HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-07-23 - Agenda Packet
Historic Preservation Commission
and
Planning Commission
Meeting Agenda
Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
July 23, 2025
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 May 28, 2025. (No meetings on June 11th,
25th and July 9th ).
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS
D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, TENTATIVE MAP, & DESIGN REVIEW – HAMILTON LAND
DEVELOPMENT – A request to subdivide 1.02 acres of land into 19 numbered lots and 1 lettered lot
including site plan and design review of 19 single-family, detached residential units with 1 unit
restricted for Very Low Income affordable housing in accordance with State Density Bonus Law for a
site located between 19th Street and Hamilton Street in the Medium (M) Residential zone at 10295
19th Street; APN: 1076-121-17. The project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill Development Projects. (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20761 and
Design Review DRC2024-00249).
D2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, MASTER PLAN, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, DESIGN REVIEW,
MINOR EXCEPTION – TRUE LIFE COMPANIES - A request for site plan and architectural review of a
mixed-use project comprised of 50 multi-family units including 10 live/work units, and a tentative tract
map for condominium purposes located on approximately 2.3 acres of land within the Neighborhood
General 3 (NG3) Zone, located on the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Amethyst Avenue;
APN: 0208-432-16. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15332 (SUBTT20708, Design Review DRC2024-00108, Master
Plan DRC2024-00109, Minor Exception DRC2025-00055).
D3. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend Section
16.36.09 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, repeal Planning Commission Resolution 87-96,
and add Chapter 17.84 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code concerning undergrounding
overhead utilities. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). This item
will be forwarded to City Council for final action.
D4. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – A request to amend the zoning
map designation for Tracts 16072, 16072-1, 16072-2, and 16072-3, totaling approximately 150.79
acres, to amend the zoning designation from neighborhood Estate 2 (NE-2) to Low Residential (L),
and ensure consistency with the configuration and development standards of a previously approved
359 lot single-family residential subdivision, in a manner consistent with the General Plan land use
designation of Traditional Neighborhood. This project qualifies for an exemption under State CEQA
Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), as the proposed zoning map amendment will not have any direct
impact on the environment. Tracts 16072, 16072-1, 16072-2, and 16072-3. (Zoning Map Amendment
DRC2025-00141).
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 appeals filed must be in writing with the City Clerk’s
Office, state the reason for the appeal, and be accompanied by an appeal fee pursuant to the most adopted
fee schedule for all decisions for 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 Draft Minutes –May 28, 2025
Page 1 of 2
2
8
3
1
Historic Preservation Commission
and
Planning Commission
Agenda
May 28, 2025
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 May 28, 2025. 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: Natalie Kalbakian, Assistant City Attorney; Sean McPherson, Principal Planner;
Jared Knight, Assistant Planner; 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 May 14, 2025.
Commissioner Daniels noted a minor correction on Page 4; fourth paragraph, second sentence,
to replace and with that as follows:
The request is to cut the curb for easier RV access to the homes that back up to the trail.
Motion: Moved by Commissioner Daniels; seconded by Commissioner Diaz. Motion carried 5-0
approved the minutes as amended.
D. Public Hearings
D1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP - Cinthia Cervantes - A request for the subdivision of an existing
45,600 square foot parcel into two new parcels within the Very Low Residential (VL) zone, located
at 13204 Banyan Street. This project qualifies for a Class 15 Categorical Exemption under State
CEQA Guidelines 15315 as a Minor Land Division. APN: 0225-122-46 (SUBTPM20962).
Page 4
HPC/PC Draft Minutes –May 28, 2025
Page 2 of 2
2
8
3
1
Assistant Planner Jared Knight presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file).
Chairman Morales opened the public hearing.
Architect Andrea Gomez attended on behalf of the applicant and was available to answer
questions.
Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Daniels stated that he had no issues, as all the requirements were met, and the
matter is straightforward.
Commissioner Diaz expressed her excitement about seeing one or possibly two new houses.
Vice Chairman Boling stated that the proposed new parcel meets all sizing requirements. If a
new project is proposed, no waivers or deviations related to setbacks are expected. Although the
lot is narrow, future projects would be required to maintain setbacks and meet all minimum
standards.
Chairman Morales expressed his support, stating that he is glad to see additional housing being
developed and appreciates the efficient use of the land.
Motion: Moved by Commissioner Dopp; seconded by Vice Chairman Boling to adopt Resolution
2025-017 to approve Tentative Parcel Map 20962. Motion carried 5-0.
E. Director Announcements - None
F. Commission Announcements - None
H. Adjournment
Motion: Moved by Commissioner Diaz, seconded by Commissioner Dopp to adjourn the
meeting. Hearing no objections, Chairman Morales adjourned the meeting at 7:14 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
Planning Department
Approved:
Page 5
DATE:July 23, 2025
TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director
INITIATED BY:Sophia Serafin, AICP, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT:ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, TENTATIVE MAP, & DESIGN
REVIEW – HAMILTON LAND DEVELOPMENT – A request to subdivide
1.02 acres of land into 19 numbered lots and 1 lettered lot including site
plan and design review of 19 single-family, detached residential units with
1 unit restricted for Very Low Income affordable housing in accordance with
State Density Bonus Law for a site located between 19th Street and
Hamilton Street in the Medium (M) Residential zone at 10295 19th Street;
APN: 1076-121-17. The project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill Development Projects.
(Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20761 and Design Review DRC2024-00249).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution of approval for Tentative
Tract Map SUBTT20761 and Design Review DRC2024-00249 with the attached conditions of
approval.
BACKGROUND:
Site Characteristics and Land Use/Zoning
The 1.02 acre, “double frontage” project site is located between 19th Street and Hamilton Street,
east of Hermosa Avenue and west of Cartilla Avenue in the Medium (M) Residential zone and the
Suburban Neighborhood Low General Plan land use designation. The site is rectangular in shape
and contains eastern and western property lines that are approximately 349 feet while the north
and south property lines are approximately 138 feet. The site slopes from north to south from
approximately 1,437 feet at the northwest corner of the property to approximately 1,424 feet at
the southeast corner, for a grade change of approximately thirteen (13) feet.
The site is developed with an existing abandoned single-family residence and accessory shed
structure that will be demolished with the development of the site. The residence was first
estimated to have been constructed around the 1930s. A historic determination letter was issued
for the property in 1999, in which the Principal Planner at the time concluded that significant,
unpermitted alterations were performed on the house that stripped it of the original architectural
features present. As such, the existing residence has been determined to not be eligible as a
historic structure.
The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent
properties are as follow:
Page 6
Page 2 of 13
2
9
1
1
Figure 1 – Site Map
Background and Legislative Context
The applicant submitted a Senate Bill (SB) 330 preliminary application on July 31st, 2024 and
followed with a timely full submittal within 180 days on November 26, 2024, which vested the
project to applicable development standards and fees in place at the time of the initial SB 330
application.
In addition to the SB 330 application, the applicant also proposes to utilize State Density Bonus
Law (SDBL) to preserve seven percent of the residential units (1 unit) for very low income
households. Pursuant to SDBL, the applicant is requesting a 25 percent density bonus (4
additional units). The base density permitted on the site is 14.28 units. Per Section 17.46.030A of
the Development Code, all density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to
the next whole number. As such, the base density calculation would be 15 units for this site in
which a 25 percent density bonus would permit 3.75 additional units. This calculation would
similarly round up to four additional units for a total of 19 units.
Further pursuant to SDBL, the applicant has also requested waivers and reductions from various
standards that would otherwise have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Single-Family
Residence Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium (M) Residential
North Single-Family
Residences Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low (L) Residential
South School General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P)
East Single-Family
Residence Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium (M) Residential
West Single-Family
Residence Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium (M) Residential
Page 7
Page 3 of 13
2
9
1
1
SDBL housing development at the density or with the incentives or concessions permitted by
Chapter 17.46 of the Development Code, or as otherwise set forth in Government Code 65915.
The applicant is also permitted to request one incentive/concession for the project due to
restricting at least five percent of the units for very low income households. The applicant
requested to receive priority processing of a housing development that qualifies for a density
bonus based on income-restricted units, as noted in Section 17.46.040C.4 of the Development
Code.
ANALYSIS:
Project Design and Layout
The project consists of 19 single-family residences located on 19 individual lots that will have
access off 19th Street by means of a north-south, 26-foot-wide private drive aisle that runs through
the center of the project. The applicant has proposed ingress and egress from the site to be
provided only from 19th Street and a waiver to permit vehicular gate that will only be utilized for
emergency, service, and maintenance vehicle access purposes with an unlocked pedestrian gate
on Hamilton. Lots one through ten will be situated on the west side of the site and face lots 11
through 19 on the eastern side of the site. The lot areas range from 1,663 square feet to 1,988
square feet. Each residence will include an individual, private driveway that ranges in length from
3.8 feet and 4 feet.
A communal open space area is proposed between lots 14 and 15 with three guest parking
spaces adjacent to the open space area. An internal four-foot sidewalk will run from north to south
in front of the eastern side lots. The tentative tract map will include 19 numbered lots for residential
purposes and one lettered lot for drive aisle, open space, and Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP) purposes. Public sidewalk and parkway improvements will be constructed on the
Hamilton Street side with a 4-foot-wide sidewalk and 8 foot wide parkways being proposed in
compliance with Engineering standards for sidewalks and parkways on Hamilton Street. Existing
sidewalk and parkway improvements are present on the 19th Street side and will remain in place.
Figure 2 – Site Plan
Architecture
The proposed residences will feature a modern farmhouse style in two color variations that will
alternate between each residence. The first color scheme provides a light, neutral palette in white,
grey, and brown with contrasting dark accents. The second color scheme will consist of warm,
Page 8
Page 4 of 13
2
9
1
1
natural tones in grey and aged white with medium to dark trim and accent elements.
Building materials include both modern and traditional materials such as stucco, vertical board
and batten wood siding, horizontal lap wood siding, concrete tile roofing, and architecturally
compatible sectional garage doors. Architectural features will consist of a gable roof, wood siding,
simple rectangular massing, decorative stucco and composite trim, decorative shutters, corbels,
and outlookers which are applied consistently to all facades and support the modern farmhouse
design.
The applicant has also proposed an enhanced elevation in both color schemes that include
additional features for the street facing right and left building elevations which contain frontage
19th Street and Hamilton Street (lots 1, 10, 11, 19). Right side enhancements include an additional
window with shutters on the right side of the building, horizontal and vertical wood siding on the
left and middle portions of the second story, a new window on the left side of the second consist
of additional shutters applied to the leftmost second story window.
Figure 3 – Colored Elevations (Scheme 1)
Page 9
Page 5 of 13
2
9
1
1
Figure 4 – Colored Elevations (Scheme 2)
Residence Size and Configuration
All proposed lots will consist of either an approximately 1,540 square foot (Plan 1) or 1,551 square
foot (Plan 2) residence. There are two floor plan layouts. Lots one through ten will receive plan
one and lots 11 through 19 will receive plan two. All residences are proposed to be two stories
and will contain a two-car garage and living spaces on the first floor and three bedrooms and two
bathrooms on the second floor. Each unit contains private front and rear yard areas.
State Density Bonus Law Waivers, Reductions, and Incentives/Concessions
Under State Density Bonus Law, developers are eligible to request waivers and reductions to
development standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the
affordable development project. The City is not required to waive or reduce development
standards if the request would: 1) have an adverse impact, as described in paragraph (2) of
subdivision (d) of Government Code 65589.5, upon health and safety for which the City
determines there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse
impact, 2) the request would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the state
registrar of historical resources and for which the City determines that there is no feasible method
to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact, or 3) if the waiver or reduction would
be contrary to state or federal law. The applicant is not limited to a specific number of waiver or
reduction requests.
Per Government Code 65915, the applicant is also eligible to receive one (1) incentive/concession
for the project due to restricting at least five (5) percent of the units for very low income
households. The applicant requested to receive priority processing of a housing development that
qualifies for a density bonus based on income-restricted units, as noted in Section 17.46.040C.4
of the Development Code.
In accordance with State Density Bonus Law, the applicant has requested a total of twenty-nine
(29) waivers or reductions for the project through State Density Bonus Law. The following waivers
Page 10
Page 6 of 13
2
9
1
1
and reductions have been requested by the applicant:
Request
Number Code Section Request City Requirement Project
Proposes
1 Table 17.36.010-B Reduce the minimum lot
size 4,000 square feet 1,600 square feet
2 Table 17.36.010-B Reduce the minimum lot
width 45 feet 31 feet
3 Table 17.36.010-B Reduce the minimum
corner lot width 50 feet 35 feet
4 Table 17.36.010-B Reduce the minimum lot
depth 80 feet 51 feet
5 Table 17.36.010-B Reduce the minimum front
yard setback 27 feet 3.8 feet
6 Table 17.36.010-B Reduce the minimum
interior side yard setback 5 feet 3.8 feet
7 Table 17.36.010-B Reduce the minimum rear
yard setback 15 feet 5 feet
8 Table 17.36.010-3
Reduce the minimum
streetscape setback for a
single-family residence
abutting a bicycle corridor
street
35 feet 19 feet
9 Table 17.36.010-3
Reduce the minimum
landscape and wall setback
for a single-family residence
abutting a bicycle corridor
street
18 feet average, 15
feet minimum
14 feet average,
13 feet minimum
10 Table 17.36.010-B Reduce the minimum
patio/porch depth 6 feet 1 foot
11 Section
17.36.010E.4
Reduce the minimum
driveway depth 19 feet 3 feet
12 Section
17.36.010E.4
Reduce the minimum
driveway width 18 feet 16 feet
13 Section
17.36.010E.4
Waiver the requirement for
one (1) of the two (2)
required parking spaces to
be uncovered
1 covered and 1
uncovered parking
space
2 covered
parking spaces
14*Section
17.36.101E.10.c
Waiver for the requirement
that prohibits new
developments from
containing entry and exit
gates
Entry and exit gates
are prohibited
1 gate to be used
only for
emergency,
service, and
maintenance
purposes
15 Table 17.36.010-B Waive the maximum lot
coverage 50%53-63%
16 Table 17.36.010-B Reduce the minimum open
space requirement 35%31%
17 Section
17.36.010E.2
Waive the minimum usable
yard area requirement
400 square feet, 15
feet in any direction
158 square feet,
5 feet
18 Section
17.120.020C.2
Waive the requirement for a
pedestrian walkway to
connect every building
entrance with a public
Pedestrian
walkways shall be
provided between
the primary entries
Lots 10 and 11
provide
pedestrian
access to the
Page 11
Page 7 of 13
2
9
1
1
sidewalk
of all buildings and
the public sidewalk,
on-site
pathways/paseos,
greenways, or other
shared open space
public sidewalk
from main
entries, Lots 12-
19 provide
pedestrian
access to a
private sidewalk
from the main
entries which can
provide access to
public sidewalks
and the shared
open space, and
Lots 1-9 do not
provide
pedestrian
access to public
sidewalks or the
open area
19 Section
17.120.020C.3
Waive the requirement for
onsite greenways
Developments shall
provide greenways
that link private
common areas with
public areas such
as rights of way
and multi-purpose
trails
No onsite
greenways in
development
20 Section
17.120.020D.3
Waive the requirement that
a minimum of 50% of units
shall have alternate garage
configurations
50% of all dwelling
units within a
single-family
residential
development shall
comply with at least
one of the
following: 1) garage
is detached and
located at least 20
feet behind the
main dwelling units,
2) the face of the
garage door is
parallel to the side
or rear property line
of the lot, or 3) the
face of the garage
door of an attached
garage is a
minimum of 10 feet
behind the longest
wall plane of the
main dwelling unit
that faces the street
or public right of
way
1 attached
garage
configuration is
applied to all 19
units
21 Section Waive the maximum 5%18%
Page 12
Page 8 of 13
2
9
1
1
17.120.020A.5.b
driveway slope for a
driveway within 18 feet in
front of any garage
22 Section
17.120.020D.1.a
Waive the maximum
frontage of access
driveways and parking on
lots up to 100 feet in width
40%51%
23 Section
17.120.020D.2.d
Waive corner parcel parking
location requirements
Access to parking
for corner lots shall
not be provided
from the front of the
lot
Corner Lots 1,
10, 11, and 19
access parking
from the front of
the lot
24 Section
17.120.020D.2.f
Reduce the minimum
distance that parking
access shall be from the
intersection of the front and
street facing side property
lines
50 feet 19 feet
25 Section
17.120.020G.1
Reduce the minimum
setback distance from the
interior edge of the sidewalk
pavement for walls and
fences located in corner
side yards
5 feet 3 feet
26 Section
17.122.010A.1.a
Waive the minimum
percentage of units in a
detached single-family
development that shall be
single-story units
25%0%
27 Section
17.122.010A.1.b
Waive the minimum
distance to vary front yard
setbacks so that no house
has the same front yard
setbacks as a house plotted
immediately adjacent to it
5 feet 0 feet
28 Section
17.122.010A.1.c
Waive the requirement for
varied garage treatments
Vary garage
treatments with
detached and semi-
detached side and
rear entries
No variation
between unit
garage
treatments
29 Section
17.122.010A.1.f
Waive the minimum number
of floor plans and elevation
variations
2 floors plans and 3
elevations
2 floor plans and
1 elevation with
enhancements
added to the right
and left
elevations of
residences on
Lots 1, 10, 11,
and 19
*See discussion below
According to the applicant, attempting to meet the above listed development standards in
compliance with the Development Code would physically preclude the project from being
constructed as the affordable unit and the density bonus would be unable to be achieved.
Page 13
Page 9 of 13
2
9
1
1
Waiver 14
As previously stated, under state density bonus law, developers are eligible to request waivers
and reductions to development standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the
construction of the affordable development project. Waiver 14 in the above table, which requests
to waive Section 17.36.101E.10.c of the Development Code that prohibits new developments
from containing entry and exit gates. This waiver would allow the applicant to, at their cost, install
a restricted access gate along Hamilton Street. This development code standard was adopted in
2022 to implement the goals of the General Plan in relation to connectivity and safety as the intent
is to develop connected neighborhoods (Goal LC-4.3), discourage new residential neighborhoods
that create discontinuous street patterns (Goal LC4.12), discourage the construction of gated
communities (Goal LC-4.13), require street connectivity and accessibility to a mix of land uses
(Goal MA-2.4), and prioritize development that enhances emergency access.
Waiver 14 increases the costs associated with the affordable housing development through the
construction, installation and maintenance of a gate. In addition, the request is not an eligible
waiver as compliance with the standard would not physically preclude the construction of the
housing development. The proposed affordable housing development is feasible without the
inclusion of the gate on Hamilton Street.
Compliance with Development Standards
The project is subject to the development standards of the Medium (M) Residential zone, which
differentiates development standards based on whether a project is for single-family or multi-
family. The project is subject to the single-family development standards as it is a single-family
development project. Compliance with the development standards provided in Table 17.36.010-
1B of the Development Code, in light of the requested waivers and reductions, are as follows:
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Development
Standard Required Proposed Complies
Density 8 to 14 DU/AC 19 DU/AC YES*
Lot Size 4,000 SF 1,663-1,988 SF WAIVER
Streetscape Setback
(19th Street)
35 Feet
(Building)19.7 Feet WAIVER
Front Setback 27 Feet 4-7.9 Feet WAIVER
Side Yard Setback
(Interior)5 Feet 3.5-4 Feet WAIVER
Side Yard Setback
(Corner)17 Feet 120 Feet YES
Page 14
Page 10 of 13
2
9
1
1
Rear Yard 15 Feet 5-8.4 Feet WAIVER
Building Height 35 Feet 27 Feet YES
Lot Coverage 50 Percent 53-63%WAIVER
*State Density Bonus Law allows for developments to exceed the maximum units per acre standard
Parking
Per State Density Bonus Law, applicants are able to request that the parking ratio set forth in
Government Code 65915 apply to the project. Based on this parking ratio, one and one-half (1.5)
onsite parking spaces are required for each two (2) to three (3) bedroom unit. As such, a total
parking count of twenty-nine (29) spaces is required. The applicant is providing two (2) covered
parking spaces for each unit, totaling thirty-eight (38) spaces. The applicant is also providing an
additional three (3) parking spaces adjacent to the open space area for guest parking purposes.
As such, the project is compliant with the required parking standards outlined in SDBL.
The project is also compliant with the number of parking spaces that would typically be applied to
a single-family development per Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code, which would be
two (2) spaces per unit. The project is not compliant with the breakdown of where spaces can be
located though as one (1) is required to be covered in a garage or carport while one (1) should
be in the driveway. The applicant has requested a waiver as such to have both parking spaces
within the garage as the proposed, reduced driveway lengths are unable to accommodate
vehicular parking.
Neighborhood Meeting
The applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting just southwest of the project site on Hamilton
Avenue at Hermosa Park at 6:00 P.M. on May 28, 2025. The applicant sent all property owners
within 660 feet of the project site a notice of the meeting. A total of eight (8) community members
attended the meeting along with the developer and the project planners. The meeting was hosted
in an open house format and the developer explained the project and spoke with each of the
attendees individually. Visuals of the project were on display along with a complete plan set. Most
of the questions asked were related to the timeline of the project, how parking would be handled,
if there would be any drainage impacts, how the vehicular and pedestrian gate on the south side
of the site would work, and estimated price of the units. Once concern voiced came from the
neighbors to the east who were worried that the two-story units will have a clear view into their
backyard and invade their privacy. They expressed that keeping the existing landscaping barrier
in place on the property line may protect some of their privacy. The developer shared that they
were intending to remove the existing landscaping as it has not been well maintained, but that
they were still committed to working with those neighbors to find another landscaping solution.
The meeting ended at approximately 7:00 P.M.
Design Review Committee
Staff presented the item to the Design Review Committee on June 3, 2025. The applicant, Matt
Hamilton, was present and no members of the public were in attendance. Both Committee
Members provided their concerns on the project and the applicant’s utilization of State Density
Bonus Law, with very limited questions for both staff and the applicant. Committee Members
provided comments on the low number of affordable units in comparison to the number of waivers
Page 15
Page 11 of 13
2
9
1
1
requested, parking issues, lack of open space, the sidewalk being only on one side of the
development, how the vehicular gate can be allowed, if they need to have a public street, limited
landscaping, and repetitive design. Committee members voiced concerns of the site being too
small to accommodate 19 units, lack of parking, legality of waivers requested, limited
enhancements to corner units, and the need for a ratio of single- and two-story units. Committee
members also expressed that while the design of an individual unit was sufficient, repeating the
same design for the entirety of the development was too monotonous. It was suggested that
minimal changes be made to each unit for some variety in window placement and other accent
details. Also stated was increased contrast in the two-color options would be better.
The applicant responded that they believed the cohesive design was a better option for this size
development and that he would consider the minor detail changes for each unit. The Committee
Members also agreed that there was a lack of amenities in the open space area and asked if the
developer would be providing any. The applicant responded that he has seen with previous
projects that the amenities would not be utilized and that residents would rather be in their own
backyards. The applicant also addressed the parking concerns by stating that households with
more than two (2) cars would not be purchasing these homes and that the Homeowner’s
Association (HOA) would uphold the requirement to park within the garages. The Committee
Members expressed that visitors would create a strain on the adjacent streets which allow for
street parking. They also noted that the HOA could technically be run solely by the residents,
which could lead to them park illegally in the drive aisle as there would not be enforcement.
Despite concerns with the project, it was recommended the item move forward to the full Planning
Commission with a recommendation of approval as proposed by the applicant due to the nature
of the project being a State Density Bonus Law application.
Public Art
Per Section 17.124.020A.1 of the Development Code, all residential development projects that
propose four (4) or more units shall be subject to the Public Art requirement. This requirement
would entail that artwork be provided which has a minimum value of $750 per unit developed.
With nineteen (19) units, the applicant would be subject to a minimum public art value of $14,250.
Per Section 17.124.020B.2 of the Development Code, residential project that contain income
restricted affordable housing units where the value of the restricted unit(s) equals or exceeds the
minimum value of the artwork that would be required, are not subject to the Public Art requirement.
The applicant has provided estimates of what the market rate units will be sold for in addition to
what the affordable unit will be valued at based on the current very low income household
affordable housing price (1/12th of 30% of 50% of the Area Medium Income) set for San
Bernardino County. The affordable unit is estimated to be sold for around $200,000, which far
exceeds the artwork value required for the number of units. As such, the project qualifies for the
exemption to the Public Art requirement and will not be required to provide public artwork onsite,
offsite, or through an in-lieu fee.
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 for a Class 32 Exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill
Development Projects, which includes infill development projects that are 1) consistent with the
applicable General Plan designation and policies as well as applicable zoning designation
regulations, 2) are developed within city limits on a site of no more than five (5) acres substantially
surrounded by urban uses, 3) the site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare, or threated
Page 16
Page 12 of 13
2
9
1
1
species, 4) approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic,
noise, air, or water quality, and 5) the site can adequately be served by all required utilities and
public services.
To support this determination, a CEQA Section 15332 Exemption report (June 2025) was
prepared by EPD Solutions, Inc., an environmental consulting firm retained by the City. Staff
thoroughly reviewed the exemption documentation and concluded that the proposed project
would not result in significant environmental impacts, including those related to the biological
resources, traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. The Planning Director has reviewed and
considered staff’s findings and, exercising their own independent judgement, concurs with staff’s
determination for a categorical exemption under CEQA.
