HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-12-11 - Agenda Packet
Historic Preservation Commission
and
Planning Commission
Meeting Agenda
Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
December 11, 2024
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
7:00 PM
A. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Chairman Morales
Vice Chairman 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 November 13, 2024. (No meeting November 27,
2024).
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS
D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP.
- A request for site plan and architectural review of 75 multi-family units located on approximately 3.18
acres of land within Planning Area N-12 in the Core Living (CL) Placetype of the Resort Specific Plan,
Planning Area 1B, located north of 6th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of
Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review DRC2023-00360). Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No.
2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment
DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment
DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR
is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. (Continued
from November 13, 2024, HPC/PC meeting).
D2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP.
- A request for site plan and architectural review of 84 multi-family units located on approximately 3.4
acres of land within Planning Area N-14 in the Village Neighborhood (VN) Placetype of the Resort
Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B, located north of 6th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way,
and west of Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review DRC2023-00331). Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
(SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City’s approval of General Plan
Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code
Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or
supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same
project. (Continued from November 13, 2024, HPC/PC meeting).
D3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP – MADOLE & ASSOCIATES FOR CHASE PARTNERS – A request to
subdivide a 5.85 acre lot into four (4) parcels within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone and the Neo-Industrial
Employment District General Plan land use designation, located at the southeast corner of Eighth
Street and Cottage Avenue at 9851 Eighth Street; APN: 0209-193-09. 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 (SUBTPM20894).
D4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, DESIGN REVIEW & VARIANCE –
GRAND PACIFIC COMMUNITIES – A request to subdivide approximately 1.7 acres of land into 8
numbered and 4 lettered lots including site plan and design review of 8 two-family residential buildings
(16 units total), and a variance to reduce the required streetscape setback and the height of property
line walls for a site located in the Medium Residential (M) Zone at 10235 19th Street; APN: 1076-121-
03. The project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill
Development Projects.
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 $3,526 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 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 – November 13, 2024
Page 1 of 5
Draft
2
8
3
1
Historic Preservation Commission
and
Planning Commission Agenda
November 13, 2024
Draft Minutes
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
7:00 p.m.
The regular Joint meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission was
held on November 13, 2024. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Morales at 7:00 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Planning Commission present: Chairman Morales, Vice Chairman Boling, Commissioner Dopp,
Commissioner Daniels and Commissioner Diaz.
Staff Present: Serita Young, Assistant City Attorney; Jennifer Nakamura, Deputy Director of
Planning; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Bond Mendez, Associate Planner; Sophia
Serafin, Assistant Planner; Lupe Biggs, Executive Assistant; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive
Assistant.
B. Public Communications
Chairman Morales opened the public communications.
Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public communications.
C. Consent Calendar
C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of October 23, 2024.
Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling; seconded by Commissioner Dopp. Motion carried 5-
0 approved the minutes as presented.
D. Public Hearings
D1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP – CREATIVE DESIGN ASSOCIATES – A request to subdivide
a 43,428 square foot lot into four parcels, for a site located in the Low (L) residential district at
6808 Hermosa Avenue; APN: 1076-081-02 (Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM20808). 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 Division’s.
Associate Planner Tabe van der Zwaag presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file).
Chairman Morales opened the public hearing.
Page 4
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 13, 2024
Page 2 of 5
Draft
2
8
3
1
Project Manager Shen was in attendance and available to answer questions.
Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Dopp stated the wall issue is in the special condition. He said the project with 4
lots is appropriate for this specific site.
Commissioner Daniels asked staff if there is a concern over a private drive vs. a cul-de-sac on
the lot.
Associate Planner van der Zwaag answered that the Engineering and Planning department
reviewed it and they felt since it is such a small subdivision, it does not make sense to put a large
cul-de-sac at the end of the street, which would cut into the farthest lot. He said this way the
applicant will maintain the street rather than the city in the future.
Vice Chairman Boling commented that he appreciates the applicant coming in with an infill project
like this. He said there are not too many parcels similar left in the city, so seeing additional
housing units potentially come online is a plus for the city.
Chairman Morales stated this is a good redevelopment of this lot. He said it will improve the
neighborhood and add more affordable housing to our community.
Motion: Moved by Commissioner Dopp; seconded by Vice Chairman Boling to adopt Resolution
2024-034, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM20808. Motion carried 5-0.
D2.TENTATIVE TRACT MAP – FORE PROPERTY - A request to consolidate six (6) parcels
into one (1) parcel totaling approximately 9.15 acres of land within the Traditional Town Center
General Plan Designation and Center 1 (CE1) Zone, located at the northeast corner of Foothill
Boulevard and Grove Avenue; APNs: 0207-011-35, -36, -41, -43, -44, and -45. This item is
consistent with the City’s General Plan and certified Program Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) (SCH No. 2021050261) pursuant to CEQA Section 15183(c) Compliance Memorandum
(SUBTT20863; Related file: Design Review DRC2022-00379).
Assistant Planner Sophia Serafin presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file).
Chairman Morales opened the public hearing.
Applicant Finger was present to answer questions.
Commissioner Daniels asked why the commercial was not carved out for a second parcel. Why
was this one parcel for the entire project.
Applicant Finger answered that it has always been designed to be one project as mixed use. It
was the desire of the city to have the commercial as part of the residential. He said at this stage
they did not have any intention to sell it off individually. They intend to keep it as one project.
Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public hearing.
Chairman Morales stated the proposed map has been reviewed by both the Engineering and
Planning departments and found it to be consistent with all the relevant standards and mapping
regulations. He expressed his support.
Page 5
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 13, 2024
Page 3 of 5
Draft
2
8
3
1
Motion: Moved by Commissioner Dopp; seconded by Commissioner Daniels to adopt Resolution
2024-033, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20863. Motion carried 5-0.
D3.ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – SC RANCHO
DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request for site plan and architectural review of 75 multi-family units
located on approximately 3.18 acres of land within Planning Area N-12 in the Core Living (CL)
Placetype of the Resort Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B, located north of 6th Street, south of the
BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review
DRC2023-00360). Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in
connection with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan
Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection
with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project.
Deputy Director of Planning Nakamura stated that staff is requesting a continuance on this item
to December 11th, 2024, due to questions for the applicant and additional time is required to
complete.
Chairman Morales opened the public hearing.
Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales announced this item will remain open
to December 11th, 2024, HPC/PC meeting.
Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling; seconded by Commissioner Diaz. Motion carried 5-0.
D4.ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – SC RANCHO
DEVELOPMENT CORP.- A request for site plan and architectural review of 84 multi-family units
located on approximately 3.4 acres of land within Planning Area N-14 in the Village Neighborhood
(VN) Placetype of the Resort Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B, located north of 6th Street, south
of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design
Review DRC2023-00331). Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in
connection with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan
Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection
with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project.
Deputy Director of Planning Nakamura stated that staff is requesting a continuance on this item
to December 11th, 2024, due to questions for the applicant and additional time is required to
complete.
Chairman Morales opened the public hearing.
Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales announced this item will remain open
to December 11th, 2024, HPC/PC meeting.
Motion: Moved by Commissioner Diaz; seconded by Vice Chairman Boling. Motion carried 5-0.
Page 6
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 13, 2024
Page 4 of 5
Draft
2
8
3
1
D5.Consideration to amend Chapter 17.62 of Article IV of Title 17 (Development Code) of the
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Amend Nonconforming Use Provisions Concerning the
Discontinuance of Nonconforming Uses. This project is exempt from environmental review pursuant
to Section 15161(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. This item will be forwarded to City Council for final
action.
Deputy Director of Planning Nakamura presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file).
Commissioner Daniels asked staff to explain the nuances of the types of industrial development.
He said there are a lot of different industrial uses but is there something we are discussing a
nonconforming for.
Deputy Director of Planning Nakamura provided examples on warehouse uses.
Commissioner Daniels asked the type of building we are talking about is the very large
warehousing buildings.
Deputy Director of Planning Nakamura replied that our industrial code impacted buildings of a wide
variety of sizes.
Vice Chairman Boling stated the timing on when this will become effective. He said if there are
any properties that would be subject to 180-day vacancy period, he asked would they then get
the remainder of their 180 and then 185+ tacked onto their current 180 that they are already
experiencing, or will 1-year start when the new ordinance becomes effective.
Deputy Director of Planning Nakamura answered we have yet to find a user in that position.
Vice Chairman Boling mentioned because this was publicly noticed, we did receive one
correspondence, it appears those in the industry are aware of this potential change and there are no
properties we are aware of that would fall within that time period.
Deputy Director of Planning Nakamura confirmed.
Assistant City Attorney Young mentioned the ordinance is not written to be retroactive and once
it goes into effect, it starts from that point going forward.
Chairman Morales opened the public hearing.
Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Dopp mentioned the real issue is the timeline. He wondered at what point some
of the existing nonconforming industrial would change to meet the new vision in the General Plan.
He is comfortable with 1-year rather than 2-years, which is extreme, regarding the letter from the
public. He recommends we do not go past that.
Commissioner Daniels stated the purpose of the nonconforming use is to potentially phase that
use out. He said he is comfortable with the 180 days and really does not have a problem with the
longer time period for this specific use. He wonders if we are giving them a special license that
the other nonconforming uses are not getting. He asked about the uses that have been made
nonconforming they can become conforming by getting a conditional use permit.
Page 7
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 13, 2024
Page 5 of 5
Draft
2
8
3
1
Deputy Director of Planning Nakamura answered not all can become conforming by getting a
conditional use permit. She said if they are no longer permitted in that zone, they are phased out.
She also mentioned that industrial land uses received a fair degree of change during the industrial
code update and the General Plan update, more than most commercial uses.
Vice Chairman Boling commented that staff has been tasked a difficult and delicate situation
where they are trying to balance the needs or concerns of some of our business constituents that
have invested millions of dollars recently in building within our city that then generates tax
revenue, property tax revenue, jobs and employment and trying balance that against a recent
change in direction vision of the City Council as they adopted the update to the General Plan. He
said the 1-year extension seems to be a reasonable striking a balance between those two
diametrically opposed in some cases instances. While he understands the need for insuring
ultimately Council’s vision of development in the future moves forward and that non-conforming
uses ultimately wither away, this seems to be a reasonable balance to help protect that investment
of millions of dollars in construction and development that occurred within the last 5, 10 years.
Chairman Morales stated that 1-year is adequate to do what they have to do, and 2-years would
be too long.
Motion: Moved by Commissioner Dopp; seconded by Vice Chairman Boling to adopt Resolution
2024-037 recommending Municipal Code Amendment DRC2021-00170 to the City Council for
approval. Motion carried 5-0.
E. Director Announcements
Deputy Director of Planning Nakamura announced there will be no meeting on November 27th,
returning on December 11th.
F. Commission Announcements - None
G. Adjournment
Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling, seconded by Commissioner Dopp to adjoin the
meeting. Hearing no objections, Chairman Morales adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
Planning and Economic Development
Department
Approved:
Page 8
DATE:December 11, 2024
TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development
INITIATED BY:Bond Mendez, CPD, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – SC
RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request for site plan and
architectural review of 75 multi-family units located on approximately 3.18
acres of land within Planning Area N-12 in the Core Living (CL) Placetype
of the Resort Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B, located north of 6th Street,
south of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of Milliken Avenue;
APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review DRC2023-00360). Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18,
2016, in connection with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment
DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and
Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required
in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project.
(Continued from November 13, 2024, HPC/PC meeting).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving Design Review
DRC2023-00360 for a proposed 75-unit multi-family project in Planning Area N-12 of the Resort
Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B, subject to Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND:
The project site is part of a 160-acre property that was formerly developed with the privately
owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course. The golf course was closed in mid-2016 following
City Council approval to develop a new mixed-use development regulated by the Resort Specific
Plan and divided into two separate planning areas, Planning Area 1A (PA1A) and Planning Area
1B (PA1B). The Project site is located within PA1B which is located north of 6th Street and south
of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way and has been rough graded with a combined area of
approximately 91 acres of land. The subject project site has an area of approximately 3.18 acres
of land within PA1B and is Parcel 7 of Tract 20440.
The project was noticed to be heard by the Planning Commission on the November 13th, 2024,
public hearing. Prior to the presentation the applicant raised questions regarding the conditions
of approval. Staff did not have sufficient time to analyze the questions and on behalf of the
applicant, requested the item to be continued to a future date certain. The Planning Commission
Page 9
Page 2 of 9
2
6
4
1
continued the item to the date certain public hearing on December 11th, 2024.
Figure 1: Project Location
Land Uses
The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for, the project site and the
surrounding properties are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Land City Center Core Living (Planning Area N12)
North Vacant Land City Center Recreation (Planning Areas N16 and N17)
South Vacant Land City Center Core Living (Planning Areas N12 and N13)
East Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Areas N14 and N15)
West Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Areas N11)
ANALYSIS:
The project is for the development of 75 for sale multi-family townhouse units. The Resort Specific
Plan (plan), Planning Area 1B is divided into nineteen (19) planning areas broken into 4
placetypes. The project site is within the planning area N-12 and the Core Living (CL) placetype.
The site is also partially within the Mixed-Use Overlay along the D Street alignment. The plan
provides flexibility in location of the non-residential land uses as long as the target square footage
of non-residential land use is met (a minimum 50,000 and maximum 85,000 combined square
Page 10
Page 3 of 9
2
6
4
1
feet of non-residential is required between Planning Areas 1A and 1B).
Architecture, Building Plotting, and Site Layout
The plan encourages the use of multiple architectural design themes throughout the plan area. It
further provides standard characteristics that should be incorporated into the architecture to
ensure that the proposed design is consistent with the selected design theme. The applicant has
chosen two architectural design themes: Craftsman and Spanish. Design elements include tile
roofs, stucco and horizontal siding, stone veneer, and paneling to reinforce the specific
architectural style. The materials are carried to each elevation to emphasize the chosen
architectural theme and building articulation. In turn, each architectural theme is distributed
throughout the plan area to create a varied street scene.
Figure 2: Craftsman
Figure 3: Spanish
Page 11
Page 4 of 9
2
6
4
1
Architectural Theme Distribution
The plan has a stated goal that building massing and design should reinforce the pedestrian scale
of the adjacent street. The proposed three-story buildings are all below 40 feet in height and are
of a size and scale that does not overwhelm the adjacent public streets, pedestrian pathways, or
paseos. The building massing includes extensive wall and roof plane articulation, creating visual
interest to each building elevation. The front entrances to the individual units and the second story
balconies face either the public street or a paseo, helping to activate the adjacent public spaces
and providing an extra level of security (i.e. eyes on the street).
Figure 4: Location of building themes. Black star denotes location of Spanish-themed buildings.
The project consists of 14 two-bedroom units, 21 three-bedroom units, and 40 three-bedroom
units that range in size from 1,201 to 2,201 square feet and are within 4, 5, and 7-unit buildings
with optional flex ground floor spaces that can be used as a bedroom, home office or workspace.
Each unit includes a private balcony with the minimum required depth of 5 feet. The units are
generally plotted with the front entrances either facing a public street or a paseo interior to the
project. Trash collection will take place in individual trash bins in fixed locations throughout the
project site.
UNIT SUMMARY
Residential
Unit Type Unit Size (SF - Net)Number of Units
2 Bedroom 1,204 SF 14
3 Bedroom 1,933 SF 21
4 Bedroom 1,897 to 2,201 SF 40
Total Number of Units 75
Page 12
Page 5 of 9
2
6
4
1
Consistent with the requirements of the plan, the project will be an “open community.” All streets
within the interior of the project will be private and maintained by a homeowner’s association.
These streets, however, will be open to the public. In compliance with the Resort Specific Plan
for PA1B, access into the project will be provided by street connections from four adjacent streets
(Streets B, C, D, and Resort Parkway) and from non-gated pedestrian access points. Landscaping
features, including enhanced paving, planters, trees, bike racks and benches. or bollards, may
improve pedestrian safety and use. Decorative paving is provided at each of the main pedestrian
crossings throughout the project site.
Compliance with Development Standards
The project was designed in compliance with the Resort Specific Plan PA1B for projects within
the Core Living (CL) placetype and shown in the following table:
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Development Standard Required Proposed Complies
Residential Density 18 to 35 DU/AC 24 DU/AC YES
Street Setback from Resort
Parkway ROW 10 Feet 10 Feet YES
Building Separation Across
Drive Aisles 26 Feet Minimum 31 Feet or greater YES
Interior/Rear Yard Setback 10 Feet N/A YES
Building Height 70 Feet Maximum Less than 40 Feet YES
Open Space 150 SF/Unit Minimum 578 SF/Unit YES
Parking
Section 9.3.5 (Parking Requirements) of the plan states that residential development with a
density of 30 units/acre or less are required to provide parking consistent with the requirements
described in Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code. The project has a proposed density of
24 dwelling units per acre and is made up of 75 units. The project is required to provide 170
resident parking spaces and 15 guest parking spaces, for a total of 185 overall parking spaces,
which the project provides. The plan allows for street parking spaces to be counted towards
required parking spaces. The following table summarizes the required and provided parking
spaces:
Page 13
Page 6 of 9
2
6
4
1
PARKING ANALYSIS
Number
of Units
Square
Footage
Parking Ratio Required
Parking
Multi-family Unit
(Two Bedrooms)14 N/A 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport)28
Multi-family Unit
(Three Bedroom)21 N/A 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport)42
Multi-family Unit
(Four Bedroom)40 N/A 2.5 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport)100
Guest parking 75 N/A 1 Per 5 Units 15
Total Garage Parking Required (Covered)170
Total Garage Parking Provided (Covered)170
Street Parking Spaces 15
Total Parking Spaces Required 185
Total Parking Spaces Provided 185
Open Space and Recreational Amenities
Individual projects within the plan area are required to provide 150 square feet of a combination
of private and common open space area per unit. The project provides private decks along with
common seating and recreation areas that when averaged across the project total approximately
578 square feet per unit. Common open space areas include passive lawn areas and paseos
totaling approximately 34,261 square feet.
In addition to the project-specific open space amenities, the larger plan area will include common
recreation facilities including pools/spas, fitness centers, parks, walking paths, and common
gathering areas that are designed to meet the recreational amenity requirements that are
generally required of multi-family projects within the City. These common recreational facilities
areas are generally designed to be within close proximity to each of the residential developments
throughout the larger project site.
Page 14
Page 7 of 9
2
6
4
1
Figure 5: Landscape Plan
Walls/Fences
Onsite walls include street facing 36-inch-tall patio walls/fences along Streets B, C, D, and Resort
Parkway. A sidewalk along the project perimeter creates a link in the larger pedestrian network
that will connect the project site to the larger Resort Specific Plan area.
Design Review Committee
The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Boling and Diaz) on September 17,
2024. Staff notes that this subject application for planning area N-12 was presented to the Design
Review Committee in tandem with another proposed project by the same developer, specifically
for planning area N-14 of the Resort Specific Plan. Following discussion on the project, the DRC
voted to move forward with Planning Area N-12 to the Planning Commission with a
recommendation of approval. A full summary of the meeting minutes are included with this staff
report as Exhibit C.
Page 15
Page 8 of 9
2
6
4
1
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 the total art value required per
Section 17.124.020.C. is $56,250. 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, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to 165
property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on October 30, 2024. To date, no
comments have been received regarding the project notifications.
Environmental Analysis
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City’s
approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-
00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR 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.
To demonstrate that no subsequent EIR is required, the City’s environmental consultant, T&B
Planning, prepared an Environmental Technical Analysis Memorandum (Exhibit D – dated
September 9, 2024). The memorandum concluded that the project is within the scope of the
approved overall project and analysis included in the Final EIR identified above and no additional
environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Design Review
DRC2023-00360. 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
previous EIR. The previous environmental review analyzed the effects of the proposed project.
Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR, nor 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.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed development is consistent with the intent of the Resort Specific Plan and will
contribute to achieving the fiscal benefits that were discussed in the Staff Report for the
associated amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development Code that were
approved by the City Council in 2016. This includes revenue generated from property tax, fees,
and assessments, and the costs for government services including, police, animal care,
community development, public works, and other general government functions.
Page 16
Page 9 of 9
2
6
4
1
In the original staff report, the annual revenues/costs in the calculations in the analysis were based
on the overall project when it was fully constructed and completed. The benefits include the
project’s contribution to Park District 85 (PD85), Landscape Maintenance District 1 (LMD1), and
Street Lighting District 1 (SLD1). This additional revenue from the proposed project would reduce
the need for General Fund contributions to these assessment districts.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:
The project supports the Council’s core value of building and preserving a family-oriented
atmosphere through thoughtful development of neighborhoods with a variety of designs and
amenities to meet our current and future resident’s needs.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – Project Location
Exhibit B – Project Plans
Exhibit C – DRC Comments and Action Agenda dated September 17, 2024
Exhibit D – CEQA Section 15162 Compliance Memorandum
Exhibit E – Draft Resolution with Conditions of Approval
Page 17
Exhibit A
Page 18
5
1
4
3
EXHIBIT B
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:
Project Plans
Page 19
Design Review Committee Meeting Agenda
September 17, 2024
FINAL MINUTES
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
New Time: 6:00 p.m.
