEX: ARCHITECTURAL: T.1 SITE PLAN, VICINITY MAP, SHEET INDEX 8058 Archibald Ave NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR: Southern Cal. Title 24 A1.1 PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN A1.3 PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR PLAN A1.5 PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS, SECTIONS A1.4 SCHEDULES & ROOF PLANS A1.2 PROPOSED ADU & SECOND FLOOR PLAN Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS (As adopted by City of Rancho Cucamonga)TRUENORTHSITE DATA SUMMARY: SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY LOT SIZE: +/- 3,145 S.F. (100%) SPRINKLERED - AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM SQUARE FOOTAGE DATA : NET SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN (CONDITIONED): 3,145 SQ. FT. (0.0721 ACRES) FIRST FLOOR:1,345 SQ. FT. SECOND FLOOR:1,363 SQ. FT. THIRD FLOOR:1,508 SQ. FT. TOTAL BUILDING AREA:4,216 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT AREA:1,345 SQ. FT. FIRST FLOOR: OFFICE AREA 242 SQ. FT. SECOND FLOOR: OFFICE AREA 1,072 SQ. FT. THIRD FLOOR: SUITE 300 828 SQ. FT. THIRD FLOOR: SUITE 310: 680 SQ. FT. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 0208-152-18-0000 TOTAL OFFICE SQUARE FEET: 1,314 S.F. ZONING: MIXED USE (CO1) CORRIDOR 1 ZONE BUILDING TYPE: MID-RISE BUILDING BUILDING ENTRANCES AND FACADES: MAIN STREET 2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC) 2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE (CRC) 2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (CEC) 2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (CMC) 2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (CPC) 2022 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE (CALGREEN / CGBC). 2022 BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS / T-24 ENERGY STANDARDS. 2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY STANDARDS. TOTAL SQUARE FEET SUITE 300 & SUITE 310: 1508 SQ. FT. CONSTRUCTION (CRC 2022 ): TYPE III-A 8659 Red Oak St. Suite I Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 (909 )257-7547 email:rob@spdrafting.com Designer: SP Drafting : Saurabh Patel Owner / Owner, Builder: PROJECT TEAM: Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 8058 Archibald Ave. Saurabh Patel Southern Cal. Title 24, LLC SCOPE OF WORK: -NO LANDSCAPING 1 BATH 680 S.F.3 CAR PARKING AND 849 S,F, 4 CAR GARAGE 1 BATHROOM 828 S.F. UNIT, SUITE 310 1 BEDROOM WITH 2 RESIDENTIAL UNITS (SUITE 300 & 310) SUITE 300 2 BEDROOM USE BUILDING CONSISTING OF 1,314 S.F. OFFICE SPACE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A 3 STORY MIXED ARTICLE VIII (FBC) SUMMARY BUILDING TYPE BUILDING ENTRANCE AND FACADE TYPE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE MID-RISE BUILDING MAIN STREET EXEMPT PARKING SUMMARY CALCULATION OFFICE 1314 S.F.4 PARKING 828 S.F. 680 S.F. 2 PARKINGSUITE 300- 2 BED SUITE 310- 1 BED 1.5 PARKING GUEST PARKING 1 PARKING- TOTAL PARKING 8.5 PARKING KEYNOTES: 1 2 SITE DATA SUMMARY: TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA SUMMARY: SITE AREA:3,145 SQ. FT. 3,110 S,F AFTER DEDICATION (P ) BUILDING FOOTPRINT (ROOF AREA)- 2,696 SQ. FT. UNCOVERED PERVIOUS PAVERS AREA (382 SQ.FT.) COVERED PARKING AREA (P )TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA- 2,728 SQ. FT. 3 : 382 SQ. FT. TOTAL UNCOVERED PERVIOUS AREA (PAVERS) NEW CURB AND GUTTER 4 KNOX BOX (E) PROPERTY LINE (P), TYP.L 2 1 3 (E)CURB, TYP.(E)CONC. SIDEWALK(E)CONC. SIDEWALK ARCHIBALD AVE.CL P CLPROPOSED FOOTPRINT AREA: FROM P.L. SETBACK SIDESETBACK 3'-9" NEW 225 AMP ELEC.PANELS SIDEWALK 30'-0"ESTACIA CT.20'-0"SFR PARKING COM VAC COM (E) (E) (E) (E) (E) 9664 ESTACIA CT. 8036 - 8040 ARCHIBALD AVE. 8042 - 8044 ARCHIBALD AVE. 4 50'-0" F.O.C. FROM SETBACK FRONT 14'-6" L 93.00'L 33.79'30'-0"5'-0"2 1 3'-0"(E)CURB, TYP. 3 3 4 1 (E)POWER POLE UNDER SEPERATE PERMIT FOR DRIVE APPROCH (P) REMOVE AC BURN 2 (E)LIGHT POLE 5 5 LIMIT SIGN RELOCATE SPEED OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL 1,345 SQ. FT. (E) COM FIRE NOTES Roof access is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-6. safety system controls, and the operational needs of the Fire District. may be required depending on the size of the building, the location of fire protection and life A Knox Box key box is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-9. Additional boxes a separate permit. Plans for the automatic fire sprinkler system are required to be submitted separately and issued separately and issued a separate permit. Plans for the alarm and/or supervision (monitoring) system are required to be submitted required to be listed and/or approved by the State Fire Marshal. provision is most appropriate for the application or situation. All materials, parts, and devices are standards differ for a specific application or situation, the fire code official will determine which provisions of the Fire Code, NFPA 72, and this Standard. Where provisions of these codes and be designed, installed, inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with the applicable Automatic and/or manual fire alarm systems and fire sprinkler supervision systems are required to District Standard 9-5. Required alarm systems and supervision systems are required to be in accordance with Fire 02/06/2024H.C. RAMP SU1.0 SITE UTILIZATION MAP REQUIRED 3 2 PARKING 1 PARKING 1 PARKING 7 PARKING PROVIDED W/M S S S 19'-3"25'-0" ARCHIBALD AVE. 48'-9" CORNER CUT DEDICATION AREA 5 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDINANCE NO: 956 AND FD 57 ROOF AREA:2,696 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS AREA (CONC.):32 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS AREA (TOTAL):2,728 SQ. FT. UN COVERED PERVIOUS PAVERS :382 SQ. FT. (P )CONC. AREA- 32 SQ. FT. GROSS 925 S.F. PARKING PARKING SUMMARY CALCULATION-OFFICE FIRST FLOOR RECEPTION WORK AREA OFFICE OFFICE TOTAL PARKING SQUARE FOOT 133 S.F. 342 S.F. 122 S.F. 192 S.F. 925 S.F. AND STORAGE ARE NOT CALCULATED IN THE PARKING SUMMARY HALL, BATHROOMS, PASSAGEWAY, KITCHEN, BREAKROOM, OFFICE 136 S.F. SP Drafting 8659 Red Oak St. Suite I Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. email:rob@spdrafting.com 91730 (909)257-7547 1 AS NOTED Date: Job No: Drawn: Checked: Scale: Sheet Title: Sheet No. Revisions Date NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR:Owner / Builder8058 Archibald AveRancho Cucamonga Ca. 91730Southern Cal. Title 241 DRC2023-00053 March 16, 2023 2 DRC2023-00053 August 10, 2023 11/03/2023 Exhibit B    Page 260 A1.1 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"NORTH TRUE1/4" FT. SLOPE - 6.00" F.S. GARAGE A 2%. F.S. -1" 93'-0"30'-0"7 A1.4 A A1.5 B A1.5 C A1.5 E 02 F.S. -1" A1.5 G 2 X 4 INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. 8' TOP PLATE WALL SYMBOL LEGEND: (1/2" GYPSUM BD. ) ( R-XX ) 2 x 6 EXTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. 849 S.F.EXISTING SIDEWALK 04 CMU 8", BURNISHED BLOCK A1.5 F 2 1/2" FURRING INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. 16'-0" A.F.F. 16'-0" A.F.F. EXIT B C 17'-0"13'-0"8'-0"OFFICE AREA - SUITE 100 01 01 01 8'-0" x 8'-0"8'-0" x 8'-0"8'-0" x 8'-0"03 3'-0" x 6'-8" WALL CONSTRUCTION FULL HEIGHT (5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. EA. SIDE)(Table-R302.6) 2 x WD. STUDS AT 16" O.C. 1 HR. FIRE RATED WALL (FRW ) 7'-4" 48'-9" 7'-4"3'-0" x 6'-8"3'-0" x 6'-8"3'-0" x 6'-8"A1.5 D FIRST FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN EXITF.S. +12" F.S. +12" F.S. -1" BREAK RM ADA 40'-0" 4 5 632 19'-3"25'-0" 8'-9"25'-4" 8'-9"1'-6"1'-6"8'-0"1'-6"8'-0"1'-6"1 02 5'-0" x 5'-0" 02 5'-0" x 5'-0"OPENING 3'-0" x 6'-0" OPENING 3'-0" x 6'-0" OPENING 3'-0" x 6'-0" 04 04 02 02 ABV. 1 A1.5 E F.S. -1" A1.5 G 2 X 4 INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. 8' TOP PLATE WALL SYMBOL LEGEND: (1/2" GYPSUM BD. ) ( R-XX ) 2 x 6 EXTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. 849 S.F. 04 CMU 8", BURNISHED BLOCK A1.5 F 133 S.F. 2 1/2" FURRING INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. 16'-0" A.F.F. EXIT B C 17'-0"13'-0"8'-0"01 01 01 8'-0" x 8'-0"8'-0" x 8'-0"8'-0" x 8'-0"03 3'-0" x 6'-8" WALL CONSTRUCTION FULL HEIGHT (5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. EA. SIDE)(Table-R302.6) 2 x WD. STUDS AT 16" O.C. 1 HR. FIRE RATED WALL (FRW ) 7'-4" 48'-9" 7'-4"3'-0" x 6'-8"A1.5 D FIRST FLOOR PLAN F.S. +12" F.S. +12" F.S. -1" AREA RECEPTION 40'-0" 4 5 632 19'-3"25'-0" 8'-9"25'-4" 8'-9"1'-6"1'-6"8'-0"1'-6"8'-0"1'-6"1 02 5'-0" x 5'-0" 02 5'-0" x 5'-0"OPENING 3'-0" x 6'-0" OPENING 3'-0" x 6'-0" OPENING 3'-0" x 6'-0" 04 02 02ABV.NORTH TRUEScale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1/4" FT. SLOPE - 6.00" F.S. GARAGE A 2%. F.S. -1" 93'-0"30'-0"7 A1.4 A A1.5 B A1.5 C 01 012'-0" x 5'-0" 05 ABV. 01 01ABV.ABV.10 25'-0" x 14'-0" MTR 277/480 X00AMP MAIN ROOM METER ELECT 3'-0" x 6'-8" FD 17"MIN.60"MIN. 44" MIN.MIN.18"#1 BATH 62 S.F. EF KEYNOTES: 1 MINIMUM OF 50CFM. VTR (VENT THRU ROOF) BATHROOM EXHAUST FAN SHALL BE SHALL BE ENERGY STAR COMPLIANT 2 CONTROLLED BY A HUMIDITY CONTROL (R303.3.1) EF 1 CBC 11A-9A (b) ADA 5'-0" DIA. CLR. PER FLR. AREA 2 3 ADA 5'-0" x 4'-8" MIN. FLR. AREA CBC 11A-9B (c) 3 4 URINAL PARTITION XXX XX 5 URINAL, SEE 5 4 6 LAVATORY WITH INSULATE HOT WATER AND TRAP ASSEMBLIES XXX XX 6 XXX XX 7 CBC 2022 SECTION 11B- 604.2 INCHES MAX. FROM THE SIDEWALL OR PARTITION, SHALL BE MIN 17 INCHES AND 18" TOILET CENTER LINE OF ACCESSIBLE TOILET 7 Stairs to Unit A and BUPUPStairs to the 2nd Floor Commercial2 3 1 02/06/2024GDAG0404 3'-0" x 6'-8" 0404 3'-0" x 6'-8" 60"MIN.18"48"47 S.F. 8 ADA COMPLIANT BREAKROOM SINK 9 1000W HOT PLATE 10 FRIDGE 8 48" 9 10 SP Drafting 8659 Red Oak St. Suite I Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. email:rob@spdrafting.com 91730 (909)257-7547 1 AS NOTED Date: Job No: Drawn: Checked: Scale: Sheet Title: Sheet No. Revisions Date NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR:Owner / Builder8058 Archibald AveRancho Cucamonga Ca. 91730Southern Cal. Title 241 DRC2023-00053 March 16, 2023 2 DRC2023-00053 August 10, 2023 11/03/2023    Page 261 A1.2 SECOND FLOOR PLAN 97 S.F. A1.5 A A1.5 B A1.5 2 X 6 INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. ( 1/2" GYPSUM BD. BOTH SIDES ) WALL SYMBOL LEGEND: ( R-XX ) 2 x 6 EXTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. 2 x 4 INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"TRUENORTH A 30'-0"C B 16'-5"13'-7"6'-6"A1.5 A1.5 11'-0" A.F.F. REF MW 136 S.F. OFFICE GD 74 S.F. 11'-0" A.F.F. AG 192 S.F. 11'-0" A.F.F. 109 S.F. EF WALL CONSTRUCTION FULL HEIGHT (5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. EA. SIDE)(Table-R302.6) 2 x WD. STUDS AT 16" O.C. 1 HR. FIRE RATED WALL (FRW ) SECOND FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN BALCONY 04 1204 S.F. 11'-0" A.F.F. 5'-0"043'-0" x 2'-0"3'-0" x 6'-8"2 1/2" FURRING INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. C A1.5 D E G 04 3'-0" x 6'-8"122 S.F. 11'-0" A.F.F. OFFICE 02 3'-0" x 6'-8"3'-0" x 6'-8" 342 S.F. 11'-0" A.F.F. 93'-0" 32 19'-3"25'-0" 745.1 48'-9" 8'-4"25'-4"15'-1" A1.5 F 3'-6"3'-0"6'-3"3'-3"3'-0"4'-6"44'-3" 4'-0"5'-0"6'-5"12'-3" B A 6'-8"16'-5"1'-6"8'-3"1 3'-0"" x 6'-8"03 XXEXIT 04 OFFICE SUITE 100 0101ABV. 11'-0" A.F.F. 11'-0" A.F.F. 2'-0" x 5'-0" ABV.05 05 2'-0" x 5'-0" 05 05 ABV. ABV.010101 0101ABV.01ABV.01ABV.02 5'-0" x 5'-0" 02 02 5'-0" x 5'-0" 02 ABV. 02 5'-0" x 5'-0" 02 02 5'-0" x 5'-0" 02025'-0" x 5'-0"025'-0" x 5'-0"#2 BATH MIN.18"17"MIN.44" MIN. FD 60"MIN. KEYNOTES: 1 MINIMUM OF 50CFM. VTR (VENT THRU ROOF) BATHROOM EXHAUST FAN SHALL BE SHALL BE ENERGY STAR COMPLIANT 2 CONTROLLED BY A HUMIDITY CONTROL (R303.3.1) EF CBC 11A-9A (b) ADA 5'-0" DIA. CLR. PER FLR. AREA 3 ADA 5'-0" x 4'-8" MIN. FLR. AREA CBC 11A-9B (c) 4 URINAL PARTITION XXX XX 5 URINAL, SEE 6 LAVATORY WITH INSULATE HOT WATER AND TRAP ASSEMBLIES XXX XX XXX XX 7 CBC 2022 SECTION 11B- 604.2 INCHES MAX. FROM THE SIDEWALL OR PARTITION, SHALL BE MIN 17 INCHES AND 18" TOILET CENTER LINE OF ACCESSIBLE TOILET UPStairs to 2nd Flr. CommercialUP Stairs to Storage 1 EF 2 3 5 4 6 7 02/06/2024KITCHEN - EXHAUST FAN, DAMPER (BACK DRAFT)DUCT / VENT TO OUTSIDE (VTO / VTR) 100 CFM MIN.. 8 8 KITCHEN PASSAGE WORK AREA OFFICE 025'-0" x 5'-0"025'-0" x 5'-0"04 3'-0" x 6'-8" 04 3'-0" x 6'-8" CLOSET 35 S.F. SP Drafting 8659 Red Oak St. Suite I Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. email:rob@spdrafting.com 91730 (909)257-7547 1 AS NOTED Date: Job No: Drawn: Checked: Scale: Sheet Title: Sheet No. Revisions Date NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR:Owner / Builder8058 Archibald AveRancho Cucamonga Ca. 91730Southern Cal. Title 241 DRC2023-00053 March 16, 2023 2 DRC2023-00053 August 10, 2023 11/03/2023    Page 262 A A1.330'-0"C THIRD FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN UNIT B BEDROOM #1 UNIT A BEDROOM #1 UNIT A BEDROOM #2 UNIT A BATH KITCHEN EF Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"TRUENORTH CLOSET B 16'-5"13'-7"4'-11"143 S.F. 143 S.F. 176 S.F. 125 S.F. 178 S.F. A1.5 A A1.5 B A1.5 A1.5 A1.5 A1.5 F SUITE 300 SD/CO SD/CO 47 S.F.2'-8" x 6'-8"SD/CO 09 0206 09 SD/CO DEN UNIT B BATH EF 51 S.F. SD/CO 2 X 6 INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. ( 1/2" GYPSUM BD. BOTH SIDES ) WALL SYMBOL LEGEND: ( R-XX ) 2 x 6 EXTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. 