Correspondence
The item was advertised as a public meeting with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper on July 9, 2025. Public notices were mailed to the 131 property
owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on July 8, 2025, as well. The site was posted
with two notices on July 9, 2025. As of today’s date, staff have received two (2) comments or
questions from the public regarding the project.
The first communication came from a neighboring resident who requested clarification on the
orientation of the development. Staff provided the resident with a site plan and explained that it
would run north to south. The resident also requested information on the affordable unit as they
were interested in purchasing it. Staff provided the income criteria that would have to be met in
order to purchase the unit.
The second communication was received from another nearby resident who requested that the
ingress and egress for the property be carefully evaluated as the traffic in the area can be very
busy, especially during the school year on the Hamilton Street side. Staff confirmed that further
evaluation will be performed by the Engineering Department.
Outside of required public noticing periods, staff have received four (4) written communications
from the public in support of the project. Three (3) of the communications were letters received
from neighbors of the project site who expressed that the project will be a good addition to the
neighborhood and that it will providing housing opportunities for young families. The other letter
was received by a non-profit legal group, YIMBY Law, who supports the project for its accessibility
and affordability and highlighted the City’s responsibility for approving a project in compliance with
State Density Bonus Law.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project site is currently subject to annual property taxes, a portion of which is allocated to the
City. With the development of nineteen (19) single-family residences, the assessed value of the
property is expected to increase, resulting in a corresponding increase is the City’s annual share
of property tax revenue. The City receives $0.05 per $1.00 in property tax assessed.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:
The proposed project supports the City Council core value of intentionally embracing and
anticipating our future by providing community desired, for-sale units that will offer a more
affordable price point than is typically found with majority of single-family homes within the City,
being aware of both present and future housing needs. The project also supports the core value
Page 17
Page 13 of 13
2
9
1
1
of building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere as single-family units are inherently
conducive to families. The project site’s location adjacent to a school and a park can additionally
contribute to this value as proximity to these locations can be desirable for families.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – State Density Bonus Waiver and Reduction Request Letter
Exhibit B – Project Plans
Exhibit C – DRC Comments and Minutes Dated June 3, 2025
Exhibit D – CEQA 15332 Infill Exemption Report
Exhibit E – Public Correspondence Letters
Exhibit F – Historic Determination Letter
Exhibit G – Draft Resolution of Approval with Conditions of Approval
Page 18
Paseo 19 - Project Description
The proposed project is a 19 lot fee simple common interest residential subdivision consisting of 18
market rate homes and 1 home set aside for a very low income household in accordance with State
Density Bonus Law. The project will include 4 density bonus homes along with necessary reductions
and waivers to development standards as outlined below. The two-story homes are anticipated to be
approximately 1550 SF with 3 bedrooms and 2.5 baths. The project will include a private drive and
adjacent walkway with a primary entrance on 19th Street and an emergency vehicle only access gate on
Hamilton Street. The private drive, open space area, and guest parking will be located on a lettered lot
owned and maintained by a homeowner’s association (HOA). The HOA will also maintain the common
area landscaping located along 19th, Hamilton and the private drive.
The project will replace an existing vacant single family home on a 1.02 acre lot. The property fronts
both 19th Street and Hamilton and there is currently a driveway entrance on 19th Street. The existing
home, accessory structure and fences are in a dilapidated condition and will be demolished as part of the
project. There are existing shrubs and fruit trees on the property that will be demolished as part of the
project. There are no heritage trees located on the property. The property gently slopes from 19th Street
to Hamilton Street.
The following is a further summary of the property and project:
•Address = 10295 19th Street
•APN = 1076-121-17
•Site Area = 1.02 Acres
•Zoning = Medium Density Residential (M), maximum of 14 units per acre
•Baseline Density = 15 Lots (1.02 x 14)
•Affordable Housing Set-Aside = 1 Very Low Income (7%)
•Density Bonus = 4 Lots (25%)
•Total Residential Lots = 19 (18 market rate, 1 affordable)
•Proposed Single Family Home Size = ~1550 SF, 3 BR, 2 Story
•Required Parking = 1.5 parking spaces per 3 BR home (SDBL / RCMC 17.46.030.D)
•Proposed Parking = 2 garage spaces per home + 3 guest parking spaces
Proposed Density Bonus Waivers, Reductions and Incentives in accordance with RCMC Chapter
17.46 (Density Bonuses, Incentives, and Concessions):
The following reductions and waivers to the Medium Density Residential Zone development
standards outlined in RCMC Chapter 17.36 are necessary to accommodate the proposed
density bonus project:
•Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum lot size reduced from 4000 square feet to 1600 square feet
•Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum lot width reduced from 45 feet to 31 feet
•Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum corner lot width reduced from 50 feet to 35 feet
•Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum lot depth reduced from 80 feet to 51 feet
•Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum front yard setback reduced from 27 feet to 3.8 feet
•Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum interior side yard setback reduced from 5 feet to 3 feet
•Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum rear yard setback reduced from 15 feet to 5 feet
Exhibit A
Page 19
• Table 17.36.010-3: Minimum streetscape setback for a single family home abutting a bicycle
corridor street reduced from 35 feet to 19 feet (as measured from face of curb)
• Table 17.36.010-3: Minimum landscape and wall setback for a single family home abutting a
bicycle corridor street reduced from 18 feet average/15 feet minimum to 14 feet average/13
feet minimum (as measured from face of curb)
• Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum patio/porch depth reduced from 6 feet to 5 feet
• 17.36.010E.4: Minimum driveway depth reduced from 19 feet to 3 feet
• 17.36.010E.4: Minimum driveway width reduced from 18 feet to 16 feet
• 17.36.010E.4: The requirement requiring one uncovered parking space in the driveway
waived
• 17.36.010E.10c: The requirement prohibiting all project gates shall be waived
• Table 17.36.010-B: 50% Maximum lot coverage waived
• Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum Open space requirement reduced from 35% to 31%
• 17.36.010E.2: 400 square foot usable yard area with a minimum horizontal dimension of 15
feet in any direction waived
The following reductions and waivers to the General Design Standards outlined in RCMC
Chapter 17.120 are necessary to accommodate the proposed density bonus project:
• 17.120.020.C.2: The requirement for a pedestrian walkway connecting every building
entrance with a public sidewalk shall be waived.
• 17.120.020.C.3: The requirement for greenways will be waived.
• 17.120.020.D.3a, b and c: The requirement for alternative garage configurations for 50% of
the units will be waived.
• 17.120.020.A.5: The requirement on driveway slopes not exceeding 5% shall be waived.
• 17.120.020D.1.a: The 40% allowable driveway width as a percentage of lot frontage width
shall be waived.
• 17.120.020D.2d: The requirement that access to parking shall not be located at the front of
the lot shall be waived.
• 17.120.020D.2f: The requirement that access to parking shall be a minimum of 50’ from the
intersection of the front and street facing side of the property shall be reduced to 19’.
• 17.120.020G.1 and Table 17.48.050-1: The minimum setback for corner side yard
walls/fences from the adjacent public sidewalk shall be reduced from five feet to three feet.
The following reductions and waivers to the Design Provisions outlined in RCMC Chapter
17.122 are necessary to accommodate the proposed density bonus project:
• 17.122.010.A.1.a: The requirement for single story units will be waived.
• 17.122.010.A.1.b: The requirement to vary front setbacks will be waived.
• 17.122.010.A.1.c: The requirement to vary garage treatments will be waived.
• 17.122.010.A.1.f: The requirement to vary floor plans and elevations will be waived.
Proposed Affordable Housing Incentive per RCMC section 17.46.040.C.4: The 7% very low
housing set-aside allows the project one incentive/concession. The proposed
incentive/concession is priority processing of the project as identified in the above referenced
code section
Page 20
EXHIBIT B
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:
Project-Plans
Page 21
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
June 3, 2024
6:00 p.m.
Sophia Serafin, Assistant Planner
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, TENTATIVE MAP, & DESIGN REVIEW – HAMILTON
LAND DEVELOPMENT – A request to subdivide 1.02 acres of land into 19 numbered lots and
1 lettered lot including site plan and design review of 19 single-family, detached residential units
with 1 unit set aside for Very Low affordable housing for a site located between 19th Street and
Hamilton Street in the Medium Residential (M) zone at 10295 19th Street; APN: 1076-121-17
(Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20761 and Design Review DRC2024-00249). The project qualifies
as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill Development
Projects.
Site Characteristics:
The “double frontage” lot is located between 19th Street and Hamilton Street, east of Hermosa
Avenue and west of Haven Avenue, and is approximately 349 feet along the east and west
property lines and 138 feet along the north and south property lines. The site slopes from north
to south from approximately 1,437 feet at the northwest corner of the property and 1,424 feet at
the southeast corner of the property, for a grade change of approximately 13 feet. The site is
developed with an existing abandoned single-family residence and accessory shed structure 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:
Background and Legislative Context:
The applicant submitted an SB 330 preliminary application on July 31, 2024 and followed with a
timely full submittal within 180 days on November 26, 2024, which vested the project to applicable
development standards in place at the time of submittal of the SB330 application.
In addition to the SB 330 application, the applicant also proposes to utilize State Density Bonus
Law (SDBL) to preserve 7% of the residential units (1 unit) for very low income households.
Pursuant to SDBL, the applicant is requesting a 25% density bonus (4 additional units). Further,
pursuant to SDBL, the applicant has also requested waivers and reductions to the standards
outlined in the below compliance table, from various development and design standards In
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Single-Family
Residence 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
Residence Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M)
Exhibit C
Page 22
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2024-00249 – Hamilton Land Development
June 3, 2025
Page 2
addition to the standards outlined in the compliance table below for which waivers have been
requested, the developer has also proposed other waivers and reductions which will be provided
to the Planning Commission and discussed in full before that body at the appropriate time.
Project Design and Layout:
The project comprises nineteen (19) two-story single-family residences on nineteen (19)
individual lots accessed by a north-south private drive aisle connecting 19th Street and Hamilton
Street. All residences are proposed to be two-story as the requirement to have at least 25% of all
units in a single-family development be single story has been waived by the Developer through
SDBL. Ingress and egress from the site will only be provided from 19th Street as the Hamilton
Street side will be closed off with a gate that shall only be utilized for emergency, service, and
maintenance purposes. An internal sidewalk will run north to south on the eastern side of the
property as well. The tentative map will include nineteen (19) numbered lots for residential
purposes and one (1) lettered lot for drive aisle, open space, and Water Quality Management
Plan (WQMP) purposes. Each residence includes an individual, private driveway and properties
are separated by landscaping north and south of the driveways. A communal open space area is
provided on the midpoint of the eastern side of the development. Three (3) guest parking spaces
are also included adjacent to the open space area. Existing trees proposed for removal from the
site do not qualify as heritage trees and therefore do not require replacement. Landscaping
improvements will be provided for each lot in front and street side yard areas, the open space
area, and the parkways on 19th Street and Hamilton Street.
Figure 1: Site Plan
Page 23
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2024-00249 – Hamilton Land Development
June 3, 2025
Page 3
Figure 2: Landscape Plan
Architecture:
The residences will feature a modern farmhouse style in two (2) color variations that will alternate
between each residence. Building materials include stucco, vertical board and batten wood siding,
horizontal lap wood siding, concrete tile roofing, and architecturally compatible sectional garage
doors. Architectural features will consist of a gable roof, stucco and composite trim, decorative
shutters, corbels, and outlookers. The applicant has also proposed an enhanced elevation in both
color schemes that include additional features on the street facing right and left sides of the
residences that front on 19th Street and Hamilton Street. The enhancements consist of additional
shutters and siding.
Figure 3: Street Scenes from 19th Street and Internally
Figure 4: Building Materials and Front Elevations
Page 24
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2024-00249 – Hamilton Land Development
June 3, 2025
Page 4
Unit Composition and Floor Plans:
The project is comprised of nineteen (19) two-story, three-bedroom units with living on the first
floor and bedrooms on the second floor. Each unit includes private front and rear yards with front
yards maintained through the Homeowner’s Association. The table below summarizes the
number of and square feet of residential units:
UNIT SUMMARY
Residential
Unit Type Unit Size (SF) Number of Units
3 Bedroom 1,540 SF 19
Total Number of Units 19
Compliance with Development Standards:
As previously noted, the applicant has requested waivers from various departments standards
through State Density Bonus Law (SDBL). Under the SDBL, a “waiver” is intended to modify or
reduce applicable development standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the
construction of the proposed density bonus or the developer’s requested concession or incentive.
See below for the project’s compliance with relevant development standards outlined in Table
17.36.010-1B and Table 17.36.010-3 of the Development Code:
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Development
Standard Required Proposed Complies
Density 8 to 14 DU/AC 19 DU/AC YES*
Lot Size 4,000 SF 1,663-1,988 SF WAIVER
Streetscape Setback
(19th Street)
35 Feet
(Building)
19.69-19.72 Feet
WAIVER
Front Setback
27 Feet
3.96-7.93 Feet
WAIVER
Side Yard Setback
(Interior)
5 Feet
3.5-4 Feet
WAIVER
Side Yard Setback
(Corner) 17 Feet 19.69-20.03 Feet
YES
Page 25
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2024-00249 – Hamilton Land Development
June 3, 2025
Page 5
Rear Yard 15 Feet 5-8.39 Feet WAIVER
Building Height 35 Feet 27 Feet YES
Lot Coverage 50 Percent 53-63% WAIVER
*State Density Bonus Law allows for developments to exceed the maximum units per acre standard
In addition to the above listed waivers, as well as those other waivers which will be discussed in
detail at the full Planning Commission, the applicant has also requested waivers from the
requirement for single-story units (17.122.010.A.1.a), requirements for varied garage treatments
(17.122.010.A.1.c), and the requirements for varied floor plans and elevations (17.122.010.A.1.f).
Parking:
The proposed three-bedroom single-family units are required to provide two (2) parking spaces
which consist of one (1) covered space in a garage or carport and one (1) uncovered space within
the driveway. Each unit provides two (2) garage parking spaces and does not include driveway
parking.
Neighborhood Meeting:
The applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting just southwest of the project site on Hamilton
Avenue at Hermosa Park at 6:00 p.m. on May 28, 2025. The applicant sent all property owners
within 660 feet of the project site a notice of the meeting. A total of eight (8) community members
attended the meeting along with the developer and the project planner. The meeting was hosted
in an open house style format and the developer explained the project and spoke with each
attendee individually. Visuals of the project were also on display along with a full planset. The
majority of questions asked were related to timeline of the project, how parking would be handled,
if there would be any drainage impacts, how the vehicular and pedestrian gate on the south side
of the site would work, and estimated price of the units. One concern voiced came from the
neighbors to the east who are worried that the two-story units will have a clear view into their
backyard and invade on their privacy. They expressed that keeping the existing landscaping
barrier on the property line may protect some of their privacy. The developer shared that they
were intending to remove the existing landscaping as it has not been well maintained, but they
would intend to work with the neighbors to find another landscaping solution. The meeting ended
at approximately 7:00 p.m.
Staff Recommendation: 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 Moving the Item Forward to the Full Planning Commission as proposed by
the applicant.
☐Recommend Moving Forward with Modifications to the design of the project by
incorporating revisions requested by the Committee. Follow-up review by the Committee is not
Page 26
DRC COMMENTS
DR DRC2024-00249 – Hamilton Land Development
June 3, 2025
Page 6
required. The revisions shall be verified by staff prior to review and action by the Planning Director
/ Planning Commission.
☐Recommend Conditional Support 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 Further Consultation with Staff of the design of the project as proposed by the
applicant.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Sophia Serafin, Assistant Planner
Members Present:
Staff Coordinator: Sean McPherson, Principal Planner
Exhibit A – Project Plans
Page 27
Design Review Committee
Meeting Agenda
June 3, 2025
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 June 3, 2025. 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 Daniels
Staff Present: Sophia Serafin, Assistant 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 May 20, 2025.
Item C1. Motion carried 2-0 vote as presented.
D. Project Review Items
D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, TENTATIVE MAP, & DESIGN REVIEW – HAMILTON
LAND DEVELOPMENT – A request to subdivide 1.02 acres of land into 19 numbered lots and
1 lettered lot including site plan and design review of 19 single-family, detached residential
units with 1 unit set aside for Very Low affordable housing for a site located between 19th
Street and Hamilton Street in the Medium Residential (M) zone at 10295 19th Street; APN:
1076-121-17 (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20761 and Design Review DRC2024-00249). The
project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill
Development Projects.
Staff presented the item to the Design Review Committee. The applicant, Matt Hamilton, was
present and no members of the public were in attendance. Both Committee Members provided
their concerns on the project and the applicant’s utilization of State Density Bonus Law, with
very limited questions for both staff and the applicant. Committee Member provided comments
on the lack of affordability in comparison to the number of waivers requested, parking issues,
lack of open space, the sidewalk being only on one side of the development, how the vehicular
gate can be allowed, if they need to have a public street, limited landscaping, and repetitive
design. Committee Member voiced concerns of the site being too small to accommodate 19
units, lack of parking, legality of waivers requested, limited enhancements to corner units, and
the need for a ratio of single- and two-story units. Committee Member also expressed that while
the design of an individual unit was sufficient, repeating the same design for the entirety of the
development was too monotonous. It was suggested that minimal changes be made to each
unit for some variety in window placement and other accent details. Also stated was increased
contrast in the two-color options would be better.
Page 28
The applicant responded that they believed the cohesive design was a better option for this
size development and that he would consider the minor detail changes for each unit. The
Committee Members also agreed that there was a lack of amenities in the open space area
and asked if the developer would be providing any. The applicant responded that he has seen
with previous projects that the amenities would not be utilized and that residents would rather
be in their own backyards. The applicant also addressed the parking concerns by stating that
households with more than two cars would not be purchasing these homes and that the HOA
would uphold the requirement to park within the garages. The Committee Members expressed
that visitors would create a strain on the adjacent school and parking lot in addition to the
surrounding streets which allow for street parking. They also noted that the HOA could
technically be run solely by the residents, which could lead to them park illegally in the drive
aisle as there would not be enforcement.
Despite concerns with the project, it was recommended the item move forward to the full
Planning Commission with a recommendation of approval as proposed by the applicant due to
the nature of the project being a State Density Bonus Law application.
Recommended approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
E. Adjournment
Principal Planner McPherson adjourned the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
Page 29
EXHIBIT D
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:
CEQA-15332-Infill-Exemption-Report
Page 30
May 8, 2025
Ms. Sophia Serafin
fity of Rancho Cucamonga
'10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Subject: Paseo 19
10295 19th Street
Dear Marie:
Please consider this letter as my suppmt for the proposed Paseo 19 new home development. I own a home near the proposed project and have lived in this area for many years. l believe the project will be
a good addition to the neighborhood. The new homes will provide housing opportunities for young families and empty-nesters that want to stay in the area. I respectfully request that the City of Rancho
Cucamonga approve the project.
Sincerely, 'K� -s .. ..h.�b
Ray Gonzales
7150 Windemere Place Alta Loma, Ca. 91701
Exhibit E
Page 31
May 8, 2025
Ms. Sophia Serafin
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Subject: Paseo 19
10295 19th Street
Dear Sophia:
Please consider this letter as my support for the proposed Paseo 19 new home development. I own a
home near the proposed project and have lived in this area for many years. I believe the project will be
a good addition to the neighborhood. The new homes will provide housing opportunities for young
families and empty-nesters that want to stay in the area. I respectfully request that the City of Rancho
Cucamonga approve the project.
Sincerely,
Steve Landis
5622 Land View Ct
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91737
Page 32
July 14, 2025
Ms. Sophia Serafin
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Subject: Paseo 19
10295 19th Street
Dear Sophia:
Please consider this letter as my support for the proposed Paseo 19 new home development. I live near
the proposed project and I believe the project is a great use of an underutilized, dilapidated property.
The proposed two-story detached single family homes will be a good addition to the neighborhood. I
respectfully request that the City of Rancho Cucamonga approve the project.
Sincerely,
Beau Cooper
5836 Emerald Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701
Page 33
YIMBY Law
2261 Market Street STE 10416
San Francisco, CA 94114
hello@yimbylaw.org
7/9/2025
Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
10500 Civic Center Dr.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Planning@CityofRC.us
Via Email
Re: 10295 19th Street
Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission,
YIMBY L aw is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation, whose mission is to increase the accessibility
and affordability of housing in California. YIMBY Law sues municipalities when they fail to
comply with state housing laws, including the Housing Accountability Act (HAA). As you know,
the Planning Commission has an obligation to abide by all relevant state housing laws when
evaluating the above captioned proposal, including the HA A. Should the City fail to follow the law,
YIMBY Law will not hesitate to file suit to ensure that the law is enforced.
The proposed project is a mixed-income 19-lot fee-simple common interest residential
subdivision. There are 18 market-rate homes and 1 home set aside for a very low-income
household. The project will include 4 density bonus homes along with necessary reductions and
waivers to development standards as allowed by state density bonus law. The two-story homes
are anticipated to be approximately 1550 SF with 3 bedrooms and 2.5 baths. The project will
include a private drive and adjacent walkway with a primary entrance on 19th Street and an
emergency vehicle-only access gate on Hamilton Street. The private drive, open space area, and
guest parking will b e located on a lettered lot owned and maintained by a homeowner’s
association (HOA). The HOA will also maintain the common area landscaping located along 19th,
Hamilton and the private drive. The project will replace a dilapidated vacant single family home
on a 1.02 acre lot.
California Government Code § 65589.5, the Housing Accountability Act, prohibits localities from
denying housing development projects that are compliant with the locality’s zoning ordinance or
general plan at the time the application was deemed complete, unless the locality can make
findings that the proposed housing development would be a threat to public health and safety.
The purpose of the exception for threats to public health and safety is not to provide localities
with a vehicle to avoid HA A compliance by seeking out arbitrary impacts from proposed
developments. Rather, the purpose of the HA A is to require local governments to provide “clear
1
Page 34
rules adopted in advance, rather than by ad hoc decisions to accept or reject proposed housing.”
1
Therefore, the Planning Commission may not construct health and safety threats to serve as a
basis for rejecting this project, but rather, must rely on the clear, objective rules already in place.
With the requested concessions and/or waivers available under the State Density Bonus Law, the
above captioned proposal is zoning and general plan compliant, therefore, your local agency must
approve the application, or else make findings to the effect that the proposed project would have
an adverse impact on public health and safety. To qualify as an “adverse impact” under the State
Density Bonus Law, there must be “a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact,
based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as
they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.” In the event that the city does
2
identify a health and safety issue for which there is substantial evidence in the record that the
requested density bonus waiver or concession conflicts with a written, public health and safety
standard that existed at the time the application was deemed complete, the city must find a way
to mitigate these impacts, and the city should facilitate this mitigation by providing the
developers with mitigating conditions of approval, not by denying the project; a denial of the
project under these circumstances would constitute a violation of the Housing Accountability Act.
Should the City fail to comply with the law, YIMBY Law will not hesitate to take legal action to
ensure that the law is enforced.
I am signing this letter both in my capacity as the Executive Director of YIMBY Law, and as a
resident of California who is affected by the shortage of housing in our state and would be eligible
to apply for residency in the proposed housing development project.
Sincerely,
Sonja Trauss
Executive Director
YIMBY Law
2 Cal. Gov't Code § 65915(d)(1)(B); § 65589.5(d)(2) (West).
1 California Renters Legal Advoc. & Educ. Fund v. City of San Mateo, 68 Cal. App. 5th 820, 851, 283 Cal.
Rptr. 3d 877, 899 (2021).
YIMBY Law, 2261 Market Street STE 10416, San Francisco, CA 94114
2
Page 35
From:Mike Pettey
To:Serafin, Sophia
Subject:10295 19th Property
Date:Friday, July 11, 2025 7:51:07 AM
CAUTION: This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or openattachments unless you recognize the sender and can confirm the content is safe.
I recommend that the entry and exit to this property be carefully
evaluated. The amount of traffic in this area can be very busy at
many times during the day. The Hamilton Street access can be
extremely busy during the school year.
Regards,
Michael Pettey
6807 Cartilla Ave.
Page 36
T H E C I T y O F
A N C H 0 C U C A M 0 N G A
May 13, 1999
Ms. Jean Amodt
7471 Kirkwood Avenue
Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730
Re: Historical Significance of House at 10295 19'" Street
Dear Ms. Amodt:
In response to your phone inquiry of the property at the subject site, staff conducted a
photo survey of the site. The results of the survey indicates the subject house has been
significantly altered over the years and has lost all of the original architectural features. In
addition, we were unable to determine any historical significance regarding previous
events, activities or ownership as prescribed by the Historic Preservation Commission
Ordinance, Chapter 24, of the Municipal Code.
In conclusion, we have determined that the present listing on the City Historical Sites List
shall be changed from SUS (Surveyed Undetermined Significance) to SDI (Surveyed
Determined Insignificant). Therefore, no further historical / cultural resource assessment
shall be needed prior to a request for demolition.
If you have any more questions please call.