A. Call to Order
The meeting of the Design Review Committee held on September 17, 2024. The meeting was called to
order by Sean McPherson, Staff Coordinator, at 6:00 p.m.
Design Review Committee members present: Vice Chairman Boling and Commissioner Diaz
Staff Present: Bond Mendez, Associate Planner
B.Public Communications
Staff Coordinator opened the public communication and after noting there were no public comments,
closed public communications.
C.Consent Calendar
C1. Consideration to adopt Meeting Minutes of September 3, 2024.
Item C1. Motion carried 2-0 vote.
D.Project Review Items
D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, DESIGN REVIEW, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP – RIGHT
TIME DEVELOPMENT - A request for site plan and architectural review of 18 multi-family units
and a tentative map for condominium purposes located on approximately 1.3 acres of land
within the Medium (M) Residential zone, located on the northwest corner of Arrow Route and
Manola Place; APNs: 0207-201-24, -10, -11. This item is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15332 (SUBTPM20738,
Design Review DRC2023-00131).
Staff presented the item to the Design Review Committee. The DRC complimented the project
design overall and asked for clarification on a few items. Committee member Boling asked for
clarification on inquiries for development and connectivity to the vacant property to the west of
the project site. Boling also requested clarification on enforcement and management of private
parking violations. The applicant responded and confirmed that the HOA is responsible for
parking management. Committee member Diaz asked for clarification on the tot lot and to
confirm if playground equipment will be included. The applicant confirmed and stated that
passive grass areas will be included as well. Both committee members commended the
applicant for a thoughtful and well-designed project. The Design Review Committee voted to
move the project forward to the Planning Commission with a recommendation of approval.
The Committee took the following action:
Recommend approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
Exhibit C
Page 20
D2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
- A request for site plan and architectural review of 75 multi-family units located on
approximately 3.18 acres of land within Planning Area N-12 in the Core Living (CL) Placetype
of the Resort North Specific Plan, located north of 6th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink right
of way, and west of Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review DRC2023-
00360). Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection
with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan
Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-
00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is
required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project.
Staff presented two items from the Lewis Management Corp. team as one presentation to the
Design Review Committee. The two items are two separate planning areas, N12 (DRC2023-
00360) and N14 (DRC2023-00331), both within the Resort North Specific Plan.
Regarding Planning Area N-12 (DRC2023-00360), the DRC asked for clarification on a few
items. Committee member Diaz asked for clarification on the “community boxes” to which the
applicant confirmed these are mailboxes and bulletin boards for community events. Diaz also
requested clarification on the availability of recreational space within the project site. The
applicant responded and confirmed that the overall Resort Specific Plan area will provide
multiple locations for recreation and amenities. Committee member Boling asked if the
applicant may consider including little free libraries throughout the community.
Regarding Planning Area N-14 (DRC2023-00331), Boling discussed the juxtaposition of the
roof style and the contemporary style for N-14 and the related parapet roofs. The Committee
voted to move forward with Planning Area N12 to the Planning Commission with a
recommendation of approval.
The Committee took the following action:
Recommend approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
D3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
- A request for site plan and architectural review of 84 multi-family units located on
approximately 3.4 acres of land within Planning Area N-14 in the Village Neighborhood (VN)
Placetype of the Resort North Specific Plan, located north of 6th Street, south of the
BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review
DRC2023-00331). Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in
connection with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific
Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-
00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is
required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project.
As mentioned, this item was presented along with the previous Agenda Item (D2). Following
the presentation and discussion, the Committee made a separate motion to move forward with
Planning Area N14 with the direction to the applicant to further analyze topic of the consistency
between hip roof and parapets on the contemporary style buildings.
The Committee took the following action:
Recommend approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
Page 21
E. Adjournment
Principal Planner Sean McPherson adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
Page 22
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
September 17, 2024
7:00 p.m.
Bond Mendez, CPD, Associate Planner
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP - A
request for site plan and architectural review of 75 multi-family units located on approximately
3.18 acres of land within Planning Area N-12 in the Core Living (CL) Placetype of the Resort North
Specific Plan, located north of 6th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of
Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review DRC2023-00360). Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City’s approval of General
Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and
Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162,
no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary
approvals of the same project.
Site Characteristics and Background: The project site is part of a 160-acre property that was
formerly developed with the privately owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course and within
the Empire Lakes Specific Plan (the “Specific Plan”). The golf course was closed in mid-2016
following City Council approval to develop a new mixed-use, transit-oriented Development (The
Resort) regulated by two separate specific plans, Resort South Specific Plan and Resort North
Specific Plan. The Resort North Specific Plan is located north of 6th Street and south of the
BNSF/Metrolink right of way and has been rough graded with a combined area of approximately
91 acres of land. The subject project site has an area of approximately 3.18 acres of land with the
Resort North Specific Plan and is Parcel 7 of Tract 20440.
Land Uses: The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for, the project site
and the surrounding properties are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Land City Center Core Living (Planning Area N12)
North Vacant Land City Center Recreation (Planning Areas N16 and N17)
South Vacant Land City Center Core Living (Planning Areas N12 and N13)
East Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Areas N14 and N15)
West Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Areas N11)
Project Overview: The project is for the development of 75 for sale multi-family townhouse units.
The Resort North Specific Plan is divided into nineteen (19) planning areas broken into 4
Placetypes. The project site is within the planning area N-14 and the Core Living (CL) Placetype.
The site is also partially within the Mixed-Use Overlay along the D Street alignment. The specific
plan provides flexibility in location of the non-residential land uses as long as the target square
footage of non-residential land use is met.
Architecture, Building Plotting, and Site Layout: The Specific Plan encourages the use of multiple
architectural design themes throughout the Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan provides
standard characteristics that should be incorporated into the architecture to ensure that the
proposed design is consistent with the selected design theme. The applicant has chosen two
architectural design themes: Craftsman and Spanish. Design elements include tile roofs, stucco
and horizontal siding, stone veneer, and paneling to reinforce the specific architectural style. The
materials are carried to each elevation to emphasize the chosen architectural theme and building
Page 23
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00360 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 2
articulation. In turn, each architectural theme is distributed throughout the plan area to create a
varied street scene.
Craftsman
Spanish
Page 24
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00360 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 3
Architectural Theme Distribution. Black Star = Spanish elevations.
The Specific Plan has a stated goal that building massing and design should reinforce the
pedestrian scale of the adjacent street. The proposed three-story buildings are all below 40 feet
in height and are of a size and scale that does not overwhelm the adjacent public streets,
pedestrian pathways, or paseos. The building massing includes extensive wall and roof plane
articulation, creating visual interest to each building elevation. The front entrances to the individual
units and the second story balconies face either the public street or a paseo, helping to activate
the adjacent public spaces and providing an extra level of security (i.e., eyes on the street).
The project consists of 14 two-bedroom units, 21 three-bedroom units, and 40 three-bedroom
units that range in size from 1,201 to 2,201 square feet and are within 4, 5, and 7-unit buildings
with optional flex ground floor spaces that can be used as a bedroom, home office or workspace.
Each unit includes a private balcony with the minimum required depth of 5 feet. The units are
generally plotted with the front entrances either facing a public street or a paseo interior to the
project. Trash collection will take place in individual trash bins in fixed locations throughout the
project site.
UNIT SUMMARY
Residential
Unit Type Unit Size (SF - Net) Number of Units
2 Bedroom 1,204 SF 14
3 Bedroom 1,933 SF 21
4 Bedroom 1,897 to 2,201 SF 40
Total Number of Units 75
Consistent with the requirements of the Specific Plan, the project will be an “open community.”
All streets within the interior of the project will be private and maintained by a homeowner’s
association. These streets, however, will be open to the public. Access into the project will be
provided by street connections from four adjacent streets (Streets B, C, D, and Resort Parkway)
and from non-gated pedestrian access points. Landscaping features, including enhanced paving,
planters, trees, bike racks and benches. or bollards, may improve pedestrian safety and use.
Decorative paving is provided at each of the main pedestrian crossings throughout the project
Page 25
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00360 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 4
site.
Compliance with Development Standards:
The project was designed in compliance with Resort North Specific Plan for projects within the
Core Living (CL) Placetype and shown in the following table:
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Development Standard Required Proposed Complies
Residential Density 18 to 35 DU/AC 24 DU/AC YES
Street Setback from Resort
Parkway ROW
10 Feet
10 Feet YES
Building Separation Across
Drive Aisles 26 Feet Minimum 31 Feet or greater
YES
Interior/Rear Yard Setback 10 Feet N/A YES
Building Height 70 Feet Maximum Less than 40 Feet YES
Open Space 150 SF/Unit Minimum 578 SF/Unit YES
Parking: Section 9.3.5 (Parking Requirements) of the Specific Plan states that residential
development with a density of 30 units/acre or less are required to provide parking consistent with
the requirements described in Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code. The project has a
proposed density of 24 dwelling units per acre and is made up of 75 units. The project is required
to provide 170 resident parking spaces and 15 guest parking spaces, for a total of 185 overall
parking spaces. The project provides 185 resident parking spaces. The Specific Plan allows for
street parking spaces to be counted towards required parking spaces. The following table
summarizes the required and provided parking spaces:
PARKING ANALYSIS
Number
of Units
Square
Footage
Parking Ratio
Required
Parking
Multi-family Unit
(Two Bedrooms) 14 N/A 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport) 28
Multi-family Unit
(Three Bedroom) 21 N/A 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport) 42
Page 26
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00360 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 5
Multi-family Unit
(Four Bedroom) 40 N/A 2.5 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport) 100
Guest parking 75 N/A 1 Per 5 Units 15
Total Garage Parking Required (Covered) 170
Total Garage Parking Provided (Covered) 170
Street Parking Spaces 15
Total Parking Spaces Required 185
Total Parking Spaces Provided 185
Open Space and Recreational Amenities: Individual projects within the Specific Plan area are
required to provide 150 square feet of a combination of private and common open space area per
unit. The project provides private decks along with common seating and recreation areas that
when averaged across the project total approximately 578 square feet per unit. Common open
space areas include passive lawn areas and paseos totaling approximately 34,261 square feet.
In addition to the project-specific open space amenities, the larger Specific Plan area will include
common recreation facilities including pools/spas, fitness centers, parks, walking paths, and
common gathering areas that are designed to meet the recreational amenity requirements that
are generally required of multi-family projects within the City. These common recreational facilities
areas are generally designed to be within close proximity to each of the residential developments
throughout the larger project site.
Page 27
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00360 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 6
Landscape Plan
Walls/Fences: Onsite walls include street facing 36-inch-tall patio walls/fences along Streets B,
C, D, and Resort Parkway. A sidewalk along the project perimeter creates a link in the larger
pedestrian network that will connect the project site to the larger Resort North Specific Plan area.
Staff Recommendation: The project complies with the intent and development requirements of
the Resort North Specific Plan and the Core Living (CL) Placetype. The buildings are placed close
to the street, creating an urban street scene consistent with the standards set forth in the Specific
Plan, pedestrian connections are provided throughout the project. Open space areas are
dispersed throughout the project area and low-walled patios are provided along the adjacent
streets. The buildings are well designed and varied in architecture including carrying materials to
each elevation creating a varied street scene.
Staff requests that the Design Review Committee consider the design (building architecture, site
planning, etc.) of the proposed project and recommend the selected action below:
☒Recommend Approval of the design of the project as proposed by the applicant.
☐Recommend Approval with Modifications to the design of the project by incorporating
revisions requested by the Committee. Follow-up review by the Committee is not required. The
revisions shall be verified by staff prior to review and action by the Planning Director / Planning
Commission.
☐Recommend Conditional Approval of the design of the project by incorporating revisions
Page 28
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00360 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 7
requested by the Committee. Follow-up review by the Committee is not required. The revisions
shall be Conditions of Approval and verified by staff during plan check after review and action by
the Planning Director / Planning Commission.
☐Recommend Denial of the design of the project as proposed by the applicant.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Bond Mendez, Associate Planner
Members Present:
Staff Coordinator: Sean McPherson, Principal Planner
Exhibit A – Project Plans
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-036
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW
DRC2023-00360, A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW OF 75 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY
3.18 ACRES OF LAND WITHIN PLANNING AREA N-12 IN THE CORE
LIVING (CL) PLACETYPE OF PLANNING AREA 1B OF THE RESORT
SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED NORTH OF 6TH STREET, SOUTH OF THE
BNSF/METROLINK RIGHT OF WAY, AND WEST OF MILLIKEN
AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN:
0209-272-20.
A.Recitals.
1.The applicant, SC Rancho Development Corp., filed an application for the approval of
Design Review DRC2023-00360 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Design Review request is referred to as "the application."
2.On the 13th day of November 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga opened the public hearing on the item and, upon request of staff, voted
unanimously to continue the item to a date certain of December 11, 2024.
3.On the 11th day of December 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.
4.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B.Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1.This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the
above-referenced public hearings on November 13, 2024, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to a 3.18 acres undeveloped site generally located north
of 6th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of Milliken Avenue; and
b.The existing Land Use, General Plan and Zoning designations for the project site
and adjacent properties are as follows:
Exhibit E
Page 148
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-036
DRC2023-00360– SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP.
DECEMBER 11, 2024
Page 2
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Land City Center Core Living (Planning Area N12)
North Vacant Land City Center Recreation (Planning Areas N16 and N17)
South Vacant Land City Center Core Living (Planning Areas N12 and N13)
West Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Areas
N11)
c. The project is for the development of 75 for sale multi-family townhouse units. The
Resort Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B is divided into nineteen (19) planning areas broken into 4
Placetypes; and
d. The project site is within the planning area N-12 and the Core Living (CL)
Placetype. The site is also partially within the Mixed-Use Overlay along the D Street alignment;
and
e. The Design Review Committee reviewed and recommended approval as proposed
on September 17, 2024.
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 proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and any
applicable specific plan. The General Plan envisions a mix of high-density residential and non-
residential land uses. The proposed development is part of the Resort Specific Plan which will
include residential and commercial land uses. Project development would also help implement
and further several goals and policies of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, including the
ability to provide complete places (LC1.1), ensuring the quality of public space (LC- 1.3), and
the provision of compatible development (LC-1.11). The additional housing units will also assist
the City in reaching its State housing Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) outlined in the
Housing Element; and
b. The proposed development is in accord with the objectives of the Development
Code, the Resort Specific Plan, and the purposes of the zone in which the site is located. The
project site is within the planning area N-12 and the Core Living (CL) Placetype which was
established to provide a range of housing types including attached townhomes in a walkable
mixed-use urban community. The project density of 24 dwelling units per acre is with the expected
density for the Core Living (CL) Placetype of 18-35 dwelling units per acre; and
c. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code and the Resort Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B. The proposed development
meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the Resort Specific Plan, Planning
Area 1B, including density, setbacks, building height, open space and parking: and
d. The proposed development, 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. A CEQA Section 15162 compliance memo was prepared for the
project which demonstrates that the project would not have a significant impact on the
environment.
Page 149
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-036
DRC2023-00360– SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP.
DECEMBER 11, 2024
Page 3
4. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with
the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment
DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR 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.
To demonstrate that no subsequent EIR is required, the City’s environmental consultant, T&B
Planning, prepared an Environmental Technical Analysis Memorandum (Exhibit D – dated
September 9, 2024). The memorandum concluded that the project is within the scope of the
approved overall project and analysis included in the Final EIR identified above and no additional
environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Design Review
DRC2023-00360. 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
previous EIR. The previous environmental review analyzed the effects of the proposed project.
Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR, nor 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 Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning and Economic Development Department’s
determination of exemption, and based on its own independent judgment, concurs in the staff’s
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 project 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 11th DAY OF DECEMBER 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 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and
Page 150
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-036
DRC2023-00360– SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP.
DECEMBER 11, 2024
Page 4
adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of
the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of December 2024, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 151
www.CityofRC.us Printed: 11/20/2024
Project #: DRC2023-00360
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
1. The Design Review authorizes the construction of 75 multi-family units located on approximately 3.18
acres of land within Planning Area N-12 in the Core Living (CL) Placetype of The Resort Specific Plan,
Planning Area 1B.
2. The project shall comply with the related CEQA Section 15162 Compliance Memorandum dated
September 9, 2024, and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) approved on
May 18, 2016 in connection with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC 2015-00114,
Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115.
Standard Conditions of Approval
3. 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.
4. 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.
Page 152
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 2 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
Page 153
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 3 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
9. 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 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 Department.
10. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible for the
continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the
public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in
healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any
damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of
damage.
11. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the
case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for
Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits for the development or
prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction
Services.
12. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right -of-way on the
perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
13. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls.
Page 154
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 4 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
14. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the
required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and
coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the
Engineering Services Department.
15. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope,
shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control .
Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the
developer prior to occupancy.
16. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope
shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one
15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each
100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in
vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250
sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope
plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed
by the developer prior to occupancy.
17. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for Planning Director review and approval
prior to issuance of Building Permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics
of the selected tree species.
18. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per
30 linear feet of building.
19. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design
shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department.
20. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient
landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82.
21. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from
back of sidewalk.
22. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and
exits shall be striped per City standards.
23. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided
throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/ recreational
uses.
24. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any
signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate
application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs.
25. Unless exempt, directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or town
homes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning
Department and the RCFPD prior to issuance of Building Permits for the signs in question. ( Chapter
17.74.040 B-4)
Page 155
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 5 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
26. 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, or any
Development Agreement in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance .
27. 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.
28. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners'
Association shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of Building
Permits, whichever occurs first. Verification of recordation shall be provided to the City Engineer. The
Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Department a list of the name and address of
their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes.
29. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for
Planning Director and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not limited to, public
notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction
activity, dust control measures, and security fencing.
30. 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, the Development Code regulations ,
and The Resort Specific Plan. and Development Agreement.
31. All Double Check Devices and Fire District Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall require
the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services /Fire Department
prior to building permit issuance. All Double Check Devices and Fire District Connections (FDC) shall
be screened in accordance with Development Code section 17.48.050.A.4.
32. All ground-mounted equipment and meters shall be visually concealed and designed to not detract from
the architecture of a building in accordance with the Resort Specific Plan.
33. A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles ,
free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the
architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval
prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
34. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner ,
homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance
shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved
prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
35. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Director and Police Department (909-477-2800) prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to
adversely affect adjacent properties.
Page 156
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 6 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
36. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State
Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Services Department to show
compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to
occupancy.
37. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for
consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building,
etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has
commenced, whichever comes first.
38. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of
Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
39. Revised Site Plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted
for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
40. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval in accordance with the
adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map
41. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the
number of trash receptacles shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the
issuance of Building Permits.
42. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick -up shall be for individual units with all
receptacles shielded from public view.
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
1. Comply with all Engineering Conditions of Approval under SUBTT20440.
2. Development Impact Fees due prior to Building Permit Issuance.
(Subject to Change/Periodic Increases - Refer to current fee schedule to determine current amounts )
except as outlined in Development Agreement Amendment Ordinance 888 approved on June 1, 2016.
3. (Final Map) The project Final Map shall meet the Subdivision Map Act, City Development Codes, and
Conditions of Approval requirements. The Final Map shall be approved and recorded with the San
Bernardino County Recorders Office prior to issuance of Building Permits .
Standard Conditions of Approval
4. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final
map.
5. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC &Rs or by deeds
and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of Building Permits, where no
map is involved.
Page 157
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 7 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
6. ** 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.
7. 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.
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
1. Designated and conforming aerial apparatus access is required in accordance with Fire District
Standard 5-1. Show aerial apparatus access on the fire access plan. The Standard has been uploaded
to the Documents section.
2. Fire apparatus access (fire lane) design, construction, and identification are required to be in
accordance with Fire District Standard 5-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents
section.
3. Roof access is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-6. The Standard has been
uploaded to the Documents section.
4. Street address and building identification signage for multi -unit residential buildings are required to be
in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-7. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents
section.
Building and Safety Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
Page 158
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 8 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Building and Safety Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural
calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance
with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards
which are effective at the time of Plan Check Submittal. The new structures are required to be equipped
with automatic fire sprinklers per the CBC/CRC NFPA 13, 13D, 13R and the Current RCFPD
Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and buildings must be in accordance to the State of CA and
ADA regulations. If it is anticipated that there will be a need for temporary fire protection water supply
and/or temporary fire access, submit a separate plan for review and approval that complies with RCFD
Standard 33-3.