2 x 4 INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C. WALL CONSTRUCTION FULL HEIGHT (5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. EA. SIDE)(Table-R302.6) 2 x WD. STUDS AT 16" O.C. 1 HR. FIRE RATED WALL (FRW ) 2 1/2" FURRING INTERIOR STUDS AT 16" O.C.2'-8" x 6'-8"09 2'-8" x 6'-8"2'-8"6'-11"2'-4"5'-0" x 5'-0"4'-0" x 2'-0"02/06/2024THIRD FLOOR PLAN C A1.5 D E G REFEF OVEN STOVE AG GD DW PNTRY REFEF OVEN STOVE AG GD DW PNTRY CLOSET CLOSET W D STORAGE04 3'-0" x 6'-8" 04 3'-0" x 6'-8" 04 3'-0" x 6'-8" KITCHEN LIVING ROOM LIVING ROOM 157 S.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 406 S.F. 150 S.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 168 S.F. CORRIDOR OPENING 5'-0" x 5'-0" OPENING 5'-0" x 5'-0" 13'-1"10'-5"2'-4"7'-3"5'-6"1'-9"5'-0"12'-5" STORAGE5'-0"3'-0"4'-0"3'-2"5'-0"4'-11"16'-3" 93'-0" 13'-6"14'-6"11'-6"6'-2" 1 1.9 2.5 11'-7"10'-10" 1'-2" 7543.4 4.1 3'-0" 2 5.6 4'-7"025'-0" x 5'-0"025'-0" x 5'-0"02 5'-0" x 5'-0"025'-0" x 5'-0"5'-0" x 5'-0" 02 5'-0" x 5'-0" 02 STAIR TO STORAGE UP EXITSUITE 310 360 S.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. 680 S.F. 2'-8" x 6'-8" 2'-8" x 6'-8" 09 09 09 09 SUITE 300 & 310 OPENING 2'-0" x 5'-0" OPENING 2'-0" x 5'-0" 010101 01STORAGEStair to Suite 300 and 310UPUPLAUNDRY127.5 S.F.127.5 S.F.EF 828 S.F. SP Drafting 8659 Red Oak St. Suite I Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. email:rob@spdrafting.com 91730 (909)257-7547 1 AS NOTED Date: Job No: Drawn: Checked: Scale: Sheet Title: Sheet No. Revisions Date NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR:Owner / Builder8058 Archibald AveRancho Cucamonga Ca. 91730Southern Cal. Title 241 DRC2023-00053 March 16, 2023 2 DRC2023-00053 August 10, 2023 11/03/2023    Page 263 A1.41 XX ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE WINDOW SCHEDULE DOOR SCHEDULE DOOR SCHEDULE WINDOW SCHEDULE ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE ROOM NAME FLOOR / BASE WALL CEILING REMARKS REMARKSFACING / FINISHCONST.FRAMENO. WINDOW NO. DOOROPENING SIZE (NOMINAL) OPENING SIZE (NOMINAL) CONST. FACING / FINISH FRAME GLASS RATED REMARKS 01 02 MILGARD OR EQUAL (LIST MFGR TECT/SPEC. DATA) 01 02 4 GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL WINDOWS SHALL EXCEED CBC REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS. 2. ALL EXTERIOR WINDOWS ASSEMBLY SHALL BE CERTIFIELD PER CBC, CEC/CAL-CERT, AND 3. ALL GLASS AND GLAZING SHALL MEET OR EXCEED CBC AND CRC REQUIREMENTS. T-24 CAC ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS. 4. THE NFRC TEMPORARY LABEL DISPLAYED ON WINDOWS MUST REMAIN ON THE UNIT UNTIL FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED. 5. ALL WINDOW UNITS - MILGARD OR EQUAL (DUAL GLAZED/PANE) (LIST MFGR TECT/SPEC. DATA) 1 5 6 GENERAL NOTES: KEYNOTES: FLOOR: BASE: WALL AND CEILING: 2 3 CARPET WOOD (PAINTED) 1. ALL INTERIOR WALL & CEILING CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING FINISHES SHALL MEET OR EXCEED 2022 CBC/CRC STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS. CERAMIC TILE 4 EXPOSED CONCRETE 3 4 03 1 8 6 04 "" 2'-6" x 6'-8" 4 1 8 6 15'-0" A.F.F. 05 5'-0" x 5'-0" 2 ROLL-UP GARAGE DR STL STL ROLL-UP GARAGE DRPAINTED / GARAGE DOOR 5/8" GYPSUM BOARD TYP. "X" - SEALED AND PAINTED 7 EXPOSED TO STRUCTURE ABOVE 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD - SEALED AND PAINTED 8 5/8" GYPSUM BOARD - SEALED AND PAINTED FIRE RATED WALL (FRW ) WALL CONSTRUCTION FULL HEIGHT(T-R302.6) 06 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" ROOF PLANS 01 8'-0" x 8'-0" 3'-0" x 7'-0" GL.. CONT. WEATHER SEAL TEMP . GL. ALUM/ANOD.ALUM/ANODIZED TEMP . ANODIZED ALUM/ SAFETY TEMP'D GENERAL NOTES: 1. EGRESS DOOR, SIDE-HINGED AND A MINIMUM CLEAR WIDTH OF 32" WHEN MEASURED BETWEEN THE FACE OF THE GATES AND THE STOP, WITH THE DOOR OPEN 90 DEGREES. THE MINIMUM CLEAR HEIGHT IS 78" MEASURED FROM THE TOP OF THRESHOLD TO THE BOTTOM OF STOP. (CRC R311.2) " LOWER THAN THE TOP THRESHOLD EXCEPT THE2 12. THE LANDINGS OR FINISHED FLOORS SHALL NOT BE MORE THAN 1 " BELOW THE TOP OF THRESHOLD PROVIDED4 3LANDING OR FLOOR ON THE EXTERIOR SIDE SHALL NOT BE MORE THAN 7 THE DOOR DOES NOT SWING OVER THE LANDING OR FLOOR. (CRC R311.3.1) opener, or integral combination lock. devices are not also self-locking devices and operated by means of a key, electronic inches (1372 mm) maximum above the finish floor or ground provided the self-latching Discussion Document 12 of 37 05/31/2012 DSA Advisory Board Access Committee Stakeholder Forum permitted to have operable parts of the release of latch on self-latching devices at 54 2. Access gates in barrier walls and fences protecting pools, spas, and hot tubs shall be or grilles that are designed with locks that are activated only at the top or bottom rail. doors without stiles, existing overhead rolling doors or grilles, and similar existing doors EXCEPTIONS: 1. Existing locks shall be permitted in any location at existing glazed be exposed and usable from both sides. floor or ground. Where sliding doors are in the fully open position, operating hardware shall shall be 34 inches (865 mm) minimum and 44 inches (1117.6 mm) maximum above the finish parts on doors and gates shall comply with 11B-309.4. Operable parts of such hardware 11B-404.2.7 Door and Gate Hardware. Handles, pulls, latches, locks, and other operable T/S 02 02 03 03 3'-0" x 6'-8" ""PAINTED 3'-0" x 6'-8" SET W/ CONT. DOOR SEAL LEVER - TYPE LATCH SET W/ CONT. DOOR SEAL PAINTED WD"" STLSTL / PTD, 04 04 WD""PAINTED SET W/ CONT. DOOR SEAL WD/SC, LEVER - TYPE LATCH WD/SC, LEVER - TYPE LATCH XX 05 05 2'-8" x 6'-8" WD""PAINTEDSET W/ CONT. DOOR SEAL WD/SC, LEVER - TYPE LATCH 07 06 06 3'-0" x 6'-8" WD/SC, LEVER - TYPE LATCH SET W/ CONT. -SMOKE FIRE DR. GASKET SEAL PAINTED WD"" 07 07 08 08 08 3'-0" x 7'-0" DR. 2'-0" x 7'-0" WINDOW ALUM/ANODIZED TEMP . TEMP . GL. ALUM/ANOD. SAFETY TEMP'D ANODIZED ALUM/ 5'-0" x 7'-0"ANODIZED ALUM/ ANODIZED TEMP . ALUM/ ANODIZED TEMP . ALUM/ BOTTOM PANEL TEMP'D SAFETY FRAME GLASS/ALUM. STORE FRONT DOOR GLASS/ALUM. STORE FRONT FACTORY FINISH T/S T/S 02 02 4'-0" x 3'-0"03 03 03 04 05 3'-0" x 2'-0" 06 4'-0" x 2'-0" 04 04 06 05 05 06 A C B NORTH TRUE30'-0"HPHP LP LP LP ROOF PITCH 12 RIDGE CRICKET LP CRICKET CRICKET CRICKET CRICKETCRICKETC RI CKE T 1/8" PER FOOT SLOPE 1/8" PER FOOT SLOPE 1/8" PER FOOTSLOPE1/8" PER FOOT SLOPE 1/8" PER FOOT SLOPE 1/8" PER FOOT SLOPE 1/8" PER FOOTSLOPE1/8" PER FOOT SLOPE 1/ 8 " P ER F OOT S L OP E KEYNOTES: 1 ROOF ACCESS HATCH, SEE 2 ROOF DRAIN AND OVERFLOW, SEE 3 X A1.X A1.X ^ PER SECTION R902.1. a: OR BOTH A 3-YEAR AGED SOLAR REFLECTANCE OF AT LEAST 0.20 AND A THERMAL EMITTANCE OF AT LEAST 0.75. NOTES: 1. ROOF SLOPES SHALL COMPLY WITH FOLLOWING: 1:12: 3- YEAR AGED SRI VALUE OF AT LEAST 16 4 3 1 2. SHALL USE CLASS "A" ROOF COVERING 2 GL. CONT. WEATHER SEAL PROPOSED ROOF SYSTEM SHALL COMPLY WITH 2022 CBC CHPTER 15. OFFICE ROOF PLAN OFFICE PAINTED WD""HC - RAISED PNL OFFICE AND SUITE 300 AND 310OFFICE RECEPTION AREA BATH FIRST FLOOR 15'-0" A.F.F. 15'-0" A.F.F. 15'-0" A.F.F. GARAGE 3 8 8 SECOND FLOOR 09 2'-8" x 6'-8" 09 09 SCHEDULES & TYP. TEMPERED SAFETY DOOR GLASS(T/S) TYP. TEMPERED SAFETY GLASS(T/S) TYP. TEMPERED SAFETY GLASS(T/S) VINYL / FIBERGLASSDUAL GLZD VINYL / FIB FACTORY FINISH VINYL / FIBERGLASSDUAL GLZD VINYL / FIB FACTORY FINISH FACTORY FINISHVINYL / FIBERGLASS VINYL / FIB DUAL GLZD OFFICE TYP. 4 2 8 6 11'-0" A.F.F. STAIR 4 1 8 6 BATH 4 1 8 6 11'-0" A.F.F. KITCHEN/PASSAGE 4 1 8 6 11'-0" A.F.F. OFFICE OFFICE #2 WORKSPACE BALCONY 4 2 8 6 11'-0" A.F.F. 4 1 8 6 11'-0" A.F.F. 4 1 8 6 11'-0" A.F.F. 4 9 96 11'-0" A.F.F. THIRD FLOOR KITCHEN UNIT "300" & "310" 4 1 8 6 10'-0" A.F.F. LIVING ROOM UNIT "300" & "310" 4 2 8 6 10'-0" A.F.F. 10'-0" A.F.F. BEDROOMS UNIT "300" & "310" 4 2 8 6 10'-0" A.F.F. BATHROOMS UNIT "300" & "310" 4 1 8 6 5 6 SEE SPECIFICATION STD. DWG. 5-6a FIRE PARAPET SHIP LADDER GRAB POST 5 6 02/06/2024LP 4 3 HP LP LP HP LP 1/8" PER FOOTSLOPE 9 STUCCO FINISH 16'-3" 93'-0" 13'-6"14'-6"11'-6"6'-2" 1 1.9 2.5 11'-7"10'-10"1'-2" 7543.4 4.1 3'-0" 2 5.6 4'-7" 6'-6" x 5'-0"ANODIZED ALUM/ ANODIZED TEMP . ALUM/ ANODIZED TEMP . ALUM/07 01 01T/S T/S T/S T/S FRAME GLASS/ALUM. STORE FRONT FRAME GLASS/ALUM. STORE FRONT 2'-0" x 5'-0"ANODIZED ALUM/ ANODIZED TEMP . ALUM/ ANODIZED TEMP . ALUM/ RIDGE ANODIZED ALUM/ ANODIZED TEMP . ALUM/ ANODIZED TEMP . ALUM/ 10 25'-0" x 14'-0" METAL ROLL UP PAINTED STL SP Drafting 8659 Red Oak St. Suite I Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. email:rob@spdrafting.com 91730 (909)257-7547 AS NOTED Date: Job No: Drawn: Checked: Scale: Sheet Title: Sheet No. Revisions Date NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR:Owner / Builder8058 Archibald AveRancho Cucamonga Ca. 91730Southern Cal. Title 241 DRC2023-00053 March 16, 2023 2 DRC2023-00053 August 10, 2023 11/03/2023    Page 264 1 EXTERIOR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" A NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION A1.502/06/2024D RED FLAT SHEET METAL POP OUT TRIM INSULATION PER TITLE 24 WINDOW, SEE WDW SCHED.5 2 6 A1.2 7 1 2 KEYNOTES: STANDING SEAM METAL SIDING 16" O.C. (WHITE) 14 3 DOOR, SEE DOOR SCHED. N/A SP DRAFTING AND SO CAL TITLE24 (3 MAX, 150 S.F. MAX TOTAL) COMPANY LOGO : A1.2 7 2 4 8 ROOF ACCESS PER FIRE STANDARD 5-6 VBVB VB #2 STAIR ROOF PITCH 12 3 C 30'-0" GARAGE B PASSAGE 8 KITCHEN GRAB POST SEE SPECIFICATION STD. DWG. 5-6a FIRE PARAPET SHIP LADDER COMPACT BASE 4" CONCRETE SLAB (CRC R506.2.3 ) VAPOR BARRIER PER OPEN BEYOND WINDOW OPENOPENOPENOPEN B EAST ELEVATION 2 9 NOT A TRUE VIEW C A 30'-0" B WEST ELEVATION E B A 30'-0" C 3'-0" #2 STAIR 3rd F.F. B.O.S. ROOF 4'-4"10'-0"44'-0" +/-11'-0"F.G. T.O.P. B.O.S. 1st F.F.15'-0"2nd F.F. 2nd F.F. B.O.S. B.O.S. ROOF F.G. A 40'-0" 4 5 632 19'-3"25'-0" 8'-9"25'-4" 8'-9" 1 93'-0" 7 7'-4" 48'-9" 7'-4" 40'-0" 456 3 2 19'-3"25'-0" 8'-9"25'-4" 8'-9" 1 93'-0" 7 7'-4" 48'-9" 7'-4" NOT A TRUE VIEW 3'-0" 8 5 0 8 OPEN OPEN 1 1 1 1 2 WALL SIGN (NON MULTI-UNIT CENTER) F.B. ZONES SIGN MAX #MAX AREA MONUMENT SIGN PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC SIGN ESTABLISHMENT 1 PER BOTH TYPES BETWEEN 3 PER MAX150 S.F. 2 S.F.:1 IF, 24 S.F. 6 S.F. 7 7 4 4 5 5 6 6 OPEN 16"#2 STAIR16"B.O.S. 6PASSAGE KITCHEN B.O.S. ROOF 4'-4"10'-0"44'-0" +/-11'-0"T.O.P. B.O.S. 1st F.F.15'-0"16"16"B.O.S. F.G. B.O.S. ROOF 4'-4"10'-0"44'-0" +/-11'-0"T.O.P. B.O.S. 1st F.F.15'-0"16"16"B.O.S. F.G. B.O.S. ROOF 4'-4"10'-0"44'-0" +/-11'-0"T.O.P. B.O.S. 1st F.F.15'-0"16"16"B.O.S. F.G. B.O.S. ROOF 4'-4"10'-0"44'-0" +/-11'-0"T.O.P. B.O.S. 1st F.F.15'-0"16"16"B.O.S. SP Drafting 8659 Red Oak St. Suite I Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. email:rob@spdrafting.com 91730 (909)257-7547 AS NOTED Date: Job No: Drawn: Checked: Scale: Sheet Title: Sheet No. Revisions Date NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR:Owner / Builder8058 Archibald AveRancho Cucamonga Ca. 91730Southern Cal. Title 241 DRC2023-00053 March 16, 2023 2 DRC2023-00053 August 10, 2023 11/03/2023    Page 265 RESOLUTION NO. 24-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2023-00053, A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A THREE-STORY 4,216 SQUARE FOOT MIXED-USE BUILDING ON A 3,145 SQUARE PARCEL OF LAND INCLUDING A RELATED REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED ONSITE PARKING BY TWO SPACES, REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK BY 5 FEET AND INCREASE THE OVERALL HEIGHT BY 4 FEET, FOR A SITE LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND ESTACIA COURT IN THE CORRIDOR 1 (CO1) ZONE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0208-152-18. A. Recitals. 