Sincerely,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIV SION
L. Henderson AICP, Principal Planner
LJH]s
Mayor William ,.Alexander Ccuncilmember Paul Biane
Mayor Pro-Tem Diane Williams f - Ccuncilmember Bob Dutton
Jack Lam, AICP City Manager Ccuncilmember James V Curatalo
10500 Civic Center Drive • PO. Box 807 • Rancho Cucamonga.CA 91729 • (909) 477-2700 • FAX(909) 477-2849
Exhibit F
Page 37
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-019
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20761 AND DESIGN REVIEW
DRC2024-00246, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.02 ACRE LOT INTO
NINETEEN (19) NUMBERED LOTS AND ONE (1) LETTERED LOT FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF NINETEEN (19) SINGLE-FAMILY
DETACHED, RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH ONE (1) UNIT SET ASIDE FOR
VERY LOW INCOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN ACCORDANCE WITH
STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW FOR A SITE LOCATED BETWEEN 19TH
STREET AND HAMILTON STREET IN THE MEDIUM (M) RESIDENTIAL
ZONE AT 10295 19th STREET; (APN: 1076-121-17), MAKE FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF, AND MAKE A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION
UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332.
A.Recitals.
1.Hamilton Land Development, Inc. filed an application for the issuance of Tentative
Tract Map SUBTT20761 and Design Review DRC2024-00246, as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject entitlements request is referred to as "the
application."
2.On the 23rd day of July 2025, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said applications and concluded said
hearing on that date.
3.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B.Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1.This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on July 23, 2025, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The applicant submitted a Senate Bill (SB) 330 preliminary application which was
accepted on July 31, 2024, followed by a timely full application on November 26, 2024, which
vested the project to applicable development standards and fees in place at the time of the initial
SB 330 application in accordance with state law; and
Exhibit G
Page 38
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-019
SUBTT20761 AND DRC2024-00249 – PASEO 19 JULY 23, 2025
Page 2
b. As of July 31, 2024, the zoning of the subject project area in place at the time,
and still effective today, was and is Medium (M) Residential; and
c. As of July 31, 2024, the General Plan land use designation of the subject project
area in place at the time, and still effective today, was and is Suburban Neighborhood Low; and
d. As the applicant proposes to set aside seven (7) percent of the residential unit
for Very Low Income Households under State Density Bonus Law, the applicant is permitted
automatic parking reductions, unlimited waivers and reductions from the City’s required
development standards that would otherwise preclude the project from being developed, and one
(1) incentive or concession; and
e. As the applicant has requested twenty-nine (29) waivers and reductions
specifically related to the following:
1) Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum lot size reduced from 4000 square feet
to 1600 square feet
2) Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum lot width reduced from 45 feet to 31 feet
3) Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum corner lot width reduced from 50 feet to
35 feet
4) Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum lot depth reduced from 80 feet to 51
feet
5) Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum front yard setback reduced from 27 feet
to 3.8 feet
6) Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum interior side yard setback reduced from 5
feet to 3 feet
7) Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum rear yard setback reduced from 15 feet to
5 feet
8) Table 17.36.010-3: Minimum streetscape setback for a single family
home abutting a bicycle corridor street reduced from 35 feet to 19 feet
(as measured from face of curb)
9) Table 17.36.010-3: Minimum landscape and wall setback for a single
family home abutting a bicycle corridor street reduced from 18 feet
average/15 feet minimum to 14 feet average/13 feet minimum (as
measured from face of curb)
10) Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum patio/porch depth reduced from 6 feet to
5 feet
11) 17.36.010E.4: Minimum driveway depth reduced from 19 feet to 3 feet
12) 17.36.010E.4: Minimum driveway width reduced from 18 feet to 16 feet
13) 17.36.010E.4: The requirement requiring one uncovered parking space
in the driveway waived
14) 17.36.010E.10.c: The requirement prohibiting all entry and exit gates
shall be waived
15) Table 17.36.010-B: 50% Maximum lot coverage waived
16) Table 17.36.010-B: Minimum Open space requirement reduced from
35% to 31%
17) 17.36.010E.2: 400 square foot usable yard area with a minimum
horizontal dimension of 15 feet in any direction waived
Page 39
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-019
SUBTT20761 AND DRC2024-00249 – PASEO 19 JULY 23, 2025
Page 3
18) 17.120.020.C.2: The requirement for a pedestrian walkway connecting
every building entrance with a public sidewalk shall be waived.
19) 17.120.020.C.3: The requirement for greenways will be waived.
20) 17.120.020.D.3a, b and c: The requirement for alternative garage
configurations for 50% of the units will be waived.
21) 17.120.020.A.5: The requirement on driveway slopes not exceeding
5% shall be waived.
22) 17.120.020D.1.a: The 40% allowable driveway width as a percentage
of lot frontage width shall be waived.
23) 17.120.020D.2d: The requirement that access to parking shall not be
located at the front of the lot shall be waived.
24) 17.120.020D.2f: The requirement that access to parking shall be a
minimum of 50’ from the intersection of the front and street facing side
of the property shall be reduced to 19’.
25) 17.120.020G.1 and Table 17.48.050-1: The minimum setback for
corner side yard walls/fences from the adjacent public sidewalk shall be
reduced from five feet to three feet.
26) 17.122.010.A.1.a: The requirement for single story units will be waived.
27) 17.122.010.A.1.b: The requirement to vary front setbacks will be
waived.
28) 17.122.010.A.1.c: The requirement to vary garage treatments will be
waived.
29) 17.122.010.A.1.f: The requirement to vary floor plans and elevations
will be waived.
f. As the applicant will be granted twenty-eight (28) waivers and reductions as
Request Fourteen (14) to waive Section 17.36.010E.10.c of the Development Code that prohibits
new developments from containing entry and exit gates is not an eligible waiver as it would not
physically preclude the construction of the affordable housing development;
g. As the applicant has requested one (1) incentive or concession specifically
related to receiving priority processing of a housing development that qualifies for a density bonus
based on income-restricted units; and
h. The applications apply to an existing project site located between 19th Street and
Hamilton Street with Hermosa Avenue to the west and Cartilla Avenue to the east; and
i. The project site is currently developed with an abandoned single-family residence
and accessory shed structures and has an area of approximately 1.02 acres. The site is
approximately 138 feet east to west, and approximately 349 feet north to south; and
j. The existing land uses, General Plan land use designations, and zoning
designations for the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcel)
are as follows:
Page 40
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-019
SUBTT20761 AND DRC2024-00249 – PASEO 19 JULY 23, 2025
Page 4
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Single-Family
Residence Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium (M) Residential
North Single-Family
Residences Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low (L) Residential
South School General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P)
East Single-Family
Residence Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium (M) Residential
West Single-Family
Residence Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium (M) Residential
k. The project includes Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20761 for the subdivision of 1.02
acres of land into nineteen (19) numbered lots and one (1) numbered lot and Design Review
DRC2024-00249 for the construction of nineteen (19) single-family, detached residences with one
(1) unit restricted for Very Low Income Households in accordance with State Density Bonus Law.
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 makes the following findings for Tentative Tract Map
SUBTT20761, pursuant to the Subdivisions Code Section 16.16.100 in support of the
recommendation:
a. The proposed subdivision, together with its provisions for its design and
improvements, is generally consistent with the General Plan. The proposal is to subdivide a
property with an area of approximately 1.02 acres of land located into nineteen (19) numbered lots
and one (1) lettered lot for the development of nineteen (19) single-family, detached residences
with one (1) restricted for Very Low Income Households in accordance with State Density Bonus
Law. The underlying General Plan designation is Suburban Neighborhood Low which is intended
for suburban neighborhoods of single-family detached and attached housing with a low to low-
medium density. The designation allows a maximum density of fourteen (14) dwelling units per
acre. The proposed development of single-family, detached residences has a density of 18.63
units per acre due to the requested density bonus in accordance with State Density Bonus Law.
The base density of the site, excluding the density bonus units, is fourteen (14) units and is
consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan also widely encourages the development of
affordable housing options in compliance with the allocation of housing units at various income
levels as provided through the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process.
b. The project site is physically suitable for the proposed subdivision at the
proposed density. The proposed Tentative Tract Map will subdivide an existing residential lot into
nineteen (19) numbered and one (1) numbered lot for the development of nineteen (19) single-
family, detached residences. Through the waivers and reductions requested in accordance with
State Density Bonus Law relating to lot size, width, and depth, the project site is able to reasonably
accommodate the development on nineteen (19) residential units.
c. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat. The project site was
previously developed with a single-family residence and the site is surrounded by other urban
development. The City’s environmental consultant prepared a California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) 15332 exemption report and further determined that the project would not have a
significant impact on the environment relating to biological resources, noise air quality, or water
after performing site visits and studies on the site.
Page 41
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-019
SUBTT20761 AND DRC2024-00249 – PASEO 19 JULY 23, 2025
Page 5
d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health
problems. Per the City of Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, the addition of
nineteen (19) single-family homes would generate a less than significant impact to Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) and therefore vehicle emissions. The City’s CEQA consultant additionally
determined that the proposed project would not result in any significant effects relating to
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions or water quality.
e. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements related to the project
will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of
property within the proposed subdivision. The subject subdivision does not conflict with existing
public rights of way or any existing easement on or surrounding the site.
4. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Design
Review DRC2024-00249 as a part of the application and makes the following findings pursuant
to the Development Code Section 17.20.040 in support of the recommendation:
a. The proposed project is generally consistent with the General Plan. The proposal
is to develop nineteen (19) single-family, detached residences with one (1) restricted for Very Low
Income Households in accordance with State Density Bonus Law. The underlying General Plan
designation is Suburban Neighborhood Low which is intended for suburban neighborhoods of
single- family detached and attached housing with a low to low-medium density. The designation
allows a maximum density of fourteen (14) dwelling units per acre. The proposed development of
single-family, detached residences has a density of 18.63 units per acre due to the requested
density bonus in accordance with State Density Bonus Law. The base density of the site,
excluding the density bonus units, is fourteen (14) units and is consistent with the General Plan.
The General Plan also widely encourages the development of affordable housing options in
compliance with the allocation of housing units at various income levels as provided through the
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process.; and
b. The proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and
the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The project site is within the Medium (M)
Residential District which permits the development of higher density single-family projects; and
c. The proposed use is generally not in compliance with each of the applicable
provisions of the Development Code as a total of twenty-nine (29) standards have been requested
to be waived or reduced in accordance with State Density Bonus Law. In order to provide the
affordable unit, the applicant has determined that strict application of the requested development
standards would preclude the project from being constructed. The project is in compliance with
Chapter 17.46 of the Development Code, which provides authority for waivers and reductions to
be requested in accordance with State Density Bonus Law; and
d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity. A Class 32 CEQA exemption report was prepared for the project
which determined that the project would not create a significant impact on traffic, noise, air quality,
or water quality, all of which can affect public health, safety, or welfare.
Page 42
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-019
SUBTT20761 AND DRC2024-00249 – PASEO 19 JULY 23, 2025
Page 6
5. Planning Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the
requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines.
The project qualifies for a Class 32 Exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 –
Infill Development Projects, which includes infill development projects that are 1) consistent with
the applicable General Plan designation and policies as well as applicable zoning designation
regulations, 2) are developed within city limits on a site of no more than five (5) acres substantially
surrounded by urban uses, 3) the site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare, or threated
species, 4) approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic,
noise, air, or water quality, and 5) the site can adequately be served by all required utilities and
public services.
To support this determination, a CEQA Section 15332 Exemption report (June 2025) was
prepared by EPD Solutions, Inc., an environmental consulting firm retained by the City. Staff
thoroughly reviewed the exemption documentation and concluded that the proposed project
would not result in significant environmental impacts, including those related to the biological
resources, traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
6. 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, 2, 3, 4, and
5, 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.
7. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF JULY 2025.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Tony Morales, Chairman
ATTEST:
Jennifer Nakamura, Secretary
I, Jennifer Nakamura, 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 23rd day of July 2025, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 43
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
The Tentative Tract Map and Design Review applications authorize the subdivision of a 1.02 acre parcel
of land into 19 numbered lots and 1 lettered lot in order to develop 19 single-family, detached residential
units with 1 unit set aside for Very Low Income affordable housing in accordance with State Density
Bonus Law, located between 19th Street and Hamilton Street in the Medium Residential zone at 10295
19th Street; APN: 1076-121-17.
1.
The Density Bonus Agreement shall be executed by the City Council prior to Building Permit issuance .2.
The CC&R's shall include a provision to limit individual garages to vehicle parking only.3.
The Final Map shall be approved and recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorders Office prior
to issuance of Building Permits.
4.
The project shall comply with all project recommendations as outlined in the categorical exemption
prepared by EPD Solutions (June 2025).
5.
Construction plans submitted to the Building Department shall remove the vehicular and pedestrian
located at the Hamilton Street ingress and egress point
6.
Standard Conditions of Approval
All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment ,
detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to Planning Director review and
approval prior to issuance of Building Permits.
7.
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.
8.
www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 44
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
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.
9.
Approval of Tentative Tract No. 20761 is granted subject to the approval of Design Review
DRC2024-00249.
10.
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.
11.
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.
12.
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.
13.
www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 45
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
14.
For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously
maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and
occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted
by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition.
15.
Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in
accordance with the Development Code Section 17.80.050, and so noted on the grading plans. The
location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown
on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist 's recommendations
regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods.
16.
Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development
Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting.
17.
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.
18.
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.
19.
A minimum of 45 trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the
project:
0 percent - 48-inch box or larger 10 percent - 36-inch box or larger, 10 percent - 24- inch
box or larger, and 80 percent - 15-gallon
20.
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.
21.
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.
22.
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.
23.
All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design
shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department.
24.
Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient
landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82.
25.
www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 46
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
The applicant shall comply with all Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Board and Federal EPA water
requirements.
26.
The applicant shall contact the U .S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of
mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes
with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall
be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
27.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on this site
unless they are the principal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit parking on interior
circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas.
28.
All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from
back of sidewalk.
29.
All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 17 feet long with a required 1-foot overhang (e.g., over a curb
stop).
30.
All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and
exits shall be striped per City standards.
31.
Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood gates .
Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC.
32.
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other
applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and /or Master Plans in effect at
the time of Building Permit issuance.
33.
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.
34.
The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners '
Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Services Department and the
City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of Building
Permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The
Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning 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.
35.
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.
36.
The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site
Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, and grading on file in the
Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations.
37.
www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 47
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located
out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry
walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. For single -family
residential developments, transformers shall also be above ground, pad mounted, meeting current SCE
design standards.
38.
On corner side yards, provide minimum 3-foot setback between walls /fences and sidewalk. The 3-foot
wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the required street
trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Director review and
approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. The parkway landscaping including trees, shrubs,
ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the Homeowners' Association.
39.
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.
40.
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 .
41.
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.
42.
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.
43.
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.
44.
Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall
condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property
owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owners at least
30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project perimeter.
45.
For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry.46.
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.
47.
If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick -up shall be for individual units with all
receptacles shielded from public view.
48.
www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 48
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or dwelling unit
shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of a solar energy system. The
easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions for the subdivision which shall be
recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map or issuance of permits, whichever comes
first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures, or any
other object, except for utility wires and similar objects.
49.
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
The developer shall enter into an Annexation Proceeding and sign a Consent and Waiver to join
Community Facilities District CFD 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) and shall be filed by Special
Districts prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Any
annexation cost shall be borne by the developer. For any questions and /or processing coordination of
the CFD please contact Kelly Guerra at (909) 774-2582 or by email at kelly.guerra@cityofrc.us.
1.
Development Impact Fees Due Prior to Building Permit Issuance:
(Subject to Change / Periodic Increases - Refer to current fee schedule to determine current amounts)
2.
To comply with but not limited to, all Engineering Conditions of Approval under case number
SUBTT20761
3.
(Street Lights): The street lights in the City right -of-way, and/or any new street lights in the City
right-of-way shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs
of street lights and to provide power to City owned street lights.
4.
Developers shall be responsible for conducting a thorough analysis of potential traffic conflicts, which
must be documented by a registered traffic engineer. Said documentation shall include a striping plan
accompanied by a formal letter outlining any identified conflicts, as well as any additional supporting
materials deemed necessary. All traffic improvements, including but not limited to striping, signage, and
restrictions, shall adhere to applicable federal, state, and local standards. Furthermore, all such
improvements must comply with the guidelines established in the latest edition of the California Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Please note that depending on the findings additional
improvements may be necessary including but not limited to ingress /egress being limited to
right-in/right-out only.
5.
Standard Conditions of Approval
www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 49
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
** 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.
6.
Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way:
City of Rancho Cucamongo
CVWD
7.
Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be completed beyond
the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map.
8.
Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to:
Street Name
Curb & Gutter
A.C. Pvmt
Side-walk
Drive Appr.
Street Lights
Street Trees
Comm Trail
Median Island
Bike Trail
Other
Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction
and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per
Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item.
9.
www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 50
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future
signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public
and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits ,
whichever occurs first.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right -of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit
shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required.
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and
interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project
along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring .
Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other
locations approved by the City Engineer.
Notes:
1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart ,
unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer.
2) Conduit shall be 3-inch pvc with pull rope or as specified.
e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA
standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate
detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be
provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the
construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to
City Standards, except for single-family residential lots.
h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check.
10.
www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 51
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed
legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement
plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: “Street
trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet ___ (typically Sheet 1).” Where public
landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape
improvement plans.
Street Name
Botanical Name
Common Name
Min. Grow Space
Spacing
Size
Qty.
Construction Notes for Street Trees :
1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans.
2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City
inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as
determined by the City inspector.
3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department.
Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only.
11.
Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted
policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including
driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines
of sight plotted as required.
12.
The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary.13.
Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas (if
applicable), electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility
Standards. Easements shall be provided as required.
14.
Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga
Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental
Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required
prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been
issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior
to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects.
15.
A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map
approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be
installed as required by the City Engineer.
16.
www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 52
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from
the outer edge of a mature tree trunk.
17.
"Developer shall install a dark fiber conduit package fronting the development. Two 4” Schedule 40
PVC conduits, along with three 1 ¼” innerducts in one of the 4” conduits, per City Standard 145, with
connection through the parkway to each lot or parcel (fiber-to-the curb, FTTC). The size, placement, and
location of the conduit shall be shown on the Street Improvement Plans and subject to Engineering
Services Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits or final map approval ,
whichever comes first.”
18.
Install fiber optic conduit, vaults, and manholes per Standard Drawings 135-137. Public improvement
plans shall show the location and limits of the conduits, vaults and manholes with construction notes.
19.
Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community
trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and
maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and /or tentative map. Private
easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as
shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
20.
All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer
until accepted by the City.
21.
A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be
submitted to the Engineering Services Department for review and approval prior to final map approval
or issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscaped parkways, medians,
paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District::
22.
Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: “All improvements within
the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans .” If
there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern.
23.
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of
energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a
permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all
improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and
accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure
or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of
completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined
by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In
no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources
prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development
approval.
24.
Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and
approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be
paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition
to any other permits required.
25.
www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 53
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped
areas, etc.) shown on the plans and /or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior
street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive
approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees.
26.
Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance
with the City's street tree program.
27.
Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of
the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them.
28.
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Fire sprinklers are required to be installed in accordance with Fire District Standard 9-3. The Standard
has been uploaded to the Documents section.
1.
Gates installed across a residential emergency vehicle access road (fire lane) are required to be in
accordance with Standard 5-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
2.
Required alarm systems and supervision systems are required to be in accordance with Fire District
Standard 9-5. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
3.
Combustible construction materials, including combustible roofing materials, are prohibited from being
onsite prior to a water supply system in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-10 being provided in
accordance with Fire District Standard 33-1. Copies of the Standards have been uploaded to the
Documents section of this project in the Online Permit Center.
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.
5.
Fire sprinklers are required to be installed in accordance with Fire District Standard 9-3. The Standard
has been uploaded to the Documents section.
6.
Due to the type of construction, construction materials, the floor area of the project, and known risks
associated with projects of this nature, a Fire Protection and Site Safety plan is recommended for this
project. Fire District Standard 33-3 provides the elements of a Fire Prevention and Site Safety plan .
The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
7.
Street address for residential buildings are required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard
5-7. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
8.
The most current versions of the Fire District's Standards can be found at:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/86zjfacfxqh8oeo/AABYEQ81w5vL7WZ7e1zBiu25a?dl=0
9.
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 54
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
1.
The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be
completed, submitted, and approved by the Engineering Department prior to the issuance of building
permits.
2.
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.
3.
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.
4.
If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan /Permit are submitted to the Engineering Department for review ,
the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and
Drainage Plan/Permit.
5.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent
property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter
wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line .
6.
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.
7.
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 .
8.
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.
9.
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 .
10.
The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond
project boundary.
11.
www.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 55
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
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 Permit
Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) 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.
12.
Prior to issuance of a wall permit, on engineered combination garden /retaining walls along the property
boundary the structural calculations for the wall shall assume a level toe /heel at the adjacent off-site
property (i.e. a manufactured slope is not present). This shall be shown in the typical sections of the
grading and drainage plan.
13.
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.
14.
It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to
the issuance of a grading permit.
15.
It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage acceptance
easements(s) from adjacent downstream property owner (s) or discharge flows in a natural condition
(concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage
study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading or
building permit.
16.
The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross -lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent
to private trails). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to
final map approval.
17.
Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lined gutters and
swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent. This
shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of a grading permit.
18.
www.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 56
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall demonstrate that the storm water run -off will not
adversely affect the downstream properties and that the water may legally discharge to the downstream
properties. The engineer of record shall show on the final permitted grading and drainage plan one (1)
or more of the following items are met: a) There is sufficient downstream capacity to accept the
proposed storm water flows and that the downstream property owner have provided permission to
accept the upstream storm water flows; b) a legal document/entity exists allowing developed storm
water flows to be discharged to the property lower in elevation; c) a storm drain system to safely convey
the storm water flows to a public storm drain system without causing flooding to adjacent property(ies).
19.
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.
20.
A permit shall be obtained from Metropolitan Water District (MWD) for any work within their right -of-way,
including grading prior to issuance of a grading permit.
21.
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).
22.
Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the
project Conditions of Approval .
23.
The Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) has been deemed “Acceptable”. Prior to
the issuance of a grading permit a final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Building Official .
24.
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 .
25.
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.
26.
f during construction more than 5,000 square feet of combined asphalt concrete and PCC parking and
driveway surface (impervious) area are proposed and /or removed and replaced, a priority final
project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) will be required for this project. If less than
5,000 square feet of impervious area is proposed a non -priority Water Quality Management Plan shall
be required. Contact the Building and Safety Department for additional direction/information.
27.
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.
28.
www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 57
Project #: DRC2024-00249
Project Name: Paseo 19
Location: 10295 19TH ST - 107612117-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
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.
The final project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared as a Phased
WQMP and shall include all phases of the project. Construction of the storm water treatment structural
devices may be constructed as construction progresses.
31.
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.
32.
The applicant shall prepare or amend existing CC &R’s as needed to clarify how maintenance
responsibilities will be shared between the newly created parcels and the remaining existing parcels of
Parcel Map prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading and drainage plan and the CC &Rs shall
address shared access street, private storm drains, storm water treatment devices, surface drainage
and maintenance of common areas, including landscaping within public rights -of-way and Best
Management Practices identified in the WQMP.
33.
www.CityofRC.us Page 15 of 15Printed: 7/17/2025
Page 58
DATE:July 23, 2025
TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director
INITIATED BY:Bond Mendez, CPD, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, MASTER PLAN, TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP, DESIGN REVIEW, MINOR EXCEPTION – TRUE LIFE COMPANIES
- A request for site plan and architectural review of a mixed-use project
comprised of 50 multi-family units including 10 live/work units, and a
tentative tract map for condominium purposes located on approximately
2.3 acres of land within the Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) Zone, located
on the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Amethyst Avenue; APN:
0208-432-16. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15332
(SUBTT20708, Design Review DRC2024-00108, Master Plan DRC2024-
00109, Minor Exception DRC2025-00055).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve
Design Review DRC2024-00108, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20708, Master Plan DRC2024-
00109, and Minor Exception DRC2025-00055 to develop 50 multi-family units, including 10
live/work units, and a tentative tract map for condominium purposes, subject to Conditions of
Approval.
BACKGROUND:
The project site is a 2.3-acre lot located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Amethyst
Avenue. The lot is currently developed with a single-family home and ancillary structures which
are proposed to be demolished. The site slopes from north to south with dimensions of
approximately 240 feet (east to west) and 486 feet (north to south). The site is surrounded by
existing single-family residential development to the west and south, senior care living to the east,
and commercial uses to the north across Base Line Road. The street frontage is currently
improved with sidewalk, landscaped parkway, curb and gutter, and an existing bike lane.