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format
provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit".
2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code
and/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 approved conceptual
Grading and Drainage Plan.
3. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform
such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall
implement design recommendations per said report.
4. A geologic report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer or Engineering Geologist and submitted at
the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review.
5. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be
completed, submitted, and approved by the Engineering Services Department prior to the issuance of
building permits.
6. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and
for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of
combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed 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 a dust
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 Building and Safety Official for
review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and
Drainage Plan/Permit.
Page 159
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 9 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility
path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance
with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail
including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building
Code.
10. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible,
and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings.
11. Prior to the issuance of a grading plan for multi-family projects, the private streets and drive aisles within
multi-family developments shall include street plans as part of the Grading and Drainage Plan set. The
private street plan view shall show typical street sections. The private street profile view shall show the
private street/drive aisle centerline.
12. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined
exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond
shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official.
13. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building
Code.
14. Grading Inspections:
a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading
meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and
the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a
pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading 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 Safety Department
at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing
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 Engineering
Services Department an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly
wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record;
iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate
Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit.
15. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan)
set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the
building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC 1804.3/CRC
R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted
California Building Code/Residential Code.
Page 160
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 10 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
16. Prior to approval of the project-specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit
to the City Engineer, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of
existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed
structures and drainage of the site.
17. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to
the issuance of a grading permit.
18. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California
Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan.
19. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the
engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP)
storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP).
20. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the
project Conditions of Approval.
21. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance
of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as
provided for in the project’s Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC &R’s or
deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC &R’s
and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of
Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan.
22. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s “Memorandum of
Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan” shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Building Official and recorded with the County Recorder’s Office .
23. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification
Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan
document.
24. The applicant shall provide a copy of a completed EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) for
each underground infiltration device, with the Facility ID Number assigned, to the Building and Safety
Services Department Official prior to issuance of the Grading Permit and /or approval of the
project-specific Water Quality Management Plan. A copy of EPA Form 7520-16 shall be scanned and
pasted onto the permitted grading plan set, and a copy of said form shall be included in the
project-specific Water Quality Management Plan.
25. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person /company on a biennial basis for
the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best
management practices (BMP”s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the
responsibility of the land owner.
Page 161
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 11 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
26. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water
treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental
Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water
Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground
infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner.
27. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved
project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a
biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager.
28. A final project-specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the
Building and Safety Director, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s “Memorandum of
Storm Water Quality Management Plan” shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit or
any building permit.
29. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval of the project specific water quality management
plan all private storm water catch basin inlets shall include insert filters to capture those pollutants of
concern as addressed in the in the final project-specific water quality management plan (WQMP). At a
minimum catch basin insert filters to capture trash and other floating debris. All catch basin insert filters
shall be maintained on a regular basis as described in the “Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility
for Post Construction BMP” section of the final project-specific water quality management plan.
30. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final 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 “Section VII – Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety
Recommendations, …” of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality
Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer’s recommendations for
Appendix D, Table VII.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety
Factors”.
31. Prior to approval of the final project-specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a
soils engineer prepare a project-specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water
quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current
adopted “San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans” .
32. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil
engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water
Treatment Devices As-Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho
Cucamonga Engineering Services Department.
33. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the
infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit,
adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect
groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be
evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project-specific Water Quality Management Plan
document.
Page 162
www.CityofRC.us
Project #:
Page 12 of 12
DRC2023-00360
Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort PA N12 Lot 7
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
34. GROUND WATER PROTECTION:
Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP
document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No .
R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm
Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads:
Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection):
Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to
primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer
strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect
groundwater:
a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of
ground water quality objectives.
b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater
quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior
to infiltration.
c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large
commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial
parking lot as ‘100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or
more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sqft or more of allowable space designated for parking
purposes’).
d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment
BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity {77}, areas subject to high
vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other
high threat to water quality land uses or activities.
e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular {78} repair or
maintenance activities{79}, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used
car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does
any vehicular repair work.
f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and
groundwater contamination.
g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water
supply wells.
h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high
groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial
uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained.
i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water
Code Section 13050.
Page 163
DATE:December 11, 2024
TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development
INITIATED BY:Bond Mendez, CPD, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – SC
RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request for site plan and
architectural review of 84 multi-family units located on approximately 3.4
acres of land within Planning Area N-14 in the Village Neighborhood (VN)
Placetype of the Resort Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B, located north of
6th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of Milliken
Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review DRC2023-00331). Pursuant
to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18,
2016, in connection with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment
DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and
Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required
in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project.
(Continued from November 13, 2024, HPC/PC meeting).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution approving Design Review
DRC2023-00331 for a proposed 84-unit multi-family project in Planning Area N-14 of the Resort
Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B, subject to Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND:
The project site is part of a 160-acre property that was formerly developed with the privately
owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course. The golf course was closed in mid-2016 following
City Council approval to develop a new mixed-use development regulated by the Resort Specific
Plan and divided into two separate planning areas, Planning Area 1A (PA1A) and Planning Areas
1B (PA1B). The Project area is located within PA1B which is located north of 6th Street and south
of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way and has been rough graded with a combined area of
approximately 91 acres of land. The subject project site has an area of approximately 3.4 acres
of land within PA1B and is Parcel 1 of Tract 20440.
The project was noticed to be heard by the Planning Commission on the November 13th, 2024,
public hearing. Prior to the presentation the applicant raised questions regarding the conditions
of approval. Staff did not have sufficient time to analyze the questions and on behalf of the
applicant, requested the item to be continued to a future date certain. The Planning Commission
continued the item to the date certain public hearing on December 11th, 2024.
Page 164
Page 2 of 10
2
6
3
9
Figure 1: Project Location
Land Uses
The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for, the project site and the
surrounding properties are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Area N14)
North Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Area N15
South Condominiums Urban
Neighborhood The Resort Specific Plan (Planning Area 1A)
East Apartments City Center Center 2 (CE2)
West Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Areas N12 and N13)
Page 165
Page 3 of 10
2
6
3
9
ANALYSIS:
The project is for the development of 84 for sale multi-family townhouse units. The Resort Specific
Plan (plan), Planning Area 1B is divided into nineteen (19) planning areas broken into 4
placetypes. The project site is within the planning area N-14 and the Village Neighborhood (VN)
placetype. The site is also partially within the Mixed-Use Overlay along the 6th Street alignment.
The plan provides flexibility in location of the non-residential land uses as long as the target square
footage of non-residential land use is met (a minimum 50,000 and maximum 85,000 combined
square feet of non-residential is required between Planning Areas 1A and 1B).
Architecture, Building Plotting, and Site Layout
The plan encourages the use of multiple architectural design themes throughout the plan area.
The plan provides standard characteristics that should be incorporated into the architecture to
ensure that the proposed design is consistent with the selected design theme. The applicant has
chosen two architectural design themes: Prairie and Contemporary. Design elements include tile
roofs, cement siding and panels, stone veneer, and stucco to reinforce the specific architectural
style. The materials are carried to each elevation to emphasize the chosen architectural theme
and building articulation. In turn, each architectural theme is distributed throughout the plan area
to create a varied street scene.
Figure 2: Prairie
Page 166
Page 4 of 10
2
6
3
9
Figure 3: Contemporary
Architectural Theme Distribution
The plan has a stated goal that building massing and design should reinforce the pedestrian scale
of the adjacent street. The proposed three-story buildings are all below 40 feet in height and are
of a size and scale that does not overwhelm the adjacent public streets, pedestrian pathways, or
paseos. The building massing includes extensive wall and roof plane articulation, creating visual
interest to each building elevation. The front entrances to the individual units and the second story
balconies face either the public street or a paseo, helping to activate the adjacent public spaces
and providing an extra level of security (i.e., eyes on the street).
Figure 4: Location of building themes. “P” denotes location of Prairie, and “C” denotes location of
Contemporary.
Page 167
Page 5 of 10
2
6
3
9
The project consists of 58 two-bedroom units and 26 three-bedroom units that range in size from
1,153 to 1,701 square feet and are within 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9-unit buildings with optional flex ground
floor spaces that can be used as a bedroom, home office or workspace. Each unit includes a
private balcony with the minimum required depth of 5 feet. The units are generally plotted with
the front entrances either facing a public street or a paseo interior to the project. Trash collection
will take place in individual trash bins in fixed locations throughout the project site.
UNIT SUMMARY
Residential
Unit Type Unit Size (SF - Net)Number of Units
2 Bedroom 1,153 to 1,553 SF 58
3 Bedroom 1,689 to 1,701 SF 26
Total Number of Units 84
Consistent with the requirements of the Specific Plan, the project will be an “open community.”
All streets within the interior of the project will be private and maintained by a homeowner’s
association. These streets, however, will be open to the public. In compliance with the Resort
Specific Plan standards for PA1B, access into the project will be provided by private street
connections from one adjacent streets (Street B) and from non-gated pedestrian access points.
Landscaping features, including enhanced paving, planters, trees, bike racks and benches. or
bollards, may improve pedestrian safety and use. Decorative paving is provided at each of the
main pedestrian crossings throughout the project site.
Compliance with Development Standards
The project was designed in compliance with the Resort Specific Plan PA1B for projects within
the Village Neighborhood (VN) Placetype and shown in the following table:
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Development Standard Required Proposed Complies
Residential Density 16 to 28 DU/AC 25 DU/AC YES
Street Setback 0 to 10 Feet 10 Feet or Less YES
Building Separation Across
Drive Aisles 26 Feet Minimum 31 Feet or greater YES
Interior/Rear Yard Setback 10 Feet 10 Feet or Greater YES
Building Height 70 Feet Maximum Less than 40 Feet YES
Page 168
Page 6 of 10
2
6
3
9
Open Space 150 SF/Unit Minimum 578 SF/Unit YES
Parking
Section 9.3.5 (Parking Requirements) of the Specific Plan states that residential development
with a density of 30 units/acre or less are required to provide parking consistent with the
requirements described in Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code. The project has a
proposed density of 25 dwelling units per acre and is made up of 84 units. The project is required
to provide 168 resident parking spaces and 17 guest parking spaces, for a total of 185 overall
parking spaces. The project provides 185 resident parking spaces. The Specific Plan allows for
street parking spaces to be counted towards required parking spaces. The following table
summarizes the required and provided parking spaces:
PARKING ANALYSIS
Number
of Units
Square
Footage
Parking Ratio Required
Parking
Multi-family Unit
(Two Bedrooms)58 N/A 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport)116
Multi-family Unit
(Three Bedroom)26 N/A 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport)52
Guest parking 84 N/A 1 Per 5 Units 17
Total Garage Parking Required (Covered)168
Total Garage Parking Provided (Covered)168
Street Parking Spaces 17
Total Parking Spaces Required 185
Total Parking Spaces Provided 185
Open Space and Recreational Amenities
Individual projects within the Specific Plan area are required to provide 150 square feet of a
combination of private and common open space area per unit. The project provides private decks
along with common seating and recreation areas that when averaged across the project total
approximately 578 square feet per unit. Common open space areas include passive lawn areas
and paseos totaling approximately 44,950 square feet.
Page 169
Page 7 of 10
2
6
3
9
In addition to the project-specific open space amenities, the larger Specific Plan area will include
common recreation facilities including pools/spas, fitness centers, parks, walking paths, and
common gathering areas that are designed to meet the recreational amenity requirements that
are generally required of multi-family projects within the city. These common recreational facilities
areas are generally designed to be within close proximity to each of the residential developments
throughout the larger project site.
Walls/Fences
Onsite walls include street facing 36-inch-tall patio walls/fences along street B, 6-foot-high fences
around the park, and a combination freestanding/retaining wall along a portion of the north
property line due to onsite grades. A stairway is provided along the north property line creating a
link in the larger pedestrian network that will connect the project site to the larger plan area.
Page 170
Page 8 of 10
2
6
3
9
Figure 5: Landscape Plan
Page 171
Page 9 of 10
2
6
3
9
Design Review Committee
The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Boling and Diaz) on September 17,
2024. Staff notes that this subject application for planning area N-14 was presented to the Design
Review Committee in tandem with another proposed project by the same developer, specifically
for planning area N-12 of the Resort Specific Plan. The DRC voted to move forward with Planning
Area N14 with the direction to the applicant to further address topic of the consistency between
hip roof and parapets on the contemporary style buildings. A full summary of the meeting minutes
is included with this staff report as Exhibit C.
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 the total art value required per
Section 17.124.020.C. is $63,000. 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, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to 165
property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on October 30, 2024. To date, no
comments have been received regarding the project notifications.
Environmental Analysis:
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City’s
approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-
00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR 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.
To demonstrate that no subsequent EIR is required, the City’s environmental consultant, T&B
Planning, prepared an Environmental Technical Analysis Memorandum (Exhibit D – dated
September 9, 2024). The memorandum concluded that the project is within the scope of the
approved overall project and analysis included in the Final EIR identified above and no additional
environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Design Review
DRC2023-00331. 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
previous EIR. The previous environmental review analyzed the effects of the proposed project.
Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR, nor have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or
Page 172
Page 10 of 10
2
6
3
9
different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of
less than significant.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed development is consistent with the intent of the Resort Specific Plan and will
contribute to achieving the fiscal benefits that were discussed in the Staff Report for the
associated amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development Code that were
approved by the City Council in 2016. This includes revenue generated from property tax, fees,
and assessments, and the costs for government services including, police, animal care,
community development, public works, and other general government functions.
In the original staff report, the annual revenues/costs in the calculations in the analysis were based
on the overall project when it was fully constructed and completed. The benefits include the
project’s contribution to Park District 85 (PD85), Landscape Maintenance District 1 (LMD1), and
Street Lighting District 1 (SLD1). This additional revenue from the proposed project would reduce
the need for General Fund contributions to these assessment districts.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:
The project supports the Council’s core value of building and preserving a family-oriented
atmosphere through thoughtful development of neighborhoods with a variety of designs and
amenities to meet our current and future resident’s needs.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – Project Location
Exhibit B – Project Plans
Exhibit C – DRC Comments and Action Agenda dated September 17, 2024
Exhibit D – CEQA Section 15162 Compliance Memorandum
Exhibit E – Draft Resolution with Conditions of Approval
Page 173
Exhibit A
Page 174
5
1
7
9
EXHIBIT B
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:
N14 Plans
Page 175
Design Review Committee Meeting Agenda
September 17, 2024
FINAL MINUTES
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
New Time: 6:00 p.m.
A. Call to Order
The meeting of the Design Review Committee held on September 17, 2024. The meeting was called to
order by Sean McPherson, Staff Coordinator, at 6:00 p.m.
Design Review Committee members present: Vice Chairman Boling and Commissioner Diaz
Staff Present: Bond Mendez, Associate Planner
B.Public Communications
Staff Coordinator opened the public communication and after noting there were no public comments,
closed public communications.
C.Consent Calendar
C1. Consideration to adopt Meeting Minutes of September 3, 2024.
Item C1. Motion carried 2-0 vote.
D.Project Review Items
D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, DESIGN REVIEW, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP – RIGHT
TIME DEVELOPMENT - A request for site plan and architectural review of 18 multi-family units
and a tentative map for condominium purposes located on approximately 1.3 acres of land
within the Medium (M) Residential zone, located on the northwest corner of Arrow Route and
Manola Place; APNs: 0207-201-24, -10, -11. This item is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15332 (SUBTPM20738,
Design Review DRC2023-00131).
Staff presented the item to the Design Review Committee. The DRC complimented the project
design overall and asked for clarification on a few items. Committee member Boling asked for
clarification on inquiries for development and connectivity to the vacant property to the west of
the project site. Boling also requested clarification on enforcement and management of private
parking violations. The applicant responded and confirmed that the HOA is responsible for
parking management. Committee member Diaz asked for clarification on the tot lot and to
confirm if playground equipment will be included. The applicant confirmed and stated that
passive grass areas will be included as well. Both committee members commended the
applicant for a thoughtful and well-designed project. The Design Review Committee voted to
move the project forward to the Planning Commission with a recommendation of approval.
The Committee took the following action:
Recommend approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
Exhibit C
Page 176
D2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
- A request for site plan and architectural review of 75 multi-family units located on
approximately 3.18 acres of land within Planning Area N-12 in the Core Living (CL) Placetype
of the Resort North Specific Plan, located north of 6th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink right
of way, and west of Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review DRC2023-
00360). Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection
with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan
Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-
00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is
required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project.
Staff presented two items from the Lewis Management Corp. team as one presentation to the
Design Review Committee. The two items are two separate planning areas, N12 (DRC2023-
00360) and N14 (DRC2023-00331), both within the Resort North Specific Plan.
Regarding Planning Area N-12 (DRC2023-00360), the DRC asked for clarification on a few
items. Committee member Diaz asked for clarification on the “community boxes” to which the
applicant confirmed these are mailboxes and bulletin boards for community events. Diaz also
requested clarification on the availability of recreational space within the project site. The
applicant responded and confirmed that the overall Resort Specific Plan area will provide
multiple locations for recreation and amenities. Committee member Boling asked if the
applicant may consider including little free libraries throughout the community.
Regarding Planning Area N-14 (DRC2023-00331), Boling discussed the juxtaposition of the
roof style and the contemporary style for N-14 and the related parapet roofs. The Committee
voted to move forward with Planning Area N12 to the Planning Commission with a
recommendation of approval.
The Committee took the following action:
Recommend approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
D3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
- A request for site plan and architectural review of 84 multi-family units located on
approximately 3.4 acres of land within Planning Area N-14 in the Village Neighborhood (VN)
Placetype of the Resort North Specific Plan, located north of 6th Street, south of the
BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review
DRC2023-00331). Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in
connection with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific
Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-
00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is
required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project.
As mentioned, this item was presented along with the previous Agenda Item (D2). Following
the presentation and discussion, the Committee made a separate motion to move forward with
Planning Area N14 with the direction to the applicant to further analyze topic of the consistency
between hip roof and parapets on the contemporary style buildings.
The Committee took the following action:
Recommend approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
Page 177
E. Adjournment
Principal Planner Sean McPherson adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
Page 178
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
September 17, 2024
7:00 p.m.
Bond Mendez, CPD, Associate Planner
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP - A
request for site plan and architectural review of 84 multi-family units located on approximately 3.4
acres of land within Planning Area N-14 in the Village Neighborhood (VN) Placetype of the Resort
North Specific Plan, located north of 6th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and
west of Milliken Avenue; APN: 0209-272-20. (Design Review DRC2023-00331). Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City’s approval of General
Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and
Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162,
no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary
approvals of the same project.
Site Characteristics and Background: The project site is part of a 160-acre property that was
formerly developed with the privately owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course and within
the Empire Lakes Specific Plan (the “Specific Plan”). The golf course was closed in mid-2016
following City Council approval to develop a new mixed-use, transit-oriented Development (The
Resort) regulated by two separate specific plans, Resort South Specific Plan and Resort North
Specific Plan. The Resort North Specific Plan is located north of 6th Street and south of the
BNSF/Metrolink right of way and has been rough graded with a combined area of approximately
91 acres of land. The subject project site has an area of approximately 3.4 acres of land with the
Resort North Specific Plan and is Parcel 1 of Tract 20440.
Land Uses: The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for, the project site
and the surrounding properties are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Area N14)
North Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Area N15
South Condominiums Urban
Neighborhood The Resort Specific Plan (Planning Area 1A)
East Apartments City Center Center 2 (CE2)
West Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Areas N12 and N13)
Project Overview: The project is for the development of 84 for sale multi-family townhouse units.
The Resort North Specific Plan is divided into nineteen (19) planning areas broken into 4
Placetypes. The project site is within the planning area N-14 and the Village Neighborhood (VN)
Placetype. The site is also partially within the Mixed-Use Overlay along the 6th Street alignment.
The specific plan provides flexibility in location of the non-residential land uses as long as the
target square footage of non-residential land use is met.
Architecture, Building Plotting, and Site Layout: The Specific Plan encourages the use of multiple
architectural design themes throughout the Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan provides
standard characteristics that should be incorporated into the architecture to ensure that the
proposed design is consistent with the selected design theme. The applicant has chosen two
architectural design themes: Prairie and Contemporary. Design elements include tile roofs,
cement siding and panels, stone veneer, and stucco to reinforce the specific architectural style.
Page 179
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00331 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 2
The materials are carried to each elevation to emphasize the chosen architectural theme and
building articulation. In turn, each architectural theme is distributed throughout the plan area to
create a varied street scene.