1. Saurabh Patel has filed an application for the issuance of Minor Design Review DRC2023-00053 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Minor Design Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 28th day of February 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution, are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on February 28, 2024, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The undeveloped 3,145-square-foot project site is located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Estacia Court; and b. The existing land use, General Plan designation, and Zones for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: c. The project is to develop a three-story 4,216 square-foot mixed-use building. The project site is within the Corridor 1 (CO1) Zone. The project includes two residential units and 1,314 square feet of non-residential land use, conforming to residential and non-residential Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Undeveloped MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) North Commercial building MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) South Single-Family Residence MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) East Commercial Center MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) West Parking Lot MU City Corridor Moderate Flood Control/Utility Corridor (FC/UC) Exhibit C    Page 266 3 4 1 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-05 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2023-00053 – SAURABH PATEL February 28, 2024 Page 2 development requirements; and d. The project was designed in compliance with the Development Code except for building height, rear yard setback, and parking for which Variance DRC2024-00044 has been submitted. 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 specifically finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Mixed-Use City Corridor Moderate, which envisions a range of commercial uses including general retail, personal services, banks, restaurants, cafes, and offices. The project is for the development of 2 residential units and 1,314 square feet of office spaces with a residential density of 28 dwelling units per acre which is consistent with the intent of the General Plan; and b.The proposed project is in accord with the objective of this Development Code and the purposes of the zone in which the site is located. The project site was within the Corridor 1 (CO1) zone which was intended for Medium-intensity mixed-use development that transitions existing auto-oriented corridors and places to vibrant areas that promote walkability. The project provides for an appropriate mix of residential and commercial uses, concentrating pedestrian activity and intensity along Archibald Avenue; and c.The proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of this Development Code. The project complies with each of the Development Code requirements for the Corridor 1 (CO1) Zone, except for building setback, building height, and parking for the applicant has submitted Variance DRC2024-00044; and d.The proposed project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed mixed-use building is in keeping with the intent of the zone and is not expected to negatively impact the surrounding property owners based on the project scope and required conformance with the Development and Building Codes, including construction and operational noise, vibration, and light glare. 4. Planning and Economic Development Department Staff determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as Class 3 and Class 5 exemptions under State CEQA Guidelines. Section 15303 covers the construction and location of up to 4 residential units and up to 10,000 square feet of office/commercial development in an urbanized area. Section 15305 covers minor alterations in land use limitations The project is for the development of a 4,216 square-foot mixed-use building that includes 1,314 square feet of office area and two residential units along with a request for a Variance related to building height, rear yard setback, and reduced parking. The Planning Commission concurs with the staff's determination that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. 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 in the attached Conditions of Approval. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.   Page 267 3 4 1 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-05 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2023-00053 – SAURABH PATEL February 28, 2024 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Morales, Chairman ATTEST: Matt Marquez, Secretary I, Matt Marquez, 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 February 2024, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:    Page 268 RESOLUTION NO. 24-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2024-00044, A REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED ONSITE PARKING BY TWO SPACES, REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK BY 5 FEET AND INCREASE THE OVERALL HEIGHT BY 4 FEET RELATED TO THE DESIGN REVEW OF A THREE-STORY 4,216 SQUARE FOOT MIXED-USE BUILDING ON A 3,145 SQUARE PARCEL OF LAND, FOR A SITE LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND ESTACIA COURT IN THE CORRIDOR 1 (CO1) ZONE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0208-152-18. A. Recitals. 1. Saurabh Patel has filed an application for the issuance of Variance DRC2024-00044 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 28th day of February 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution, are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on February 28, 2024, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The undeveloped 3,145-square-foot project site is located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Estacia Court; and b. The existing land use, General Plan designation, and Zones for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: c. The project is for the development of a three-story 4,216 square-foot mixed-use building. The project site is within the Corridor 1 (CO1) Zone. The project includes two residential units and 1,314 square feet of non-residential land use, conforming to residential and non- residential development requirements; and Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Undeveloped MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) North Commercial building MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) South Single-Family Residence MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) East Commercial Center MU City Corridor Moderate Corridor 1 (CO1) West Parking Lot MU City Corridor Moderate Flood Control/Utility Corridor (FC/UC) Exhibit D    Page 269 3 4 1 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-06 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2023-00053 – SAURABH PATEL February 28, 2024 Page 2 d. The project was designed in compliance with the Development Code except for building height, rear yard setback, and parking for which Variance DRC2024-00044 has been submitted. 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 specifically finds and concludes as follows: a. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this code. The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Mixed-Use City Corridor Moderate, which envisions a range of commercial uses including general retail, personal services, banks, restaurants, cafes, and offices. The project is for the development of 2 residential units and 1,314 square feet of office spaces with a residential density of 28 dwelling units per acre which is consistent with the intent of the General Plan; and b.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 zone. The subject Variance is related to a request for site plan and architectural review of a three-story - 4,216 square-foot mixed-use building (MDR DRC2023- 00053) on a 3,145 square parcel of land. The requested deviations from the development standards related to rear yard setback, building height, and parking are necessary due to the small parcel size and to comply with the code-required residential density (24 units per acre) and non-residential floor area ratio (.4 - 1.0); and c.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 zone. Without the requested deviations related to setback, height, and parking, the applicant would be unable to develop the project site at the required residential density and non-residential floor area ratio; and d.The granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. Granting the variance will not be a grant of special privilege as it will allow the project site to be developed per the intent of the Mixed-Use Corridor Moderate General Plan land use designation with a mix of residential and non-residential land uses; and e. 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. The subject variance for building setback, height, and reduced parking is not expected to negatively impact the surrounding properties as the project will be required to comply with all building code requirements and development requirements including performance standards related to noise, vibrations, and light glare. 4. Planning and Economic Development Department Staff determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as Class 3 and Class 5 exemptions under State CEQA Guidelines. Section 15303 covers the construction and location of up to 4 residential units and up to 10,000 square feet of office/commercial development in an urbanized area. Section 15305 covers minor alterations in land use limitations The project is for the development of a 4,216 square-foot mixed-use building that includes 1,314 square feet of office area and two residential units along with a request for a Variance related to building height, rear yard setback, and reduced parking. The Planning Commission concurs with the staff's determination that there    Page 270 3 4 1 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-06 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2023-00053 – SAURABH PATEL February 28, 2024 Page 3 is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. 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 in the attached Conditions of Approval. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Morales, Chairman ATTEST: Matt Marquez, Secretary I, Matt Marquez, 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 February 2024, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:    Page 271 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2023-00053 & DRC2024-00044 Project Name: So Cal Title 24 LLC Office Location: 9684 ESTACIA CT - 020815218-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review & Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Approval is granted for the site plan and architectural review of a three-story 4,216 square foot mixed-use building on a 3,145 square parcel of land including a request to reduce the required onsite parking by two spaces, reduce the rear yard setback by 5 feet and increase the height by 4 feet, 1. Standard Conditions of Approval The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval provided by the Planning and Economic Development Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning and Economic Development Department prior to the submittal of grading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license, and/or commencement of the approved activity. 2. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 2/15/2024 Exhibit E    Page 272 Project #: DRC2023-00053 DRC2023-00399 Project Name: So Cal Title 24 LLC Office Location: 9684 ESTACIA CT - 020815218-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Minor Exception ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval The applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City, and/or any of its officials , officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, those City agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials and instrumentalities thereof (collectively “Indemnitees”), from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other actions and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature ), and alternative dispute resolutions procedures (including, but not limited to, arbitrations, mediations, and other such procedures ) (collectively “Actions”), brought against the City, and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, the action of, or any permit or approval issued by, the City and /or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City ), for or concerning the project, whether such actions are brought under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivisions Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1085 or 1094.5, or any other state, federal, or local statute, law, ordinance, rule, regulation, or any decision of a competent jurisdiction. This indemnification provision expressly includes losses, judgments, costs, and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees or court costs) in any manner arising out of or incident to this approval, the Planning Director’s actions, the Planning Commission’s actions, and/or the City Council’s actions , related entitlements, or the City’s environmental review thereof. The Applicant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or the other Indemnitees in any such suit , action, or other legal proceeding. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve , which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City’s defense, and that the applicant shall reimburse City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate with applicant in the defense of the Action. In the event such a legal action is filed challenging the City’s determinations herein or the issuance of the approval, the City shall estimate its expenses for the litigation. The Applicant shall deposit said amount with the City or, at the discretion of the City, enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due. 3. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolutions of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet (s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction /grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 4. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption fee in the amount of $50.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing or within 5 days of the date of project approval. 5. Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 2 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. 6. www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 9Printed: 2/15/2024    Page 273 Project #: DRC2023-00053 DRC2023-00399 Project Name: So Cal Title 24 LLC Office Location: 9684 ESTACIA CT - 020815218-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Minor Exception ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval This project is subject to public art requirement outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code . Prior to the issuance of building permits (for grading or construction ), the applicant shall inform the Planning and Economic Development Department of their choice to install public art, donate art or select the in-lieu option as outlined in 17.124.020.D. If the project developer chooses to pay the in -lieu fee, the in-lieu art fee will be invoiced on the building permit by the City and shall be paid by the applicant prior to building permit issuance. If the project developer chooses to install art, they shall submit, during the plan check process, an application for the art work that will be installed on the project site that contains information applicable to the art work in addition to any other information as may be required by the City to adequately evaluate the proposed the art work in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.124. If the project developer chooses to donate art, applications for art work donated to the City shall be subject to review by the Public Art Committee which shall make a recommendation whether the proposed donation is consistent with Chapter 17.124 and final acceptance by the City Council. No final approval, such as a final inspection or the a issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, for any development project (or if a multi-phased project, the final phase of a development project) that is subject to this requirement shall occur unless the public art requirement has been fulfilled to the satisfaction of the Planning and Economic Development Department. 7. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and /or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 8. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination and in conformance with Building and Safety Services Department standards, the Municipal Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFD) Standards. 9. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, and grading on file in the Planning and Economic Development Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations, 10. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. For single -family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 11. All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment , detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 12. For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll -up doors and service doors to match main building colors. 13. www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 9Printed: 2/15/2024    Page 274 Project #: DRC2023-00053 DRC2023-00399 Project Name: So Cal Title 24 LLC Office Location: 9684 ESTACIA CT - 020815218-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Minor Exception ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and /or projections shall be screened from all sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and /or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet, shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and /or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included in building plans. 14. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Curb Ramp: The existing ramp located at the N /W corner of Estacia Court and Archibald Avenue shall be evaluated for conformance to current ADA regulations. If the ramp does not meet ADA regulations then the developer shall be responsible for providing design and reconstruction of the ramp for compliance. Design shall be completed and improvements secured for prior to issuance of Building permit. The reconstruction along with all public improvements shall be completed prior to occupancy. 1. RCMU Fiber Requirements: Fiber: The proposed development is slated to be included in the City’s Fiber Optic Master Plan that would provide a City owned Fiber -to-the-Premise (FTTP) infrastructure. The City will require 1-2” UG Fiber Optic dark conduit to be interconnected to the City 's existing fiber optic backbone conduit located in the west side of Archibald Ave along the frontage of the property. The applicant will locate, pothole and intercept the existing conduit. Placement and location of a fiber pullbox shall be connected to the 1-2” conduit structure (Service) with high-density polyethylene (HDPE) directly from the mainline pullbox to an 8” round plastic “flower pot” type telecom access box flush mounted to finish grade to serve as a drop access point to city network directly at each individual unit or a dedicated telecommunication closet. This drop conduit shall be dedicated for City fiber drop installation only. - An Optical network demarcation enclosure /panel shall be mounted on the side of the unit or utility closet for the placement of a Fiber Optic Network Interface Device. Place a #6 solid ground wire placed from network demarcation enclosure to power ground. If no power ground exists a 5/8” x 8” copper clad ground rod is to be installed for ground wire to be connected. The size, placement and location of the conduit and vaults shall be shown on the Street Improvement and/or Public Improvement Plans and subject to the Engineering Services Department 's review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever comes first. 2. www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 9Printed: 2/15/2024    Page 275 Project #: DRC2023-00053 DRC2023-00399 Project Name: So Cal Title 24 LLC Office Location: 9684 ESTACIA CT - 020815218-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Minor Exception ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Development Impact Fees: Development impact fees are due prior to issuance of a building permit or certificate of occupancy per the Engineering Fee schedule, fees subject to change annually. 3. Standard Conditions of Approval Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards .4. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way: City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department Cucamonga Valley Water District 5. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Existing pole within frontage on Estacia Court will need to be removed and utilities to be underground. 6. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and /or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 7. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Estacia Court: Curb & Gutter Cross Gutter A.C. Pvmt Side-walk Drive Appr. Curb Ramp: N/W corner of Estacia Ct & Archibald Ave Notes: (a) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (b) Curb and Gutter will start at ECR going straight west to property line. (c) Sidewalk will be adjacent to property line. 8. www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 9Printed: 2/15/2024    Page 276 Project #: DRC2023-00053 DRC2023-00399 Project Name: So Cal Title 24 LLC Office Location: 9684 ESTACIA CT - 020815218-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Minor Exception ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 9. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits , whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right -of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction 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 pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 10. www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 9Printed: 2/15/2024    Page 277 Project #: DRC2023-00053 DRC2023-00399 Project Name: So Cal Title 24 LLC Office Location: 9684 ESTACIA CT - 020815218-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Minor Exception ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval A signed consent and waiver form to join and /or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. This parcel is required to be annexed into Community Facilities District 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) to finance the maintenance and services of streetlights, traffic lights, and appurtenant facilities. This condition needs to be completed before the FINAL Inspection is scheduled. Any annexation cost shall be borne by the property owner /developer. To start the annexation process, please contact Kelly Guerra at 909-774-2582. 11. 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. 12. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 13. ** CD Information Required Prior to Sign-Off for Building Permit Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion Deposit and a related administrative fee shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant must identify if they are self -hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the completion of the construction and / or demolition project. Contact Marissa Ostos, Environmental Engineering, at (909) 774-4062 for more information. Instructions and forms are available at the City 's website, www.cityofrc.us, under City Hall / Engineering / Environmental Programs / Construction & Demolition Diversion Program. 14. Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval Required alarm systems and supervision systems are required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 9-5. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 1. Plans for the alarm and /or supervision (monitoring) system are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire District. 2. www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 9Printed: 2/15/2024    Page 278 Project #: DRC2023-00053 DRC2023-00399 Project Name: So Cal Title 24 LLC Office Location: 9684 ESTACIA CT - 020815218-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Minor Exception ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval Plans for the automatic fire sprinkler system are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire District. 3. A Knox Box key box is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-9. Additional boxes may be required depending on the size of the building, the location of fire protection and life safety system controls, and the operational needs of the Fire District. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. If an installed Knox Box is available to this project or business, keys for the building/suite/unit are required to be provided to the Fire Inspector at the final inspection. 4. Roof access is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-6. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 5. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval This application for storm water quality management plan purposes may be considered a non -priority project. Therefore, prior to issuance of any building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way permit the land owner with the applicant shall file a Non -Priority Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) with the Engineering Services Department. The applicant may contact Engineering Services Department at (909) 477-2740. This project is required to prepare a non -priority WQMP project as the following requirement has been met: i)For areas less than 2,000 square feet of impervious area, the development will be considered a non-priority project and a WQMP document is not required, unless the project is for the outdoor storage of hazardous materials or other materials which may require a pre -treatment of the storm water runoff which will require that a non -priority WQMP document is prepared, including but not limited to, vehicle fueling operations; ii)For significant re-development projects proposing impervious areas of 2,000 square feet to 4,999 square feet and new development projects proposing impervious areas of 2,000 square feet to 9,999 square feet the following criteria will require a non-priority WQMP document to be prepared : a.For all new and significant redevelopment projects; b.If the project is part of a common area of development, a non -priority WQMP document shall be prepared; c.If the proposed development is a commercial project the City will determine if activities may impact the water quality, and if impacts are determined to affect the water quality a non -priority WQMP document will be prepared; d.All industrial projects will require a non-priority WQMP document to be prepared . 1. www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 9Printed: 2/15/2024    Page 279 Project #: DRC2023-00053 DRC2023-00399 Project Name: So Cal Title 24 LLC Office Location: 9684 ESTACIA CT - 020815218-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Minor Exception ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES – CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE – Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall comply with Section 5.106.1 (Storm water pollution prevention) of the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code: Newly construction projects and additions which disturb less than one acre of land shall prevent the pollution of stormwater runoff from the construction activities through one or more of the following measures: 5.106.1.1 Local Ordinance – Comply with a lawfully enacted stormwater management and /or erosion control ordinance. 5.106.1.2 Best Management Practices (BMP) – Prevent the loss of soil through wind or water erosion by implementing an effective combination of erosion and sediment control and good housekeeping BMP. 1.Soil loss BMP that should be considered for implementation as appropriate for each project include , but are not limited to, the following: a.Scheduling construction activity. b.Preservation of natural features, vegetation and soil. c.Drainage swales or lined ditches to control stormwater flow. d.Mulching or hydroseeding to stabilize disturbed soils. e.Erosion control to protect slopes. f.Protection of storm drain inlets (gravel bags or catch basin inserts). g.Perimeter sediment control (perimeter silt fence, fiber rolls). h.Sediment trap or sediment basin to retain sediment on site. i.Stabilized construction exits. j.Wind erosion control. k.Other soil loss BMP acceptable to the enforcing agency . 2.Good housekeeping BMP to manage construction equipment, materials and wastes that should be considered for implementation as appropriate for each project include, but are not limited to, the following: a.Material handling and waste management. b.Building materials stockpile management. c.Management of washout areas (concrete, paints, stucco, etc.). d.Control of vehicle/equipment fueling to contractors staging area. e.Vehicle and equipment cleaning performed off site . f.Spill prevention and control. g.Other housekeeping BMP acceptable to the enforcing agency (City of Rancho Cucamonga). 2. www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 9Printed: 2/15/2024    Page 280 Page 1 2 2 3 5 DATE: February 28, 2024 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development INITIATED BY:Jennifer Nakamura, Deputy Director of Planning SUBJECT:MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. Consideration to amend Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to amend requirements for Density Bonus applications and agreements, Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s), update administrative review of specified modifications to historic structures, and update allowed use descriptions for Microbrewery and Light Warehouse and Distribution uses. This project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. This item will be forwarded to City Council for final action. (DRC2024- 00047) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance to make cleanup revisions to certain development standards. BACKGROUND: In 2022, the City Council, on recommendation of the Planning Commission, adopted a comprehensive update to the development code to implement the goals and policies of the General Plan. Periodically, as staff is reviewing or applying sections of the code, we find areas that may contain outdated information that needs to be updated to be consistent with other sections of the code. There may also be a need to change code standards to reflect changes in state law. The code amendments currently under consideration fall into these two categories. Detailed text changes are included in Exhibit A. ANALYSIS: Modifications to Density Bonus, Incentives and Concessions Density bonus projects are becoming more commonplace as state law has provided additional incentives for private development. As we have been navigating several applications, two issues have arisen with the code that need to be addressed. First, a density bonus agreement is required between the city and the developer to ensure the long-term affordability of the target units. The code currently requires this to be completed prior to the “award of density bonus and any related incentives or concessions”, which translates into prior to project approval. Given the current complexities of density bonus projects, adding this additional step prior to project approval lengthens the time to get a project to the Planning Commission. Staff is proposing amending this language to require the density bonus agreement to be completed prior to building permit issuance. Second, the code requires any density bonus, incentives and concessions requested as part of a project be approved by the City Council. This section was not updated in the 2022 code update. State law limits the number of hearings on a housing project to a maximum of 5 and eliminating this additional The State Department of    Page 281 Page 2 2 2 3 5 Housing and Community Development provided us some guidance on this issue and recommends maintaining one body for approval of the entire project, as all of the project components should be considered together. Staff recommends the approval body for all aspects of a density bonus project be retained with the Planning Commission. Director Review of Certificate of Appropriateness For historic structures that need to make alterations to the structure, a certificate of appropriateness is required. Most of these applications require review and approval of the Historic Preservation Commission, however, repair or replacement of certain deteriorating materials and the addition or deletion of awning, shutters and canopies can be reviewed by the Planning and Economic Development Director. The code states that the Planning Director shall conduct a public hearing on the changes, however, the Planning Director public hearing process was eliminated in 2012 and all Planning Director reviews are administrative. This section will be updated to remove the public hearing requirement for Planning Director decisions for a certificate of appropriateness. Accessory Dwelling Units ADU’s are an important source of additional housing and has regularly updated state law to remove barriers to ADU development. Several years ago, the state permitted cities to enact occupancy requirements that required property owners to reside in one of the units on the property, either the primary dwelling or ADU. The city moved forward with this and established a deed restriction requirement to ensure compliance. Since then, state law has been further amended to eliminate the owner occupancy requirement. The city retained the deed restriction requirement for other ADU requirements permitted by state law and deleted the owner occupancy requirement. These requirements are already outlined in the code and are not required to be memorialized by deed restriction and can be enforced by our Community Improvement team through the administrative citation process. Land Use Definition Changes Two existing land use definitions were not updated when we moved from an administrative conditional use permit process to a bi-level commission/council conditional use permit and administrative minor use permit process. For microbrewery uses, if they want to add retail sales or tasting, a minor use permit will be required instead of a conditional use permit. For light wholesale and distribution uses wanting to add retail sales, a minor use permit instead of a conditional use permit will be required. Environmental Assessment The proposed Amendments are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Amendments, making clean-up revisions to certain existing development standards, will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed Amendments constitute an administrative process of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. FISCAL IMPACT: None COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED: This code amendment meets the Council’s goal of relentless improvement by addressing development related code issues regularly to ensure clarity for all stakeholders and compliance with state law. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Proposed Code Changes Exhibit B – Resolution 24-09 Exhibit C – Draft Ordinance    Page 282 Proposed Code Changes Chapter 17.46 – Density Bonuses, Incentives, and Concessions 17.46.030 General requirements. (Note: Subsection I only) I. Agreement required. 1. Prior to the award of a density bonus and any related incentives or concessionsissuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city to ensure the continued affordability of all target units. 2. For all target units, the agreement shall specify the household income classification, number, location, size, and construction scheduling and shall require target units in a project and phases of a project to be constructed concurrently with the construction of non-target units. The agreement shall include such other provisions as necessary to establish compliance with the requirements of this chapter. 17.46.070 Process for approval or denial. A. Process for approval. The density bonus and incentive(s) and concession(s) request shall be considered in conjunction with any necessary development entitlements for the project. The designated approving authority for density bonuses, incentives, and concessions shall be the city councilplanning commission. In approving the density bonus and any related incentives or concessions, the city and the applicant shall enter into a density bonus agreement. B. Approval of density bonus required. The city shall grant the density bonus requested by the applicant provided it is consistent with the requirements of this chapter and state law. C. Approval of incentives or concessions required unless findings made. The city shall grant the incentive(s) and concession(s) requested by the applicant unless the city makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: 1. The incentive or concession is not required in order to provide for affordable housing costs as defined in Health and Safety Code § 5052.5 or affordable rent for the target units. 2. The incentive or concession would have a specific adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Government Code § 65589.5, upon public health and safety that is listed in the state register of historical resources and for which the city determines there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-and moderate-income households. 