The City Council held a preliminary review hearing on July 19, 2023, for the consideration of a
proposed Master Plan development for a mixed-use project that would include site-specific
development standards including a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) lower than the standard under the
Development Code, see attached Exhibit F. The project does not meet the required non-
residential FAR of 0.4-0.6 for the Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) zone. This standard would
require the project area, at 2.3 acres, to provide between approximately 40,000 to 60,000 square
feet of nonresidential floor area. Instead, the developer had proposed a possible alternative of 10
Page 59
Page 2 of 14
2
9
4
0
live/work units which cumulatively total approximately 3,000 square feet of non-residential floor
area, which when factored against the site size of the 2.3-acre site equals an approximate 0.03
FAR. In this case, the applicant cited the 0.4-0.6 FAR requirement for non-residential floor area
as burdensome considering the small size of the lot. The recommendation was to move forward
with the Master Plan development including the reduced FAR design. Upon review of the formal
submittal of the development application, the applicant has also included deviations from the
Development Code including zoning and building type standards, building entrance and façade
standards, and a Minor Exception request for reduced upper story setbacks.
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 Single-Family Neighborhood Corridor Neighborhood General 3 (NG3)
North Commercial Traditional Town Center Center 1 (CE1)
South Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low (L) Residential
East Residential
Care Facility Neighborhood Corridor Neighborhood General 3 (NG3)
West Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low (L) Residential
ANALYSIS:
General Plan and Zoning Designations
The project site is within the Neighborhood Corridor general plan land use designation which
allows for and encourages infill development with a mix of land uses. The project is within the
Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) zone which allows for mixed-use development subject to the
N
Page 60
Page 3 of 14
2
9
4
0
design standards specific to the NG3 zone including but not limited to building types, building and
entrance façade, and public open space. This project proposes infill development with a mix of
land uses, building types, entrances and facades, and public open space, consistent with the
general plan and zoning designations.
Further, the project site is also located within the Alta Loma Town Center Focus Area (Focus Area
6). The Alta Loma Town Center is intended to be a highly active and attractive community activity
center reflective of traditional development patterns wherein activity centers and streets are
improved to create more human-scale, comfortable and walkable community gathering places.
Connectivity and walkability improvements within this area are envisioned so that residents from
surrounding neighborhoods may walk, bike or ride a horse to existing and future commercial
amenities. Accordingly, the project proposes a mixed-use human-scale development that
promotes pedestrian connectivity to the existing surrounding single-family neighborhood and
residential care facility, and from the commercial uses located north of Base Line Road. The
project site is also within walking distance, approximately 400 feet, to the Pacific Electric Trail,
and the street contains an existing bike lane along Base Line Road.
Architecture, Building Plotting, and Site Layout
The project proposes five 10-unit buildings, and each building is three stories maximum with the
last unit of each building on the west end dropped down to two-stories. The proposed buildings
are designed in a rowhouse configuration and do not exceed the maximum 40 feet in height and
are of a size and scale that does not overwhelm the adjacent public streets. The building massing
includes wall façade offsets, projection, and roof plane articulation, creating visual interest to each
building elevation. The building that sits closest to Base Line Road is designed with 10 live/work
units to include ground-floor commercial space for an active street frontage of the project site.
These units include entrances to the individual residential floor space above the commercial
space. The remaining 40 townhouse units are designed exclusively as residential units. The units
closest to Base Line Road face the public street which provides direct visibility to the public way,
providing an extra level of security (i.e., eyes on the street).
Figure 2: Site Layout
N
Page 61
Page 4 of 14
2
9
4
0
The applicant has chosen a Contemporary architectural theme. Design elements include tile
roofs, cementitious board and batten, cementitious lap siding, stucco siding, vinyl windows, and
metal sectional garage doors, with contrasting trim colors and door finishes to reinforce the
specific architectural style. The materials are carried to each elevation to emphasize the chosen
architectural theme and building articulation.
Figure 3: Live/Work Building Frontage along Base Line Road
Figure 4: Residential Rowhouse Building
All streets within the interior of the project will be private and maintained by a homeowner’s
association, however, will be open to the public. Access into the project will be provided by street
connections from Base Line Road at the north end of the project and Ruby Avenue from the south
end of the project. All access will be non-obstructed vehicular and pedestrian access points. The
project will not include access gates but will be designed as a connected neighborhood, consistent
with the General Plan and Alta Loma Town Center Focus Area.
Tentative Tract Map
The tentative tract map is requested for 50 condominium lots resulting in each unit on its own lot.
The project site will remain as one parcel. As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to
file a final map which is to be recorded with the County of San Bernardino Recorder’s Office prior
to the issuance of building permits. The applicant is also concurrently processing a quit claim for
the existing parcel map in order to correct unresolved lot line conflicts with the public right-of-way
along Ruby Avenue. The quit claim is in review with the Engineering Department and is also
required to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits as outlined in the conditions of
approval.
Page 62
Page 5 of 14
2
9
4
0
Unit Composition
The project consists of 37 three-bedroom units, and 12 two-bedroom units, and 1 one-bedroom
unit that range in size from 1,220 to 2,198 square feet. Each unit includes private outdoor space,
and a ground floor attached garage. The units are plotted in an east-west configuration with the
front entrances facing internally to each other creating private front yard courtyards, and garages
facing the drive aisles interior to the project. Trash collection will take place in a centralized trash
bin for the project site. See the unit summary in the following table:
UNIT SUMMARY
Live/Work Units – 10 Units
Unit Type Unit Size (SF -
Net)
Non-Residential
Floor (SF)Number of Units
3 BR - Plan 1.1 1,825 304 4
3 BR - Plan 2.1/2X.1 2,055 304 4
3 BR - Plan 3.1 2,198 318 1
1 BR - Plan 4.1 1,146 314 1
Townhouse Units – 40 Units
2 BR - Plan 1.0/1.1 1,210 -8
3 BR Plan 2.1/2X.1 1,465 -16
3 BR Plan 3.1 1,777 -12
2 BR - Plan 4.1 1,223 -4
Total Number of
Units 50
Compliance with Development Standards
The project is within a form-based zone, Neighborhood General 3 (NG3), and is required to meet
compliance with the zone and building standards, building entrance and facades, public open
space, and land use standards. The applicant has chosen to develop the site with the Rowhouse
Building type including the live/work units and the shopfront façade for the building that fronts
Base Line Road, and a porch front with the remaining four townhouse buildings. The project
includes a paseo for the required public open space and as previously mentioned, the project
includes both multi-family structures and mixed-use structures specifically with the live/work land
use to meet the non-residential requirement for the NG3 zone. The project is consistent with
majority of the required development requirements for the NG3 Zone as outlined in the table
below. The applicant has proposed a Master Plan with the project to establish site-specific
development standards and a Minor Exception for a setback reduction. These deviations and
exceptions are further discussed in the Master Plan and Minor Exception sections of the report.
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Development Standard Required Proposed Complies
Residential Density 0 - 24 du/ac 22 du/ac Yes
Primary Build-to-Line 5 - 15 feet 15 feet maximum Yes
Page 63
Page 6 of 14
2
9
4
0
Lot Coverage (max.)75 percent 42 percent Yes
Total Stories (max.)3 stories 3 stories Yes
Building Height 40 feet maximum 40 feet Yes
Open Space 1 open space type paseo Yes
Parking
Section 17.64.050 (Number of Parking Spaces Required) of the Development Code states that
multi-family residential provides parking based on the number of bedrooms per unit, general
commercial parking is required to provide 4 spaces for every 1,000 square feet and a ratio of 1
visitor parking space per 5 dwelling units if the project is less than or equal to 50 units. The
following table summarizes the required and provided parking spaces:
PARKING ANALYSIS
Residential Parking
Bedroom Count Number of Units Parking Ratio Required
Parking
3 Bedrooms 37 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport)74
2 Bedrooms 12 2 Per Unit
(1 in Garage or Carport)24
1 Bedroom 1 1.5 Per Unit
(1 in Garage or Carport)1.5
Guest parking 50 1 Per 5 Units 10
Residential Parking Spaces Required 109.5
Total Garage Parking Required (Covered)99.5
Total Garage Parking Provided (Covered)100
Residential Visitor Parking Spaces Required 10
Visitor Parking Spaces Provided (Residential and Non-Residential serving)22
Non-Residential Parking
Live/Work Non-Residential Square Feet Parking Ratio Required
Parking
Page 64
Page 7 of 14
2
9
4
0
3,065 4 spaces / 1,000 sq. ft.12
Total Parking Spaces Required 122
Total Parking Spaces Provided 122
As outlined in the table above, the project is consistent with the required minimum parking.
Furthermore, the project applicant provided a parking study and parking management plan that
confirms the parking for the site is consistent for the proposed land uses and provides
recommendations for managing and monitoring the parking for both the residential and live/work
units. The applicant is required to provide a final parking management plan that identifies the
management process prior to issuance of building permits.
Open Space, Recreational Amenities, and Landscaping
Projects within a form-based zone and less than 3 acres in size are required to provide at least
one public open space type and the building types identify minimum requirements for private
outdoor space. The project proposes a paseo along the east property line of the project that
provides a walking path from Base Line Road to Ruby Avenue. The paseo will include trees for
shade canopies and seating for leisure. The site also includes 3 outdoor barbeque cooking areas
for recreational purposes. Landscaping is distributed along the project’s Base Line frontage, and
along the west and south property lines. There is also landscaping between the residential
building frontages which creates interior courtyards. Every unit provides private outdoor space in
the forms of patios, porches, and balconies. The project proposes a new CMU wall along the west
and south property lines between the existing single-family residential properties, and a new
retaining wall along the west property line as necessary due to the grade difference. The retaining
wall will also be added to the front of the property behind an existing retaining wall where there is
a grade difference from the curb to the building face. Furthermore, the project includes the
removal of existing trees which will require the applicant to apply for a Tree Removal Permit to
remove any existing heritage trees as defined by the Development Code section 17.16.080.C
(Heritage Tree). The tree removal permit application will include an arborist report which outlines
the total number of heritage trees to be removed and replaced. The applicant is also required to
submit a final landscape plan which is subject to the Planning Director for review and subsequent
approval. The final landscape plan and tree removal permit are both required to be approved prior
to the issuance of building permits as outlined in the conditions of approval.
Page 65
Page 8 of 14
2
9
4
0
Figure 5: Landscape Plan
Minor Exception
The applicant has applied for a minor exception for a reduced upper story setback requirement.
Pursuant to 17.130.030.K.2 (Massing Adjacent to Lower-Density Residential), when abutting a
single-family residential zone, the third and fourth stories must be stepped back a minimum 30
feet from the property line or a minimum eight feet from the ground floor side or rear facade,
whichever is greater. The project proposes five 3-story buildings with 10 units in each building,
resulting in 5 units at the west end of the project at the required minimum 10-foot setback. The
applicant has reduced the height of all five end units to two-stories. Each building complies with
the minimum required 10-foot setback from the western interior property line except the third story
of each building is required to be setback 30 feet from the property line. The applicant is
requesting a 10% reduction, up to 3 feet, which would result in a 27-foot setback. The reduced
setback would only apply to a portion of the unit and not the full dimension of the west facing
façade of the third story. The units have been designed to where the reduced setback allows for
the interior staircase to reach the 3rd floor and the staircase landing at the 3rd floor, and for a
bedroom walk-in closet. The minor exception would only apply to the residential rowhouse
buildings as the live/work building is in compliance with the third story setback.
Page 66
Page 9 of 14
2
9
4
0
Figure 6: Townhouse Building, North Elevation
Page 67
Page 10 of 14
2
9
4
0
Figure 7: Floor plan illustrating reduced third floor setback
Master Plan
As previously discussed, this project site is within a form-based code which requires specific zone
and building standards, building entrance and facades, public open space, and land use
standards. The applicant has applied for a master plan to establish site-specific development
standards pursuant to Development Code Section 17.22.020 (Master Plan).
NG3 Zone Development Standards – 17.130.050
Required Proposed Compliant
Floor Area Ratio (min-max)0.4 - 0.6 0.03 FAR No
Page 68
Page 11 of 14
2
9
4
0
Ground Floor Nonresidential
Use Height (min)12 Feet 10 Feet No
Rowhouse Building Type Standards – 17.130.060.D
Primary Building Depth (max)50 Feet 55’-6”No
Building Entrance and Façade – 17.132.050
Transparency, Ground Floor
(Min/Max)70% / 90%45%No
In summary, the project includes a request for a master plan to establish site-specific development
standards for nonresidential floor area (FAR), ground floor non-residential use height, primary
building depth, and ground floor transparency to be approved by the City Council. Development
Code Section 17.22.020 establishes that an applicant may propose site-specific regulations by
way of a master plan. The purpose of a master plan is to allow for the coordinated comprehensive
planning of a subarea of the city to accomplish specific objectives including to allow the
development of an exceptional project design that cannot be built under an existing zone or due
to constraints of existing development standards.
In addition to these referenced Development Code regulations, the City has also established a
policy on master plans and other legislative actions. Pursuant to the Development Code and the
City’s master plan policy, staff notes that the City Council held a policy discussion on July 19,
2023 wherein the Council specifically discussed policy implications for allowing deficient non-
residential floor area standards for parcels which meet certain criteria, specifically for lots which
are less than 3-acres and which are not located within a frontage overlay along a primary corridor.
During their discussion, the Council generally expressed support for allowing deficient non-
residential FAR in such circumstances, on a case-by-case basis. Staff notes that the project site
meets these same narrow criteria as previously discussed by City Council as the site is less than
3-acres (2.3 acres) and is not located within a frontage overlay. Therefore, in this case, staff
supports the applicant’s requested reduction in non-residential FAR. Staff’s determination is
supported by the fact that while the project is deficient in meeting the code required 0.4 to 0.6
non-residential FAR, the project proposes to still provide a cumulative 3,065 square feet of non-
residential space. In addition to the reduced FAR, the applicant is proposing a reduced ground
floor retail height from 12 feet to 10 feet, and a reduced ground floor transparency to 45% total.
These deviations apply to the live/work building that fronts Base Line Road and were discovered
during the formal review process after Council had rendered their opinion on the reduced FAR.
For the residential rowhouse buildings, the requested deviation proposed is to increase the
building depth from 50 feet maximum to 55’-6” maximum for an enhanced design including wall
and façade articulation and projections.
Further, staff notes that the project site is surrounded by a mix of existing residential, commercial,
retail, and office land uses that are readily accessible to future project residents and commercial
tenants. Due to these circumstances, and despite not providing code-compliant nonresidential
floor area, ground floor residential use height, primary building depth, and ground floor
transparency, the project would implement the City’s vision in the NG3 zone by introducing a
medium density (22 du/ac) mixed-use development along a pedestrian and bicycle priority
corridor.
Inclusive of the request to approve a master plan, the project does not conflict with the General
Plan or the land use designation of the project site as the Neighborhood Corridor land use
designation encourages infill development with a mix of land uses. The proposed residential and
commercial land uses will complement and be compatible with the surrounding area's character,
Page 69
Page 12 of 14
2
9
4
0
which consists of a mix of residential, retail, office, and commercial land uses.
Further, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.22.020.A.3, 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.
Neighborhood Meeting
The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on April 3, 2025, located at Cucamonga Middle
School. Approximately 70 of the neighboring property owners were in attendance and asked
questions relating to traffic impacts and street connections, parking, landscaping and privacy,
building height, and density. Neighbors stated concern with the connection from Base Line Road
and the continuation of Ruby Avenue which they believed to have a traffic influx that will
overburden the neighborhood streets. There is a concern that the residents of the project and
visitors to the commercial space will park along the public neighborhood streets and compromise
safety and thus have inquired about creating a parking permit system for the surrounding
neighborhood. The neighbors to the west expressed privacy concerns regarding the windows that
will face their property. There is a concern over the lack of outdoor recreational space for children
and pets on the site. There is concern that the adjacent senior facility is opposed to the project
and will itself be burdened by traffic and parking as there is belief that employees of the facility
already park in the neighborhood due to lack of parking at the facility. There is a consensus from
the neighbors that the project is too dense for the site. Following the meeting and prior to the DRC
meeting, Staff had follow-up communications with several of the residents both via email, over
the phone, and in-person at City Hall.
Design Review Committee
The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Boling and Daniels) on May 20,
2025. A number of residents attended the meeting and expressed the same concerns as
mentioned prior during the neighborhood meeting. It was discussed that the project applicant had
redesigned the buildings to have a two-story end unit closest to the west property line to alleviate
privacy concerns as well as selective landscaping plant species to grow in height that would add
a “screen” between the sites. The DRC members discussed the windows along the west
elevations of the buildings, the wall and grade difference between the sites, the public and private
open space, and the color scheme of the live/work building. Following the discussion on the
project, the DRC voted to move forward to the Planning Commission. Since the DRC meeting,
the applicant has revised the windows along the western elevations of the buildings to maximize
privacy between the two properties and has selected the color scheme the DRC found to be more
compatible with the project. 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 and total square feet of
commercial development, the total art value required per Section 17.124.020.C. is $40,565.00.
Page 70
Page 13 of 14
2
9
4
0
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 July 9, 2025. To date, Staff has
also received correspondence from the public via phone calls and email, see attached Exhibit G.
Environmental Analysis
The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project qualifies as a Class
32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 - In-Fill Development Projects for the
following reasons: (1) the project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designations and
all applicable General Plan policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and
regulations, (2) the proposed development occurs within the City limits on a project site of no
more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses, (3) the project site has no value as
a habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, (4) approval of the project would not result
in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality, and (5) the site can
be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The General Plan Land Use and Zoning designation for the project site are Neighborhood Corridor
and Neighborhood General 3, respectively, which permits the development of a mixed-use
development of the proposed size and configuration. The project complies with the majority of
City’s development standards and design guidelines other than those outlined in the Master Plan
and Minor Exception sections of this report. The project site is located within the City limits on a
site less than 5 acres and is surrounded by existing residential and commercial development and
City infrastructure. The following are the four environmental factors that need to be analyzed in
order to determine that the project, respectively, qualifies for the Class 32 Exemption.
a) Traffic: The Trip Generation Analysis and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis
(Ganddini Group, March 2025) was prepared for the project which determined that the
number of trips generated by the project would not create a significant impact. The
proposed mixed-use project is anticipated to generate 322 total daily trips including 23 AM
peak hour trips and 27 PM peak hour trips occurring on a typical weekday. Therefore, the
proposed Project is not expected to generate 50 or more trips during the AM or PM peak
hour and does not require a detailed LOS analysis. Additionally, the proposed project
satisfies the City-established vehicle miles traveled (VMT) screening criteria for projects
located in a low VMT area. Therefore, preparation of a transportation impact study with
VMT analysis is not warranted, and the project may be presumed to result in a less than
significant VMT impact. Furthermore, a New Roadway Connection Analysis (Fehr & Peers,
May 2025) determined that based on the travel patterns for the existing surrounding single-
family neighborhood, a greater number of trips would occur along the Ruby Avenue Street
connection through the project site from the adjacent residents than those of the project
site.
b) Noise: A Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis was prepared for the project (Ganddini
Group, March 2025). The analysis determined that the construction and operational noise
Page 71
Page 14 of 14
2
9
4
0
and vibration levels would not exceed the City’s noise thresholds is expected to result in
less than significant impacts.
c) Air Quality: Based on the Air Quality Assessment (Ganddini Group, April 2025), emissions
generated during construction and operation of the Project would not result in in the
generation of criteria air pollutants that would exceed South Coast Air Quality Management
District’s (SCAQMD’s) significance thresholds. It was also determined that the GHG
emissions will comply with the consistency measures outlined in the City’s CAP checklist.
Overall, all air quality and GHG impacts are considered less than significant.
d) Water Quality: The project will include a Grading Plan, Best Management Practices (BMPs)
outlined in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), and a Landscape Plan that will
be prepared and reviewed for consistency with the City’s adopted standard measures and
regulatory compliance measures. The water quality analysis determined that the project
would not result in any significant impacts associated with hydrology and water quality.
(Adkan Engineers, March 2024).
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project site currently is assessed with 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 townhomes 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 / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:
The project supports the Council’s core values of building and preserving a family-oriented
atmosphere and intentionally embracing and anticipating our future through thoughtful
development of mixed-use neighborhoods with a variety of designs and services to meet our
current and future resident’s needs.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – Project Location
Exhibit B – Link_Project Plans
Exhibit C – DRC Comments and Action Agenda dated May 20, 2025
Exhibit D – Link_CEQA Section 15332 Exemption
Exhibit E – New Roadway Connection Analysis
Exhibit F – City Council Minutes dated July 19, 2023, and Master Plan Policy
Exhibit G – Public Correspondence
Exhibit H – Draft Resolution 2025-021 with Conditions of Approval
Page 72
Exhibit A – Aerial Map
Page 73
EXHIBIT B
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:
Project-Plans
Page 74
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please
contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. 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.
MAY 20, 2025- 6:00 P.M.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
RAINS ROOM
CITY HALL
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
A.Call to Order
Roll Call: Vice Chairman Al Boling
Commissioner James Daniels
B.Public Communications
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee on any item listed or not
listed on the agenda. The Committee may not discuss any issue not included on the agenda but set
the matter for a subsequent meeting.
C.Consent Calendar
C1. Consideration to adopt Meeting Minutes of February 18, 2025. (No meetings March 4th,
18th, April 1st, 15th and May 6th, 2025).
D.Project Review Items
D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, DESIGN REVIEW, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, MINOR
EXCEPTION, MASTER PLAN – TRUE LIFE COMPANIES - A request for site plan and
architectural review of 50 multi-family units, including 10 live/work units, and a tentative tract
map for condominium purposes located on approximately 2.3 acres of land within the
Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) Zone, located on the southwest corner of Base Line Road and
Amethyst Avenue; APN: 0208-432-16. This item is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15332 (SUBTT20708,
Design Review DRC2024-00108, Master Plan DRC2024-00109, Minor Exception DRC2025-
00055).
E.Adjournment
The Design Review Committee has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m. adjournment
time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Committee.
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.
Exhibit C
Page 75
Design Review Committee Meeting Agenda
February 18, 2025
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 February 18, 2025. The meeting was called to
order by Sean McPherson, Staff Coordinator, at 6:02 p.m.
Design Review Committee members present: Vice Chairman Boling and Commissioner Daniels
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 December 17, 2024.
Item C1. Motion carried 2-0 vote as presented.
D. Project Review Items
D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT & DESIGN REVIEW – STUDIO ROCA – A request for site
plan and design review of 8 single-family residences on 4.78 acres of land on a previously
approved tract map (Tract 14644) at the terminus of Camellia Court in the Very Low Residential
(VL) Zone and the Equestrian Overlay; APN: 1076-381-24 thru 31. The project qualifies as a
Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill Development Projects
(Design Review DRC2024-00174).
The Committee members raised several questions related to trails, overall design, the interior
dimensions of the garages, and the project’s connection to the sewer system.
The applicant clarified that equestrian trails would be constructed along the perimeter of the
project site, with planned connections to the existing trail network. They also stated that the
garages would be designed to accommodate recreational vehicles as well as multiple
passenger vehicles. Additionally, the project is required to connect to the existing sewer system
located on Beryl Street. A new sewer line will be installed through Camelia Court, providing the
opportunity for existing homes along Camelia Court to connect to the sewer system.
Committee members expressed support for the site layout and architectural design. Following
the discussion, the Committee voted to advance the project to the full Planning Commission
for a final decision.
Recommended approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
Page 76
E. Adjournment
Principal Planner McPherson adjourned the meeting at 6:28 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
Page 77
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
May 20, 2025
6:00 p.m.
Bond Mendez, CPD, Associate Planner
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, DESIGN REVIEW, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, MINOR
EXCEPTION, MASTER PLAN – TRUE LIFE COMPANIES - A request for site plan and
architectural review of 50 multi-family units, including 10 live/work units, and a tentative tract map
for condominium purposes located on approximately 2.3 acres of land within the Neighborhood
General 3 (NG3) Zone, located on the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Amethyst Avenue;
APN: 0208-432-16. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15332 (SUBTT20708, Design Review DRC2024-00108,
Master Plan DRC2024-00109, Minor Exception DRC2025-00055).
Site Characteristics: The 2.3-acre lot is located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and
Amethyst Avenue. The lot is currently developed with a single-family home and ancillary
structures which are proposed to be demolished. The site slopes from north to south with
dimensions of approximately 240 feet (east to west) and 486 feet (north to south). The site is
surrounded by existing single-family residential neighborhood to the west and south, senior care
living facility to the east, and non-residential/commercial uses to the north across Base Line Road.
The street frontage along Base Line Road is currently improved with sidewalk, landscaped
parkway, curb and gutter, and an existing bike lane. Currently, Ruby Avenue dead-ends into the
Project site.
Background: The City Council held a preliminary review hearing on July 19, 2023. The hearing
was for the consideration of a proposed Master Plan development for a mixed-use project that
would include site-specific development standards including a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) lower than
the standard under the Development Code. The Council’s recommendation was to allow the
developer to submit an application subject to staff’s review of the project with the requested
deviation from FAR standards. Upon review of the formal submittal of the development
application, the applicant has also requested deviations from the Development Code including
zoning and building type standards, building entrance and façade standards. The developer has
also requested a Minor Exception to allow for reduced upper story setbacks.