Prairie
Contemporary
Page 180
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00331 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 3
Architectural Theme Distribution
The Specific Plan has a stated goal that building massing and design should reinforce the
pedestrian scale of the adjacent street. The proposed three-story buildings are all below 40 feet
in height and are of a size and scale that does not overwhelm the adjacent public streets,
pedestrian pathways, or paseos. The building massing includes extensive wall and roof plane
articulation, creating visual interest to each building elevation. The front entrances to the individual
units and the second story balconies face either the public street or a paseo, helping to activate
the adjacent public spaces and providing an extra level of security (i.e., eyes on the street).
The project consists of 58 two-bedroom units and 26 three-bedroom units that range in size from
1,153 to 1,701 square feet and are within 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9-unit buildings with optional flex ground
floor spaces that can be used as a bedroom, home office or workspace. Each unit includes a
private balcony with the minimum required depth of 5 feet. The units are generally plotted with
the front entrances either facing a public street or a paseo interior to the project. Trash collection
will take place in individual trash bins in fixed locations throughout the project site.
UNIT SUMMARY
Residential
Unit Type Unit Size (SF - Net) Number of Units
2 Bedroom 1,153 to 1,553 SF 58
3 Bedroom 1,689 to 1,701 SF 26
Total Number of Units 84
Consistent with the requirements of the Specific Plan, the project will be an “open community.”
All streets within the interior of the project will be private and maintained by a homeowner’s
association. These streets, however, will be open to the public. Access into the project will be
provided by private street connections from one adjacent streets (Street B) and from non-gated
pedestrian access points. Landscaping features, including enhanced paving, planters, trees, bike
racks and benches. or bollards, may improve pedestrian safety and use. Decorative paving is
provided at each of the main pedestrian crossings throughout the project site.
Page 181
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00331 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 4
Compliance with Development Standards:
The project was designed in compliance with Resort North Specific Plan for projects within the
Village Neighborhood (VN) Placetype and shown in the following table:
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Development Standard Required Proposed Complies
Residential Density 16 to 28 DU/AC 25 DU/AC YES
Street Setback
0 to 10 Feet
10 Feet or Less YES
Building Separation Across
Drive Aisles 26 Feet Minimum 31 Feet or greater
YES
Interior/Rear Yard Setback 10 Feet 10 Feet or Greater YES
Building Height 70 Feet Maximum Less than 40 Feet YES
Open Space 150 SF/Unit Minimum 578 SF/Unit YES
Parking: Section 9.3.5 (Parking Requirements) of the Specific Plan states that residential
development with a density of 30 units/acre or less are required to provide parking consistent with
the requirements described in Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code. The project has a
proposed density of 25 dwelling units per acre and is made up of 84 units. The project is required
to provide 168 resident parking spaces and 17 guest parking spaces, for a total of 185 overall
parking spaces. The project provides 185 resident parking spaces. The Specific Plan allows for
street parking spaces to be counted towards required parking spaces. The following table
summarizes the required and provided parking spaces:
PARKING ANALYSIS
Number
of Units
Square
Footage
Parking Ratio
Required
Parking
Multi-family Unit
(Two Bedrooms) 58 N/A 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport) 116
Multi-family Unit
(Three Bedroom) 26 N/A 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport) 52
Guest parking 84 N/A 1 Per 5 Units 17
Page 182
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00331 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 5
Total Garage Parking Required (Covered) 168
Total Garage Parking Provided (Covered) 168
Street Parking Spaces 17
Total Parking Spaces Required 185
Total Parking Spaces Provided 185
Open Space and Recreational Amenities: Individual projects within the Specific Plan area are
required to provide 150 square feet of a combination of private and common open space area per
unit. The project provides private decks along with common seating and recreation areas that
when averaged across the project total approximately 578 square feet per unit. Common open
space areas include the community park and passive lawn areas totaling approximately 44,950
square feet.
In addition to the project-specific open space amenities, the larger Specific Plan area will include
common recreation facilities including pools/spas, fitness centers, parks, walking paths, and
common gathering areas that are designed to meet the recreational amenity requirements that
are generally required of multi-family projects within the City. These common recreational facilities
areas are generally designed to be within close proximity to each of the residential developments
throughout the larger project site.
Landscape Plan
Walls/Fences: Onsite walls include street facing 36-inch-tall patio walls/fences along Street B, 6-
foot-high fences around the park, and a combination freestanding/retaining wall along a portion
of the north property line due to onsite grades. A stairway is provided along the north property
line creating a link in the larger pedestrian network that will connect the project site to the larger
Resort North Specific Plan area.
Page 183
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2023-00331 – LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP
September 17, 2024
Page 6
Staff Recommendation: The project complies with the intent and development requirements of
the Resort North Specific Plan and the Village Neighborhood (VN) Placetype. The buildings are
placed close to the street, creating an urban street scene consistent with the standards set forth
in the Specific Plan, pedestrian connections are provided throughout the project. Open space
areas are dispersed throughout the project area and low-walled patios are provided along the
adjacent streets. The buildings are well designed and varied in architecture including carrying
materials to each elevation creating a varied street scene.
Staff requests that the Design Review Committee consider the design (building architecture, site
planning, etc.) of the proposed project and recommend the selected action below:
☒Recommend Approval of the design of the project as proposed by the applicant.
☐Recommend Approval with Modifications to the design of the project by incorporating
revisions requested by the Committee. Follow-up review by the Committee is not required. The
revisions shall be verified by staff prior to review and action by the Planning Director / Planning
Commission.
☐Recommend Conditional Approval of the design of the project by incorporating revisions
requested by the Committee. Follow-up review by the Committee is not required. The revisions
shall be Conditions of Approval and verified by staff during plan check after review and action by
the Planning Director / Planning Commission.
☐Recommend Denial of the design of the project as proposed by the applicant.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Bond Mendez, Associate Planner
Members Present:
Staff Coordinator: Sean McPherson, Principal Planner
Exhibit A – Project Plans
Page 184
Page 185
Page 186
Page 187
Page 188
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
Page 194
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Page 223
Page 224
Page 225
Page 226
Page 227
Page 228
Page 229
Page 230
Page 231
Page 232
Page 233
Page 234
Page 235
Page 236
Page 237
Page 238
Page 239
Page 240
Page 241
Page 242
Page 243
Page 244
Page 245
Page 246
Page 247
Page 248
Page 249
Page 250
Page 251
Page 252
Page 253
Page 254
Page 255
Page 256
Page 257
Page 258
Page 259
Page 260
Page 261
Page 262
Page 263
Page 264
Page 265
Page 266
Page 267
Page 268
Page 269
Page 270
Page 271
Page 272
Page 273
Page 274
Page 275
Page 276
Page 277
Page 278
Page 279
Page 280
Page 281
Page 282
Page 283
Page 284
Page 285
Page 286
Page 287
Page 288
Page 289
Page 290
Page 291
Page 292
Page 293
Page 294
Page 295
Page 296
Page 297
Page 298
Page 299
Page 300
Page 301
Page 302
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-035
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW
DRC2023-00331, A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW OF 84 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY
3.4 ACRES OF LAND WITHIN PLANNING AREA N-14 IN THE VILLAGE
NEIGHBORHOOD (VN) PLACETYPE OF PLANNING AREA 1B OF THE
RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED NORTH OF 6TH STREET, SOUTH
OF THE BNSF/METROLINK RIGHT OF WAY, AND WEST OF MILLIKEN
AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN:
0209-272-20.
A.Recitals.
1.The applicant, SC Rancho Development Corp., filed an application for the approval of
Design Review DRC2023-00331 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Design Review request is referred to as "the application."
2.On the 13th day of November 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga opened the public hearing on the item and, upon request of staff, voted
unanimously to continue the item to a date certain of December 11, 2024.
3.On the 11th day of December 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.
4.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B.Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1.This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearings on November 13, 2024, and December 11, 2024, including written and
oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as
follows:
a.The application applies to a 3.4 acres undeveloped site generally located north
of 6th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink right of way, and west of Milliken Avenue; and
b.The existing Land Use, General Plan and Zoning designations for the project site
and adjacent properties are as follows:
Exhibit E
Page 303
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-035
DRC2023-00331– SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP.
DECEMBER 11, 2024
Page 2
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Area N14)
North Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Area N15
South Condominiums Urban Neighborhood The Resort Specific Plan (Planning Area 1A)
East Apartments City Center Center 2 (CE2)
West Vacant Land City Center Village Neighborhood (Planning Areas N12
and N13)
c. The project is for the development of 84 for sale multi-family townhouse units. The
Resort Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B is divided into nineteen (19) planning areas broken into 4
Placetypes; and
d. The project site is within the planning area N-14 and the Village Neighborhood
(VN) Placetype. The site is also partially within the Mixed-Use Overlay along the 6th Street
alignment; and
e. The Design Review Committee reviewed and recommended to move forward with
the direction to the applicant to further address topic of the consistency between hip roof and
parapets on the contemporary style buildings on September 17, 2024.
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 proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable
specific plan. The General Plan envisions a mix of high-density residential and non-residential
land uses. The proposed development is part of the Resort Specific Plan which will include
residential and commercial land uses. Project development would also help further implement
several goals and policies of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, including the ability to provide
complete places (LC1.1), ensuring the quality of public space (LC- 1.3), and the provision of
compatible development (LC-1.11). The additional housing units will also assist the city in reaching
its State housing Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) outlined in the Housing Element;
and
b. The proposed development is in accord with the objectives of the Development
Code, the Resort Specific Plan, and the purposes of the zone in which the site is located. The
project site is within the planning area N-14 and the Village Neighborhood (VN) Placetype which
was established to provide a range of housing types including attached townhomes in a walkable
mixed-use urban community. The project density of 25 dwelling units per acre is with the expected
density for the Village Neighborhood (VN) Placetype of 16-28 dwelling units per acre; and
c. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code and the Resort Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B. The proposed development
meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the Resort Specific Plan, Planning
Area 1B, including density, setbacks, building height, open space and parking: and
d. The proposed development, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will
not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
Page 304
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-035
DRC2023-00331– SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP.
DECEMBER 11, 2024
Page 3
improvements in the vicinity. A CEQA Section 15162 compliance memo was prepared for the
project which demonstrates that the project would not have a significant impact on the
environment.
4. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the city certified an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with
the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment
DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR 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.
To demonstrate that no subsequent EIR is required, the City’s environmental consultant, T&B
Planning, prepared an Environmental Technical Analysis Memorandum (Exhibit D – dated
September 9, 2024). The memorandum concluded that the project is within the scope of the
approved overall project and analysis included in the Final EIR identified above and no additional
environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Design Review
DRC2023-00331. 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
previous EIR. The previous environmental review analyzed the effects of the proposed project.
Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR, nor 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 Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning and Economic Development Department’s
determination of exemption, and based on its own independent judgment, concurs in the staff’s
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 project 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 11th DAY OF DECEMBER 2024.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Tony Morales, Chairman
ATTEST:
Matt Marquez, Secretary
Page 305
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-035
DRC2023-00331– SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP.
DECEMBER 11, 2024
Page 4
I, Matt Marquez, Secretary of the Planning Commission for 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 11th day of December 2024, by the following
vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 306
www.CityofRC.us Printed: 11/20/2024
Project #: DRC2023-00331
Project Name: The Resort
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
1. The Design Review authorizes the construction of 84 multi-family units located on approximately 3.4
acres of land within Planning Area N-14 in the Village Neighborhood (VN) Placetype of The Resort
Specific Plan, Planning Area 1B.
2. The project shall comply with the related CEQA Section 15162 Compliance Memorandum dated
September 9, 2024, and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) approved on
May 18, 2016. in connection with the City’s approval of General Plan Amendment DRC 2015-00114,
Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115.
Standard Conditions of Approval
3. 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.
Page 307
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 2 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
Page 308
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 3 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
8. 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 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 Department.
9. 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.
10. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible for the
continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the
public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in
healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any
damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of
damage.
Page 309
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 4 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
11. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the
case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for
Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits for the development or
prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction
Services.
12. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right -of-way on the
perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
13. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the
required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and
coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the
Engineering Services Department.
14. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for Planning Director review and approval
prior to issuance of Building Permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics
of the selected tree species.
15. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per
30 linear feet of building.
16. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design
shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department.
17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient
landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82.
18. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls.
19. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope,
shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control .
Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the
developer prior to occupancy.
20. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope
shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one
15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each
100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in
vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250
sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope
plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed
by the developer prior to occupancy.
21. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from
back of sidewalk.
22. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and
exits shall be striped per City standards.
Page 310
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 5 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
23. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided
throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/ recreational
uses.
24. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any
signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate
application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs.
25. Unless exempt, directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or town
homes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning
Department and the RCFPD prior to issuance of Building Permits for the signs in question. ( Chapter
17.74.040 B-4)
26. 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, or any
Development Agreement in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance .
27. 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.
28. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners'
Association shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of Building
Permits, whichever occurs first. Verification of recordation shall be provided to the City Engineer. The
Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Department a list of the name and address of
their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes.
29. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for
Planning Director and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not limited to, public
notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction
activity, dust control measures, and security fencing.
30. 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, the Development Code regulations ,
and The Resort Specific Plan and Development Agreement.
31. All Double Check Devices and Fire District Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall require
the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services /Fire Department
prior to building permit issuance. All Double Check Devices and Fire District Connections (FDC) shall
be screened in accordance with Development Code section 17.48.050.A.4.
32. All ground-mounted equipment and meters shall be visually concealed and designed to not detract from
the architecture of a building in accordance with the Resort Specific Plan.
33. A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles ,
free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the
architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval
prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
Page 311
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 6 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
34. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Director and Police Department (909-477-2800) prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to
adversely affect adjacent properties.
35. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State
Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Services Department to show
compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to
occupancy.
36. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for
consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building,
etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has
commenced, whichever comes first.
37. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of
Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
38. Revised Site Plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted
for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
39. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval in accordance with the
adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map
40. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the
number of trash receptacles shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the
issuance of Building Permits.
41. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick -up shall be for individual units with all
receptacles shielded from public view.
42. Downspouts shall be painted to match adjacent surface or colored to match accent colors in
accordance with the Resort Specific Plan.
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
1. Comply with all Engineering Conditions of Approval under SUBTT20440.
2. Development Impact Fees due prior to Building Permit Issuance.
(Subject to Change/Periodic Increases - Refer to current fee schedule to determine current amounts )
except as outlined in Development Agreement Amendment Ordinance 888 approved on June 1, 2016.
3. (Final Map) The project Final Map shall meet the Subdivision Map Act, City Development Codes, and
Conditions of Approval requirements. The Final Map shall be approved and recorded with the San
Bernardino County Recorders Office prior to issuance of Building Permits .
Standard Conditions of Approval
Page 312
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 7 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
4. ** 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.
5. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final
map. Existing drainage easement within right-of-way of Metro Avenue to be vacated.
6. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC &Rs or by deeds
and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of Building Permits, where no
map is involved.
7. 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.
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
1. Roof access is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-6. The Standard has been
uploaded to the Documents section.
2. Street address and building identification signage for multi -unit residential buildings are required to be
in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-7. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents
section.
3. Designated and conforming aerial apparatus access is required in accordance with Fire District
Standard 5-1. Show aerial apparatus access on the fire access plan. The Standard has been uploaded
to the Documents section.
4. Fire apparatus access (fire lane) design, construction, and identification are required to be in
accordance with Fire District Standard 5-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents
section.
Building and Safety Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
Page 313
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 8 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Building and Safety Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural
calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance
with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards
which are effective at the time of Plan Check Submittal. The new structures are required to be equipped
with automatic fire sprinklers per the CBC/CRC NFPA 13, 13D, 13R and the Current RCFPD
Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and buildings must be in accordance to the State of CA and
ADA regulations. If it is anticipated that there will be a need for temporary fire protection water supply
and/or temporary fire access, submit a separate plan for review and approval that complies with RCFD
Standard 33-3.
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
1. Grading Inspections:
a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading
meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and
the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a
pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading 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 Safety Department
at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing
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 Engineering
Services Department an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly
wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record;
iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate
Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit.
2. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan)
set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the
building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC 1804.3/CRC
R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted
California Building Code/Residential Code.
3. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the
engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP)
storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP).
4. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the
project Conditions of Approval.
Page 314
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 9 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
5. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s “Memorandum of
Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan” shall be submitted for review and approval by the
City Engineer or his designee and recorded with the County Recorder’s Office .
6. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification
Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan
document.
7. The applicant shall provide a copy of a completed EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) for
each underground infiltration device, with the Facility ID Number assigned, to the Engineering Services
Department Official prior to issuance of the Grading Permit and/or approval of the project-specific
Water Quality Management Plan. A copy of EPA Form 7520-16 shall be scanned and pasted onto the
permitted grading plan set, and a copy of said form shall be included in the project -specific Water
Quality Management Plan.
8. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person /company on a biennial basis for
the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best
management practices (BMP”s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the
responsibility of the land owner.
9. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water
treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental
Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water
Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground
infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner.
10. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved
project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a
biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager.
11. A final project-specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the City
Engineer, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s “Memorandum of Storm Water Quality
Management Plan” shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any building permit.
Page 315
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 10 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
12. The final project-specific water quality management plan (WQMP) shall include executed maintenance
agreements along with the maintenance guidelines for all proprietary structural storm water treatment
devices (BMP’s). In the event the applicant cannot get the proprietary device maintenance agreements
executed prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant is required to submit a letter to be included
within the WQMP document, and scanned and pasted onto the Site and Drainage Plan which states
that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy with applicant shall enter into a contract for the
maintenance of the proprietary storm water treatment device. If the proprietary storm water treatment
device is part of a residential subdivision, prior to the sale of the residential lot, the developer shall
include maintenance agreement(s) as part of the sale of the residential lot to the buyer. A copy of the
maintenance agreements to be included in the sale of the property shall be included within the WQMP
document.
13. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final 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 “Section VII – Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety
Recommendations, …” of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality
Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer’s recommendations for
Appendix D, Table VII.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety
Factors”.
14. The subject project, shall accept all existing off-site storm water drainage flows and safely convey those
flows through or around the project site. If existing off-site storm water drainage flows mix with any
on-site storm water drainage flows, then the off-site storm water drainage flows shall be treated with the
on-site storm water drainage flows for storm water quality purposes, prior to discharging the storm
water drainage flows from the project site.
Page 316
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 11 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
15. GROUND WATER PROTECTION:
Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP
document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No .
R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm
Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads:
Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection):
Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to
primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer
strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect
groundwater:
a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of
ground water quality objectives.
b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater
quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior
to infiltration.
c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large
commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial
parking lot as ‘100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or
more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sqft or more of allowable space designated for parking
purposes’).
d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment
BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity {77}, areas subject to high
vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other
high threat to water quality land uses or activities.
e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular {78} repair or
maintenance activities{79}, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used
car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does
any vehicular repair work.
f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and
groundwater contamination.
g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water
supply wells.
h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high
groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial
uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained.
i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water
Code Section 13050.
Page 317
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 12 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
16. RESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES – CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE –
Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall comply with Section 4.106.3 (Grading
and Paving) of the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code:
Construction plans shall indicate how the site grading or drainage system will manage all surface water
flows to keep water from entering building. Examples of methods to manage surface water include, but
are not limited to, the following:
1. Swales.
2. Water collection and disposal systems.
3. French drains.
4. Water retention gardens.
5. Other water measures which keep surface water away from buildings and aid in groundwater
recharge.
Exception: Additions and alterations not altering the drainage path.
17. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code
and/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 approved conceptual
Grading and Drainage Plan.
18. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform
such work. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report.
19. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be
completed, submitted, and approved by the Engineering Services Department prior to the issuance of
building permits.
20. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and
for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of
combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by
a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit.
21. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust
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.
22. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Engineering Services Department
for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading
and Drainage Plan/Permit.
23. Prior to the issuance of a grading plan for multi-family projects, the private streets and drive aisles within
multi-family developments shall include street plans as part of the Grading and Drainage Plan set. The
private street plan view shall show typical street sections. The private street profile view shall show the
private street/drive aisle centerline.
24. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined
exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond
shall be approved by the City Engineer or his designee.
Page 318
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 13 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
25. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible,
and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings.
26. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the City Engineer, or his designee, the civil
engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water
Treatment Devices As-Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho
Cucamonga Engineering Services Department.
27. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California
Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan.
28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format
provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit".
29. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility
path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance
with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail
including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building
Code.
30. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building
Code.
31. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to
the issuance of a grading permit.
32. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance
of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as
provided for in the project’s Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC &R’s or
deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC &R’s
and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of
Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan.
33. Prior to approval of the final project-specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a
soils engineer prepare a project-specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water
quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current
adopted “San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans” .
34. A geologic report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer or Engineering Geologist and submitted at
the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review.
35. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a
minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All
slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code .