3. The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. Chapter 17.100 – Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units    Page 283 17.100.080 Ownership, rental, and occupancy requirements. A. Owner occupancy required for junior accessory dwelling units. If the property contains a JADU, one of the residential dwellings on the lot shall be occupied as the primary residence of the owner of the lot and shall not be rented or leased as long as the JADU exists, unless state law is amended to prohibit owner occupancy requirements for JADUs. B. Rental occupancy. Any residential unit on a lot with an accessory dwelling unit or JADU must be rented for a period exceeding 30 consecutive days. C. Sale of accessory dwelling units. Sale or ownership of an accessory dwelling unit or JADU separate from the main dwelling unit is prohibited, except as required by law. D.Deed restrictions. Prior to final inspection for an accessory dwelling unit or JADU, the property owner shall execute and record in the office of the county recorder a covenant setting forth the following minimum requirements, in a form and substance satisfactory to the planning department and city attorney’s office: 1. The accessory dwelling unit or JADU shall not be sold or owned separately from the main dwelling unit, and the parcel upon which the unit is located shall not be subdivided in any manner that would authorize such sale or ownership, except as otherwise required by law; 2. If the property contains a JADU, the JADU shall be a legal unit and may be used as habitable space, only so long as either the main dwelling unit, or the JADU, is occupied by the owner of record of the property, unless state law is amended to prohibit local agencies from requiring owner- occupancy; 3. Any rental of an accessory dwelling unit or JADU shall be for a period exceeding 30 consecutive days; and 4. The restrictions shall be binding upon any successor in ownership of the property. 17.18 – Historic Preservation Commission Decisions 17.18.040 Certificate of appropriateness. (Note: Subsection D only) D. Procedures. 1. Application. An application for a certificate of appropriateness shall be filed with the planning department upon the prescribed form and shall contain the following data: a. A description of the proposed work and an explanation of how it is compatible with the historical nature of the resource. b. Plans describing the size, height, and appearance of the proposed work. c. A site plan showing all existing buildings and structures and the relationship of the proposed work to the surrounding environment.    Page 284 d. Relationship to the existing scale, massing, architectural style, site and streetscape, landscaping and signage, for new construction in historic districts. e. If the application is for demolition, an explanation why the demolition is necessary and an economic feasibility report. f. Other information deemed necessary by the planning director. 2. Commission review. The commission shall conduct a public hearing on the application, after which it shall adopt a resolution approving, conditionally approving, or denying the application. 3. Planning director review. Notwithstanding the previous paragraph, the planning director shall review, and after conducting a public hearing, shall and deny, approve, or conditionally approve any application for a certificate of appropriateness for any of the following types of alterations: a. Repair or replacement of deteriorated materials with applications or materials of the same kind, type, and texture already in use for roofs, windows, siding material, chimneys and fire-places, accessory structures, or fencing. b. Addition or deletion of awnings, shutters, canopies, and similar incidental appurtenances. 4. Upon approval, copies of the certificate of appropriateness shall be forwarded to the applicant, the building and safety official, the planning director, and any other department or agency that requests one. 5. No certificate of appropriateness shall become effective until the time to appeal its approval has expired. Chapter 17.32 – Allowed Use Descriptions 17.32.020 Allowed Use Descriptions (Note: Subsection H 10 and 17 only) 10. Microbrewery. A small-scale brewery operation dedicated to the production of specialty beers and producing less than 15,000 barrels (465,000 U.S. gallons) per year. Ancillary on-site tasting and/or retail sales of beers produced on-site for off-site consumption may be permitted when approved by a conditional minor use permit. 17.Wholesale, and distribution, light. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, wholesaling and distribution of finished goods and/or food products from the premises. Activities under this classification shall be conducted in enclosed buildings and occupy 50,000 square feet or less of building space. Includes incidental storage and warehousing. Retail sales from the premises may occur when approved by a conditional minor use permit.    Page 285 Proposed Code Changes Chapter 17.46 – Density Bonuses, Incentives, and Concessions 17.46.030 General requirements. (Note: Subsection I only) I. Agreement required. 1. Prior to the award of a density bonus and any related incentives or concessionsissuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city to ensure the continued affordability of all target units. 2. For all target units, the agreement shall specify the household income classification, number, location, size, and construction scheduling and shall require target units in a project and phases of a project to be constructed concurrently with the construction of non-target units. The agreement shall include such other provisions as necessary to establish compliance with the requirements of this chapter. 17.46.070 Process for approval or denial. A. Process for approval. The density bonus and incentive(s) and concession(s) request shall be considered in conjunction with any necessary development entitlements for the project. The designated approving authority for density bonuses, incentives, and concessions shall be the city councilplanning commission. In approving the density bonus and any related incentives or concessions, the city and the applicant shall enter into a density bonus agreement. B. Approval of density bonus required. The city shall grant the density bonus requested by the applicant provided it is consistent with the requirements of this chapter and state law. C. Approval of incentives or concessions required unless findings made. The city shall grant the incentive(s) and concession(s) requested by the applicant unless the city makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: 1. The incentive or concession is not required in order to provide for affordable housing costs as defined in Health and Safety Code § 5052.5 or affordable rent for the target units. 2. The incentive or concession would have a specific adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Government Code § 65589.5, upon public health and safety that is listed in the state register of historical resources and for which the city determines there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-and moderate-income households. 3. The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. Chapter 17.100 – Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units Exhibit A    Page 286 17.100.080 Ownership, rental, and occupancy requirements. A. Owner occupancy required for junior accessory dwelling units. If the property contains a JADU, one of the residential dwellings on the lot shall be occupied as the primary residence of the owner of the lot and shall not be rented or leased as long as the JADU exists, unless state law is amended to prohibit owner occupancy requirements for JADUs. B. Rental occupancy. Any residential unit on a lot with an accessory dwelling unit or JADU must be rented for a period exceeding 30 consecutive days. C. Sale of accessory dwelling units. Sale or ownership of an accessory dwelling unit or JADU separate from the main dwelling unit is prohibited, except as required by law. D.Deed restrictions. Prior to final inspection for an accessory dwelling unit or JADU, the property owner shall execute and record in the office of the county recorder a covenant setting forth the following minimum requirements, in a form and substance satisfactory to the planning department and city attorney’s office: 1. The accessory dwelling unit or JADU shall not be sold or owned separately from the main dwelling unit, and the parcel upon which the unit is located shall not be subdivided in any manner that would authorize such sale or ownership, except as otherwise required by law; 2. If the property contains a JADU, the JADU shall be a legal unit and may be used as habitable space, only so long as either the main dwelling unit, or the JADU, is occupied by the owner of record of the property, unless state law is amended to prohibit local agencies from requiring owner- occupancy; 3. Any rental of an accessory dwelling unit or JADU shall be for a period exceeding 30 consecutive days; and 4. The restrictions shall be binding upon any successor in ownership of the property. 17.18 – Historic Preservation Commission Decisions 17.18.040 Certificate of appropriateness. (Note: Subsection D only) D. Procedures. 1. Application. An application for a certificate of appropriateness shall be filed with the planning department upon the prescribed form and shall contain the following data: a. A description of the proposed work and an explanation of how it is compatible with the historical nature of the resource. b. Plans describing the size, height, and appearance of the proposed work. c. A site plan showing all existing buildings and structures and the relationship of the proposed work to the surrounding environment.    Page 287 d. Relationship to the existing scale, massing, architectural style, site and streetscape, landscaping and signage, for new construction in historic districts. e. If the application is for demolition, an explanation why the demolition is necessary and an economic feasibility report. f. Other information deemed necessary by the planning director. 2. Commission review. The commission shall conduct a public hearing on the application, after which it shall adopt a resolution approving, conditionally approving, or denying the application. 3. Planning director review. Notwithstanding the previous paragraph, the planning director shall review, and after conducting a public hearing, shall and deny, approve, or conditionally approve any application for a certificate of appropriateness for any of the following types of alterations: a. Repair or replacement of deteriorated materials with applications or materials of the same kind, type, and texture already in use for roofs, windows, siding material, chimneys and fire-places, accessory structures, or fencing. b. Addition or deletion of awnings, shutters, canopies, and similar incidental appurtenances. 4. Upon approval, copies of the certificate of appropriateness shall be forwarded to the applicant, the building and safety official, the planning director, and any other department or agency that requests one. 5. No certificate of appropriateness shall become effective until the time to appeal its approval has expired. Chapter 17.32 – Allowed Use Descriptions 17.32.020 Allowed Use Descriptions (Note: Subsection H 10 and 17 only) 10. Microbrewery. A small-scale brewery operation dedicated to the production of specialty beers and producing less than 15,000 barrels (465,000 U.S. gallons) per year. Ancillary on-site tasting and/or retail sales of beers produced on-site for off-site consumption may be permitted when approved by a conditional minor use permit. 17.Wholesale, and distribution, light. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, wholesaling and distribution of finished goods and/or food products from the premises. Activities under this classification shall be conducted in enclosed buildings and occupy 50,000 square feet or less of building space. Includes incidental storage and warehousing. Retail sales from the premises may occur when approved by a conditional minor use permit.    Page 288 RESOLUTION NO. 24-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2024-00047, AMENDING SECTIONS 17.18.040, 17.32.020, 17.46.030, 17.46.070, AND 17.100.080 OF TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE CLEAN-UP REVISIONS TO CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, MAKING A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF A. Recitals. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared a Municipal Code Amendment as described in the title of this resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Municipal Code Amendment is referred to as “the Application”. 