Land Uses: The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for, the project site
and the surrounding properties are as follows:
Current Use General Plan Zoning
Site Single-Family Neighborhood Corridor Neighborhood General 3
(NG3)
North Commercial Traditional Town Center Center 1 (CE1)
South Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low (L) Residential
East Residential
Care Facility Neighborhood Corridor Neighborhood General 3
(NG3)
West Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low (L) Residential
Project Overview, Architecture, Building Plotting, and Site Layout: The project is for the
development of 50 for-sale multi-family townhouse units including 10 live/work units. The tract
map will result in 50 condominium lots with each unit on its own lot. The applicant has chosen a
Contemporary architectural theme. Design elements include tile roofs, cementitious board and
Page 78
DRC COMMENTS
SUBTT20708, DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – TRUE LIFE
COMPANIES
May 20, 2025
Page 2
batten, cementitious lap siding, stucco siding, vinyl windows, and metal sectional garage doors,
with contrasting trim colors and door finishes to reinforce the specific architectural style. The
materials are carried to each elevation to emphasize the chosen architectural theme and building
articulation.
The project proposes five 10-unit buildings, and each building is three stories maximum with the
last unit of each building on the west end dropped down to two-stories in height. The proposed
buildings are designed in a rowhouse configuration and do not exceed the maximum 40 feet in
height and are of a size and scale that does not overwhelm the adjacent public streets. The
building massing includes wall façade offsets, projection, and roof plane articulation, creating
visual interest to each building elevation. The building that sits closest to Base Line Road is
designed with 10 live/work units to include ground-floor commercial space for an active street
frontage of the project site. These units include entrances to the individual residential floor space
above the commercial space. The remaining 40 townhouse units are designed exclusively as
residential units. The units closest to Base Line Road face the public street which provides direct
visibility to the public way, providing an extra level of security (i.e., eyes on the street).
Figure1: Site and Landscape Plan
The project consists of 37 three-bedroom units, and 12 two-bedroom units, and 1 one-bedroom
unit that range in size from 1,220 to 2,198 square feet. Each unit includes private outdoor space,
and a ground floor attached garage. The units are plotted in an east-west configuration with the
front entrances facing internally to each other creating private front yard courtyards, and garages
facing the drive aisles interior to the project. Trash collection will take place in a centralized trash
bin for the project site. See the unit summary and breakdown on the following page:
Page 79
DRC COMMENTS
SUBTT20708, DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – TRUE LIFE
COMPANIES
May 20, 2025
Page 3
UNIT SUMMARY
Live/Work Units – 10 Units
Unit Type Unit Size (SF -
Net)
Non-Residential
Floor (SF) Number of Units
3 BR - Plan 1.1 1,825 304 4
3 BR - Plan 2.1/2X.1 2,055 304 4
3 BR - Plan 3.1 2,198 318 1
1 BR - Plan 4.1 1,146 314 1
Townhouse Units – 40 Units
2 BR - Plan 1.0/1.1 1,210 - 8
3 BR Plan 2.1/2X.1 1,465 - 16
3 BR Plan 3.1 1,777 - 12
2 BR - Plan 4.1 1,223 - 4
Total Number of
Units 50
All driveways and the extension of Ruby Avenue within the interior of the project will be private
and maintained by a homeowner’s association, however, will be open to the public. Access into
the project will be provided by street connections from Base Line Road at the north end of the
project and Ruby Avenue from the south end of the project. All access will be non-obstructed
vehicular and pedestrian access points. The project will not include access gates or but will be
designed as a connected neighborhood, consistent with the General Plan.
Compliance with Development Standards: The project is within a form-based zone, Neighborhood
General 3 (NG3), and is required to meet compliance with the zone and building standards,
building entrance and facades, public open space, and land use standards. The applicant has
chosen to develop the site with the Rowhouse Building type including the live/work units and the
shopfront façade for the building that fronts Base Line Road, and a porch front with the remaining
four townhouse buildings. The project includes a paseo for the required public open space and
as previously mentioned, the project includes both multi-family structures and mixed-use
structures specifically with the live/work land use to meet the non-residential requirement for the
NG3 zone. The project is consistent with majority of the required development requirements for
the NG3 Zone. The applicant has proposed a Master Plan with the project to deviate from specific
development standards and a Minor Exception for a setback reduction. These deviations and
exceptions are further discussed in the Master Plan and Minor Exception sections of the report.
Master Plan: As previously discussed, this project site is within a form-based code which requires
specific zone and building standards, building entrance and facades, public open space, and land
use standards. The applicant has applied for a master plan to deviate from a few of these
requirements as outlined in the table below.
NG3 Zone Development Standards – 17.130.050
Required Proposed
Floor Area Ratio (min-max) 0.4 - 0.6 0.03 FAR
Ground Floor
Nonresidential Use Height 12 Feet 10 Feet
Page 80
DRC COMMENTS
SUBTT20708, DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – TRUE LIFE
COMPANIES
May 20, 2025
Page 4
(min)
Rowhouse Building Type Standards – 17.130.060.D
Primary Building Depth (max) 50 Feet 55’-6”
Building Entrance and Façade – 17.132.050
Transparency, Ground Floor (Min/Max) 70% / 90% 45%
The purpose of a master plan is to allow for the coordinated comprehensive planning of a subarea
of the city to accomplish specific objectives including to allow the development of an exceptional
project design that cannot be built under an existing zone or due to constraints of existing
development standards. The required non-residential FAR of 0.4-0.6 applies to the NG3 zone.
This standard would require the project area, at 2.3 acres, to provide between approximately
40,000 to 60,000 square feet of non-residential floor area. Instead, the developer has proposed
a possible alternative of 10 live/work units which cumulatively totals approximately 3,065 square
feet of non-residential floor area, which when factored against the site size of the 2.3-acre site
equals an approximate 0.03 FAR, which is far below the 0.4-0.6 required FAR for the NG3 zone.
In this case, the applicant cites the 0.4-0.6 FAR requirement for non-residential floor area as
burdensome considering the small size of the lot. Thus, the applicant is requesting to develop a
master plan for the site that includes site-specific development standards. In addition to the
reduced FAR, the applicant is proposing a reduced ground floor retail height from 12 feet to 10
feet, and a reduced ground floor transparency to 45% total. These deviations apply to the live/work
building that fronts Base Line Road. For the residential rowhouse buildings, the requested
deviation proposed is to increase the building depth from 50 feet maximum to 55’-6” maximum for
an enhanced design including wall and façade articulation and projections.
Minor Exception: In addition to the master plan, the applicant has applied for a minor exception
for a reduced upper story setback requirement. Pursuant to 17.130.030.K.2 Massing Adjacent to
Lower-Density Residential, when abutting a single-family residential zone, the third and fourth
stories must be stepped back a minimum 30 feet from the property line or a minimum eight feet
from the ground floor side or rear facade, whichever is greater. The project proposes five 3-story
buildings with 10 units in each building, resulting in 5 units at the west end of the project at the
minimum 10-foot setback. The applicant has reduced the height of all five end units to two-stories.
Each building complies with the minimum required 10-foot setback from the western interior
property line except the third story of each building is required to be setback 30 feet from the
property line. The applicant is requesting a 10% reduction, up to 3 feet, which would result in a
27-foot setback. The reduced setback would only apply to a portion of the unit and not the full
dimension of the west facing façade of the third story. The units have been designed to where the
reduced setback allows for the interior staircase to reach the 3rd floor and the staircase landing at
the 3rd floor, and for a bedroom walk-in closet. The minor exception would only apply to the
residential rowhouse buildings as the live/work building is in compliance with the third story
setback. See the illustrations on the following pages:
Page 81
DRC COMMENTS
SUBTT20708, DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – TRUE LIFE
COMPANIES
May 20, 2025
Page 5
Figure 2: Townhouse Building, North Elevation
Page 82
DRC COMMENTS
SUBTT20708, DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – TRUE LIFE
COMPANIES
May 20, 2025
Page 6
Figure 3: Floor plan illustrating reduced third floor setback
Parking: Section 17.64.050 (Number of Parking Spaces Required) of the Development Code
states that multi-family residential provides parking based on the number of bedrooms per unit,
and general commercial parking is required to provide 4 spaces for every 1,000 square feet. The
project proposes 3-bedroom, 2-bedroom, and 1-bedroom dwelling units which requires a range
of 1.5 - 2 parking spaces per unit, and a ratio of 1 visitor parking space per 3 dwelling units if the
project is less than or equal to 50 units. The following table summarizes the required and provided
parking spaces:
Page 83
DRC COMMENTS
SUBTT20708, DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – TRUE LIFE
COMPANIES
May 20, 2025
Page 7
PARKING ANALYSIS
Residential Parking
Bedroom Count Number of Units
Parking Ratio
Required
Parking
3 Bedrooms 37 2 Per Unit
(2 in Garage or Carport) 74
2 Bedrooms 12 2 Per Unit
(1 in Garage or Carport) 24
1 Bedroom 1 1.5 Per Unit
(1 in Garage or Carport) 1.5
Guest parking 50 1 Per 5 Units 10
Residential Parking Spaces Required 109.5
Total Garage Parking Required (Covered) 99.5
Total Garage Parking Provided (Covered) 100
Residential Visitor Parking Spaces Required 10
Visitor Parking Spaces Provided 22
Non-Residential Parking
Live/Work Non-Residential Square Feet
Parking Ratio Required
Parking
3,065
4 spaces / 1,000 sq. ft. 12
Total Parking Spaces Required 122
Total Parking Spaces Provided 122
As outlined in the table above, the project site is consistent with the required minimum parking.
Furthermore, the project applicant shall provide a parking management plan which confirms the
parking for the site is consistent for the proposed land uses.
Open Space, Recreational Amenities, and Landscaping: Projects within a form-based zone and
less than 3 acres in size are required to provide at least one public open space type, and the
building types identify minimum requirements for private outdoor space for each residential unit.
The project proposes a paseo along the east property line of the project that provides a walking
path from Base Line Road to Ruby Avenue. The paseo will include trees for shade canopies and
seating for leisure. The site also includes 3 outdoor barbeque cooking areas for recreational
purposes. Landscaping is distributed along the project’s Base Line frontage, and along the west
and south property lines. There is also landscaping between the residential building frontages
which creates 2 smaller interior courtyards. Every unit provides private outdoor space in the forms
Page 84
DRC COMMENTS
SUBTT20708, DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – TRUE LIFE
COMPANIES
May 20, 2025
Page 8
of patios, porches, and balconies. The project proposes a new CMU wall along the west and south
property lines between the existing single-family residential properties, and new retaining wall
along the west property line as necessary due to the grade difference. The retaining wall will also
be added to the front of the property behind an existing retaining wall where there is a grade
difference from the curb to the building face.
Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on April 3rd at Cucamonga
Middle School. Approximately 70 of the neighboring property owners were in attendance and
asked questions relating to traffic impacts and street connections, parking, landscaping and
privacy, building height, and density, generally expressing concern about the project’s
compatibility with the surrounding existing neighborhood.
Staff Recommendation: The project complies with the intent of the Neighborhood General 3
(NG3) zone and the Neighborhood Corridor General Plan designation. While the project meets
the majority of required development standards, the developer has applied for a Master Plan,
which pursuant to Development Code Section 17.22.020 permits an applicant to request site-
specific development standards. These site-specific development standards which the applicant
proposes include Floor Area Ratio (FAR), ground floor non-residential use height, building depth,
and ground floor transparency. Further, the applicant has requested a Minor Exception to deviate
from upper-story setbacks. Pedestrian connections are provided throughout the project and the
site is publicly accessible to create public space shared by pedestrians, bicycles, and low speed
motor vehicles. Open space areas are dispersed throughout the project area. The project adds to
the for-sale housing stock which ultimately adds to housing variety within the City.
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 85
Design Review Committee Meeting Agenda
May 20, 2025
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 May 20, 2025. 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 Daniels
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 February 18, 2025. (No meetings March 4th,
18th, April 1st, 15th and May 6th, 2025).
Item C1. Motion carried 2-0 vote as presented.
D. Project Review Items
D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, DESIGN REVIEW, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, MINOR
EXCEPTION, MASTER PLAN – TRUE LIFE COMPANIES - A request for site plan and
architectural review of 50 multi-family units, including 10 live/work units, and a tentative tract
map for condominium purposes located on approximately 2.3 acres of land within the
Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) Zone, located on the southwest corner of Base Line Road and
Amethyst Avenue; APN: 0208-432-16. This item is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Section 15332 (SUBTT20708,
Design Review DRC2024-00108, Master Plan DRC2024-00109, Minor Exception DRC2025-
00055).
Staff presented the item to the Design Review Committee. Members of the public provided
comments/concerns regarding parking, the continuation of Ruby Avenue, the undesired
accessibility and connectivity of the paseo from the surrounding public way to the existing
single-family neighborhood, noise, privacy, and lack of amenities.
The applicant responded and confirmed that the site provides the required amount of parking,
and the team is willing to provide landscaping that will provide substantial privacy in addition to
the perimeter wall. The applicant also confirmed that the types of air conditioners will be
specifically selected to reduce the noise output as much as possible.
Page 86
Staff confirmed that the continuation of Ruby Avenue is a requirement of the project pursuant
to the City’s General Plan. The DRC asked for clarification on a few items. Committee member
asked for clarification on the quantity and location of windows along the west elevations of the
units. Staff responded with confirmation of the quantity and the location of the window
placement which is designed to reduce the visibility from the project site to the neighboring
properties as much as possible.
Committee member asked for clarification on the paseo as public open space and if the
residential units will have private space. Staff confirmed that the residential units will have their
own private porches, patios, and balconies, and the public open space is provided with the
paseo, the outdoor barbecue amenities, and the outdoor area in between the front building and
the sidewalk along Base Line Road.
Committee members agreed that the applicant use the color scheme on the building corner
that is more architecturally compatible with the rest of the building. Both committee members
also agreed that the reduction in the non-residential floor area is suitable for the size of the
property and is appropriate for the market trends in commercial space demand.
The DRC voted to move the project forward to the Planning Commission with a
recommendation of approval.
Recommended approval to PC. 2-0 Vote.
E. Adjournment
Principal Planner McPherson adjourned the meeting at 7:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
Page 87
EXHIBIT D
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:
CEQA-Section-15332-Exemption
Page 88
Memorandum
Date: May 2, 2025
To: City of Rancho Cucamonga
From: Fehr & Peers
Subject: 9505 Baseline Road – New Roadway Connection Analysis
OC25-1134
Fehr & Peers reviewed the proposed new roadway connection at the proposed 9505 Baseline Road
(DRC2024-00108) project. The proposed project has a previously approved Transportation
Screening Assessment (Ganddini Group; February 6, 2025) which outlined that the Project proposes
a 50-residential unit building, including 10 live/work units fronting Baseline Road. This project
includes an extension of Ruby Avenue to Baseline Road. Attachment A provides the site plan.
The proposed extension of Ruby Avenue to Baseline Road through the proposed project site
provides a new north/south roadway connection between Baseline Road and Alder Street. This
provides new connectivity and vehicle access to the local neighborhood, which is generally bound
by Baseline Road to the North, Palo Alto Street to the South, Kirkwood Avenue to the West, and
Klunsman Avenue to the East.
Fehr & Peers evaluated how much traffic would be expected to use the new roadway connection,
both from the existing neighborhood and the proposed project.
As documented in the February 6th memorandum, the proposed project is expected to generate 22
AM peak hour trips, 25 PM peak hour trips, and 303 daily trips. As the project takes direct access
from the new roadway connection, it is assumed that all project trips would use this roadway.
For the existing neighborhood traffic, Fehr & Peers collected data from StreetLight. StreetLight is a
big data source that aggregates metadata from cell phones and provides estimates of the number
of vehicles on roadways and also tracks the origins and destinations of those vehicles.
The data showed the travel patterns for the existing neighborhood, which is presented in Figure 1.
Based on these travel patterns, the distribution of households through the existing neighborhood,
and the other north/south roadway connections to Baseline Avenue, Alder Street, and Palo Alto
Exhibit E
Page 89
May 2, 2025
Page 2 of 4
Street, Fehr & Peers assumed that all traffic on Amethyst Avenue and 10% of traffic on Baseline
Avenue from the existing neighborhood would utilize the new roadway connection. This results in
an additional 27 AM peak hour trips, 35 PM peak hour trips, and 344 daily trips.
The total expected vehicle traffic on the new roadway connection would be 49 AM peak hour trips,
60 PM peak hour trips, and 647 daily trips. This is presented on Table 1 and in Figure 1.
Table 1: Expected Travel on New Roadway Connection
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Total SB NB Total SB NB Total SB NB
Vehicle Trips from 9505 Baseline
Project 303 152 152 22 6 16 25 15 10
Vehicle Trips diverted from Existing
Neighborhood 344 178 165 27 7 20 35 22 13
Total 647 330 317 49 13 36 60 37 23
Sources: StreetLight Data, Fehr & Peers, 2025
Attachments
Attachment A - Project Site Plan
Figure 1 - Existing Trip Distribution
Page 90
S
S W
W
W W W
W
W
S
S
W
W
W
S
S
SSSS
ENGINEERING SITE PLAN | C1APX-2
Page 91
9505 Baseline Road - New Roadway
Figure 1
1
2
9%
28%
23%
22%
4%
13
%
Neighborhood
Project Site
New roadway Begin/End - Ruby Avenue
New Roadway - Ruby Avenue
%Existing Neighborhood Trip Distribution
Trips on Ruby Ave - Northbound
Daily: 317
Peak AM: 36
Peak PM: 23
Trips on Ruby Ave - Southbound
Daily: 330
Peak AM: 13
Peak PM: 37
Page 92
ii
July 19,2023
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY, SUCCESSOR AGENCY,
PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY AND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETINGS MINUTES
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a closed session on Wednesday, July 19, 2023,
in the Tapia Conference Room at the Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Mayor Michael called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Present were Council Members: Ryan Hutchison, Kristine Scott, Ashley Stickler, Mayor Pro Tern Lynne
Kennedy and Mayor L. Dennis Michael.
Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; Elisa Cox, Assistant City Manager; Nicholas Ghirelli, City
Attorney; Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development and Julie Sowles,
Deputy City Manager/Civic and Cultural Services.
A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
No public communications were made.
C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION
D1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8408 ROCHESTER AVENUE, RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA EPICENTER STADIUM); AGENCY
NEGOTIATORS: JOHN GILLISON 'AND ELISA COX, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA; NEGOTIATING PARTY: RANCHO BASEBALL LLC; REGARDING
PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. (CITY)
D2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A); INLAND REAL ESTATE GROUP, LLC, ET AL
V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT
OF CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:21-CV-01656-SP; NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
CASE NO. No. 22-55435. (CITY)
D3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO
PARAGRAPH(1)OF SUBDIVISION(D)OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE'S INC.
V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL
DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP(CITY)
E. RECESS
The closed session recessed at 6:28 p.m.
July 19, 2023 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 1 of 6
Exhibit F
Page 93
REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER- COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The Regular meetings of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency,
Successor Agency, Public Finance Authority, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council were held on
July 19, 2023, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California. Mayor Michael called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Present were Council Members: Ryan Hutchison, Kristine Scott, Ashley Stickler, Mayor Pro Tern Lynne
Kennedy and Mayor L. Dennis Michael.
Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney; and Linda Troyan, MMC,
City Clerk Services Director.
Council Member Stickler led the Pledge of Allegiance.
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
None.
B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
None.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Bill Kaufman, spoke about potential economic opportunities of commercial cannabis dispensaries and stated
that he submitted an updated Economic Impact Analysis along with letters of recommendation on July 18,
2023 for the City Council's review.
Seema Jain, distributed invitations and invited the City Council and Community to a "Sixth Sense Meditation
and Wisdom" event at the Ontario Convention Center on Saturday, August 5, 2023.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Member Scott announced that she will need to abstain on item D3, due to a potential conflict of interest
as her employer is Southern California Gas Company.
D1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes for Regular Meetings of July 5, 2023.
D2. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
2,642,926.97 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of$4,946,186.26 Dated June 26, 2023,
Through July 09, 2023. (CITY/FIRE)
D3. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $16,721.03 Dated June 26, 2023,
Through July 09, 2023. (CITY/FIRE)
D4. Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of June 30, 2023 for the
City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
D5. Consideration of the Purchase of Thirty Sets of Firefighting Turnout Gear from All-star Fire
Equipment, Inc. as a Single Source Vendor in the Amount of$115,990. (FIRE)
July 19, 2023 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 2 of 6
Page 94
D6. Consideration of Amendment No. 001 to the Professional Services Agreement No. 2021-140
with Superior Pavement Markings Inc. for Annual Citywide Striping and Pavement Marking
Services Extending the Agreement Term to June 30, 2024. (CITY)
D7. Consideration of Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Cambridge
Seven Associates(Contract No.2020-120)for Design Services Not To Exceed$66,520.(CITY)
D8. Consideration to Accept an Appropriate Grant Revenue in the Amount of $19,114 from the
Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant(JAG)for Fiscal Year 2019. (CITY)
D9. Consideration to Accept the Heritage Park Equestrian Center Roof Repair Project as Complete,
File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Retention and Bonds. (CITY)
D10. Consideration of Final Maps for Tracts 16072-1 and 16072-2, a Related Improvement
Agreement, and Improvement Securities, Located North of Wilson Avenue between East
Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue, Related to Case No's. SUBTT16072. An Environment Impact
Report was Certified for this Project on June 16, 2004. (CITY)
D11. Consideration to Approve a Resolution Adopting a Memorandum of Understanding Between
the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and Rancho Cucamonga Firefighters Local
2274 Relative to Wages, Benefits, and Other Terms and Conditions for the Period of July 2023
through June 30, 2026. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2023-036)(FIRE)
D12. Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Approving the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
Salary Schedules for the Fiscal Year 2023-24. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2023-033) (FIRE)
D13. Consideration of Resolution Adopting a Policy Regarding the Distribution of Complimentary
Tickets or Passes Pursuant to FPPC Regulation 18944.1. (RESOLUTION NO. 2023-090 AND
RESOLUTION NO. FD 2023-035) (CITY/FIRE)
MOTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy, seconded by Council Member Stickler, to approve Consent
Calendar Items D1 through D13,with Council Member Scott abstaining on item D3, due to her employment
with Southern California Gas Company. Motion carried 5-0.
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) - SECOND READING/ADOPTION
None.
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
F1. Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 1019, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading, Repealing Chapter 10.76 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, Discontinuing the
City's Police Tow Rotation Program and Making a Determination that the Ordinance is Exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act. (ORDINANCE NO. 1019) (CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Michael Parmer, Assistant to the City Manager, who provided a verbal
report for item F1.
Mayor Michael opened the Administrative Hearing.
There were no public communications.
Mayor Michael closed the Administrative Hearing.
July 19, 2023 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 3 of 6
Page 95
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Stickler, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy, to approve staffs
recommendation and Introduce First Reading of Ordinance No. 1019, by title only and waive further
readings.
Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director, read the title of Ordinance No. 1019 by title only.
ORDINANCE NO. 1019
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING CHAPTER
10.76 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE, DISCONTINUING THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA'S POLICE TOW ROTATION PROGRAM,AND MAKING A DETERMINATION THAT THE
ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
VOTES NOW CAST ON MOTION: Moved by Council Member Stickler, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern
Kennedy, to approve staffs recommendation and Introduce First Reading of Ordinance No. 1019, by title
only and waive further reading. Motion carried 5-0.
F2. Preliminary Review Hearing to Consider a Proposed Master Plan Application for a Mixed-Use
Development that would Include Site-Specific Development Standards, Including a Floor Area
Ratio Standard Lower than the Current Standard Under the Development Code, at 9505 Base Line
Road. (CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development and Sean
McPherson, Senior Planner, who provided the staff report along with a PowerPoint presentation for item
F2.
Mayor Michael opened the Administrative Hearing.
There were no public communications.
Mayor Michael closed the Administrative Hearing.
Council discussion ensued on support of the Master Plan Policy and staffs recommendation supporting
the General Plan and proposed projects fitting in with existing area/neighborhoods.
MOTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy, seconded by Council Member Scott, to approve staffs
recommendation to consider policy implications of reducing a non-residential floor area standard for a
specific site at 9505 Base Line Road, authorize the project to move forward understanding that this is not
an approval or guarantee of an approval, and direct staff to immediately analyze non-residential standards
for mixed-use projects and consider a Development Code Amendment to that affect. Motion carried 5-0.
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) - CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1. Public Hearing of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to Consider Resolutions Confirming the
Diagrams and Assessments and Ordering the Levy and Collection of Annual Assessments for
Landscape Maintenance Districts; Street Lighting Maintenance Districts; and Park and Recreation
Improvement District No. PD-85 for Fiscal Year 2023/24. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2023-087, 2023-
088, 2023-089) (CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Kelly Guerra, Special Districts Analyst, who gave a verbal report for item
G1.
Mayor Michael opened the Public Hearing.
There were no public communications.
Mayor Michael closed the Public Hearing.
July 19, 2023 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 4 of 6
Page 96
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Council Member Stickler, to adopt
Resolution Nos. 2023-087, 2023-088 and 2023-089, confirming the diagrams and assessments and
ordering the levy and collection of annual assessments for Landscape Maintenance Districts; Street
Lighting Maintenance Districts; and Park and Recreation Improvement District No. PD-85 for Fiscal Year
2023/24. Motion carried 5-0.