36. Prior to approval of the project-specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit
to the City Engineer, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of
existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed
structures and drainage of the site.
Page 319
Project #:
www.CityofRC.us
DRC2023-00331
Page 14 of 14 Printed: 11/20/2024
Project Name: The Resort
Location: 9097 CLEVELAND AVE - 020927220-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
37. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval of the project specific water quality management
plan all private storm water catch basin inlets shall include insert filters to capture those pollutants of
concern as addressed in the in the final project-specific water quality management plan (WQMP). At a
minimum catch basin insert filters to capture trash and other floating debris. All catch basin insert filters
shall be maintained on a regular basis as described in the “Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility
for Post Construction BMP” section of the final project-specific water quality management plan.
38. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the
infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit,
adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect
groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be
evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project-specific Water Quality Management Plan
document.
Page 320
DATE:December 11, 2024
TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development
INITIATED BY:Sophia Serafin, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP – MADOLE & ASSOCIATES FOR CHASE
PARTNERS – A request to subdivide a 5.85 acre lot into four (4) parcels
within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone and the Neo-Industrial Employment
District General Plan land use designation, located at the southeast corner
of Eighth Street and Cottage Avenue at 9851 Eighth Street; APN: 0209-
193-09. 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 (SUBTPM20894).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Planning Commission adopt a resolution for the approval of Tentative Parcel
Map SUBTPM20894 with the attached conditions of approval.
BACKGROUND:
The project site, located at the southeast corner of Eighth Street and Cottage Avenue, totals 5.85
acres. The existing parcel is approximately 374 feet along the northern property line, 516 feet
along the southern property line, 616 feet on the eastern property line, and 500 feet on the western
property line. The site is fully improved and currently developed with five (5) industrial buildings.
The existing land use, General Plan land use designation, and zoning designation for the project
site and adjacent properties are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site
Wholesale and
Distribution /
Automobile Repair
Neo-Industrial Employment
District Neo-Industrial
North Railroad General Open Space and
Facilities
Neo-Industrial /
Flood Control / Utility
Corridor
South Wholesale and
Warehouse Distribution
Neo-Industrial Employment
District Neo-Industrial
East Self-Storage Facility Neo-Industrial Employment
District Neo-Industrial
West Custom Manufacturing /
Industrial Commercial Traditional Town Center Center 1 Southwest
Cucamonga
Page 321
Page 2 of 4
2
6
2
9
Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM20894 is for the subdivision of a 5.85 acre lot into four (4) parcels
of land for the property owner to have the potential opportunity to sell the buildings and lots
separately. The existing buildings on the site will remain, with Parcels 1, 2 and 4 containing one
(1) building and Parcel 3 containing two (2) buildings. The buildings will not be bisected by any of
the proposed property lines. Access to all properties will be provided via two (2) existing shared
driveways off Eighth Street and three (3) existing shared driveways off Cottage Court. Staff
recommends that a reciprocal access and parking agreement be put in place between the parcels
prior to, or concurrent with, the recordation of the final map.
Figure 1 – Aerial Site View (red arrows indicate location of existing driveways to remain)
ANALYSIS:
All four (4) of the parcels meet the minimum lot width and minimum lot size and do not exceed
the maximum floor area ratio requirements of the Neo-Industrial (NI) zone. All five (5) buildings
on the four (4) parcels are also sufficient in the minimum front, side, and street side yard setbacks
of 25 feet, 5 feet, and 25 feet respectively. The proposed parcel map has also been reviewed by
Page 322
Page 3 of 4
2
6
2
9
the Engineering Department for technical accuracy and has been found to be consistent with all
relevant standards and mapping regulations. The table below provides an overview of the
development standards which are met:
Parcel Lot Width (ft)Lot Area (ac)Floor Area Ratio
Required 100 (minimum)0.5 (minimum)0.6 (maximum)
Parcel 1 171.14 0.84 0.42
Parcel 2 290.27 1.06 0.47
Parcel 3 100.56 1.90 0.37
Parcel 4 100.36 2.03 0.50
Public Art
Per Section 17.124.020A of the Development Code, public art requirements do not apply to
tentative parcel maps and are applicable only to site development review, minor design review,
or design review applications that meet specified criteria. As such, the tentative parcel map is
exempt from the public art requirement.
Environmental Assessment
The Planning 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 a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section
15315 – Minor Land Divisions, which consists of the division of property in urbanized areas zoned
for industrial use into four (4) or fewer parcels given the division is in conformance with the
General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are required, all services and access to the
proposed parcels to local standards are available, the parcel was not involved in a division of a
larger parcel within the previous two (2) years, and the parcel does not have an average slope
greater than twenty (20) percent. The project scope is for the subdivision of an improved and
developed industrial parcel into four (4) separate parcels. All four (4) parcels are in conformance
with the applicable Neo-Industrial development standards as well as the General Plan and do not
require any variances or exceptions to achieve approval. There will be a reciprocal access
agreement in which a total of five (5) existing access driveways will be provided for the parcels.
There have not been any division of the existing parcel from a larger parcel in the previous two
(2) years. Lastly, the parcel does not have an average slope of greater than twenty (20) percent
as it contains five (5) existing buildings for which the site is generally flat. There is no substantial
evidence that the project, which is the subdivision of land resulting in no new construction, will
have a significant effect on the environment.
Correspondence
This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland
Valley Dailey Bulletin newspaper on November 28, 2024. Notices were mailed to a total of
seventy-one (71) property owners within 660 feet of the site on November 26, 2024 as well. The
site was posted on November 27, 2024. As of date, staff have received one verbal communication
from the public regarding this project. The inquiring party requested information on what the scope
of work of the project was as well as if any public improvements would be required. Staff
responded that the approval was for a map only and did not involve any construction. Staff also
explained that there would be lack of a nexus to require improvements and that these would only
Page 323
Page 4 of 4
2
6
2
9
be required if the scope of work included development. The inquirer noted that they would have
liked to see sidewalk improvements completed to connect to the sidewalk on their property to the
east to the subject property for safety reasons as well as to create a pedestrian friendly
environment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this tax is shared
with the City. While the proposed subdivision will not result in any physical changes to the existing
site, it has the potential to lead to a reassessment and subsequent increase of property taxes as
the individual parcels are now able to be sold off separately. As a result, the City’s share of the
property tax could increase accordingly.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:
The proposed subdivision addresses the Council vision of creating a city that is rich in opportunity
for all to thrive. Currently, all five (5) buildings on the site are owned by one entity. The subdivision
will create separate parcels that have the potential to be sold to individual business or property
owners. This parcel map can generate the opportunity to not only empower business ownership
for multiple businesses, but also allow for these businesses to own the land and building in which
their business is located. This can create an environment in which business owners are able to
thrive.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – Tentative Parcel Map
Exhibit B – Draft Resolution of Approval with Conditions of Approval
Page 324
Underground Service Alert
Call: TOLL FREE
811
TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOT 4, SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 7
WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MAP OF CUCAMONGA LAND, AS PER MAP RECORDED
IN BOOK 4, PAGE 9, OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
([KLELWꢀ$
Page 325
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-041
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP SUBTPM20894, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A 5.85 ACRE
LOT INTO FOUR (4) PARCELS WITHIN THE NEO-INDUSTRIAL (NI)
ZONE, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EIGHTH STREET
AND COTTAGE AVENUE AT 9851 EIGHTH STREET, AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN 0209-193-09.
A.Recitals.
1.Madole & Associates, on behalf of Chase Partners, filed an application for the approval
of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM20894, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in
this Resolution, the subject Tentative Parcel Map request is referred to as "the application."
2.On the 11th day of December 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 meeting on December 11, 2024, including written and oral staff reports, together
with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to an industrially developed site located at the southeast
corner of Eighth Street and Cottage Avenue; and
b.The project site is made up of one (1) parcel of land and has a frontage of about
375 feet along Eighth Street and a depth of approximately 524 feet from north to south along
Cottage Avenue. The site contains existing improvements as it was previously developed with five
(5) industrial buildings; and
c.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 parcel) are as follows:
Page 326
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-041
TPM SUBTPM20894 – Madole & Associates on behalf of Chase Partners
December 11, 2024
Page 2
d.Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM20894 is for the subdivision of a 5.85 acre site into
four (4) parcels of land for the property owner to have the potential opportunity to sell the buildings
and lots separately. The site is improved and developed with five (5) existing industrial buildings
where Parcels 1, 2, and 4 will contain one (1) building and Parcel 3 will contain two (2) buildings;
and
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 tentative parcel map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code,
and any applicable specific plans. The proposed parcel map will subdivide a 5.85 acre parcel into
four (4) parcels for the potential opportunity to sell the buildings and lots separately and is
consistent with the Neo-Industrial Employment District General Plan land use designation and the
Neo-Industrial (NI) zoning designation, which both permit the existing industrial uses onsite; and
b.The site is physically suitable for the proposed subdivision. The project site
contains five (5) existing industrial buildings onsite that are able to be designated to their own lots
in accordance with the standards outlined in the development code and are consistent with the
Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone; and
c.The design of the tentative parcel map is not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat. The scope of
the project is to subdivide an existing industrial site into four (4) separate parcels. The project
site is partially surrounded by similar industrial development and is in keeping of what is expected
based on the project zoning; and
d.The tentative parcel map is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The
subdivision of the project site is not expected to cause serious public health issues, as the proposed
tentative parcel map is for the subdivision of a 5.85 acre parcel of land into four (4) parcels for the
potential opportunity to sell the existing buildings and lots separately; and
e.The design of the tentative parcel map will not conflict with any easement acquired
by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Wholesale and Distribution /
Automobile Repair
Neo-Industrial
Employment District Neo-Industrial
North Railroad General Open Space and
Facilities
Neo-Industrial /
Flood Control / Utility
Corridor
South Wholesale and Warehouse
Distribution
Neo-Industrial
Employment District Neo-Industrial
East Self-Storage Facility Neo-Industrial
Employment District Neo-Industrial
West Custom Manufacturing /
Industrial Commercial Traditional Town Center Center 1 Southwest
Cucamonga
Page 327
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-041
TPM SUBTPM20894 – Madole & Associates on behalf of Chase Partners
December 11, 2024
Page 3
subdivided parcels. The subject project does not contain any easements that would limit access to
or use of the project site.
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) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under State
CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 – Minor Land Divisions, which consists of the division of property
in urbanized areas zoned for industrial use into four (4) or fewer parcels given the division is in
conformance with the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are required, all
services and access to the proposed parcel to local standards are available, the parcel was not
involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous two (2) years, and the parcel does not
have an average slope greater than twenty (20) percent. The project scope is for the subdivision of
an improved and developed industrial parcel into four (4) separate parcels. All four (4) parcels are in
conformance with the applicable Neo-Industrial development standards as well as the General Plan
and do not require any variances or exceptions to achieve approval. There will be a reciprocal
access agreement in which a total of five (5) existing access driveways will be provided for the
parcels. There have not been any division of the existing parcel from a larger parcel in the previous
two (2) years. Lastly, the parcel does not have an average slope of greater than twenty (20) percent
as it contains five (5) existing buildings for which the site is generally flat. There is no substantial
evidence that the project, which is the subdivision of land resulting in no new construction, 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 Conditions of Approval, 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 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2024.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY: Tony Morales, Chairman
ATTEST:
Matt Marquez, Secretary
I, Matt Marquez, Secretary 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 11th
day of December 2024, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 328
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-041
TPM SUBTPM20894 – Madole & Associates on behalf of Chase Partners
December 11, 2024
Page 4
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 329
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department
Project #: SUBTPM20894
Project Name: Subdivision 8th Street
Location: 9851 8TH ST A - 020919309-0000
Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
This Tentative Parcel Map authorizes the applicant to subdivide a 5.85 acre lot into four (4) parcels
within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone and the Neo-Industrial Employment District General Plan land use
designation, located at the southeast corner of of Eighth Street and Cottage Avenue; APN
0209-193-09.
1.
Before approval of the Final Map, if a Uniform Sign Program is in place for the existing buildings at the
time of approval of SUBTPM20894, a recorded system must be created for the separate parcels in
order to continue governance of the Uniform Sign Program. Alternatively, the Uniform Sign Program
may be dissolved by means of applying for a Uniform Sign Program Modification in which governance
of future signs will be through Chapter 17.74 of the Development Code before the approval of the Final
Map. If a Uniform Sign Program is not in place at the time of approval, governance of future signage will
continue to be through Chapter 17.74 of the Development Code.
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: 12/5/2024
Page 330
Project #: SUBTPM20894
Project Name: Subdivision 8th Street
Location: 9851 8TH ST A - 020919309-0000
Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map
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.
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.
This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning
Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3
years from the date of the approval.
6.
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.
7.
www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 3Printed: 12/5/2024
Page 331
Project #: SUBTPM20894
Project Name: Subdivision 8th Street
Location: 9851 8TH ST A - 020919309-0000
Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
(Final Map) The project Final Map shall meet the Subdivision Map Act, City Development Codes, and
Conditions of Approval requirements. The Final Map shall be approved and recorded with the San
Bernardino County Recorders Office prior to issuance of Building Permits .
1.
Standard Conditions of Approval
Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards .2.
Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC &Rs or by deeds
and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of Building Permits, where no
map is involved.
3.
Reciprocal parking agreements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance
of all common roads, drives, or parking areas shall be provided by CC & R's or deeds and shall be
recorded prior to, or concurrent with, the final parcel map.
4.
www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 3Printed: 12/5/2024
Page 332
DATE:December 11, 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:ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, DESIGN
REVIEW & VARIANCE – GRAND PACIFIC COMMUNITIES – A request
to subdivide approximately 1.7 acres of land into 8 numbered and 4 lettered
lots including site plan and design review of 8 two-family residential
buildings (16 units total), and a variance to reduce the required streetscape
setback and the height of property line walls for a site located in the Medium
Residential (M) Zone at 10235 19th Street; APN: 1076-121-03. The project
qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section
15332 – Infill Development Projects. The project also qualifies as a Class
5 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15305 – Minor
Alterations to Land Use Limitations (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20662,
Design Review DRC2023-00363, and Variance DRC2024-00300).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the resolutions of approval for Tentative
Tract Map SUBTT20662, Design Review DRC2023-00363, and Variance DRC2024-00300,
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND:
Site Characteristics
The subject project site is a “double frontage” lot located at 10235 19th Street. The site is
approximately 335 feet along the north and south property lines and 224 feet along the east and
west property lines. It slopes from north to south from approximately 1,437 feet at the northwest
corner of the property to 1,429 feet at the southeast corner of the property, for a grade change of
approximately 8 feet. The site is developed with a single-family residence and landscaping that
will be demolished with the development of the site.
The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent
properties are as follows:
Page 333
Page 2 of 7
2
6
4
6
ANALYSIS:
Project Design and Layout
The project comprises 8 two-story, two-family residential buildings on 8 individual lots accessed
by a new north-south public street connecting 19th and Hamilton Streets. The related tentative
tract map includes 8 numbered lots for residential purposes and 4 lettered lots for open
space/Water Quality Management Facility purposes. Each two-family building includes individual
driveways separated by a landscape strip serving two-car garages. An existing coastal oak tree
located along the north property line has been determined to not be a good candidate for
relocation and will be replaced along the 19th Street frontage with a 60-inch box coastal oak tree.
Figure 1: Site/Landscape Plan
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site SFR/Vacant Land Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M)
North Single-Family
Residences Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low Residential (L)
South School General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P)
East Single-Family
Residence Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M)
West Single-Family
Residences Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M)
Page 334
Page 3 of 7
2
6
4
6
Architecture
The residences have a contemporary design theme that includes variation in the application of
finish materials and color. Building materials include stucco, cementitious siding (wood-look)
vertical and horizontal siding, metal railings, and architecturally compatible garage doors. The
footprint of the buildings on Lots 2, 3, 7, and 8 are flipped to provide visual interest along the
streetscape.
Figure 2: Street Scene
Unit Composition and Floor Plans
The project is comprised of 8 two-family residential buildings (16 two-story four-bedroom units)
with living on the first floor and bedrooms on the second floor. Each unit includes private front and
rear yards. The table below summarizes the size and number of residential units:
UNIT SUMMARY
Residential
Unit Type Unit Size (SF - Net)Number of Units
4 Bedroom 1,958 SF 10
4 Bedroom 2,564 SF 6
Total Number of Units 16
Page 335
Page 4 of 7
2
6
4
6
Compliance with Development Standards
The project was designed in compliance with development requirements for the Medium
Residential (M) Zone as outlined in Development Code Table 17.36.010-1B as shown in the
following table except for the streetscape setback from 19th Street and property line wall heights:
Parking
The proposed 4-bedroom units are required to provide 2.5 parking spaces (including 2 covered
spaces in a garage or carport) and 1 guest parking space per three units. The project exceeds
the minimum parking requirement as each unit will provide 2 garage spaces and two driveway
spaces for a total of 64 parking spaces for all 16 units.
Variance
The project includes a request for a Variance to reduce the required streetscape setback.
Development Code Table 17.36.010-3 (Residential Streetscape and Wall Setback Standards)
requires a 45-foot building and wall setback from streets classified as Collector/Bicycle Corridors
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Development
Standard Required Proposed Complies
Density 8 to 14 DU/AC 9.41 DU/AC YES
Lot Size 4,000 SF 5,300 – 6,161 SF YES
Streetscape Setback
(19th Street)
45 Feet
(Building and Wall)
40 Feet - 4 Inches (House)
33 Feet – 3.5 Inches (Wall)YES*
Front Setback 27 Feet 27 Feet YES
Side yard Setback
(Interior)5 Feet 5 Feet YES
Side yard Setback
(Corner)17 Feet 31 Feet (Min)YES
Rear Yard 15 Feet 15 Feet – 2 Inches YES
Building Height 35 Feet Max 30 Feet - Inches YES
Wall Height 6 feet Up to 12 feet YES*
Lot Coverage 50 Percent Under 50 Percent YES
*With the approval of Variance DRC2024-00300
Page 336
Page 5 of 7
2
6
4
6
within the Medium (M) Zone. General Plan Figure M-3 (Layered Roadway Network) classifies
19th Street as a Bicycle Corridor. The proposed building and wall streetscape setbacks along
19th Street are 40 feet-4 inches, and 33 feet-3.5 inches, respectively, for an encroachment into
the setback by approximately 4 feet, 8 inches for the buildings, and approximately 12 feet for the
walls. The reduction in the streetscape building and wall setback is necessary to install the
required stormwater infiltration system along the south property line, which pushes the residential
lots northward into the required setback as described.
The applicant is also requesting the subject Variance to permit an increase in the permitted wall
height. Development Code Table 17.48.050-1 (Maximum Height of Fences and Walls) limits
residential property line walls to 6 feet in height. The new public street connecting 19th Street to
the north and Hamilton Street to the south dictates the pad elevations of the lots and the onsite
drainage. Combination walls (up to 6-foot-high retaining walls topped by 6-foot-high garden walls)
are necessary due to existing onsite grades between the project site and the adjacent lots to the
east and west and the elevation of the new public street. The tallest walls (10.7 feet to 12 feet)
are located along the east property line of Lot 8. The rear property line walls on Lots 1 - 7 range
in height from 6 feet to 8.7 feet). The height of the walls, as seen from the adjacent property to
the east, will be partially mitigated in the future when that lot is redeveloped, and the current low
spots are backfilled against the new retaining wall.
Neighborhood Meeting
The applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting across Hamilton Street from the project site at Deer
Canyon Elementary School at 6:00 p.m. on September 24, 2024. The developer sent notices
advertising the neighborhood meeting to property owners within 660 feet of the project site.
Approximately 20 community members attended the meeting along with the applicant’s team and
the project planner. The applicant’s team presented the project and opened the meeting to
questions. The questions were related to traffic and parking, with additional comments on unit
size, drainage, and architecture. The major concern was how the project would impact parking
which participants stated was already impacted by pickup and drop-off of students at the school
located south of the project site on Hamilton Street. The applicant responded that each unit would
provide two enclosed parking spaces in the garages and two spaces in the driveway, along with
space for approximately 6 vehicles along the new public street.
Design Review Committee
The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC – Daniels and Boling) on
October 1, 2024. Staff presented the item, and the Committee members asked several questions
regarding WQMP facilities, wall height, street width, and requirements for completing sidewalks.
Additional questions from committee members included landscaping, specifically that the
applicant consider a tree type that does not drop pods or is fruit-bearing, the placement of
mailboxes, the placement of rooftop solar, and the location of trash receptacles. Committee
Members were complimentary to the site and architectural design. Committee Member Boling
inquired about the need for crosswalks and crossing guards. Committee Members recommended
that the applicant contact the school district and City engineering department for the requirements
on crosswalks and crossing guards. The committee members voted to move the item forward to
the full Planning Commission with the motion that the applicant consider flashing beacons in any
potential crosswalk and coordinate with the school district on the need for crossing guards and
any other requirements the school district may desire. The motion also included recommendations
that the applicant consider revising the landscape plan related to the choice of plant material and
Page 337
Page 6 of 7
2
6
4
6
the incorporation of a dog relief station within the WQMP area.