2. On February 28, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the Amendment and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance 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. The Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on February 28, 2024, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, the Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The Amendment identified herein has been processed, including, but not limited to, public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). b. The Amendment is consistent with the direction, goals, policies, and implementation programs of the adopted General Plan, including without limitation, the Land Use Element and Housing Element thereof, and will provide for development in a manner consistent with the General Plan. c. The findings set forth in this Resolution reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission. 3. This project is deemed exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Amendments, making clean-up revisions to certain existing development standards, will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed Amendments constitute an administrative process of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical Exhibit B   Page 289 changes in the environment. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed Amendment. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the Municipal Code Amendment as indicated in the draft ordinance incorporated herein by this reference. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Morales, Chairman ATTEST: Matt Marquez, Secretary I, Matt Marquez, 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 February 2024, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:    Page 290 RESOLUTION NO. 24-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2024-00047, AMENDING SECTIONS 17.18.040, 17.32.020, 17.46.030, 17.46.070, AND 17.100.080 OF TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE CLEAN-UP REVISIONS TO CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, MAKING A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF A. Recitals. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared a Municipal Code Amendment as described in the title of this resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Municipal Code Amendment is referred to as “the Application”. 2. On February 28, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the Amendment and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance 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. The Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on February 28, 2024, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, the Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The Amendment identified herein has been processed, including, but not limited to, public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). b. The Amendment is consistent with the direction, goals, policies, and implementation programs of the adopted General Plan, including without limitation, the Land Use Element and Housing Element thereof, and will provide for development in a manner consistent with the General Plan. c. The findings set forth in this Resolution reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission. 3. This project is deemed exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Amendments, making clean-up revisions to certain existing development standards, will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed Amendments constitute an administrative process of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical Exhibit B   Page 291 changes in the environment. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed Amendment. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the Municipal Code Amendment as indicated in the draft ordinance incorporated herein by this reference. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Morales, Chairman ATTEST: Matt Marquez, Secretary I, Matt Marquez, 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 February 2024, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:    Page 292 1 ORDINANCE XXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2024-00047, AMENDING SECTIONS 17.18.040, 17.32.020, 17.46.030, 17.46.070, AND 17.100.080 OF TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE CLEAN-UP REVISIONS TO CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND MAKING A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1.Recitals. A. The City of Rancho Cucamonga (the “City”) is proposing clean-up revisions to certain existing development standards in order to better calibrate the Development Code to the vision of the General Plan. B. The City has prepared Municipal Code Amendment DRC2024-00047, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance and the subject Municipal Code Amendment are referred to as the “Amendments”. C. The City is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the constitution and laws of the State of California. D. As shown in the Exhibits A through E of this Ordinance, the amendment proposes to amend Sections 17.18.040, 17.32.020, 17.46.030, 17.46.070, and 17.100.080 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code to make clean-up revisions to certain development standards. E. On February 28, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed continued public hearing with respect to the Amendments and, following the conclusion thereof, adopted Resolution No. 24-__ recommending that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt the Amendments. F. On March __, 2024, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the amendment and concluded said hearing on that date. G. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. SECTION 2.Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:    Page 293 2 A. Recitals. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Section 1, of this Ordinance are true and correct. B. Findings. 1) Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing, this Council hereby finds and concludes that the changes proposed to Title 17 (Development Code) in the Amendments are consistent with the Development Code and the General Plan’s goals, policies and implementation programs. Pursuant to Section 17.22.040(C) of the Municipal Code, amendments to the Municipal Code “may be approved only when the City Council finds that the amendment[s] are consistent with the General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs.” The proposed amendment is consistent with the following Land Use Element and Housing Element policies: a) Land Use LC-1.2: Quality of Place. “Ensure that new infill development is compatible with existing historic and envisioned future character of the neighborhood” b) Housing H-1.3: Accessory Dwelling Units. “Facilitate the development of accessory dwelling units to provide additional housing opportunities pursuant to State law and established zoning regulations” c) Housing H-5.1: Development Review Processes. “Consider new policies, codes and procedures that have the potential to reduce procedural delays, provide information early in the development process regarding development costs and charge only those fees necessary to adequately carry out needed public services and improvements” 2) The Amendments identified herein have been processed, including, but not limited to, public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). C. CEQA. The proposed Amendments are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Amendments, making clean-up revisions to certain existing development standards, will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed Amendments constitute an administrative process of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. The City Council has reviewed the administrative record concerning the proposed Amendments and the proposed CEQA determination, and based on its own independent judgment, finds that the Amendments set forth in this Ordinance is not subject to, or exempt from, the requirements of the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). D. The City Council hereby amends Subsection (D)(3) of Section 17.18.040 (“Certificate of Appropriateness”) of Chapter 17.18 (“Historic Preservation Commission    Page 294 3 Decisions”) of Article II (“Land Use and Development Procedures”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit A of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. E. The City Council hereby amends Subsections (H)(10) and (H)(17) of Section 17.32.020 (“Allowed Use Descriptions”) of Chapter 17.32 (“Allowed Use Descriptions”) of Article III (“Zones, Allowed Uses, and Development Standards”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit B of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. F. The City Council hereby amends Subsection (I)(1) of Section 17.46.030 (“General Requirements”) of Chapter 17.46 (“Density Bonuses, Incentives, and Concessions”) of Article IV (“Site Development Standards”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit C of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. G. The City Council hereby amends Subsection (A) (“Process for Approval”) of Section 17.46.070 (“Process for Approval of Denial”) of Chapter 17.46 (“Density Bonuses, Incentives, and Concessions”) of Article IV (“Site Development Standards”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit D of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. H. The City Council hereby amends Section 17.100.080 (“Ownership, Rental, and Occupancy Requirements”) of Chapter 17.100 (“Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs)”) of Article V (“Specific Use Requirements”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit E of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. I. Severability. The City Council declares that, should any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. J. Enforcement. Neither the adoption of this Ordinance nor the repeal of any other Ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances, which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver of any penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation thereof. K. Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause it to be published in the manner required by law.    Page 295 4 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS __ DAY OF __________, 2024. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: L. Dennis Michael, Mayor I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the ____ day of March, 2024, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga    Page 296 5 EXHIBIT A Amendments to Subsection (D)(3) of Section 17.18.040 of Chapter 17.18 of Article II of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Subsection: Subsection (D)(3) of Section 17.18.040 Certificate of Appropriateness Subsection (D)(3). Planning Director Review: 3. Planning director review. Notwithstanding the previous paragraph, the planning director shall review, and deny, approve, or conditionally approve any application for a certificate of appropriateness for any of the following types of alterations: a. Repair or replacement of deteriorated materials with applications or materials of the same kind, type, and texture already in use for roofs, windows, siding material, chimneys and fire-places, accessory structures, or fencing. b. Addition or deletion of awnings, shutters, canopies, and similar incidental appurtenances.    Page 297 6 EXHIBIT B Amendments to Subsections (H)(10) and (H)(17) of Section 17.32.020 of Chapter 17.32 of Article III of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Subsections: Subsection (H)(10) of Section 17.32.020 Allowed Use Descriptions Subsection (H)(10). Microbrewery: 10. Microbrewery. A small-scale brewery operation dedicated to the production of specialty beers and producing less than 15,000 barrels (465,000 U.S. gallons) per year. Ancillary on-site tasting and/or retail sales of beers produced on-site for off- site consumption may be permitted when approved by a minor use permit. Subsection (H)(17) of Section 17.32.020 Allowed Use Descriptions Subsection (H)(17). Wholesale, and Distribution, Light: 17. Wholesale, and distribution, light. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, wholesaling and distribution of finished goods and/or food products from the premises. Activities under this classification shall be conducted in enclosed buildings and occupy 50,000 square feet or less of building space. Includes incidental storage and warehousing. Retail sales from the premises may occur when approved by a minor use permit.    