G2. Public Hearing for Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Fire District's General Fund
Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2023-24. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2023-034) (FIRE)
City Manager Gillison reported the Fire Protection District's preliminary budget was adopted on June 22,
2023.After public noticing, the final budget is presented for adoption.
Mayor Michael opened the Public Hearing.
There were no public communications.
Mayor Michael closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Scott, seconded by Council Member Stickler, adopt Resolution No.
FD 2023-034,adopting the Fire District's General Fund Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2023-24. Motion carried
5-0.
H. CITY MANAGERS STAFF REPORT(S)
H1. Presentation from Empire Economics Inc. on the City's Annual Employment and Housing Trends
Study and Analysis of the Current and Future State of Warehousing and Distribution. (CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Economist, Dr. Joe Janczyk from Empire Economics, who provided a
report along with a PowerPoint presentation for item H1.
Council discussion ensued.
City Council received and filed report.
H2. Quarterly Development Update—Second Quarter 2023. (CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development and Zack
Neighbors, Deputy Director of Building and Safety, who provided a staff report along with a PowerPoint
presentation for item H2.
City Council received and filed report.
I.COUNCIL BUSINESS
11. Consideration of the City Council Library Subcommittee's Recommendation to Appoint Members
to the Library Board of Trustees. (CITY)
MOTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy, seconded by Council Member Hutchison, to appoint
Christine DeVries and Laurel Rice to a three-year term ending on June 30, 2026 and appoint William
Diepenbrock to fill an un-scheduled vacancy for an unexpired term ending on June 30, 2024 on the Library
Board of Trustees. Motion carried 5-0.
July 19, 2023 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 5 of 6
Page 97
12. Designation of Voting Delegates and Alternates for the League of California Cities (Cal Cities)
Annual Business Meeting. (CITY)
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Mayor Michael, to approve Voting
Delegate, Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy, and Alternate Council Member Scott for the League of California
Cities Annual Business Meeting.
AMENDED MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Mayor Michael, to approve
Voting Delegate, Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy, and Alternates Council Member Scott and Mayor Michael for
the League of California Cities Annual Business Meeting. Motion carried 5-0.
13. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
14. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES
None.
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
City Attorney Ghirelli noted that there was no reportable action taken during Closed Session held earlier
that evening.
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
None.
L. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Michael adjourned the Council Meeting at 8:33 p.m.
Approved: August 2, 2023
Linda yan, MMC
Services Director
July 15, 20201 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 6 of 6
Page 98
DATE:August 18, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager of Community Development
SUBJECT:City Policy Pertaining to Early Feedback on General Plan Amendments,
Planned Community, Master Plan and Specific Plan Amendments, and
Development Code Amendments. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive, file and adopt the attached policy on providing
early Council feedback on General Plan amendments, Specific Plan, Planned Community or
Master Plan Amendments, or Development Code Amendments.
BACKGROUND:
The General Plan and Development Code are the primary documents that regulate the physical
development of the city. Additionally, in many areas of the city, Specific Plans, Planned
Communities, and master plans serve to regulate land use in place of the Development Code or
as a bridge between the General Plan and the Development Code. These documents regulate
land uses, infrastructure, and the mitigation of impacts. Under the Development Code, only the
City Council, Planning Commission, Planning Director, or a property owner may initiate
applications for these legislative amendments. In many cases, property owners (or their agents)
who apply for projects that may require multiple entitlements spend several years and thousands
of dollars designing a proposed project before ever knowing whether the City Council has any
interest in considering the necessary legislative change for the project.
ANALYSIS:
While the City typically receives limited applications for legislative changes such as General Plan
amendments, there are currently several such applications undergoing review by the Planning
Department. These types of legislative approvals can only be granted by the City Council and
have separate and distinct policy implications apart from the merits of a project. In order, however,
for an application to be considered by the City Council (under present policy and process), that
application must first undergo review and analysis by City staff, potential consideration by the
Design Review Committee, environmental analysis under CEQA, and consideration by the
Planning Commission. This process can easily take up to 18+ months and require an applicant
to spend thousands of dollars for design and studies, all before they have any understanding
whether the City Council has an interest in approving such a legislative change, which may be
necessary before any other entitlements needed for a project may be approved. In practice, staff
is finding that this approach causes a greater degree of uncertainty for the applicant and further
complicates the development review process for city staff, particularly in situations with competing
interests.
Page 99
Page 2
9
1
7
There is another alternative; some cities allow for an applicant to seek preliminary feedback from
the city council in connection with the merits of a General Plan amendment or other legislative
changes. After the Council provides its feedback on the proposed legislative amendment, the
applicant can decide whether to pursue the legislative amendment, and the other entitlements for
the applicant’s proposed project, with the Council’s preliminary policy considerations in mind. This
opportunity provides the applicant with more information about whether the proposed project is
likely to be successful after the application has been processed by staff. Rancho Cucamonga’s
past practice, dating back to the 1980’s, was to request initial authorization by the City Council
prior to beginning any amendments to the development code or any Specific Plan, Planned
Community or Master Plan that included more than one parcel or project (i.e., Town Square
Master Plan). The City abandoned this policy in 2012 intending to streamline the development
review process. While it may streamline the process, the new practice also causes a greater
degree of uncertainty and further complicates development review, in some cases actually
complicating the process.
Under the new process, a detailed description of the applicant’s project shall not be required.
Staff will work with the City Attorney to analyze the provided information, provide a list of pros
and cons, and a staff recommendation to the City Council on only the legislative change for their
consideration. The staff report shall include specific language indicating the pre-application
review is not an approval nor a guarantee of approval, that staff and the Planning Commission
may recommend against, and the City Council may ultimately vote against or not support the
project at the project hearings once additional details and analysis become available in the
future.
While the City Council would not vote on the project at the time of this administrative hearing,
each Councilmember may provide comments addressing positive or negative aspects of the
amendment, potential issues that should be evaluated by staff, and suggested changes that
could make the amendment more acceptable, if any. The City Council’s comments should focus
on the policy implications of the General Plan amendment rather than the project itself. The
City Council will not vote on any aspect of the amendment or project, as the intent of the
preliminary review process is informational only.
Staff will take the feedback provided by the City Council into consideration to help inform further
staff analysis, possible conditions or modifications to the project, the recommendation to the
Planning Commission, and ultimately the recommendation to the City Council. Staff shall provide
a letter to the applicant following the administrative hearing memorializing the input and results
of the hearing. The Applicant may then take that information into account in deciding whether to
move forward in the process. After the administrative hearing, the application will move through
the standard development review process for review by the Design Review Committee, the
Planning Commission, and the City Council per our current process.
This policy shall only apply to private property owners and shall not apply to any City initiated
legislative changes. Staff reports on legislative changes shall be prepared and presented only
by the Planning Director, the Deputy City Manager of Community and Economic Development,
the City Attorney, and the City Manager. The staff report may discuss the proposed project in
general terms, but the staff recommendation will only address the General Plan amendment.
It is important to note that an initial City Council direction on a legislative change is not an approval
and does not guarantee an approval. It would not involve any consideration of a particular project.
Put more simply, it would only give the Council an opportunity to consider the policy implications
Page 100
Page 3
9
1
7
of changing the General Plan, Specific Plan, Master Plan, Community Plan, or Development
Code, as the case may be. Some of the policy considerations that the Council might consider as
part of this initial feedback may include neighborhood impacts, economic development, and
whether the use is appropriate for the site. This change creates an opportunity to provide staff
and applicants with such feedback before thousands of hours, dollars, and years are spent
processing an application. As such, staff recommends re-establishing the City’s prior policy to
bring requests for all General Plan amendments, Specific Plan amendments, and Development
Code changes requested by owners of real property or their authorized representatives to the
City Council for an initial round of feedback. An applicant would still be required to conduct the
same CEQA analysis and go through the same development and environmental review if it
decides to pursue its applications further. This policy will not apply to any current applications
that have been deemed complete.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This policy helps realize the City Council’s vision for creating a world class community and the
City Council value of “Equitable prosperity for all” by helping to identify and remove barriers within
the City’s Development Review process.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Legislative Changes Review Policy
Page 101
DATE:August 18, 2021
TO:Anne McIntosh, Planning Director
FROM:Matthew Burris, Deputy City Manager of Community Development
SUBJECT:Legislative Changes and Amendments Policy
PURPOSE: To re-establish a policy for initiating General Plan amendments, Specific Plan
amendments, and Development Code amendments requested by builders and developers.
BACKGROUND: The General Plan and Development Code are the primary documents that
regulate the physical development of the city. Additionally, in many areas of the city, Specific
Plans serve to regulate land use in place of the Development Code. These documents
regulate land uses, infrastructure, and the mitigation of impacts. The City’s past practice,
dating back to the 1980s, was to request authorization by the City Council to initiate any
amendments to the development code or any Specific Plan, Planned Community, or Master
Plan that includes more than one parcel or project (i.e., Town Square Master Plan). This
policy allowed for discussion of the pros and cons of such requests and consideration for
larger policy implications. The City abandoned this practice in 2012 with the intent of
streamlining the development review process. However, currently, staff is finding that this
approach causes a greater degree of uncertainty and further complicates development
review. It results in applicants spending many years and thousands of dollars designing a
proposed project before ever knowing whether the City Council may even desire considering
such legislative changes.
POLICY: An application for a legislative change, such as a General Plan amendment, that is
initiated by a private property owner shall be recommended for an administrative hearing
before the City Council as the first step in the Development Review process. The Planning
Director shall schedule a preliminary review hearing before the City Council once the
applicant has provided enough information about the proposed amendment and related
project to permit the Planning Director to prepare a staff report for the hearing. This
information shall include, but is not limited to, a statement explaining the applicant’s reason
for requesting the General Plan amendment, the proposed change in land use designations
on the parcel(s), the project’s proposed uses and density, and any other project parameters
associated with the amendment that are deemed necessary by the Planning Director. A
detailed description of the applicant’s project shall not be required. Staff will work with the
City Attorney to analyze the provided information, provide a list of pros and cons, and a staff
recommendation to the City Council on only the legislative change for their consideration.
The staff report shall include specific language indicating the pre-application review is not an
approval nor a guarantee of approval, that staff and the Planning Commission may
recommend against, and the City Council may ultimately vote against or not support the
project at the project hearings once additional details and analysis become available in the
Page 102
Page 2
1
5
9
5
future.
While the City Council would not vote on the project at the time of this administrative hearing,
each Councilmember may provide comments addressing positive or negative aspects of the
amendment, potential issues that should be evaluated by staff, and suggested changes that
could make the amendment more acceptable, if any. The City Council’s comments should
focus on the policy implications of the General Plan amendment rather than the project
itself. The City Council will not vote on any aspect of the amendment or project, as the
intent of the preliminary review process is informational only.
Staff will take the feedback provided by the City Council into consideration to help inform
further staff analysis, possible conditions or modifications to the project, the recommendation
to the Planning Commission, and ultimately the recommendation to the City Council. Staff
shall provide a letter to the applicant following the administrative hearing memorializing the
input and results of the hearing. The Applicant may then take that information into account in
deciding whether to move forward in the process.
If an applicant does not want to go to City Council for the preliminary review and insists on a
full hearing on the project merits, they shall sign an At Risk Waiver acknowledging they had
the opportunity to go to the City Council on the legislative change but chose to decline. That
document will become part of the entitlement package and administrative record.
After the administrative hearing, alternatively, after signing an At Risk Waiver, the application
will move through the standard development review process for review by the Design Review
Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council per our current process. If the
City Council’s input is not positive, staff shall use the City Council’s feedback to problem
solve with the applicant and work on a redesigned or different project. In such case, the
Applicant shall be welcome to an additional review with the City Council to determine if a
revised or alternative proposal might be a better solution.
This policy shall only apply to private property owners and shall not apply to any City initiated
legislative changes.
Staff reports on legislative changes shall be prepared and presented only by the Planning
Director, the Deputy City Manager of Community and Economic Development, the City
Attorney, and the City Manager. The staff report may discuss the proposed project in
general terms, but the staff recommendation will only address the General Plan amendment.
The City shall not charge a fee for the administrative hearing and will expedite scheduling a
hearing date. The Planning Department shall provide the applicant at least ten (10) days
written notice of the hearing date and time.
Page 103
of 715
Page 104
become available in the future.
While the City Council would not vote on the project at the time of this administrative hearing,
each Councilmember may provide comments addressing positive or negative aspects of the
amendment, potential issues that should be evaluated by staff, and suggested changes that
could make the amendment more acceptable, if any. The City Council's comments should
focus on the policy implications of the General Plan amendment, rather than the project
itself. The City Council will not vote on any aspect of the amendment or project, as the
preliminary review process is intended to be informational only.
Staff will take the feedback provided by the City Council into consideration to help inform
further staff analysis, possible conditions or modifications to the project, the recommendation
to the Planning Commission, and ultimately the recommendation to the City Council. Staff
shall provide a letter to the applicant following the administrative hearing memorializing the
input and results of the hearing. The Applicant may then take that information into account in
deciding whether to move forward in the process.
After the administrative hearing, the application will move through the standard development
review process for review by the Design Review Committee, the Planning Commission, and
the City Council per our current process. If the City Council's input is not positive, staff shall
use the City Council's feedback to problem solve with the applicant and work or a redesigned
or different project. In such case, the Applicant shall be welcome to an additional review with
the City Council to determine if a revised or different proposal might be a better solution.
This policy shall only apply to private property owners and shall not apply to any City initiated
legislative changes. This policy is not meant to apply to Development Agreements.
Staff reports on legislative changes shall be prepared and presented only by the Planning
Director, the Deputy City Manager of Community and Economic Development, the City
Attorney, and the City Manager. The staff report may discuss the proposed project in
general terms, but the staff recommendation will only address the General Plan amendment.
The City shall not charge a fee for the administrative hearing and will expedite scheduling a
hearing date. The Planning Department shall provide the applicant at least 10 days' written
notice of the hearing date and time.
Page 2
Page 105
Exhibit G
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
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-021
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVE TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP SUBTT20708, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2024-00108, MASTER
PLAN DRC2024-00109, AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2025-00055, A
REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.3 ACRE LOT INTO 50 NUMBERED LOTS
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
INCLUDING MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND LIVE/WORK UNITS
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD AND
AMETHYST AVENUE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL 3 (NG3)
ZONE (APN: 0208-432-16), MAKE FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF,
AND MAKE A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA
GUIDELINES SECTION 15332.
A.Recitals.
1.True Life Companies filed an application for the issuance of Tentative Tract Map
SUBTT20708, Design Review DRC2024-00108, Master Plan DRC2024-00109, and Minor
Exception DRC2025-00055, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject entitlements request is referred to as "the application."
2.On the 23rd day of July 2025, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said
hearing on that date.
3.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B.Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1.This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on July 23, 2025, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to an undeveloped project site located at the southwest
corner of Base Line Road and Amethyst Avenue; and
b.The project site is currently developed with a single-family home and accessory
structures and has an area of approximately 2.3 acres. The site is approximately 240 feet east to
west, and approximately 486 feet north to south; 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:
Exhibit H
Page 122
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-021 SUBTT20708,
DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – REMPEL MIXED-USE
JULY 23, 2025
Page 2
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site
Single-Family Neighborhood Corridor Neighborhood General 3
(NG3)
North Commercial Traditional Town Center Center 1 (CE1)
South Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood
Very Low Low (L) Residential
East Residential Care
Facility Neighborhood Corridor Neighborhood General 3
(NG3)
West Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood
Very Low Low (L) Residential
d. The project includes the subdivision of 2.3 acres of land located into 50 numbered
lots for condominium purposes, and the construction of 40 residential townhouse units and 10
live/work units, and a minor exception for a reduction in a third-story setback, and a master plan
for site-specific development standards including a reduced floor area ratio, a reduced ground
floor non-residential use height, a reduced ground floor transparency, and an increases primary
building depth.
3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve
Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20708 as a part of the application and makes the following findings
pursuant to the Subdivisions Code Section 16.16.100 in support of the recommendation:
a. The proposed subdivision, together with its provisions for its design and
improvements, is consistent with the General Plan. The proposal is to subdivide a property with an
area of approximately 2.3 acres of land located into 50 numbered lots, for condominium purposes,
for the development of 50 multi-family residences including 10 live/work units. The underlying
General Plan designation is Neighborhood Corridor which allows for and encourages infill development
with a mix of land uses. The designation is intended for the development of multi-family residences with
a maximum density range of 24 dwelling units per acre. The proposed project has a density of 22
units per acre. 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.
4. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Design
Review DRC2024-00108 as a part of the application and makes the following findings pursuant
to the Development Code Section 17.20.040 in support of the recommendation:
a. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan land
use designation is Suburban Neighborhood Low, which permits the development of multi-family
residences with a density range of 8-14 units per acre. The project is for the development of multi-
family residences with a density of 14 units per acre; and
Page 123
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-021 SUBTT20708,
DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – REMPEL MIXED-USE
JULY 23, 2025
Page 3
b. The proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and
the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The project site is within the Medium (M)
Residential District which permits the development of multi-family residences; and
c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code. The project complies with each of the requirements of the Development Code
except for the minimum required lot size as described in the staff report and for which is
determined to be existing non-conforming pursuant to Development Code section 17.62
Nonconforming Uses and Structures; and
d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Minor
Exception DRC2025-00055 as a part of the application and makes the following findings pursuant
to the Development Code Section 17.16.110 in support of the recommendation:
a. The proposed development is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of
the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The General
Plan designation of the project site is Neighborhood Corridor, and the zoning of the property is
Neighborhood General 3 (NG3). The Minor Exception does not affect the General Plan
designation, zoning designation, or the residential purpose of the project site; and
b. The proposed development is compatible with existing and proposed land uses
in the surrounding area. The Minor Exception for reduced setbacks will not result in substantially
larger units or buildings, an increase in lot coverage, an increase in density, or adjustments to the
physical lot area of the site; and
c. The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary to
allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or
accommodate unique site conditions. The proposed setback still provides adequate distance from
the adjacent property owners and does not compromise the design of the dwelling nor the overall
project. The portion of the units that will encroach into the setback with the minor exception is the
stairway and a closet space which contributes to the interior use and design of the units; and
d. The granting of the minor exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, and will not be
detrimental to public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements
in the vicinity. The Minor Exception will allow the applicant to construct and access third floor living
space and still allow for adequate distance beyond the first and second floors of the attached end
units. This exception does not compromise the required setback of the overall buildings which will
remain in compliance with the interior side yard setback. The development will be consistent with
the standards and guidelines of the City. The setback reduction is unlikely to impact public
health, safety, or welfare.
Page 124
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-021 SUBTT20708,
DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – REMPEL MIXED-USE
JULY 23, 2025
Page 4
6. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Master
Plan DRC2024-00109 as a part of the application and makes the following findings pursuant to
the Development Code Section 17.22.020 in support of the recommendation:
a. The proposed master plan is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives
of the General Plan. The project furthers the vision of the General Plan and the Neighborhood
Corridor land use designation which encourages infill development with a mix of uses. The
proposed residential and commercial land uses will complement and be compatible with the
surrounding area's character, comprising residential, retail, office, and commercial 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 master plan meets the applicable requirements set forth in this
title. Development Code Section 17.22.020 provides the Master Plan as a tool for establishing
site specific development standards for projects of exceptional design that cannot be built under
an existing zone due to constraints of existing development standards relative to site constraints
or the location of a subject parcel or parcels within the city. The applicant is proposing a reduction
in non-residential FAR. Staff’s determination is supported by the fact that while the project is
deficient in meeting the code required 0.4 to 0.6 non-residential FAR, the project proposes to still
provide a cumulative 3,065 square feet of non-residential space. In addition to the reduced FAR,
the applicant is proposing a reduced ground floor retail height from 12 feet to 10 feet, and a
reduced ground floor transparency to 45% total. These deviations apply to the live/work building
that fronts Base Line Road. For the residential rowhouse buildings, the requested deviation
proposed is to increase the building depth from 50 feet maximum to 55’-6” maximum for an
enhanced design including wall and façade articulation and projections. In addition to
Development Code regulations which allow a developer to establish site specific development
standards by way of a master plan, the City Council has established that parcels which meet
certain criteria, specifically for lots which are less than 3-acres and which are not located within a
frontage overlay along a primary corridor, may be granted a reduction in non-residential floor area
due to these constraints, on a case by case basis.
Staff supports the requested site-specific development standards. The project site is surrounded
by a mix of commercial, retail, and office land uses that are readily accessible to future project
residents and commercial tenants. Due to these circumstances, and despite not providing code-
compliant nonresidential floor area, ground floor residential use height, primary building depth,
and ground floor transparency, the project would also help implement the City's vision in the NG3
zone by introducing a medium-density (22 du/ac) mixed-use development along a pedestrian and
bicycle priority corridor.
7. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council make the
following environmental findings and determinations in connection with approval of the
application. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt
from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project qualifies as
a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 - In-Fill Development Projects
Page 125
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-021 SUBTT20708,
DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – REMPEL MIXED-USE
JULY 23, 2025
Page 5
for the following reasons: (1) the project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designations
and all applicable General Plan policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and
regulations, (2) the proposed development occurs within the City limits on a project site of no more
than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses, (3) the project site has no value as a habitat
for endangered, rare or threatened species, (4) approval of the project would not result in any
significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality, and (5) the site can be
adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
a. The General Plan Land Use and Zoning designation for the project site are
Neighborhood Corridor and Neighborhood General 3, respectively, which permits the
development of a mixed-use development of the proposed size and configuration. The project
complies with the majority of City’s development standards and design guidelines other than those
outlined in the Master Plan and Minor Exception sections of this report.
b. The project site is located within the City limits on a site less than 5 acres and is
surrounded by existing residential and commercial development and City infrastructure.
c. The project site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened
species as determined by the Biological Resources study provided within the CEQA exemption
(Glenn Lukos Associates 2023).
d. The following are the four environmental factors that need to be analyzed in order
to determine that the project, respectively, qualifies for the Class 32 Exemption:
(1) Traffic: The Trip Generation Analysis and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening
Analysis (Ganddini Group, March 2025) was prepared for the project which determined that the
number of trips generated by the project would not create a significant impact. The proposed
mixed-use project is anticipated to generate 322 total daily trips including 23 AM peak hour trips
and 27 PM peak hour trips occurring on a typical weekday. Therefore, the proposed Project is not
expected to generate 50 or more trips during the AM or PM peak hour and does not require a
detailed Level of Service (LOS) analysis. Additionally, the proposed project satisfies the City-
established VMT screening criteria for projects located in a low VMT area. Therefore, preparation
of a transportation impact study with VMT analysis is not warranted, and the project may be
presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. Furthermore, a New Roadway
Connection Analysis (Fehr & Peers, May 2025) determined that based on the travel patterns for
the existing surrounding single-family neighborhood, a greater number of trips would occur along
the Ruby Avenue Street connection through the project site from the adjacent residents than those
of the project site.
(2) Noise: A Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis was prepared for the project
(Ganddini Group, March 2025). The analysis determined that the construction and operational
noise and vibration levels would not exceed the City’s noise thresholds is expected to result in
less than significant impacts.
(3) Air Quality: Based on the Air Quality Assessment (Ganddini Group, April 2025),
emissions generated during construction and operation of the Project would not result in in the
generation of criteria air pollutants that would exceed South Coast Air Quality Management
District’s (SCAQMD’s) significance thresholds. It was also determined that the GHG emissions
Page 126
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-021 SUBTT20708,
DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, DRC2025-00055 – REMPEL MIXED-USE
JULY 23, 2025
Page 6
will comply with the consistency measures outlined in the City’s CAP checklist. Overall, all air
quality and GHG impacts are considered less than significant.
(4) Water Quality: The project will include a Grading Plan, Best Management Practices
(BMPs) outlined in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), and a Landscape Plan that will
be prepared and reviewed for consistency with the City’s adopted standard measures and
regulatory compliance measures. The water quality analysis determined that the project would not
result in any significant impacts associated with hydrology and water quality during construction
and/or operations. (Adkan Engineers, March 2024).
e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services as
determined by the reviewing departments of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and external utility
agencies.
8. 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, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
and 7 above, this Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the application
subject to each and every condition set forth in the Conditions of Approval, attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference.
9. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF JULY 2025.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Tony Morales, Chairman
ATTEST:
Jennifer Nakamura, Secretary
I, Jennifer Nakamura, 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 23rd day of July 2025, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 127
www.CityofRC.us Printed: 7/15/2025
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
1. The Design Review Permit authorizes the applicant to construct a mixed -use development comprised of
50-unit multi-family townhouses including 10 live/work units providing a total of 3,065 square feet
non-residential floor space located at 9505 Base Line Road, APN 0208-432-16.
2. The Tentative Tract Map authorizes the applicant to subdivide the property into 50 lots for the purpose of
condominiums.
3. The Master Plan authorize authorizes site-specific development standards limited to 0.03
non-residential Floor Area Ratio, 10-foot minimum ground floor non-residential use height, 45%
minimum ground floor transparency, and 55’-6” maximum primary building depth.
4. The Minor Exception authorizes the applicant to construct new dwelling units with reduced third -story
setbacks on the residential townhouse buildings. The residential townhouse buildings are authorized to
have a 27'-0" minimum interior side yard setback for the third story from the west property line.