In response to the committee members' recommendations, the applicant met with the Assistant
Superintendent of the Alta Loma School District to discuss the proposed project. Per the applicant,
they were informed that the school district would recommend that students use the existing
crosswalks and would reassess the situation as necessary. The applicant and the Assistant
Superintendent also discussed noise and access during the construction phase of the project.
The applicant agreed to provide the school district with construction timing and noise ratings to
assist the school in scheduling outdoor activities. They also agreed to schedule deliveries outside
of the normal student drop-off and pickup times. The Engineering Department will evaluate any
necessary modifications to the existing crosswalks as needed for public safety purposes.
The project plans (Exhibit B) were updated to modify the landscape plan to choose tree species
that do not drop pods and to include a dog waste station in both of the WQMP open space areas.
The grading plan was modified to relocate the drainage outlet on Lot 8 to reduce the property line
wall height along the east property line.
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, the total art value required per
Section 17.124.020.C. is $12,000 (16 units multiplied by $750 per unit). A condition of approval
has been proposed by staff pursuant to the Development Code that requires the public art
requirement to be fulfilled prior to occupancy.
Environmental Assessment
Planning staff has 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 a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill
Development Projects, as the project is for the construction of 16 residential units on 1.7 acres of
land. The Section 15332 CEQA exemption covers infill developments on sites less than 5 acres
in area that will not have a significant impact relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water. The
project also qualifies as a Class 5 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15305 –
Minor Alterations to Land Use Limitations, which covers the related Variance request to reduce
the required streetscape setback and increase the permitted property line wall heights. The
proposed exceptions are necessary due to the dimensions of the project site and
existing/proposed grades.
A Section 15332 CEQA exemption was prepared by Psomas (June 2024), an environmental
consultant hired by the City (Exhibit D – CEQA Section 15332 Infill Exemption), to demonstrate
compliance with the Section 15332 exemption. Staff evaluated the CEQA exemption prepared by
Psomas and concluded that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment
relating to biological resources, traffic, noise, air quality, or water. The Director of Planning and
Economic Development has reviewed staff’s determination of exemption, and based on their own
independent judgment, concurs with staff's determination of exemption.
Page 338
Page 7 of 7
2
6
4
6
Correspondence
This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper on November 25, 2024, the property was posted on November
27, 2024, and notices were mailed to 129 property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project
site on November 25, 2024. To date, Staff has not received any comments from the public but
has been working with the Alta Loma School District to address their questions and concerns.
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 lot subdivision will increase the value of the project site when
developed with homes 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 MISSION / VISION / VALUES(S) ADDRESSED:
The project supports several City Council core values including providing and nurturing a high
quality of life for all and building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere. The proposed
subdivision will create 16 well-designed residences on an underutilized parcel of land, providing
much-needed for-sale housing units.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – Project Location
Exhibit B – Project Plans
Exhibit C – DRC Comments and Minutes Dated October 1, 2024
Exhibit D – Link to CEQA 15332 Infill Exemption
Exhibit E – Draft Resolutions of Approval with Conditions of Approval
Page 339
Project Site
Exhibit A
Page 340
PROJECT DIRECTORY PROJECT DATA CDA
+OWNER/ DEVELOPER:ADDRESS: 10235 19TH STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91701
APN NUMBER: 1076-121-03 PDGGRAND PACIFIC COMMUNITIES
100 N. BARRANCA, SUITE 950
WEST CONVINA CA 91791
PHONE: (949) 660-8988
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 20662
TUSTIN OFFICE
ZONING: M (MEDIUM) RESIDENTIAL
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VB
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
CONTACT NAME: RICHARD CHOU
CONTACT EMAIL: rcho@gpcus.com
CONTACT NAME: MIKE MCDANIEL BUILDING STORIES:2 INDUSTRY OFFICE
CONTACT EMAIL: mmcdaniel@gpcus.com 17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
BUILDING HEIGHT 35' MAX. REQ. +/- 31' PROVIDED
FIRE SPRINKLERS: YES NFPA 13DARCHITECT:
CREATIVE DESIGN ASSOCIATES
150 EL CAMINO REAL #112
TUSTIN, CA. 92780
OCCUPANCY GROUPS: R-3/ U
P r o j e c t :Hamilton HeightsPROJECT DESCRIPTION: SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX HOMES. 2 STORIES,
8 BUILDINGS, 16 UNITS.PHONE: (714) 832-5100
CONTACT NAME: KENNETH PANG
CONTACT EMAIL: kpang@cdapdg.com
LOT AREA: 52,689 SF.10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
PARKING: 2 PER UNIT X (16)= 32 REQUIRED
CONTACT NAME: ALI HAMMOUD 2 GARAGE SPACES X (16) = 32 PROVIDED
CONTACT EMAIL: ahammoud@cdapdg.com
MIN. DWELLING UNIT SIZE 1,000 SF. REQ. OVER 2,000 SF. PROVIDED
CIVIL ENGINEER:
Cl i e n t :Grand PacificALLARD ENGINERING
16866 SEVILLE AVENUE
FONTANA, CA 92335
PHONE: (909) 356-1815
CONTACT NAME: RAY ALLARD
CONTACT EMAIL: rallard@allardeng.com
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
HAMILTON HEIGHTS LANDSCAPE:CIVIL SHEET INDEX ARCHITECTURE SHEET INDEX
Sheet Name
SEGURA ASSOCIATES INC.
P.O. BOX 964
LA VERNE, CA 91750
PHONE: (909) 624-2700
CONTACT NAME: TOM SEGURA
CONTACT EMAIL: tsegura@segurla.com
#SHEET NAME Sheet
Number
1
2
3
4
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN
SECTIONS & WQMP EXHIBIT
SITE UTILIZATION MAP
A-1.1 COVER SHEET PROJECT DATA
SITE PLAN
OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS
3D VIEWS
A-1.2
A-1.3
A-1.4
A-1.5
A-2.1
A-2.2
A-2.3
A-2.4
A-2.5
A-2.6
A-2.7
A-2.8
A-2.9
A-3.1
A-3.2
M.E.P.:
3D VIEWS GOUVIS ENGINEERING
15 STUDEBAKER
IRVINE , CA 92618
PHONE: (949) 590-9005
CONTACT NAME: ROBERT GOMEZ
CONTACT EMAIL: rgomez@gouvisgroup.com
LANDSCAPE SHEET INDEX BLDG 1 ELEVATIONS TYPE 1
BLDG 1 ELEVATIONS TYPE 1
BLDG 1 ELEVATIONS TYPE 2
BLDG 1 ELEVATIONS TYPE 2
BLDG 1 ELEVATIONS TYPE 3
BLDG 1 ELEVATIONS TYPE 3
BDLG 2 ELEVATIONS TYPE 1
BLDG 2 ELEVATIONS TYPE 1
ELEVATION MATERIALS
BLDG 1 LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLANS
BLDG 1 LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLANS
BLDG 1 ROOF PLAN
BLDG 2 LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLANS
BLDG 2 LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLANS
BLDG 2 ROOF PLAN
BLDG 1 BUILDING SECTIONS
BLDG 2 BUIDING SECTIONS
#SHEET NAME S t a mp :
L1
L-2
OVERALL PLAN
MATERIALS
PROJECT SF. SUMMARY TABLE CODE SUMMARY:
ELECTRICAL SHEET INDEX ALL WORK PERTAINING TO ALL MATERIALS SUPPLIED FOR
EXECUTING AND COMPLETING THIS CONTRACT SHALL
COMPLY WITH PROVISIONS SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT
DOCUMENTS AND WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS,
UNIT A
1ST FLOOR SF. 2ND FLOOR SF. 1ST & 2ND
FLOOR TOTAL
GARAGE SF.
479 SF.
BALCONY SF.
244 SF.
TOTAL #SHEET NAME No. C-25837
E-0.1
E-0.2
E-0.3
SHEET INDEX AND GENERAL NOTES A-3.3 REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES GOVERNING WORK
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THOSE OF:1,143 SF.1,421 SF.2,564 SF.3,287 SF.DETAILS A-3.4
A-3.5
A-3.6
A-4.1
A-4.2
CMETER PEDESTAL SINGLE LINE
DIAGRAM & PANEL SCHEDULE
SITE LIGHTING PLAN
PHOTOMETRIC PLAN
LIGHTING SPECIFICATIONS
2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE
E-1.1
E-1.2
E-1.3
UNIT B
1ST FLOOR SF. 2ND FLOOR SF. 1ST & 2ND
FLOOR TOTAL
GARAGE SF.
435 SF.
BALCONY SF.
79 SF.
TOTAL
2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING CODE (CALGREEN)764 SF.1,194 SF.1,958 SF.2,472 SF.Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
COVER SHEET
PROJECT DATAUNIT A TOTAL SF. 3,287 X (6) UNITS = 19,722 SF.
UNIT B TOTAL SF. 2,472 X (10) UNITS = 24,720 SF.
SITE PHOTO:VICINITY MAP:TOTAL BUILDABLE SF. 44,442 SF.
LOT SUMMARY CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
LOT # 01 UNIT TYPES: A&B
LOT # 02 UNIT TYPES: A&B
LOT # 03 UNIT TYPES: A&B
LOT # 04 UNIT TYPES: B&B
LOT # 05 UNIT TYPES: B&B
LOT # 06 UNIT TYPES: A&B
LOT # 07 UNIT TYPES: A&B
LOT # 08 UNIT TYPES: A&B
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE: 1 LOT SIZE: 6,161 SF.
LOT SIZE: 5,970 SF.
LOT SIZE: 5,970 SF.
LOT SIZE: 5,300 SF.
LOT SIZE: 5,332 SF.
LOT SIZE: 5,970 SF.
LOT SIZE: 5,970 SF.
LOT SIZE: 6,004 SF.
P h a s e :SD
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE: 2 (MIRRORED)
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE: 3 (MIRRORED)
BLDG 2, ELEVATION TYPE: 1
BLDG 2, ELEVATION TYPE: 1
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE: 1
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
Checker
Author
2339
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE: 3
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE: 2 No.Description Date
(6) UNIT TYPE A
(10) UNIT TYPE B
(16) TOTAL UNITS
ELEVATION TYPES
(2) BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE: 1 LOTS 1,6
(2) BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE: 2 LOTS 2,8
(2) BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE: 3 LOTS 3,7
(2) BLDG 2, ELEVATION TYPE: 1 LOTS 4,5
Dr a wi n g No. :
([KLELWꢀ%A-1.1
Printed Date:7/31/2024 6:44:41 PM
Page 341
NOTES:LEGEND SITE PLAN KEYNOTES
note text CDA
+
1. DIMENSIONS ARE TO BUILDING FACE OF STUD
2. REFER TO CIVIL PLANS FOR EXISTING SITE INFORMATION,
GRADING, STREET IMPROVEMENTS, AND UNDERGROUND UTILITY
INFORMATION.
3. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR LANDSCAPE INFORMATION
4. REFER TO ELECTRICAL PLANS FOR SITE LIGHTING
note
numberXXX SF.OPEN AREA CALCULATION
T- TRASH BIN (BLACK)
R- RECYCLING BIN (BLUE)
F- FOOD BIN (GREEN)
SIZE 64 GALLON
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
CONCRETE SIDEWALK PDGTCONCRETE DRIVEWAY
CONCRETE WALKWAY
CMU WALL 6' HIGH
UTILITY METERS SEE LEGEND
LANDSCAPE
ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER
TRASH BINS SEE LEGEND
A/C UNIT W/ CONCRETE PAD
E- ELECTRIC METER
G- GAS METER TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
E G
3' CLEARANCE
PHONE: 714 832 5100A/C CONDENSING UNIT ON CONCRETE SLAB
2' CLEARANCE ALL SIDES INDUSTRY OFFICE1017528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
LOT LINE
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
10235 19TH STREET, RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CA 91701NEIGHBORING RESIDENCE NOT A PART
OF THE SUBMITTAL
A5.3
2(E) FIRE HYDRANT
ACROSS THE STREET
BLDG 2, ELEVATION TYPE 1
SHEET A-2.7 & A-2.8
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE 3 (MIRRORED)
SHEET A-2.5 & A-2.6
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE 2 (MIRRORED)
SHEET A-2.3 & A-2.4 BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE 1
SHEET A-2.1 & A-2.2
20' - 2 1/2"65' - 2 1/2"72' - 10"72' - 10"75' - 0"
Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
LOT C LOT 4
5
LOT 3
5
LOT 2
5
LOT 1 LOT A (E) POWER POLE
(E) LIGHT POLE
5PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
5' - 2"
SETBACK 5' - 2"
SETBACK
5' - 2"5' - 2"
SETBACK
5' - 2"5' - 2"
SETBACK
10 8
5
7
TRANSFORMER
2' - 11"
5
9
208 SF.T TYP.
6
TYP.
6
TYP.G
E
R
F
G
E
G
E
6' - 7 1/2"
17' - 0"BALCONY ABOVE
37' - 5"40' - 4"
UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT A UNIT B UNIT A UNIT A UNIT BSTREET SIDE YARD STREET SIDE YARD TO BLDG
7
3 4' - 0"1
2 TYP.
2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT DATA ZONE M (15)2 7 2 2 7 2 2 7 2 7 S t a mp :
3 LINE OF SETBACK 3
7
3 3 3 1 3 LINE OF SETBACK 3
SIDEWALK LAND USE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED PROVIDED1
MIN. LOT AREA
MIN. LOT WIDTH
MIN. LOT WIDTH (CORNER) 50 FT
MIN. LOT DEPTH
MIN. FRONTAGE
MIN. DENSITY
4,000 SF
45 FT
MIN. 5,299 SF
MIN. 64'-4"
MIN. 64'-4"
MIN. 81'-11"
MIN. 30'-0"
13.33 DU/AC
13.33 DU/AC
7 7 1 117 PEDESTRIAN
CIRCULATION77 7 7 7VEHICULAR CIRCULATION
C.L. OF STREET
A5.2
1
3PEDESTRIAN
CIRCULATION VEHICULAR CIRCULATION
C.L. OF STREET
A5.1 80 FT
30FT
8 DU/AC
14 DU/AC
No. C-25837
VEHICULAR CIRCULATION
PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
A5.1 VEHICULAR CIRCULATION MAX. DENSITYPEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 YARD REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED MIN. PROVIDED C1
FRONT YARD
STREET SIDE YARD
SIDE YARD
REAR YARD
GARAGE SETBACK
19TH STREET SETBACK
TO BLDG
27 FT
17 FT
5' EACH UNIT
15'
20 FT
27 '-2"
37'-5"
MINI. 5' EACH UNIT
15'- 2"
20'-6"
1 3 3 3 LINE OF SETBACK 3 3 3 3 LINE OF SETBACK
2
3 1
7 2 2 7 7 7(E) FIRE HYDRANT
ACROSS THE STREET 2 2 2 7 35 FT 38'-5 1/2"2 2 Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
SITE PLAN(PER 17.36.010-3)
9TH STREET SETBACK
TO FENCE
(E) LIGHT
POLE 35 FT 33'-0"UNIT B UNIT A UNIT B UNIT A UNIT A UNIT BSIDEWALKUNIT B
BALCONY ABOVE
UNIT B 7
56 (PER 17.36.010-3)TYP.T T SIDEWALK
37' - 6"R R
F
6
F
E TYP.LOT COVERAGE COVERAGE ALLOWED BUILD. AREASTREET SIDE YARD E
G G 9 LOT 1 6,161 X (50%)
LOT 2 5,970 X (50%)
LOT 3 5,970 X (50%)
LOT 4 5,300 X (50%)
LOT 5 5,332 X (50%)
LOT 6 5,970 X (50%)
LOT 7 5,970 X (50%)
LOT 8 6,004 X (50%)
3,080 SF
2,985 SF
2,985 SF
2,650 SF
2,655 SF
2,985 SF
2,985 SF
3,002 SF
2,985 SF
2,985 SF
2,985 SF
2,650 SF
2,650 SF
2,985 SF
2,985 SF
2,985 SF
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :17' - 0"T TYP.
38' - 5 1/2"7 R P h a s e :SD
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2238
FSTREET SIDE YARD TO BLDG33' - 0"Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
5' - 6"SIDE YARD TO FENCE (E) LIGHT
POLE510
7 7
5
7 7 7 7 7 75' - 9"5' - 2 1/2"PROPERTY LINE20' - 1"5' - 1 1/2"
SETBACK
5 5' - 3"5' - 1 1/2"
SETBACK
5 PROPERTY LINE No.Description Date11' - 7"64' - 7"
LOT 5
72' - 10"72' - 10"
LOT 7
5 73' - 4 1/2"
LOT 8
21' - 3"
LOT B
12' - 0"MIN. PATIO/PORCH DEPTH 6'6'
5' - 1"
SETBACKLOT D LOT 6 SEE SHEET A-1.3 FOR OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONSBLDG 2, ELEVATION TYPE 1
SHEET A-2.7 & A-2.8
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE 1
SHEET A-2.1 & A-2.2
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE 3
SHEET A-2.5 & A-2.6
BLDG 1, ELEVATION TYPE 2
SHEET A-2.3 & A-2.4
NEIGHBORING RESIDENCE NOT A PART
OF THE SUBMITTAL
NEIGHBORING RESIDENCE NOT A PART
OF THE SUBMITTAL
Dr a wi n g No. :
SITE PLAN
1" = 20'-0"N1 A-1.2
Printed Date:7/31/2024 6:36:53 PM
Page 342
CDA
+OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS:
35% OF TOTAL PROJECT AREA REQUIRED PDGTOTAL LOT AREA: 52,689 SF. (1.2 ACRES)
OPEN SPACE AT GROUND FLOOR TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
LOT 01 - 1,973 SF.
LOT 02 - 1,826 SF.
LOT 03 - 1,812 SF.
LOT 04 - 1,608 SF.
LOT 05 - 1,616 SF.
LOT 06 - 1,859 SF.
LOT 07 - 1,836 SF.
LOT 08 - 1,879 SF.
LOT A - 1,477 SF.
LOT B - 1,504 SF.
LOT C - 1,547 SF
LOT D - 1,547 SF
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
TOTAL AT GROUND FLOOR: 20,484 SF.
10235 19TH STREET, RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CA 9170165' - 2 1/2"72' - 10"72' - 10"74' - 10"
LOT 1
OPEN SPACE AT 2ND FLOOR BALCONY'S
UNIT A - 122 SF. X 6 UNITS = 732 SF.LOT C LOT 4 LOT 3 LOT 2 LOT A
PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE TOTAL AT BALCONY'S
TOTAL OPEN SPACE
732 SF.
940 SF.1049 SF.1049 SF.1078 SF.
20,484 + 732 = 21,216 SF.Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
21,156 SF./ 52,689 SF. = 40.15%
40% PROVIDED > 35% REQUIRED
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
7' - 1"
1547 SF.LEGEND1477 SF.
OPEN SPACE AREA
UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT A UNIT B UNIT A UNIT A UNIT B
446 SF.323 SF.323 SF.440 SF.323 SF.
345 SF.454 SF.449 SF.
S t a mp :
LINE OF SETBACK LINE OF SETBACK
SIDEWALKSIDEWALK
PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
No. C-25837
C.L. OF STREET
C
SIDEWALK PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION SIDEWALK
LINE OF SETBACK LINE OF SETBACK
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
OPEN SPACE
CALCULATIONS
338 SF.324 SF.487 SF.349 SF.440 SF.444 SF.
348 SF.
394 SF.
UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT A UNIT B UNIT A UNIT A UNIT B
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
KPCh e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
BJ, AD, AH
22381547 SF.1,504 SF.
5' - 5 1/2"
No.Description Date
930 SF.
64' - 7"
1048 SF.1047 SF.
72' - 10"
1041 SF.
PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE
11' - 7"72' - 10"73' - 0 1/2"21' - 6 1/2"
LOT BLOT 6LOT D LOT 5 LOT 7 LOT 8
Dr a wi n g No. :
SITE PLAN OPEN SPACE
1/16" = 1'-0"N A-1.31
Printed Date:7/31/2024 6:38:19 PM
Page 343
CDA+PDG
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
C l i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
STREET VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST CORNER S t a m p :
No. C-25837
.