Page 298 7 EXHIBIT C Amendments to Subsection (I)(1) of Section 17.46.030 of Chapter 17.46 of Article IV of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Subsection: Subsection (I)(1) of Section 17.46.030 General Requirements Subsection (I)(1). Agreement Required: 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city to ensure the continued affordability of all target units.    Page 299 8 EXHIBIT D Amendments to Subsection (A) of Section 17.46.070 of Chapter 17.46 of Article IV of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Subsection: Subsection (A) of Section 17.46.070 Process for Approval or Denial Subsection (A). Process for Approval: A. Process for approval. The density bonus and incentive(s) and concession(s) request shall be considered in conjunction with any necessary development entitlements for the project. The designated approving authority for density bonuses, incentives, and concessions shall be the planning commission. In approving the density bonus and any related incentives or concessions, the city and the applicant shall enter into a density bonus agreement.    Page 300 9 EXHIBIT E Amendments to Section 17.100.080 of Chapter 17.100 of Article V of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Section: Section 17.100.080 Ownership, Rental, and Occupancy Requirements Section 17.100.080. Ownership, Rental, and Occupancy Requirements: A. Owner occupancy required for junior accessory dwelling units. If the property contains a JADU, one of the residential dwellings on the lot shall be occupied as the primary residence of the owner of the lot and shall not be rented or leased as long as the JADU exists, unless state law is amended to prohibit owner occupancy requirements for JADUs. B. Rental occupancy. Any residential unit on a lot with an accessory dwelling unit or JADU must be rented for a period exceeding 30 consecutive days. C. Sale of accessory dwelling units. Sale or ownership of an accessory dwelling unit or JADU separate from the main dwelling unit is prohibited, except as required by law.    Page 301 1 ORDINANCE XXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2024-00047, AMENDING SECTIONS 17.18.040, 17.32.020, 17.46.030, 17.46.070, AND 17.100.080 OF TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE CLEAN-UP REVISIONS TO CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND MAKING A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Recitals. A.The City of Rancho Cucamonga (the “City”) is proposing clean-up revisions to certain existing development standards in order to better calibrate the Development Code to the vision of the General Plan. B.The City has prepared Municipal Code Amendment DRC2024-00047, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance and the subject Municipal Code Amendment are referred to as the “Amendments”. C.The City is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the constitution and laws of the State of California. D.As shown in the Exhibits A through E of this Ordinance, the amendment proposes to amend Sections 17.18.040, 17.32.020, 17.46.030, 17.46.070, and 17.100.080 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code to make clean-up revisions to certain development standards. E.On February 28, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed continued public hearing with respect to the Amendments and, following the conclusion thereof, adopted Resolution No. 24-__ recommending that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt the Amendments. F.On March __, 2024, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the amendment and concluded said hearing on that date. G.All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. SECTION 2. Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: Exhibit C   Page 302 2 A. Recitals. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Section 1, of this Ordinance are true and correct. B. Findings. 1) Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing, this Council hereby finds and concludes that the changes proposed to Title 17 (Development Code) in the Amendments are consistent with the Development Code and the General Plan’s goals, policies and implementation programs. Pursuant to Section 17.22.040(C) of the Municipal Code, amendments to the Municipal Code “may be approved only when the City Council finds that the amendment[s] are consistent with the General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs.” The proposed amendment is consistent with the following Land Use Element and Housing Element policies: a) Land Use LC-1.2: Quality of Place. “Ensure that new infill development is compatible with existing historic and envisioned future character of the neighborhood” b) Housing H-1.3: Accessory Dwelling Units. “Facilitate the development of accessory dwelling units to provide additional housing opportunities pursuant to State law and established zoning regulations” c) Housing H-5.1: Development Review Processes. “Consider new policies, codes and procedures that have the potential to reduce procedural delays, provide information early in the development process regarding development costs and charge only those fees necessary to adequately carry out needed public services and improvements” 2) The Amendments identified herein have been processed, including, but not limited to, public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). C. CEQA. The proposed Amendments are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Amendments, making clean-up revisions to certain existing development standards, will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed Amendments constitute an administrative process of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. The City Council has reviewed the administrative record concerning the proposed Amendments and the proposed CEQA determination, and based on its own independent judgment, finds that the Amendments set forth in this Ordinance is not subject to, or exempt from, the requirements of the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). D. The City Council hereby amends Subsection (D)(3) of Section 17.18.040 (“Certificate of Appropriateness”) of Chapter 17.18 (“Historic Preservation Commission    Page 303 3 Decisions”) of Article II (“Land Use and Development Procedures”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit A of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. E. The City Council hereby amends Subsections (H)(10) and (H)(17) of Section 17.32.020 (“Allowed Use Descriptions”) of Chapter 17.32 (“Allowed Use Descriptions”) of Article III (“Zones, Allowed Uses, and Development Standards”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit B of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. F. The City Council hereby amends Subsection (I)(1) of Section 17.46.030 (“General Requirements”) of Chapter 17.46 (“Density Bonuses, Incentives, and Concessions”) of Article IV (“Site Development Standards”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit C of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. G. The City Council hereby amends Subsection (A) (“Process for Approval”) of Section 17.46.070 (“Process for Approval of Denial”) of Chapter 17.46 (“Density Bonuses, Incentives, and Concessions”) of Article IV (“Site Development Standards”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit D of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. H. The City Council hereby amends Section 17.100.080 (“Ownership, Rental, and Occupancy Requirements”) of Chapter 17.100 (“Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs)”) of Article V (“Specific Use Requirements”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit E of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. I. Severability. The City Council declares that, should any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. J. Enforcement. Neither the adoption of this Ordinance nor the repeal of any other Ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances, which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver of any penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation thereof. K. Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause it to be published in the manner required by law.    Page 304 4 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS __ DAY OF __________, 2024. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: L. Dennis Michael, Mayor I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the ____ day of March, 2024, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga    Page 305 5 EXHIBIT A Amendments to Subsection (D)(3) of Section 17.18.040 of Chapter 17.18 of Article II of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Subsection: Subsection (D)(3) of Section 17.18.040 Certificate of Appropriateness Subsection (D)(3). Planning Director Review: 3. Planning director review. Notwithstanding the previous paragraph, the planning director shall review, and deny, approve, or conditionally approve any application for a certificate of appropriateness for any of the following types of alterations: a. Repair or replacement of deteriorated materials with applications or materials of the same kind, type, and texture already in use for roofs, windows, siding material, chimneys and fire-places, accessory structures, or fencing. b. Addition or deletion of awnings, shutters, canopies, and similar incidental appurtenances.    Page 306 6 EXHIBIT B Amendments to Subsections (H)(10) and (H)(17) of Section 17.32.020 of Chapter 17.32 of Article III of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Subsections: Subsection (H)(10) of Section 17.32.020 Allowed Use Descriptions Subsection (H)(10). Microbrewery: 10. Microbrewery. A small-scale brewery operation dedicated to the production of specialty beers and producing less than 15,000 barrels (465,000 U.S. gallons) per year. Ancillary on-site tasting and/or retail sales of beers produced on-site for off- site consumption may be permitted when approved by a minor use permit. Subsection (H)(17) of Section 17.32.020 Allowed Use Descriptions Subsection (H)(17). Wholesale, and Distribution, Light: 17. Wholesale, and distribution, light. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, wholesaling and distribution of finished goods and/or food products from the premises. Activities under this classification shall be conducted in enclosed buildings and occupy 50,000 square feet or less of building space. Includes incidental storage and warehousing. Retail sales from the premises may occur when approved by a minor use permit.    Page 307 7 EXHIBIT C Amendments to Subsection (I)(1) of Section 17.46.030 of Chapter 17.46 of Article IV of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Subsection: Subsection (I)(1) of Section 17.46.030 General Requirements Subsection (I)(1). Agreement Required: 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city to ensure the continued affordability of all target units.    Page 308 8 EXHIBIT D Amendments to Subsection (A) of Section 17.46.070 of Chapter 17.46 of Article IV of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Subsection: Subsection (A) of Section 17.46.070 Process for Approval or Denial Subsection (A). Process for Approval: A. Process for approval. The density bonus and incentive(s) and concession(s) request shall be considered in conjunction with any necessary development entitlements for the project. The designated approving authority for density bonuses, incentives, and concessions shall be the planning commission. In approving the density bonus and any related incentives or concessions, the city and the applicant shall enter into a density bonus agreement.    Page 309 9 EXHIBIT E Amendments to Section 17.100.080 of Chapter 17.100 of Article V of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Amended Section: Section 17.100.080 Ownership, Rental, and Occupancy Requirements Section 17.100.080. Ownership, Rental, and Occupancy Requirements: A. Owner occupancy required for junior accessory dwelling units. If the property contains a JADU, one of the residential dwellings on the lot shall be occupied as the primary residence of the owner of the lot and shall not be rented or leased as long as the JADU exists, unless state law is amended to prohibit owner occupancy requirements for JADUs. B. Rental occupancy. Any residential unit on a lot with an accessory dwelling unit or JADU must be rented for a period exceeding 30 consecutive days. C. Sale of accessory dwelling units. Sale or ownership of an accessory dwelling unit or JADU separate from the main dwelling unit is prohibited, except as required by law.    Page 310