5. Prior to occupancy for each dwelling unit, a Planning final inspection is required. All on -site and off-site
development and landscaping shall be installed prior to requesting a final inspection.
6. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall provide a final Parking Management Plan
that contains the provisions outlined in the Development Code section 17.64.060.B.2 and is consistent
with the recommendations provided in the Parking Study and Management Plan provided by Urban
Crossroads dated April 22, 2025.
Standard Conditions of Approval
7. 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.
8. 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 128
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
9. 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.
10. Copies of the signed City Council 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.
11. 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.
12. 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 129
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
13. 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.
14. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the City Council, unless
a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of
the approval.
15. 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.
16. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in
accordance with the Development Code Section 17.80.050, and so noted on the grading plans. The
location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown
on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist 's recommendations
regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. The applicant shall submit for a Tree
Removal Permit to remove any existing heritage trees as defined by the Development Code section
17.16.080.C (Heritage Tree). The tree removal permit application will include an arborist report which
outlines the total number of heritage trees to be removed and replaced. The tree removal permit shall be
approved prior to the issuance of building permits.
Page 130
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
17. 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.
18. 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.
19. The minimum planting size for trees shall be 15-gallon, with 25 percent of all trees on the project site
planted at a minimum 24-inch box size. For mixed-use, commercial, office, and community/civic uses
tree spacing with-in perimeter planters along streets and abutting residential property shall be planted
no farther apart on center than the mature diameter of the proposed species. Minimum planter widths
for trees shall be between five feet and ten feet, consistent with the city 's adopted master list of street
trees and parking lot trees. Shrub planting shall be a minimum five -gallon size, with a 15-gallon
minimum size required where a landscape screen (visual buffer) is conditioned by the designated
approving authority (e.g., screening of headlights from drive-through aisles). The minimum planter width
for shrubs is four feet.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. 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.
24. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design
shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department.
25. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient
landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82.
Page 131
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
26. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on this site
unless they are the principal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit parking on interior
circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas.
27. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from
back of sidewalk.
28. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and
exits shall be striped per City standards.
29. 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.
30. 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.
31. 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)
32. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other
applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and /or Master Plans in effect at
the time of Building Permit issuance.
33. 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.
34. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners'
Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Services Department and the
City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of Building
Permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The
Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning 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.
35. 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.
36. 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 approved Master Plan.
Page 132
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
37. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed
shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line -of-sight of the main entrance. The
specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review and approval of the Planning
Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and
Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be screened behind a 4-foot high block wall. These walls
shall be constructed of similar material used on-site to match the building.
38. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located
out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry
walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. For single -family
residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults.
39. 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.
40. 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.
41. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Director 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 .
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. 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.
45. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the west and south property lines of the
project perimeter. If a double wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to
work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all
contiguous property owners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls /fences along the
project perimeter.
46. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry.
Page 133
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
47. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured
products.
48. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to
maintain an open feeling and enhance views.
49. 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
50. 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.
51. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick -up shall be for individual units with all
receptacles shielded from public view.
52. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 17 feet long with a required 1-foot overhang (e.g., over a curb
stop).
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
1. (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 .
2. Per Resolution No. 87-96:
All developments, except those contained in section 7 and others specifically waived by the Planning
Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the
removal the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development as follows:
1. Lines on the opposite of the street from the project: The Developer shall pay a fee to the City for
one-half the amount per Section 6.
3. Development Impact Fees Due Prior to Building Permit Issuance or Certificate of Occupancy: ( Fees
subject to Change / Periodic Increases - Refer to current fee schedule to determine current amounts)
A written notice shall be submitted if fees will be paid until Certificate of Occupancy prior to issuance of
Building permits.
Standard Conditions of Approval
4. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC &Rs, recorded
easements, or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of
Building Permits, where no map is involved.
5. 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.
Page 134
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
6. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map
approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be
installed as required by the City Engineer.
7. ** 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.
8. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way:
City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department
Cucamonga Valley Water District
9. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape Maintenance District
No. 1 shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of
Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer.
This parcel is required to be annexed into CFD 2022-01 district (Street Lighting Services) to finance the
maintenance and services of streetlights, traffic lights, and appurtenant facilities. This condition needs to
be completed before the Final Map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Any
annexation cost shall be borne by the developer. To start the annexation process, please contact Kelly
Guerra at 909-774-2582
Page 135
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
10. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to:
Street Name: Base Line Road
Curb Ramp
Side-walk
Street Trees
Bike Lane
Notes:(a) The existing curb ramp located at south west corner of Base Line Rd. and Amethyst Ave. shall
be evaluated for conformance to current ADA regulations. If the ramp does not meet ADA regulations
then the developer shall be responsible for providing design and reconstruction of the ramp for
compliance. Design shall be completed and improvements secured for prior to issuance of Building
permit or approval of final subdivision map whichever occurs first . The reconstruction along with all
public improvements shall be completed prior to occupancy . (b) Sidewalk shall be reconstructed
adjacent to property line.
11. Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future
signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public
and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits ,
whichever occurs first.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit
shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required.
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and
interconnect conduit, if applicable, shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Notes:
1. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate
detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required.
2. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to
City Standards, except for single-family residential lots.
Page 136
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
12. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed
legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement
plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: “Street
trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet (typically Sheet 1).” Where public
landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape
improvement plans.
Street Name
Botanical Name
Common Name
Min. Grow Space
Spacing
Size
Qty.
Construction Notes for Street Trees:
1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans.
2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City
inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as
determined by the City inspector.
3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department.
Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only.
4. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in
accordance with the City's street tree program.
13. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary to accommodate
project improvements or eliminate direct conflicts.
14. An access easement/agreement for the joint use of the driveway entrance on Base Line Road between
the proposed project and eastern parcel shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance of
Building Permits, whichever occurs first.
15. The quit claim for Lot C of Tract No. 6939 shall be approved by Planning Commission, accepted and
approved by City Council, and recorded prior recordation of Final Map. In the event that the project is
not approved, this action item can be move forward for approval to City Council.
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Page 137
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
1. Emergency responder communication coverage in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-12 is
required for the building(s) included in this project. A radio signal strength test of the public safety radio
communication system conducted in accordance with the requirements of the 2022 California Fire
Code is required to be submitted. Where existing radio signal strength does not meet the requirements
of the Fire Code, a separate submittal for an emergency responder communication coverage system is
required.
2. Fire extinguishers are required in accordance with Section 906 of the California Fire Code. Consult with
the Fire Inspector for the correct type, size, and exact installation locations.
3. Fire flow information for this project is obtained from the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).
CVWD can be reached at 909-944-6000 or custserv@cvwdwater.com.
4. Fire flow is required to be in accordance with Appendix B of the California Fire Code. The Fire District
has adopted the appendix without local amendments except that the minimum fire flow for commercial
buildings shall not be less than 1500 gpm. Proof of the availability of the required fire flow must be
provided to the Fire District in the form of a letter or written report dated within the past 12 months.
5. Fire sprinklers are required to be installed in accordance with Fire District Standard 9-3. The Standard
has been uploaded to the Documents section.
6. Knox Box key boxes are required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-9. The Fire Marshal will
determine the locations of the boxes based on the operational needs of the Fire District. The Standard
has been uploaded to the Documents section. If an installed Knox Box is available to this project or
business, keys for the building/suite/unit are required to be provided to the Fire Inspector at the final
inspection.
7. Coordinate landscaping with the roof access ladder points and address signage. Landscaping cannot
obstruct roof access or clear visibility of address signage from time of installation to maturity of the
shrubs and trees.
8. Due to the type of construction, construction materials, the floor area of the project, and known risks
associated with projects of this nature, a Fire Protection and Site Safety plan is required to be
implemented when combustible construction materials are delivered to the site, with the exception of
foundation form materials. The Fire Prevention and Site Safety plan is required to be in compliance with
Fire District Standard 33-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. Review and
approval of the fire prevention and site safety plan is a condition of construction permit approval. The
fire prevention and site safety plan is required to be approved by the Fire District prior to construction
permits being approved and issued.
Page 138
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
9. The fire access / fire lane crosses existing property lines, is located on property not under the control of
the applicant or is located on a property that is being or could be subdivided. To ensure continued Fire
District use of and access to, and maintenance as needed, of the fire access / fire lane, a reciprocal
agreement between property owners and the Fire District is required. The agreement is required to be
recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder. A site plan showing the location of the fire access /
fire lane is required to be included with the agreement. The agreement is required to be reviewed and
approved by the Fire District prior to recording. Proof of recordation is required to be submitted to the
Fire District. A template of this agreement is included in Fire District Standard 5-1, which has been
uploaded to the Documents section.
10. Roof access is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-6. The Standard has been
uploaded to the Documents section.
11. Street address and unit/suite signage for commercial and industrial buildings are required to be in
accordance with Fire District Standard 5-8. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents
section.
12. Fire apparatus access roads and emergency vehicle access is required to be identified with signs
and/or other approved makings in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-1. A copy of the Standard
has been uploaded to the Documents section.
13. 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.
14. A new public hydrant may need to be installed within 15-50 feet of the Fire Department Connection
(FDC) and in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-10.
15. Any new connections to the public water mains will require the submittal of public, off -site fire
underground plans that conform to the standards of the water purveyor and Fire District Standard 5-10.
16. Public and private fire service water mains, public and private hydrants, water control valves, fire
sprinkler risers, fire department connections (FDCs), and other fire protection water related devices and
equipment are required to be provided, designed, and installed in accordance with Fire District
Standard 5-10. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
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 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. The new structure is required to
be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report is required for new structures. Disabled
access improvements to the site and building must be provided in accordance to the State of CA
published thresholds at the time of plan check submittal.
Page 139
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
1. 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.
2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform
such work. A copy will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall
implement design recommendations per said report.
3. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be
completed, submitted, and approved by the City Engineer, or designee, prior to the issuance of building
permits.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond
project boundary.
Page 140
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
11. 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.
12. 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".
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. 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).
16. 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 .
17. 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.
18. 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.
Page 141
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 15 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
19. 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.
20. 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” .
21. 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.
Page 142
Project #: DRC2024-00108, DRC2024-00109, SUBTT20708, DRC2025-00055
www.CityofRC.us Page 16 of 16 Printed: 7/15/2025
Project Name: Rempel Mixed-Use
Location: 9505 BASE LINE RD - 020843216-0000
Project Type: Design Review, Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Minor Exception
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
22. 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, if applicable. (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, if applicable.
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 143
DATE:July 23, 2025
TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Miguel Sotomayor, Principal Engineer
SUBJECT:MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
A request to amend Section 16.36.09 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal
Code, repeal Planning Commission Resolution 87-96, and add Chapter
17.84 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code concerning
undergrounding overhead utilities. This item is exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
City’s CEQA Guidelines under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). This
item will be forwarded to City Council for final action.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the draft resolution attached hereto as Exhibit
B, recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Section 16.36.09 of the
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, repeal Planning Commission Resolution 87-96, and adding
Chapter 17.84 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code concerning undergrounding of
overhead utilities to further establish in-lieu fee amount requirements, limits of responsibility,
exemptions and establishing defined regions for the collection and expenditure of in-lieu fees to
be adopted by City Council as shown conceptually in Exhibit C to this staff report. Final draft of
Exhibit C will be approved by the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
On June 10, 1987, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted
Resolution 87-96 (Exhibit A) establishing a revised policy for the undergrounding of existing
overhead utilities and repealing Resolution 86-77 which was adopted on May 28, 1986.
At the time of adoption of these resolutions, the Planning Commission wished to remove unsightly
existing overhead utility lines in order to promote a more aesthetic and desirable working and
living environment. Resolution 87-96 was necessary to establish a policy to inform property
owners and developers of the City goal. Said resolution established that all developments, except
those listed in the resolution and others specifically waived by the Planning Commission, shall be
responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal of the
related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development.
Resolution 87-96 required developers to underground utility lines along their project frontage at
their own expense. In certain circumstances, developers are required to pay an in-lieu fee. The
resolution also stipulates that developers are eligible for reimbursement of half the
undergrounding costs from future developments on the opposite side of the street.
Page 144
Page 2 of 4
2
9
4
2
Additionally, Resolution 87-96 addresses the handling of utility lines on the opposite side of the
proposed development, particularly when utility lines are present on both sides of the street. It
further specifies requirements for poles containing 66KV or larger electrical lines, defines the limits
of responsibility, and details the in-lieu fee amount and applicable exemptions.
Furthermore, chapter 16.36.09 of the Municipal Code requires undergrounding for all subdivisions
and allows the City Council to accept an in-lieu fee of the undergrounding of existing facilities
along peripheral streets. However, the current code does not permit the acceptance of in-lieu fees
for new residential subdivisions, which limits the flexibility and financial options available for these
projects. The proposed amendment will allow in-lieu fees for all project types as determined by
the City Engineer.
Since the adoption of Resolution 87-96, staff has successfully conditioned projects to either
underground utility lines or pay an in-lieu fee. This initiative has led to the undergrounding of many
areas, significantly improving the aesthetic by removing unsightly overhead utilities.
ANALYSIS:
As part of this code update, staff analyzed the current resolution and municipal code requirements
for undergrounding of overhead utilities and determined updates were required to further clarify
and update to meet the City’s vision, goals and policies. This update will further clarify the
requirements for undergrounding of overhead utilities and continue to improve the area by
removing unsightly overhead utilities while recognizing and respecting the character of
established neighborhoods and the minimizing impacts that such requirements may have on in-
fill development costs and timelines.
Proposed Code Update Summary
The proposed code update specifies the timeline for completing required undergrounding.
Undergrounding must be completed before the acceptance of related street improvements or, if
no street improvements are required, before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
The proposed update shifts the authority to determine the impracticality of undergrounding from
the Planning Commission to the City Engineer. This change is important for several reasons:
Streamlined Decision Making: By aligning the decision-making authority with the City
Engineer, the process becomes more efficient. The City Engineer is directly involved in
the entitlement process and the issuance of conditions of approval, which means
decisions regarding the impracticality of undergrounding can be made more swiftly and
in conjunction with other project considerations.
Consistency and Coordination: Centralizing this authority with the City Engineer promotes
consistency in decision-making. It ensures that all determinations regarding
undergrounding impracticality are made using the same criteria and standards, reducing
the potential for discrepancies and ensuring a uniform approach across different projects.
Enhanced Project Management: Integrating this decision within the technical review of
the entitlement process allows for better coordination and management of projects. The
City Engineer can assess the impracticality of undergrounding in the context of the overall
project plan, leading to well-integrated infrastructure solutions.
Page 145
Page 3 of 4
2
9
4
2
Improved Responsiveness: The City Engineer's involvement from the beginning of the
project allows for more responsive and adaptive decision-making. As conditions and
project requirements evolve, the City Engineer can quickly reassess and adjust
determinations regarding undergrounding, ensuring that the city's infrastructure goals are
met without unnecessary delays.
In-Lieu Fee Calculations
The update clarifies the calculation of in-lieu fees, requiring a qualified engineer registered in
California to prepare the cost estimate. Once approved by the City Engineer, this estimate will
determine the in-lieu fee required from the developer.
In-Lieu Fee Expenditure
The update now includes a section for where the in-lieu fees shall be spent. The proposed regions
are specified on Exhibit B. Once the City has collected sufficient funds from in-lieu fees within a
region, the City may underground a section of utility lines within that region.
Exemptions and Focus Areas
The exemptions section has been updated to include any specific plan or master plan adopted by
the City Council and Focus Areas as defined in the General Plan and conceptually shown on
Exhibit B. Given the nature of change envisioned for these focus areas, staff recommends that
developments within the areas be required to undergo undergrounding and therefore would not
be exempt. These include:
Focus Area 1: Downtown Rancho Cucamonga (Victoria Gardens & Epicenter)
Focus Area 2: Civic Center
Focus Area 3: HART District
Focus Area 8: Southeast Industrial Area
Additionally, the exemption for undergrounding for residential subdivisions has been expanded
from four to ten single-family residential parcels, provided utility lines extend at least 600 feet
offsite from both project boundaries. This change aims to make development more feasible for
these smaller projects.
Appeal Process
A new section has been introduced to establish a clear procedure for applicants to appeal the
undergrounding requirements or the calculation of the in-lieu fee. Under this process, applicants
may submit a written appeal detailing the grounds for their request, specifically citing why utility
undergrounding is deemed unreasonable or impractical, or why the in-lieu fee was calculated in
error.
To initiate an appeal, the applicant must file a notice of appeal with the City Clerk within 20
calendar days from the date on which the City Engineer’s decision was rendered and fee was
paid. The City Council shall thereupon fix a time and place for hearing such appeal. The City
Council shall have all authority to determine all questions raised on such appeal and City Council
determinations are final.
Page 146
Page 4 of 4
2
9
4
2
Environmental Analysis
Staff has determined that the proposed code amendment is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2)
and 15378(a), the proposed Amendments are not considered a “Project” under CEQA because it
does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or
a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. This is due to the fact that
the amendments do not change any practice or procedure, but rather clarify and codify existing
practice.
Furthermore, the proposed Amendments are exempt from the CEQA pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have
the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment because most new development
in the City is required to underground utilities along their frontage and this does not change that
requirement. Furthermore, the Amendments are categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15302(c) which exempts from review the replacement or reconstruction
of existing utility systems and/or facilities involving a negligible or no expansion of capacity. For
existing utility systems that are required to be placed underground, there will be a negligible or no
expansion of capacity.
Additionally, the Amendments are categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15302(d) which exempts from review the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and
facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and
will have substantially the same purpose and capacity replaced including conversion of overhead
electric utility distribution facilities to underground including connection to existing overhead
electric utility distribution lines where the surface is restored to the condition existing prior to the
undergrounding. For any new development where the undergrounding of utilities is required, the
adoption of this Amendment is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15303(d) which exempts from review the construction of and location of new small facilities and
structures including water main, sewage, electrical, gas, and other utility extensions including
street improvements, of reasonable length to serve such construction.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s core values by promoting and enhancing a safe and
healthy community for all, and by providing continuous improvement through the construction of
high-quality public improvements.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – Planning Commission Resolution 87-96
Exhibit B – Resolution 2025-022 with Draft Ordinance
Exhibit C – Region/Focus Area Map
Page 147
RESOLUTION NO. 87-96
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTABLISHING A REVISED POLICY FOR THE
UNDERGROUNDING OF EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES AND
REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 86-77
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
wishes to repeal Resolution No. 86-77 which was adopted on the 28th day of
May, 1986 and establish the revised policy contained herein;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
wishes to remove unsightly existing overhead utility lines in order to promote
a more aesthetic and desirable working and living environment within the City;
and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish a policy to inform property
owners and developers of the City goal.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved and established that all developments,
except those contained in Section 7 and any others specifically waived by the
Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing
overhead utility lines including the removal of the related supporting poles
adjacent to and within the limits of a development as follows:
1. Lines on the project side of the street*:
a. Said lines shall be undergrounded at the developer's expense.
b. In those circumstances where the Planning Commission decides that
undergrounding is impractical at present for such reasons as a short
length of undergrounding (less than 300 feet and not undergrounded
adjacent), a heavy concentration of services to other users,
disruption to existing improvements, etc. , the Developer shall pay an
in-lieu fee for the full amount per Section 6.
c. The Developer shall be eligible for reimbursement of one-half the cost
of undergrounding from future developments as they occur on the
opposite side of the street.
2. Lines on the opposite side of the street from the project: The Developer
shall pay a fee to the City for one-half the amount per Section 6.
3. Lines on both sides of the street: The Developer shall comply with
Section 1 above and be eligible for reimbursement or pay additional fees
so that he bears a total expense equivalent to one-half the total cost of
undergrounding the lines on both sides of the street.
4. Pole lines containing 66KV or larger electrical lines: All lines shall be
undergrounded or in-lieu fees paid in accordance with section 1, 2 or 3,
above, except for 66 KV or larger electrical lines
Exhibit A
Page 148
5. Limits of Responsibilities:
a. In-lieu fees shall be based upon the length of the property being
developed from property line to property line (the center of adjacent
streets for corner properties).
b. Undergrounding shall include the entire project frontage and extend
to: (1 ) the first existing pole off-site from the project boundaries
across the street for corner properties), (2) a new pole erected at a
project boundary (across the street for corner properties), or (3) an
existing pole within 5 feet of a project boundary, except at a corner.
6. Fee Amount: The amount for in-lieu fees shall equal the length (per
Section 5.a) times the unit amount as established by the City Council
based upon information supplied by the utility companies and as updated
periodically as deemed necessary.
7. Exemptions: The following types of projects shall be exempt from this
policy:
a. The addition of functional equipment to existing developments, such
as: loading docks, silos, satellite dishes, antennas, water tanks, air
conditioners, cooling towers, enclosure of an outdoor storage area,
parking and loading areas, block walls and fences, etc.
b. Building additions or new free standing buildings of less than 25% of
the floor area of the existing building(s) on the same assessor' s
parcel , or 5,000 square feet, whichever is less.
c. Exterior upgrading or repair of existing developments, such as:
reroofing, addition of trellis, awnings, landscaping, equipment
screening, repainting and exterior finishes, etc.
d. interior tennant improvements and non-construction CUPs.
e. The construction of a single family residence on an existing parcel .
f. Existing overhead utility lines located in trails, alleys, and utility
easements with a heavy concentration of services to adjacent
developments, and the utility lines are 500' or more from the right of
way line of a Special Boulevard.
g. Residential subdivisions of four or fewer single family residential
parcels, where the utility lines extend at least 600' offsite from
both the project boundaries and the adjacent property is not likely to
contribute to future undergrounding.
All references to streets shall also mean alleys, railroad or channel
rights-of-way, etc.
Page 149
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10th DAY OF JUNE 1987.
PLANNING COM ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY: a Ili.ca )79°
La y T. McNi -1 Chairman
ATTEST: 1 1; agcs t
ra: 71141741r ecretary
K.
I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 10 day of June, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK, CHITIEA, MCNIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY
Page 150
Rev. 4/14/88
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - ENGINEERING DIVISION
EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY REQUIREMENTS
A. POLICY: All developments shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing
overhead utility lines including the removal of the related supporting poles
along all streets (alleys, railroad or channel rights-of-way, etc. ) adjacent to
the development limits as follows:
1 . Lines on the project side of the street:
a. The lines shall be undergrounded at the Developer' s expense.
b. In those circumstances where it is decided that undergrounding isimpracticalatpresentforsuchreasonsasashortlengthof
undergrounding ( less than 300 feet and not undergrounded adjacent), a
heavy concentration of services to other users, disruption to existingimprovements, etc. , the Developer shall pay an in-lieu fee per Section 6.
c. The Developer shall be eligible for reimbursement of one-half the costs
of undergrounding from future developments as they occur on the opposite
side of the street.
2. Lines on the opposite side of the street from the development:
The Developer shall pay a fee to the City of one-half the amount per Section
6 as contribution to the future undergrounding of the lines on the opposite
side of the street.
3. Lines on both sides of the street:
The Developer shall comply with Section 1 above and be eligible for
reimbursement or pay additional fees so that he bears a total expense
equivalent to one-half the total cost of undergrounding the lines on both
sides of the street.
4. Pole lines containing 66KV or larger electrical lines:
All lines shall be undergrounded or in-lieu fees paid in accordance with
Section 1, 2, or 3, above, except for 66KV or larger electrical lines.
5. Undergrounding Limits:
Undergrounding shall include the entire project frontage and extend to: (a)
the first pole off-site from the project boundaries (across the street for
corner properties), (b) a new pole erected at a project boundary (across the
street for corner properties) , or (c) an existing pole within 5 feet of a
project boundary (except at a corner) .
6. In-lieu fee amount:
a. The amount for in-lieu fees shall equal the length (per b. below) times
the unit amount (per c. below) .
b. The length of the property being developed from property line to propertyline (the center of adjacent streets for corner properties) .
c. The unit amount shall be on a per foot basis as established by the City
Council, subject to change without notice, currently:
1) Telecommunications $85.
2) Electrical - depending upon when undergrounded as follows:
1986 and before $100; 1987 $135; 1988 and after $128.
Continued On Page 2
1
Page 151
7. Completion requirements:
a. Undergrounding shall be completed as follows:
1 ) Prior to acceptance of public improvements for non-development
subdivisions.
2) Prior to occupancy release for all others.
b. In-lieu fees shall be paid as follows :
1 ) Prior to approval of the Final Map for residential and the developed
portions of other subdivisions.
2) Prior to the issuance of building permits for all others.
8. Exceptions:
Single family residences to be constructed on existing parcels which were
not required to underground by a previous approval and other developments
specifically designated by the Planning Commission shall be exempt from
these requirements.
B. PLAN SUBMITTALS: All development submittals shall contain an 8 1/
2 " X 11"
drawing to scale accurately showing the type and location of existing utility
lines and supporting poles on both sides of all streets (alleys, railroad and
channel rights-of-way, etc. ) adjacent to the project limits and extend to the
first existing pole off-site from the project boundaries. The drawing shall
conform to the sample below.