C
D r a w i n g T i t l e :
3D VIEWS
C
D
P
C
D
D
a
h
h
A P
:
r o j e c t N o.
t e
a
e
s e
k
n
:SD
KPcedB
:
y
r a w B
t
y
N
c
BJ
P
R
R
r o j e c o.:2339
e
e
f e
i
r e n e :
v s i o n s :
No.Description Date
D r a w i n g N o. :
A-1.419TH STREET VIEWNOTE: RENDERING IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE ONLY AND IS ARTISTIC PORTRAYAL OF THE PROJECT. PLEASE SEE PLANS FOR EXACT LANDSCAPING, FINISHES, ETC.
Printed Date: 5/20/2024 3:57:03 PM
Page 344
CDA+PDG
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
C l i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
S t a m p :
No. C-25837
.
C
D r a w i n g T i t l e :
3D VIEWS
C
D
P
C
D
D
a
h
h
A P
:
r o j e c t N o.
t e
a
e
s e
k
n
:SD
KPcedB
:
y
r a w B
t
y
N
c
BJ
P
R
R
r o j e c o.:2339
e
e
f e
i
r e n e :
v s i o n s :
No.Description Date
HAMILTON STREET VIEW
D r a w i n g N o. :
NOTE: RENDERING IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE ONLY AND IS ARTISTIC PORTRAYAL OF THE PROJECT. PLEASE SEE PLANS FOR EXACT LANDSCAPING, FINISHES, ETC.A-1.5
Printed Date: 5/20/2024 3:57:25 PM
Page 345
ELEVATION TYPE 1 KEYNOTES
note text CDA
+
note
numberE1-01 E1-09 E1-04 E1-03 E1-04 E1-02
E1-01 3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 50 CRYSTAL WHITE OR
EQUAL
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 16 SILVER GREY(57)
BASE 200 OR EQUAL
VERTICAL FIBER CEMENT SIDING-NICHIHA-NICHIPANEL-CEDER COLOR:
SW2845 BUNGLEHOUSE GREY OR EQUAL
JELD-WEN BUILDERS VINYL WINDOWS AND PATIO DOORS EXTERIOR
COLOR-BRONZE OR EQUAL
PDGE1-02
E1-03
E1-04
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
E1-05
E1-06
METAL GUARDRAIL-COLOR: SW2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY OR EQUAL
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN SIDE
COLOR-WHITE
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN SIDE
COLOR-BRONZE
FRONT ENTRY DOOR-MP-NARROW LITE ENTRY DOOR-FROSTED
GLASS-COLOR: WHITE OR BLACK
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101E1-07
E1-08
E1-09
P r o j e c t :
CONCRETE TILE ROOF -EAGLE ROOFING-BEL AIR 4679 LIGHT GREY
RANGE OR EQUAL Hamilton HeightsL2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"E1-10
E1-11
STUCCO CONTROL JOINT
DOWNSPOUT PAINT TO MATCH WALL COLOR 10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
Cl i e n t :
Level 2 Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
UNIT AE1-10 E1-11
West
1/4" = 1'-0"2 S t a mp :
E1-04 E1-05 E1-03 E1-02 E1-04 E1-09 E1-01 E1-04 E1-03 E1-02
No. C-25837
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
ELEVATIONS
TYPE 1
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
No.Description DateL1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
E1-03 E1-08 E1-06 UNIT A E1-10 E1-07 UNIT B E1-08 Dr a wi n g No. :
A-2.1
South
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 12:31:19 PM
Page 346
ELEVATION TYPE 1 KEYNOTES
note text CDA
+
E1-09 E1-03 E1-02 E1-03 E1-04 note
number
E1-01 3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 50 CRYSTAL WHITE OR
EQUAL
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 16 SILVER GREY(57)
BASE 200 OR EQUAL
VERTICAL FIBER CEMENT SIDING-NICHIHA-NICHIPANEL-CEDER COLOR:
SW2845 BUNGLEHOUSE GREY OR EQUAL
JELD-WEN BUILDERS VINYL WINDOWS AND PATIO DOORS EXTERIOR
COLOR-BRONZE OR EQUAL
PDGT.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"E1-02
E1-03
E1-04
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
E1-05
E1-06
METAL GUARDRAIL-COLOR: SW2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY OR EQUAL
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN SIDE
COLOR-WHITE
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN SIDE
COLOR-BRONZE
FRONT ENTRY DOOR-MP-NARROW LITE ENTRY DOOR-FROSTED
GLASS-COLOR: WHITE OR BLACK
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101E1-07
E1-08
E1-09
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"P r o j e c t :
CONCRETE TILE ROOF -EAGLE ROOFING-BEL AIR 4679 LIGHT GREY
RANGE OR EQUAL
Hamilton Heights
E1-10
E1-11
STUCCO CONTROL JOINT
DOWNSPOUT PAINT TO MATCH WALL COLOR 10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
Cl i e n t :
L1 TOP
9' - 1"Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
E1-11 E1-10 E1-01
East
1/4" = 1'-0"2
S t a mp :
E1-05 E1-04 E1-03 E1-01 E1-04 E1-09 E1-02 E1-04 E1-05 E1-01
No. C-25837
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 1
ELEVATIONS
TYPE 1L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"No.Description Date
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
Dr a wi n g No. :
E1-03 E1-10 E1-11
A-2.2
North
1/4" = 1'-0"1 Printed Date:5/20/2024 12:39:59 PM
Page 347
ELEVATION TYPE 2 KEYNOTES
note text CDA
+
note
number
E2-01 3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 50 CRYSTAL
WHITE OR EQUAL
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 434
FALLBROCK (42) BASE 200 OR EQUAL
VERTICAL FIBER CEMENT SIDING-NICHIHA-NICHIPANEL-CEDER
COLOR: SW2846 ROYCROFT BRONZE GREEN OR EQUAL
JELD-WEN BUILDERS VINYL WINDOWS AND PATIO DOORS
EXTERIOR COLOR-BRONZE OR EQUAL
METAL GUARDRAIL-COLOR: SW2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY
OR EQUAL
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS
DOWN SIDE COLOR-WHITE
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS
DOWN SIDE COLOR-BRONZE
PDGE2-02 E2-09 E2-04 E2-03 E2-02
E2-03
E2-04
E2-05
E2-06
E2-07
E2-08
E2-09
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
FRONT ENTRY DOOR-MP-NARROW LITE ENTRY
DOOR-FROSTED GLASS-COLOR: WHITE OR BLACK
CONCRETE TILE ROOF -EAGLE ROOFING-BEL AIR SCB 8827
TACOMA BLEND OR EQUAL
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
E2-10
E2-11
STUCCO CONTROL JOINT
DOWNSPOUT PAINT TO MATCH WALL COLOR
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"
Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
E1-10 E1-11 E2-02
S t a mp :
West Type 2
1/4" = 1'-0"2
E2-04 E2-05 E2-03 E2-02 E2-04 E2-09 E2-01 E2-04 E2-03 E2-02 No. C-25837
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 1
ELEVATIONS
TYPE 2
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
No.Description Date
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-2.3E2-03 E2-08 E2-06 E2-10 E2-11 E2-07 E2-08
South Type 2
1/4" = 1'-0"
Printed Date:5/20/2024 12:41:32 PM1
Page 348
ELEVATION TYPE 2 KEYNOTES
note text
CDA
+note
number
E2-01 3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 50 CRYSTAL
WHITE OR EQUAL
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 434
FALLBROCK (42) BASE 200 OR EQUAL
VERTICAL FIBER CEMENT SIDING-NICHIHA-NICHIPANEL-CEDER
COLOR: SW2846 ROYCROFT BRONZE GREEN OR EQUAL
JELD-WEN BUILDERS VINYL WINDOWS AND PATIO DOORS
EXTERIOR COLOR-BRONZE OR EQUAL
METAL GUARDRAIL-COLOR: SW2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY
OR EQUAL
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS
DOWN SIDE COLOR-WHITE
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS
DOWN SIDE COLOR-BRONZE
PDG
E2-02
E2-03
E2-04
E2-05
E2-06
E2-07
E2-08
E2-09
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
E2-03 E2-09 E2-04 E2-04 E2-02 E2-04 E2-02 E2-03
PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICET.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
FRONT ENTRY DOOR-MP-NARROW LITE ENTRY
DOOR-FROSTED GLASS-COLOR: WHITE OR BLACK
CONCRETE TILE ROOF -EAGLE ROOFING-BEL AIR SCB 8827
TACOMA BLEND OR EQUAL
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
E2-10
E2-11
STUCCO CONTROL JOINT
DOWNSPOUT PAINT TO MATCH WALL COLOR
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"
Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
S t a mp :E2-10 E2-01E2-01 E2-11
East Type 2
1/4" = 1'-0"2
E2-04 E2-05 E2-03 E2-02 E2-04 E2-09 E2-01 E2-02 E2-04 E2-05
No. C-25837
CT.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 1
ELEVATIONS
TYPE 2
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
No.Description Date
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-2.4E2-01 E2-10 E2-11
North Type 2
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 12:42:11 PM
Page 349
CDA
+
PDG
ELEVATION TYPE 3 KEYNOTES
note text
note
number
E3-01 E3-09 E3-04 E3-03 E3-02 E3-01 3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 50 CRYSTAL
WHITE OR EQUAL
E3-02
E3-03
E3-04
E3-05
E3-06
E3-07
E3-08
E3-09
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 81588 MORNING
SIDE (30) BASE 100 OR EQUAL TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780VERTICAL FIBER CEMENT
SIDING-NICHIHA-VINTAGEWOOD-COLOR: CEDER OR EQUAL
JELD-WEN BUILDERS VINYL WINDOWS AND PATIO DOORS
EXTERIOR COLOR-BRONZE OR EQUAL
METAL GUARDRAIL-COLOR: SW2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY OR
EQUAL
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN
SIDE COLOR-WHITE
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN
SIDE COLOR-BRONZE
FRONT ENTRY DOOR-MP-NARROW LITE ENTRY DOOR-FROSTED
GLASS-COLOR: WHITE OR BLACK
CONCRETE TILE ROOF -EAGLE ROOFING-BEL AIR 4679 LIGHT
GREY RANGE OR EQUAL
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701E3-10
E3-11
STUCCO CONTROL JOINT
DOWNSPOUT PAINT TO MATCH WALL COLOR
Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
E3-10 E3-11 E3-02
S t a mp :West Type 3
1/4" = 1'-0"2
E3-04 E3-05 E3-03 E3-02 E3-09 E3-01 E3-04 E3-03 E3-02
No. C-25837
T.O. ROOF30' - 4 1/2"C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 1
ELEVATIONS
TYPE 3
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"No.Description Date
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"Dr a wi n g No. :
E3-08 E3-06 E3-10 E3-11 E3-07 E3-08 A-2.5
South Type 3
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 12:43:12 PM
Page 350
ELEVATION TYPE 3 KEYNOTES
note text CDA
+
note
number
E3-01 3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 50 CRYSTAL
WHITE OR EQUAL
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 81588 MORNING
SIDE (30) BASE 100 OR EQUAL
PDGE3-09 E3-03 E3-04 E3-02 E3-04 E3-03 E3-01
E3-02
E3-03
E3-04
E3-05
E3-06
E3-07
E3-08
E3-09
VERTICAL FIBER CEMENT
SIDING-NICHIHA-VINTAGEWOOD-COLOR: CEDER OR EQUAL
JELD-WEN BUILDERS VINYL WINDOWS AND PATIO DOORS
EXTERIOR COLOR-BRONZE OR EQUAL
METAL GUARDRAIL-COLOR: SW2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY OR
EQUAL
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN
SIDE COLOR-WHITE
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN
SIDE COLOR-BRONZE
FRONT ENTRY DOOR-MP-NARROW LITE ENTRY DOOR-FROSTED
GLASS-COLOR: WHITE OR BLACK
CONCRETE TILE ROOF -EAGLE ROOFING-BEL AIR 4679 LIGHT
GREY RANGE OR EQUAL
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
E3-10
E3-11
STUCCO CONTROL JOINT
DOWNSPOUT PAINT TO MATCH WALL COLORL2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
E3-11 E3-10 E3-01
S t a mp :
East Type 3
1/4" = 1'-0"2
E3-05 E3-04 E3-03 E3-01 E3-09 E3-02 E3-04 E3-01 E3-05 E3-04
No. C-25837
CT.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 1
ELEVATIONS
TYPE 3
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
No.Description Date
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-2.6E3-10 E3-11
North Type 3
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 12:43:47 PM
Page 351
CDA
+ELEVATION BLDG 2 KEYNOTES
note text
E-04 E-08 E-06 E-01 E-07 E-03 E-05 E-10
note
number PDGE-01 3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 50 CRYSTAL
WHITE OR EQUAL
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 434 FALLBROCK
(42) BASE 200 OR EQUAL
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 81588 MORNING
SIDE (30) BASE 100 OR EQUAL
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
E-02
E-03
E-04
E-05
E-06
PHONE: 714 832 5100
HORIZONTAL FIBER CEMENT
SIDING-NICHIHA-VINTAGEWOOD-COLOR: CEDER OR EQUAL
VERTICAL FIBER CEMENT SIDING-NICHIHA-NICHIPANEL-CEDER
COLOR: SW2846 ROYCROFT BRONZE GREEN OR EQUAL
CONCRETE TILE ROOF -EAGLE ROOFING-BEL AIR SCB 8827
TACOMA BLEND OR EQUAL
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
E-07
E-08
STUCCO CONTROL JOINT
JELD-WEN BUILDERS VINYL WINDOWS AND PATIO DOORS
EXTERIOR COLOR-BRONZE OR EQUAL
P r o j e c t :Hamilton HeightsL2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"E-09 METAL GUARDRAIL-COLOR: SW2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY OR
EQUAL 10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
E-10
E-11
DOWNSPOUT PAINT TO MATCH WALL COLOR
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN
SIDE COLOR-WHITE
E-12
E-13
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN
SIDE COLOR-BRONZE
FRONT ENTRY DOOR-MP-NARROW LITE ENTRY DOOR-FROSTED
GLASS-COLOR: WHITE OR BLACK Cl i e n t :
Level 2 Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
UNIT A
West
1/4" = 1'-0"2 S t a mp :
E-01 E-07 E-08 E-04 E-09 E-06 E-03 E-05 E-10 E-07 E-02
No. C-25837
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BDLG 2
ELEVATIONS
TYPE 1L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
No.Description DateL1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
E-13 E-11 UNIT A E-12 UNIT B E-13 Dr a wi n g No. :
A-2.7
South
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 3:24:55 PM
Page 352
CDA
+
E-03 E-06 E-07 E-08 E-02 E-05 E-01 E-10 E-09
ELEVATION BLDG 2 KEYNOTES
note text
note
number PDGT.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"E-01 3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 50 CRYSTAL
WHITE OR EQUAL
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 434 FALLBROCK
(42) BASE 200 OR EQUAL
3 COAT STUCCO-FINE SAND-LA HABRA STUCCO 81588 MORNING
SIDE (30) BASE 100 OR EQUAL
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
E-02
E-03
E-04
E-05
E-06
PHONE: 714 832 5100
HORIZONTAL FIBER CEMENT
SIDING-NICHIHA-VINTAGEWOOD-COLOR: CEDER OR EQUAL
VERTICAL FIBER CEMENT SIDING-NICHIHA-NICHIPANEL-CEDER
COLOR: SW2846 ROYCROFT BRONZE GREEN OR EQUAL
CONCRETE TILE ROOF -EAGLE ROOFING-BEL AIR SCB 8827
TACOMA BLEND OR EQUAL
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"E-07
E-08
STUCCO CONTROL JOINT
JELD-WEN BUILDERS VINYL WINDOWS AND PATIO DOORS
EXTERIOR COLOR-BRONZE OR EQUAL
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
E-09 METAL GUARDRAIL-COLOR: SW2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY OR
EQUAL 10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
E-10
E-11
DOWNSPOUT PAINT TO MATCH WALL COLOR
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN
SIDE COLOR-WHITE
E-12
E-13
COPLAY CANYON RIDGE MODERN-PLANK LONG WINDOWS DOWN
SIDE COLOR-BRONZE
FRONT ENTRY DOOR-MP-NARROW LITE ENTRY DOOR-FROSTED
GLASS-COLOR: WHITE OR BLACK
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
Cl i e n t :
L1 TOP
9' - 1"Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
East
1/4" = 1'-0"2
S t a mp :
E-09 E-08 E-05 E-07 E-06 E-02 E-01 E-08 E-07 E-04 E-09 E-10
No. C-25837
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 2
ELEVATIONS
TYPE 1L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
Checker
Author
2339
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"No.Description Date
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-2.8
North
1/4" = 1'-0"1 Printed Date:5/20/2024 7:30:16 PM
Page 353
CDA
+
PDG
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
SLIDING WINDOW SINGLE HUNG WINDOW
MANUFACTURE: JELD WEN
MODEL: BUILDERS VINYL (V-2500)
COLORS: EXTERIOR FINISH -BRONZE
INTERIOR FINISH -WHITE
MANUFACTURE: JELD WEN
MODEL: BUILDERS VINYL (V-2500)
COLORS: EXTERIOR FINISH -BRONZE
INTERIOR FINISH -WHITE
Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
GARAGE DOOR SLIDING PATIO DOOR
MANUFACTURE: CANYON RIDGE
MODEL: MODERN PLANK W/ WINDOW
COLORS: BRONZE OR WHITE
MANUFACTURE: JELD WEN
MODEL: BUILDERS VINYL
COLORS: EXTERIOR FINISH -BRONZE
INTERIOR FINISH -WHITE
ENTRY DOOR:
MP DOORS NARROW LITE
COLORS: BLACK OR WHITE
S t a mp :
3 COAT STUCCO:
MANUFACTURE: LA HABRA
FINE SAND FINISH
COLOR: 81588 MORNING SIDE
(30) BASE 100
3 COAT STUCCO:
MANUFACTURE: LA HABRA
FINE SAND FINISH
COLOR: 434 FALLBROOK
(42) BASE 200
3 COAT STUCCO:
MANUFACTURE: LA HABRA
FINE SAND FINISH
COLOR: 16 SILVER GREY
(57) BASE 200
3 COAT STUCCO:
MANUFACTURE: LA HABRA
FINE SAND FINISH
COLOR: 50 CRYSTAL WHITE
(79) BASE 100
No. C-25837
ROOFING ROOFING OCCURS AT ELEVATION TYPE 3 OCCURS AT ELEVATION TYPE 2 OCCURS AT ELEVATION TYPE 1 OCCURS AT ALL ELEVATIONSMANUFACTURE: EAGLE ROOFING
PROFILE: BEL AIR SCB 8827
COLOR: TACOMA BLEND
MANUFACTURE: EAGLE ROOFING
PROFILE: BEL AIR 4679
COLOR: LIGHT GREY RANGE
C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
ELEVATION
MATERIALS
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
HORIZONTAL SIDING VERTICAL SIDING
MANUFACTURE: NICHIHA
TYPE: CEDAR
COLOR: ROYCROFT BRONZE GREEN
SW 2846
VERTICAL SIDING
MANUFACTURE: NICHIHA
TYPE: CEDAR
COLOR: SW2845 BUNGLEHOUSE GREY
OR EQUAL
ALUMINUM DOWNSPOUT
COLOR: PAINT TO MATCH
ADJACENT WALL COLOR
HORIZONTAL METAL GUARDRAIL
COLOR: ROYCROFT MIST GRAY
SW 2844
MANUFACTURE: NICHIHA
TYPE: VINTAGE WOOD
COLOR: CEDAR
No.Description Date
OCCURS AT ELEVATION TYPE 3 OCCURS AT ELEVATION TYPE 2 OCCURS AT ELEVATION TYPE 1
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-2.9
NOTE: FOR ELEVATIONS SEE SHEETS A-2.1 - A-2.8
Printed Date:5/20/2024 3:27:27 PM
Page 354
CDA
+PDG61' - 6"
19' - 0"16' - 6"TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 51000' - 6"34' - 10"
UNIT A
0' - 2"26' - 6"
UNIT B
0' - 6"
INDUSTRY OFFICE217528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
5' - 9"8' - 0" A-4.1 13' - 10"7' - 3"4' - 9"13' - 8"8' - 1"
CONCRETE PAD
CONCRETE PAD BALCONY ABOVE BALCONY ABOVE
P r o j e c t :
1-HR WALL Hamilton Heights
13' - 0"12' - 1"10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701REF
LIVING ROOM DINING 4' - 0"4' - 0"2' - 1"
1 2
14'-0"X18'-0"9'-3"X18'-0"
KITCHENKITCHEN Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific124A-4.1 3
10'X18'13'-0"X10'-3"Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 917912' - 1"3' - 8"4' - 6"
LIVING ROOMDINING ROOM 222312'-1"X19'-6"
3' - 6"13'-0"X10'-10"REF14' - 0"9' - 3 1/2"10' - 1"
15' - 6 1/2"4' - 10"4' - 2"2' - 0"UP
UP PANTRY
4 POWDER CLOSET10'-3"X 6'-7"CLOSET
26 25 29CLOSET10' - 3 1/2"
S t a mp :9
20' - 0"20' - 0"5' - 10 1/2"
BATH 4 ENTRY
6 279'-1"X5'-2"No. C-25837
9' - 1"4' - 10"
C
GARAGE GARAGEENTRY
OFFICE 7 288
5 20'X20'
CLEAR20'X20'
CLEAR9'-1"X12'-1"
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 1 LEVEL 1
FLOOR PLANSWALL ABOVE
PORCH
PORCH 1-HR WALL CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :BALCONY ABOVE
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339UNIT A UNIT B
ELEVATION SHEET SCHEDULE
ELEVATION TYPE 1
NORTH -1/A-2.2
EAST- 2/A-2.2
SOUTH- 1/A-2.1
WEST- 2/A-2.1
No.Description Date2' - 3 1/2"16' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"16' - 0"2' - 3 1/2"
5' - 0"GARAGE DOOR GARAGE DOOR
10' - 0"4' - 6"20' - 10"0' - 2"20' - 10"6' - 2"
ELEVATION TYPE 2
NORTH -1/A-2.4
EAST- 2/A-2.4
35' - 4"27' - 0"
SOUTH- 1/A-2.3
WEST- 2/A-2.362' - 6"
ELEVATION TYPE 3
NORTH -1/A-2.6
EAST- 2/A-2.6
SOUTH- 1/A-2.5
WEST- 2/A-2.5 Dr a wi n g No. :
A-3.1LEVEL 1
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:7/31/2024 6:43:42 PM
Page 355
CDA
+35' - 4"0' - 2"27' - 0"PDG0' - 6"34' - 10"
UNIT A
26' - 6"
UNIT B
0' - 6"
18' - 3"16' - 7"11' - 11"14' - 7"TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 927806' - 2"10' - 5"
PHONE: 714 832 510018' - 9"
13' - 9"INDUSTRY OFFICE2' - 6"2' - 6"17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
2
A-4.1
5' - 9"3' - 0"8' - 1"5' - 6"4' - 0"
8' - 1"P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights1-HR WALL BALCONY
BALCONY 2
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
10' - 8"14' - 1 1/2"
BEDROOM 3 M. BATH
311713' - 0 1/2"10' - 2"10'-0"X13'-10"Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific10'-8"X9'-7"
M. BEDROOM1 Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
M. BATH
11
A-4.1 30
14'-0"X15'-4"
10'-2"X11'-0"
M. W.I.C.
3210' - 0 1/2"
7'-8"X5'-8"
M. BEDROOM 10' - 2 1/2"
10
WIC 313'-0"X14'-8"
18 11' - 3" LAUNDRY
M. W.I.C.11'-3"X4'-11"39 BATH 2
12 4' - 1"3410'-4"X7'-9"D W 10'-2"X5'-1"
4' - 2"10' - 4"4' - 0"5'X9'-8"
BATH 3
19
10' - 2 1/2"
DN BEDROOM 2 S t a mp :33DN4' - 4 1/2"6' - 5 1/2"5' - 2"10'-2"X12'-8"
3' - 7"
BATH 3
38
11'-2"X5'-2"No. C-25837WIC 2 LAUNDRY
16 WIC 415216'-6"X8'-6"
CBEDROOM 2
9' - 10 1/2"13
BATH 2 BEDROOM 412'-7"X13'-11"W.I.C. 21420BEDROOM 310'-0"X10'-6"3511'-1"X5'-1"
11' - 1 1/2"
36
12' - 7"5' - 10 1/2"Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BEDROOM 4
37
9'-10"X10'-0"BLDG 1 LEVEL 2
FLOOR PLANS
10' - 0 1/2"9'-10"X12'-2"
4' - 0"6' - 11"4' - 5 1/2"3' - 3 1/2"
BALCONY 1
9' - 10"
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :1-HR WALL ELEVATION SHEET SCHEDULE P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
23399' - 7"7' - 1"ELEVATION TYPE 1
NORTH -1/A-2.2
EAST- 2/A-2.2
SOUTH- 1/A-2.1
WEST- 2/A-2.1
UNIT B
UNIT A
5' - 8"4' - 5"EQ.EQ.No.Description Date
ELEVATION TYPE 2
NORTH -1/A-2.4
EAST- 2/A-2.4
SOUTH- 1/A-2.3
WEST- 2/A-2.3
18' - 8"
18' - 8"
6' - 3"10' - 1"10' - 9"
24' - 11"10' - 5"
16' - 8"20' - 10"6' - 2"
35' - 4"0' - 2"27' - 0"ELEVATION TYPE 3
NORTH -1/A-2.6
EAST- 2/A-2.662' - 6"
SOUTH- 1/A-2.5
WEST- 2/A-2.5
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-3.2
Level 2
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 12:49:57 PM
Page 356
CDA
+
PDG
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
2 BALCONY BELOWA-4.1 P r o j e c t :
BALCONY
BELOW Hamilton Heights
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
SOLAR ZONE
1
A-4.1
ROOF TILE:
FOR ELEVATION TYPES 1& 2
CONCRETE TILE ROOF- EAGLE ROOFING
BELAIR 4679 LIGHT GRAY RANGE OR EQUAL
FOR ELEVATION TYPES 1& 2
CONCRETE TILE ROOF- EAGLE ROOFING
BELAIR SCB 8827 TACOMA BLEND OR EQUAL
2 1/2" / 1'-0"
S t a mp :
No. C-25837
C
SOLAR ZONE
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 1 ROOF
PLANSOLAR ZONE
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
23392 1/2" / 1'-0"
No.Description Date
BALCONY BELOW
UNIT A UNIT B
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-3.3ROOF PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 12:50:20 PM
Page 357
CDA
+
PDG
2
A-4.2
27' - 0"
26' - 6"
0' - 2"27' - 0"
26' - 6"0' - 6"0' - 6"
16' - 6"TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
16' - 6"
PHONE: 714 832 5100
CONCRETE PAD CONCRETE PAD INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
8' - 1"13' - 8"4' - 9"4' - 9"13' - 8"8' - 1"
BALCONY ABOVE BALCONY ABOVE
P r o j e c t :
1-HR WALL Hamilton Heights
13' - 0"12' - 1"10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701REF
KITCHEN KITCHEN Cl i e n t :1 2 24 Grand PacificA-4.2
13'-0"X10'-3"13'-0"X10'-3"Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 917912' - 1"3' - 8"4' - 6"
LIVING ROOM LIVING ROOMDINING ROOM DINING ROOM1 2232312'-1"X19'-6"12'-1"X19'-6"
13'-0"X10'-10"3' - 6"13'-0"X10'-10"
15' - 6 1/2"4' - 10"4' - 2"2' - 0"UP
CLOSET POWDER POWDER CLOSETCLOSETCLOSET
2665 25 294
S t a mp :
20' - 0"5' - 10 1/2"
ENTRY ENTRY
7 27 No. C-25837
C
GARAGE GARAGE
8 28
20'X20'
CLEAR
20'X20'
CLEAR
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 2 LEVEL 1
FLOOR PLANSWALL ABOVE WALL ABOVE
PORCH
1-HR WALL CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
BALCONY ABOVE Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339ELEVATION SHEET SCHEDULEUNIT B UNIT B ELEVATION TYPE 1
NORTH -1/A-2.8
EAST- 2/A-2.8 No.Description Date2' - 4 1/2"16' - 0"2' - 1"2' - 1"16' - 0"2' - 4 1/2"
GARAGE DOOR GARAGE DOOR SOUTH- 1/A-2.7
WEST- 2/A-2.76' - 2"20' - 11"0' - 0"20' - 10"6' - 2"
27' - 0"27' - 0"
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-3.4LEVEL 1
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 3:36:36 PM
Page 358
CDA
+
2
A-4.2
27' - 0"
26' - 6"
27' - 0"PDG26' - 6"
UNIT B
0' - 6"
14' - 6 1/2"11' - 11 1/2"11' - 11"14' - 7"TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
3' - 0"10' - 6"10' - 6"3' - 0"
4' - 0"8' - 1"
P r o j e c t :Hamilton Heights
8' - 1"BALCONY 1-HR WALL BALCONY
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
10' - 8"14' - 1 1/2"
M. BATH
31M. BATH
10 Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
10'-8"X9'-7"
M. BEDROOM M. BEDROOM110'-8"X9'-7"
A-4.2 9 30
14'-0"X15'-4"14'-0"X15'-4"
M. W.I.C.
32
M. W.I.C.
11
7'-8"X5'-8"7'-8"X5'-8"
10' - 2 1/2"
LAUNDRY 11' - 3" LAUNDRY
18 11'-3"X4'-11"39BATH 2 BATH 2
13 4' - 1"34DW10'-2"X5'-1"10'-2"X5'-1"
10' - 2 1/2"
BEDROOM 2 DN BEDROOM 2 S t a mp :12 33
10'-2"X12'-8"10'-2"X12'-8"
3' - 7"
BATH 3 BATH 3
17 38
11'-2"X5'-2"11'-2"X5'-2"No. C-25837
C
9' - 10 1/2"
W.I.C. 2 W.I.C. 2
14 BEDROOM 3
15
BEDROOM 3 3536
5' - 10 1/2"Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
9'-10"X10'-0"BEDROOM 4
16
BEDROOM 4
37
9'-10"X10'-0"BLDG 2 LEVEL 2
FLOOR PLANS
9'-10"X12'-2"9'-10"X12'-2"
9' - 10"
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :1-HR WALL ELEVATION SHEET SCHEDULE P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
BALCONY
20' - 3 1/2"
ELEVATION TYPE 1
NORTH -1/A-2.8
EAST- 2/A-2.8
SOUTH- 1/A-2.7
WEST- 2/A-2.7EQ3' - 6"EQ 4' - 9"5' - 8"4' - 5"EQ 3' - 6"EQ No.Description Date
10' - 9"10' - 3"10' - 1"10' - 9"
6' - 2"20' - 10"20' - 10"6' - 2"
27' - 0"0' - 2"27' - 0"
UNIT B UNIT B
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-3.5
Level 2
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 3:36:46 PM
Page 359
CDA
+
PDG2
A-4.2
TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
PHONE: 714 832 5100
INDUSTRY OFFICE
17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
P r o j e c t :
BALCONY
BELOW Hamilton HeightsBALCONY BELOW
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
SOLAR ZONE
1
A-4.2
ROOF TILE:
CONCRETE TILE ROOF- EAGLE ROOFING
BELAIR SCB 8827 TACOMA BLEND OR EQUAL
SOLAR ZONE
2 1/2" / 1'-0"
S t a mp :
No. C-25837
C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
BLDG 2 ROOF
PLAN
SOLAR ZONE
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
P h a s e :SD
Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
No.Description Date
BALCONY BELOW
UNIT B UNIT B
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-3.6ROOF PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 3:43:23 PM
Page 360
CDA
+
PDGT.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
FRAMING W/ PLYWOOD SHEATHING
(2) LAYERS OF 60 MINUTE TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
GRADE D BUILDING PAPER
EXTERIOR FINISH:3 COAT STUCCO
SYSTEM 7/8" CEMENT PLASTER 0/
METAL LATH PHONE: 714 832 5100
INTERIOR EXTERIOR
INDUSTRY OFFICESELF ADHEARED W.P. MEMBRANE O/ WEEP SCREED
STUCCO WEEP SCREED FRY REGLET OR EQUAL 17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
PRESSURE TREATED SILL PLATE/WOOD LESS THAN
INCHES FROM EXPOSED EARTH AT CONCRETE WHERE
OCCURS
8
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"P r o j e c t :1/4" SLOPE Hamilton HeightsBEDROOM 2 M. BEDROOM
13 10
10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
WALL- WEEP SCREED AT STUCCO
1 1/2" = 1'-0"3
BALCONY 1 BALCONY 2
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
Cl i e n t :Grand Pacific
Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791LIVING ROOMENTRY18 Sim3
A-4.1
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
Section 2
1/4" = 1'-0"2
S t a mp :
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"No. C-25837
C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"BLDG 1 BUILDING
SECTIONS
M. BATH
31
M. BEDROOM CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :M. BEDROOM M. BATH
11
BEDROOM 3 3010 P h a s e :SD
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339
17 Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
No.Description DateLIVING ROOM DINING KITCHEN KITCHEN LIVING ROOM
1 2 3 24 22
Sim3
A-4.1
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
UNIT A UNIT B
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-4.1
Section 111/4" = 1'-0"
Printed Date:5/20/2024 12:50:33 PM
Page 361
CDA
+
PDGT.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"
FRAMING W/ PLYWOOD SHEATHING
(2) LAYERS OF 60 MINUTE TUSTIN OFFICE
150 EL CAMINO REAL. #112
TUSTIN, CA 92780
GRADE D BUILDING PAPER
EXTERIOR FINISH:3 COAT STUCCO
SYSTEM 7/8" CEMENT PLASTER 0/
METAL LATH PHONE: 714 832 5100
INTERIOR EXTERIOR
INDUSTRY OFFICESELF ADHEARED W.P. MEMBRANE O/ WEEP SCREED
STUCCO WEEP SCREED FRY REGLET OR EQUAL 17528 E. ROWLAND ST,
CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91748
PHONE: 626 913 8101
PRESSURE TREATED SILL PLATE/WOOD LESS THAN
INCHES FROM EXPOSED EARTH AT CONCRETE WHERE
OCCURS
8
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"P r o j e c t :1/4" SLOPE Hamilton HeightsW.I.C. 2 BEDROOM 2 M. BEDROOM
14 12 9BATH 2
13 10235 19th street rancho cucamonga ca 91701
WALL- WEEP SCREED AT STUCCO
1 1/2" = 1'-0"3
BALCONY 2
Level 2
10' - 3 3/4"
L1 TOP
9' - 1"
Cl i e n t :Grand PacificENTRYLIVING ROOM Communities
100 N Barranca st. #950
West Covina, CA 91791
7 1
Sim3
A-4.2
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
Section 2
1/4" = 1'-0"2
S t a mp :
T.O. ROOF
30' - 4 1/2"No. C-25837
C
Dr a wi n g T i t l e :
L2 TOP
19' - 4 3/4"BUILDING 2
SECTIONS
M. BEDROOMM. BEDROOM M. BATH
10
M. BATH 30931
CDA P r o j e c t No.
Da t e :
Level 2 P h a s e :SD
10' - 3 3/4"Ch e c k e d B y
Dr a wn B y :
P r o j e c t No. :
Re f e r e n c e :
Re v i s i o n s :
KP
BJ, AD, AH
2339L1 TOP
9' - 1"
No.Description DateLIVING ROOM KITCHEN KITCHEN
24
LIVING ROOM
1 2 22
Sim3
A-4.2
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
UNIT B UNIT B
Dr a wi n g No. :
A-4.2
Section 1
1/4" = 1'-0"1
Printed Date:5/20/2024 3:37:32 PM
Page 362
IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 20662
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF
SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, S.B.M., ACCORDING TO THE
OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND
VICINITY
C1
Page 363
Page 364
Page 365
Page 366
Page 367
Design Review Committee Meeting Agenda
October 1, 2024
DRAFT MINUTES
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
New Time: 6:00 p.m.
A. Call to Order
The meeting of the Design Review Committee held on October 1, 2024. The meeting was called to order
by Sean McPherson, Staff Coordinator, at 6:00 p.m.
Design Review Committee members present: Vice Chairman Boling and Commissioner Diaz
Staff Present: Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner
B. Public Communications
Staff Coordinator opened the public communication and after noting there were no public comments,
closed public communications.
C. Consent Calendar
C1. Consideration to adopt Meeting Minutes of September 17, 2024.
Item C1. Motion carried 2-0 vote.
D.Project Review Items
D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, TENTATIVE MAP, DESIGN REVIEW & VARIANCE –
GRAND PACIFIC COMMUNITIES – A request to subdivide approximately 1.7 acres of land
into 8 numbered and 4 lettered lots including site plan and design review of 8 duplexes (16
units total), and a variance to reduce the required streetscape setback for a site located
between 19th and Hamilton Streets east of Hermosa Avenue in the Medium Residential (M)
Zone; APN: 1076-121-03 (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20662, Design Review DRC2023-
00363, and Variance DRC2024-00300). The project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill Development Projects.
Staff presented the item. Committee members asked a number of questions regarding WQMP
facilities, wall height, street width, and requirements for completing sidewalks. Additional
questions from committee members included landscaping, specifically that the applicant
consider a tree type that does not drop pods, the placement of mailboxes, the placement of
solar and location of trash cans. Committee Members complimented the design. Committee
Member Boling inquired about the need for crosswalks and crossing guards, considering the
new proposed street included within the project design would terminate right in front of an
elementary school. Committee Members recommended that the applicant contact the school
district and City engineering department for requirements on crosswalks and crossing guards.
Committee members voted to move the item forward to the full Planning Commission with the
motion that the applicant consider flashing beacons in any potential crosswalk and coordinate
with the school district on the need for crossing guards and any other requirements the school
district may desire. The motion also included that the applicant consider revising the landscape
plan as well as incorporate a dog relief station within the WQMP area. Exhibit C
Page 368
The Committee took the following action:
Recommend approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
D2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, DESIGN REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT –
GORRE ARCHITECHTS FOR CAL BOX - A request for site plan and architectural review of
45,993 square foot addition to an existing 98,406 square foot industrial building and a
Conditional Use Permit to operate a manufacturing use over 50,000 square feet located on
approximately 7.7 acres of land within Mixed Employment 2 (ME2) Zone, located on the east
side of Toronto Avenue where it terminates into the BNSF/Metrolink right of way; APN: 0209-
401-05. (Design Review DRC2023-00379 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2024-00288). The
project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill
Development Projects.
Staff presented the item. Committee members asked general questions related to nonconforming setbacks
and the project’s compliance with other standards. Committee members asked the applicant questions about
the history of their business in Rancho Cucamonga and about business operations related to the proposed
addition. Committee members noted that the plan set did not include colored renderings which would have
been helpful in their review. Particularly since this is an addition to an existing building, colored renderings
would be helpful to distinguish the existing structure from the new addition. Staff responded that these items
will be addressed prior to the item going to the Planning Commission.
The Committee took the following action:
Recommend approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
E. Adjournment
Principal Planner Sean McPherson adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
Page 369
EXHIBIT D
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:
CEQA 15332 Infill Exemption
Page 370
Exhibit E
Page 371
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2024-038
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20662 - GRAND PACIFIC COMMUNITIES
December 11, 2024
Page 2
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site SFRNacant Land Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M)
North Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low Residential (L) Residences
South School General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P)
East Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M) Residence
West Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M) Residences
c.Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20662 is to subdivide 1.7 acres of land into 8
numbered lots for residential purposes and 4 lettered lots for open space/WQMP purposes. The
existing single-family residence on the project site will be demolished with the project. Access to
the lots will be provided from a new public street connecting 19th Street to the north and Hamilton
Street to the south; and
d.The overall project scope includes Design Review of the residential units
(DRC2023-00363) and a Variance to reduce the streetscape setback from 19th Street and the
height of property line walls (DRC2024-00300); and
e.All lots comply with the depth, width and total area requirements of the
Development Code.
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 design and layout of the subject Tentative Tract Map will be consistent with
the General Plan and Development Code. The project site is being subdivided to facilitate the
development of 8 two-family residential lots that comply with the development requirements of
the Medium Residential (M) Zone and are consistent with the Suburban Neighborhood Low land
use designation of the General Plan except for streetscape setback and property line wall height
for which the applicant has filed a Variance request. The reduction in the streetscape setback is
necessary to construct the required WQMP facility on the project site and the additional wall height
is necessary due to onsite grades.
b.The site is physically suitable for the proposed subdivision. The proposed
subdivision will subdivide an existing residential lot into 8 two-family residential lots for the
development of 16 residential units. The general size and layout of the lots are consistent with
the Medium Residential (M) Zone.
c.The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat. The scope of the project is
the subdivision of an existing residential lot into eight two-family residential lots. The project site
is surrounded by residential development and is in keeping with the underlying zoning. The City's
Page 372
Page 373
Page 374
Page 375
Page 376
Page 377
Page 378
Page 379
Page 380
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department
SUBTT206662. DRC2023-00363, DRC2024-00300 Project:______________________ _
Project Name:
Location:
Project Type:
Hamilton Heights
10235 19TH ST-107612103-0000
Tentative Map, Design Review, Variance
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
1.The project shall comply with all project recommendations as outlined in the categorical exemption
prepared by Psomis (June 2024).
Standard Conditions of Approval
2.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.
www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 12/3/2024
Page 381
Page 382
Page 383
Page 384
Page 385
Page 386
Page 387
Page 388
Page 389
Page 390
Page 391
Page 392