Project No. CUP 86-14
I• L LOCATION OF EXISTING
OVERHEAD UTILITIES
0
60'
Q
Site
w
1" = 100'
En I °
E, T
190' J 350' 65' 1
A" Street
LEGEND:
66KV - 66KV or larger Electrical
E - Other Electrical
T - Telecommunications
Supporting Pole
2
Page 152
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-022
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL (1) ADOPT
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 16.36.09 OF, AND
ADDING CHAPTER 17.84 TO, THE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING
UNDERGROUNDING OVERHEAD UTILITIES AND (2) FIND
THAT THE ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
A.Recitals.
1.The City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared a set of amendments, as
described in the title of this Resolution, to the City’s Subdivision Ordinance (Title 16 of the
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code) and Development Code (Title 17 of the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code). Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Municipal Code
amendments are collectively referred to as the “Amendments.”
2.Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.22.040.B.2 requires the
Planning Commission to hold a hearing and provide a recommendation to the City Council
on proposed Development Code Amendments.
3.On July 23, 2025, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the Amendments 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 Planning Commission hereby 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 the Planning
Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on July 23, 2025, including
written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Planning Commission
hereby finds as follows:
a. The Articles/Chapters/Sections of the Municipal Code subject to the
Amendments are as follows:
Exhibit B
Page 153
2
(1) Section 16.36.09 (“Required improvements; utilities”) to
amend Section 16.36.09 to require all new and existing overhead utility lines to comply
with the requirements of Chapter 17.84 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code;
(2) Chapter 17.84 (“Underground Utilities”) to add Sections
17.84.010 through 17.84.080 to codify requirements for, and processes related to,
undergrounding overhead utilities.
b. The City prepared the Amendments, which are included in Exhibit
“A,” to this Resolution and are hereby incorporated by this reference as set forth in full.
c. The Amendments conform to and do not conflict with the goals,
policies, and implementation programs of the General Plan, including, without limitation,
Goal S-5.6 which provides: “Underground Utilities. Promote under-grounding of utilities
for new development, major remodels, and redevelopment.”
d. The Amendments have been reviewed pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) and the
City’s local CEQA Guidelines, and are exempt from CEQA.
(1) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) and
15378(a), the proposed Amendments are not considered a “Project” under CEQA
because it does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in
the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment. This is due to the fact that the Amendments not change any practice or
procedure, but rather clarify and codify existing practice. Furthermore, the proposed
Amendments are exempt from the CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15061(b)(3), the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential
for causing a significant effect on the environment because most new development in the
City is required to underground utilities along their frontage and this does not change that
requirement. Furthermore, the Amendments are categorically exempt from CEQA
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15302(c) which exempts from review the
replacement or reconstruction of existing utility systems and/or facilities involving a
negligible or no expansion of capacity. For existing utility systems that are required to be
placed underground, there will be a negligible or no expansion of capacity. Additionally,
the Amendments are categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15302(d) which exempts from review the replacement or reconstruction of existing
structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the
structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity replaced
including conversion of overhead electric utility distribution facilities to underground
including connection to existing overhead electric utility distribution lines where the
surface is restored to the condition existing prior to the undergrounding. For any new
development where the undergrounding of utilities is required, the adoption of this
Amendments are categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(d)
which exempts from review the construction of and location of new small facilities and
Page 154
3
structures including water main, sewage, electrical, gas, and other utility extensions
including street improvements, of reasonable length to serve such construction.
(2) The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed
Amendments, along with the CEQA exemption analysis in subparagraph 1 of paragraph
d above, and, hereby recommends that the City Council finds the Amendments exempt
from CEQA.
3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in subparagraphs 1 and
2 of paragraph B above, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City
Council adopt an ordinance as indicated in Exhibit “A”, and incorporated herein by this
reference.
4. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23rd DAY OF JULY, 2025.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY: _______________________________
Tony Morales, Chairman
ATTEST: ___________________________
Jennifer Nakamura, Secretary
I, Jennifer Nakamura, 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 an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the
23rd day of July, 2025, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 155
4
Exhibit “A”
Draft Ordinance with Proposed Code Amendments
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA AMENDING CHAPTER 16.36.09
OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE AND
ADDING CHAPTER 17.84 TO THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING UNDERGROUNDING
OVERHEAD UTILITIES, AND MAKING A DETERMINATION
OF EXEMPTION FROM CEQA
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby ordains as follows:
Section 1. Adoption of Chapter 17.84. Chapter 17.84 (“Underground Utilities”) of
Article IV (“Site Development Provisions”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby added to read in full as follows:
“17.84 Underground Utilities.
17.84.010. Undergrounding Utilities. Except as provided in Section 17.84.060 or
where payment of an in-lieu fee is authorized, all new and existing overhead utility
lines shall be installed underground in conjunction with any development, including
the removal of the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of the
development as provided in this Chapter, at the applicant’s expense.
A. Arrangements, including the payment of all costs for
undergrounding, shall be made by the applicant with the serving
utilities.
B. Undergrounding shall be completed:
1. Prior to the acceptance of related street improvements; or
2. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy if no related
street improvements are required.
17.84.020. In-Lieu Fee. In those circumstances where the City Engineer decides
that undergrounding is impractical, the applicant may satisfy the undergrounding
requirement by paying an in-lieu fee in accordance with the formula set forth in
Section 17.84.050. The in-lieu fee shall be paid to the city prior to the approval of
the final subdivision map, or building permit, whichever occurs first. The City
Engineer may determine undergrounding is impractical if any of the following
conditions exist:
Page 156
5
A. The length of the lines to be places underground will be less than
three hundred (300) feet and the utility lines have not been placed
underground on any property abutting the subject property;
B. Severe disruption to existing off-site improvements or heavy
congestion of utility lines would make impractical service to
properties under separate ownership; or
C. Any other condition that City Engineer finds exists and will make
undergrounding impractical.
17.84.030. Poles Containing 66KV or Larger Electrical Lines. 66KV or larger
electrical lines shall not be undergrounded unless the City Engineer and applicant
agree to do so.
17.84.040. Limits of Responsibility. Undergrounding shall include the
development’s entire frontage and extend to: (i) the first existing pole off-site from
the development’s boundaries (across the street for corner properties), (ii) a new
pole erected at a development’s boundary (across the street for corner properties),
or (iii) an existing pole within five feet of a development’s boundary, except a
corner.
17.84.050. Fee Amount. The in-lieu fee amount shall be equal to the amount
identified in a detailed project specific construction cost estimate approved by the
City Engineer and prepared by a qualified engineer registered in the State of
California. The cost for preparation of the required construction cost estimate shall
be borne by the applicant.
17.84.060. Exemptions.
A. The following developments shall be exempt from undergrounding
utility lines as required by this Chapter:
1. The addition of functional equipment to existing developments,
such as: loading docks, silos, satellite dishes, antennas, water
tanks, air conditioners, cooling towers, enclosures of outdoor
storage area, parking and loading area, block walls and fences,
etc.
2. Building additions or new free standing buildings of less than 25%
of the floor area of the existing building(s) on the same assessor’s
parcel, or 5,000 square feet, whichever is less.
3. Exterior upgrading or repair of existing developments, such as:
reroofing, addition of trellis, awnings, landscaping, equipment
screening, repainting and exterior finishes, etc.
4. Interior tenant improvements and non-construction CUPs.
Page 157
6
5. Projects consisting of the construction of one (1) single family
residence on an existing parcel.
6. Existing overhead utility lines located in public and private rights-
of way, including but not limited to streets, trails, alleys, and utility
easements where heavy congestion of utility lines would make
impractical service to properties under separate ownership..
7. Residential subdivisions of ten or fewer single family residential
parcels, where utility lines extend at least 600 feet offsite from
both project boundaries.
8. Where otherwise preempted by state law.
B. Notwithstanding the foregoing, there is no exemption to the
requirement to underground overhead utilities under this Chapter for
projects within the boundaries of:
1. (i) General Plan Focus Area 1: Downtown Rancho Cucamonga
(Victoria Gardens & Epicenter); (ii) General Plan Focus Area 2:
Civic Center; (iii) General Plan Focus Area 3: HART District; and
(iv) General Plan Focus Area 8: Southeast Industrial Area, as all
such focus areas are defined by the general plan and shown in a
resolution approved by the City Council.
2. Any specific plan or master plan adopted by the City Council.
17.84.070. In-Lieu Fee Expenditure.
A. Funds collected from in-lieu fees shall be spent in the region in which
the development from which the funds were collected is located. For
purposes of this Chapter, the regions shall be identified in a map that
is approved by the Council in a resolution and the official copy shall
be on file in the Engineering Division.
B. Once the City has collected sufficient funds from in-lieu fees within a
region to underground a section of utility lines, the City may
underground a section of utility lines within that region.
17.84.080. Appeals.
A. An applicant adversely affected by the City Engineer’s determination
that undergrounding is or is not impractical pursuant to Section
17.84.020 or contesting the amount of the in-lieu fee may appeal
such determinations to the City Council.
B. All appeals shall be in writing and shall state the reason why utility
undergrounding is unreasonable or impractical or the in-lieu fee was
Page 158
7
unreasonable or erroneously calculated. Appeals in instances finding
undergrounding is not impractical shall include a preliminary
estimate of cost, in writing, from the serving utilities.
C. An applicant may initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal with
the City Clerk within 20 days after the date on which the City
Engineer takes the action appealed from and paying the applicable
fee, which shall be set by resolution.
D. The City Council shall thereupon fix a time and place for hearing such
appeal. The City Clerk shall give notice to the appellant of the time
and place of hearing by serving the notice personally or by depositing
it in the United States Post Office in the city, postage prepaid,
addressed to such persons at their last known addresses.
E. The City Council shall have the authority to determine all questions
raised on such appeal.
F. City Council determinations are final.”
Section 2. Amendment of Chapter 16.39.090. Chapter 16.36.090 (“Required
Improvements; Utilities”) of Title 16 (“Subdivisions”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal
Code is hereby amended to read as set forth below.
“16.36.090 Required improvements; utilities.
All new and existing overhead utility lines are subject to and shall comply with the
requirements of Chapter 17.84 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code.”
Section 3. The development code amendment set forth in Section 1 above generally
requiring the undergrounding of new utility facilities in new development, with certain
exceptions, is consistent with the general plan, including for example, Goal S-5.6 which
provides: “Underground Utilities. Promote under-grounding of utilities for new
development, major remodels, and redevelopment.”
Section 4. Repeal of Planning Commission Resolution 87-96. Upon the date that this
Ordinance takes effect, Planning Commission Resolution 87-96 and related policies of
the City’s Engineering Division with conflicting processes for undergrounding utility lines
in developments are hereby repealed.
Section 5. Projects deemed complete or entitled as of the effective date of this
Ordinance that have not implemented their undergrounding requirements specified in
applicable entitlement conditions of approval may request review of such conditions by
the Engineering Director and Planning Director for a determination of whether any
changes in applicable Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code or other applicable
regulations pertaining to utility undergrounding would either (i) eliminate the
undergrounding requirements or (ii) allow for compliance with undergrounding
Page 159
8
requirements through payment of an in-lieu fee. Notwithstanding Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code Section 17.14.100, the Directors are jointly authorized to amend or waive
the applicable condition of approval if they find that either condition (i) or (ii) described
above applies.
Section 6. CEQA. The City Council finds that pursuant to California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15378(a), the proposed
Ordinance is not considered a “Project” under CEQA because it does not have the
potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. This is due to the
fact that the Ordinance does not change any practice or procedure, but rather clarifies
and codifies existing practice. Furthermore, the proposed action is exempt from the CEQA
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule that CEQA applies
only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the
environment because most new development in the City is required to underground
utilities along their frontage and this does not change that requirement.
The City Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is categorically exempt from
CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15302(c) which exempts from review the
replacement or reconstruction of existing utility systems and/or facilities involving a
negligible or no expansion of capacity. For existing utility systems that are required to be
placed underground, there will be a negligible or no expansion of capacity. The City
Council further finds that the adoption of the Ordinance is categorically exempt pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15302(d) which exempts from review the replacement or
reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located
on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose
and capacity replaced including conversion of overhead electric utility distribution facilities
to underground including connection to existing overhead electric utility distribution lines
where the surface is restored to the condition existing prior to the undergrounding.
For any new development where the undergrounding of utilities is required, the City
Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is categorically exempt pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(d) which exempts from review the construction of and
location of new small facilities and structures including water main, sewage, electrical,
gas, and other utility extensions including street improvements, of reasonable length to
serve such construction.
Section 7. Severability. The City Council declares that, should any provision, section,
paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance be rendered or declared invalid by any
final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive
legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences and words of this
Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect.
Page 160
9
Section 8. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance.
___________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________________
Kim Sevy, City Clerk
I, Kim Sevy, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the ____________, 2025, and was passed at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on
____________, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Page 161
REGION 1 REGION 2
REGION 3
REGION 4
REGION 5
REGION 6
EXHIBIT C
FOCUS AREA 1
FOCUS AREA 2
FOCUS AREA 3 FOCUS AREA 8
Page 162
DATE:July 23, 2025
TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director
INITIATED BY:Claudia Vargas, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:ZONING MAP AMENDMENT – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – A
request to amend the zoning map designation for Tracts 16072, 16072-1,
16072-2, and 16072-3, totaling approximately 150.79 acres, to amend the
zoning designation from neighborhood Estate 2 (NE-2) to Low Residential
(L), and ensure consistency with the configuration and development
standards of a previously approved 359 lot single-family residential
subdivision, in a manner consistent with the General Plan land use
designation of Traditional Neighborhood. This project qualifies for an
exemption under State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), as the
proposed zoning map amendment will not have any direct impact on the
environment. Tracts 16072, 16072-1, 16072-2, and 16072-3. (Zoning Map
Amendment DRC2025-00141).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City
Council approve a Zoning Map Amendment to change the zoning of the subject parcels from
Neighborhood Estate 2 (NE-2), to Low Residential (L).
BACKGROUND:
Site Characteristics and Land Use/Zoning
The project site comprises of approximately 150.79 acres across Tract 16072, 16072-1, 16072-
2, and 16072-3. It is located on Wilson Avenue, between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue, in
the northeaster portion of the City. The parcels are rectangular in layout and currently graded,
subdivided into 359 single family residential lots.
The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent
properties are as follow:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Traditional Neighborhood
Currently: Neighborhood
Estate 2 (NE-2)
Proposed: Low Residential (L)
North Vacant General Open Space and
Facilities
Flood Control/Utility Corridor
(FC/UC)
South CVWD
Facility/Residential
General Open Space and
Facilities Very Low (VL)/Parks (P)
East Vacant Traditional Neighborhood Neighborhood Estate 2 (NE-2)
West Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Low Residential (L)
Page 163
Page 2 of 4
2
9
1
1
Figure 1 – Site Map
Legislative Context
The project site was originally entitled under Tentative Tract Map SBT16071, which was approved
by the planning Commission on May 12, 2004, and subsequently by the City Council on June 16,
2004. The project was subdivided into 359 single family residential lots. Due to a combination of
local and state mandated time extensions under the Subdivision Map Act, there was a significant
delay between the original Tentative Map approval and the Final Map recordation. The Final Maps
were recorded as follows:
Tracts 16072-1 and 16072-2: August 16, 2023
Tracts 16072 and 16072-3: December 12, 2023
On December 21, 2021, the City adopted an updated General Plan, which designated the project
area as Traditional Neighborhood. To implement the new General Plan, the City adopted a new
form-based Development Code and updated the Zoning Map on May 4, 2022. At the time, the
project area was assigned the Neighborhood Estates 2 (NE-2) zoning designation to maintain
consistency with the updated land use policy. However, the zoning designation was assigned
prior to the recordation of the Final Maps.
In 2024, following the recordation of the Final Maps, two (2) developers submitted application
proposing single-family residential housing consistent with the approved subdivision. During
Page 164
Page 3 of 4
2
9
1
1
staff’s review of these development applications, it became apparent that the form-based
development standards of NE-2 zone were incompatible with the recorded subdivision layout.
Specifically, standards such as rear-loaded garages and block-based diversity requirements
conflicted with the conventional suburban design established by the original map.
To resolve this regulatory inconsitency, the City initiated a Zoning Map Amendment to rezone the
subject tracts from Neighborhood Estates 2 (NE-2) to Low Residential (L). This zoning designation
more accurately reflects the standards and layout approved under the original entitlement and
aligns with the zoning of the adjacent established neighborhood to the west.
ANALYSIS:
The City proposes a Zoning Map Amendment to change the zoning designation of Tract 16072,
16072-1, 16072-2 and 16072-3 from Neighborhood Estate 2 (NE-2) to Low Residential (L). This
change is necessary to align the zoning with the existing 359 lot subdivision recorded in 2023,
originally approved in 2004 under the now retired Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The
Neighborhood Estates 2 (NE-2) zone, established through the 2022 form-based Development
Code, includes design requirement such as rear-loaded garages and a variety of housing types
that do not match he recorded subdivision layout. In contrast, the Low Residential (L) zone reflects
conventional suburban development standards that align with the original subdivision design. This
rezoning would resolve the development challenges associated with applying Neighborhood
Estate 2 (NE-2) standards to the built environement.
Consistency with General Plan Density and Approved Subdivision
The subject parcels maintain a General Plan land use designation of Traditional Neighborhood,
which permits up to 8 dwelling units per acre. The existing subdivision of 359 lot on approximately
150.79 acres results in a density of approximately 2.3 units per acre, well within the allowable
range. No changes to the General Plan designation are proposed.
While the density is compliant, the Neighborhood Estate 2 (NE-2) zone’s form-based development
standards, conflict with the approved lot structure and design envisioned under the Etiwanda
North Specific Plan. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 was approved based on the standards in
effect at the time, which are more consistent with the current Low Residential (L) zone.
Development Code Section 17.08.020 confirms that Low Residential (L) allows up to 6 dwelling
units per acre, which aligns with the Traditional Neighborhood designation. The proposed zone
change ensures conformity with both the General Plan and the approved subdivision, enabling
development as intended.
Environmental Review
Pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Guidelines, where it can be seen with certainty that
there is no possibility the activity in question may have significant effect on the environment, the
activity is not subject to CEQA. The proposed Zoning Map Amendment does not authorize any
physical development or site disturbance and will not result in a physical change to the
environment. It merely updates the zoning designation to align with the configuration and
development standared of an existing 359 lot single-family residential subdivision that was
approved by the City Council in 2004 and finalized throught recordation of the Final Map in 2023.
The new zoning designation is consistent with the site’s General Plan land use designation of
Traditional Neighborhood. Therefore, the proposed Amendment qualifies for exemption under
CEQA and does not require further environmental review.
Page 165
Page 4 of 4
2
9
1
1
Correspondence
Advertisements of this item and the associated public hearing were posted on the project site on
July 2, 2025. This item was advertised as a public hearing with a large legal advertisement in the
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper on July 2, 2025, and 549 notices were mailed to property
owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on July 1, 2025.
To date, planning staff has received one inquiry from a nearby resident. Staff responded to the
email and followed up with a phone conversation to address and resolve the resident’s concerns.
A copy of the correspondence is included as Exhibit B.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed Zoning Map Amendment does not authorize physical development or construction.
As such, there is no direct fiscal impact to the City associated with this action. Any future
development of the site will be subject to a separate review and may involve applicable fees or
assessments at the time.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:
The proposed amendment achieves the City Council’s Core Values of “Working together
cooperatively and respectfully with each other, staff, and all stakeholders” and “Relentless pursuit
of improvement”. By proactively initiating this zoning map amendment, the city is addressing a
regulatory mismatch and ensuring that the land use regulations aligned with approved
subdivisions and the General Plan. This action reinforces public trust and demonstrates a
commitment to thoughtful, collaborative planning.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – General Plan Land Use Map
Exhibit B – Resident Correspondence
Exhibit C – Resolution 2025-018 with Draft Ordinance
Page 166
Exhibit A
Page 167
You don't often get email from jamilascranton@gmail.com. Learn why this is important
From:Vargas, Claudia
To:jamilascranton@gmail.com
Cc:drewscranton30@gmail.com
Subject:RE: Opposition to Proposed Zoning Change from NE-2 to Low Residential
Date:Tuesday, July 8, 2025 11:31:00 AM
Dear Jamila and Andrew,
Thank you for reaching out and sharing your concerns. We appreciate your care for the neighborhood.
I would be happy to speak with you directly to clarify the intent behind the proposed zoning map
amendment. If you're available, please feel free to call me at 909-774-4312 or let us know the best
number and time to reach you.
Thank you,
Claudia Vargas | Associate PlannerCity of Rancho Cucamonga | Planning DepartmentOffice: 909-477-2750 ext. 4312claudia.vargas@cityofrc.us | www.cityofrc.us
From: Jamila Scranton <jamilascranton@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2025 5:19 PM
To: Planning, City <City.Planning@cityofrc.us>
Cc: Andrew Scranton <drewscranton30@gmail.com>
Subject: Opposition to Proposed Zoning Change from NE-2 to Low Residential
CAUTION: This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or
open attachments unless you recognize the sender and can confirm the content is safe.
Dear City Planning Department,
We are writing to formally express my strong opposition to the proposed zoning change of the
parcel adjacent to our neighborhood from Neighborhood Estate (NE-2) to Low Residential
(L).
As long-time residents of this community, I believe this change would significantly and
negatively impact the character, livability, and safety of our area. The existing NE-2 zoning
reflects a thoughtful design that prioritizes larger lot sizes, estate-style homes, and open
space—key qualities that define and preserve the unique identity of our neighborhood.
Allowing higher-density development would undermine these characteristics.
Specifically, my concerns include:
Loss of Community Character: The estate-style homes and spacious layout of NE-2
zoning are what make this area special. A shift to Low Residential would introduce a
much denser housing pattern that is incompatible with the established neighborhood.
Exhibit B
Page 168
Increased Traffic and Overcrowding: Higher density housing will bring more vehicles
and congestion to our local streets, creating safety concerns—particularly for the
children in this neighborhood, pedestrians, and cyclists, especially along Wilson avenue
where speeding and running stop signs is already a problem.
Strain on Infrastructure and Services: More homes mean greater demand on already
limited infrastructure, including roads, schools, emergency services, and utilities.
Precedent for Further Densification: Rezoning this parcel sets a dangerous precedent
for future land use changes that chip away at the integrity of estate-zoned
neighborhoods.
While we understand the need for responsible growth, that growth should be consistent with
the existing zoning and community plan. I urge the City to reject the proposed zoning change
and instead uphold the current NE-2 designation to maintain the integrity and quality of life of
our neighborhood.
Thank you for your time and for considering the voice of the community in this important
matter.
Sincerely,
Andrew and Jamila Scranton
12886 Bermuda Court, Rancho Cucamonga
JamilaScranton@gmail.com
Page 169
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-018
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2025-
00141, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP DESIGNATION FOR
TRACTS 16072, 16072-1, 16072-2 AND 16072-3, TOTALING
APPROXIMATELY 150.79 ACRES, TO CHANGE THE ZONING
DESIGNATION FROM NEIGHBORHOOD ESTATE 2 (NE-2) TO LOW
RESIDENTIAL (L), AND ENSURE CONSISTENSY WITH THE
CONFIGURATION AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF AN
EXISTING 359 LOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, IN A
MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
DESINATION OF TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS PROJECT IS
EXEMPT FROM CEQA GUIDELIENS SECTION 15061(B)(3).
A.Recitals.
1.The City of Rancho Cucamonga filed an application for the issuance of Zoning Map
Amendment DRC2025-00141, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Zoning Map Amendment request is referred to as "the application."
2.On the 23rd day of July 2025, 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 at which time the Commission voted to recommend approval of the
subject Zoning Map Amendment to the City Council.
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 July 23rd, 2025, including written and oral staff reports, together
with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to the properties comprising Tracts 16072, 16072-1,
16072-2 and 16072-3, totaling approximately 150.79 acres in the northeastern portion of the City;
and
b. The tracts were subdivided into 359 single-family residential lots, originally
approved in 2004, with Final Maps recorded in 2023; and
Exhibit C
Page 170
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-018
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2025-00141
City of Rancho Cucamonga
July 23, 2025
Page 2
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:
d.This amendment changes the zoning designation from Neighborhood Estate 2
(NE-2) to Low Residential (L) for the subject tracts; Tracts 16072, 16072-1, 16072-2 and 16072-
3; and
e.The existing General Plan Land Use Map designation for the subject tracts is
Traditional Neighborhood; and
f.There is no new physical development or site improvement associated with this
application.
3.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the
above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a.The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan goals, policies,
and implementation programs. The existing General Plan Land Use Map designation for the
subject parcels is Traditional Neighborhood. The site was originally approved under the Etiwanda
North Specific Plan and subdivided into 359 single-family lots in 2004, and the final map recorded
in 2023. Changing the zoning designation to Low Residential (L) restores alignment with the
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant (Subdivided for
housing) Traditional Neighborhood
Current: Neighborhood
Estate 2 (NE-2)
Proposed: Low (L)
Residential
North Utility Corridor (Vacant) General Open Space and
Facilities (OS)
Flood Control/Utility Corridor
(FC/UC)
South CVWD facility/
Residential
General Open Space and
Facilities (OS) Very Low (VL)/Parks (P)
East Vacant Traditional Neighborhood Neighborhood Estate 2 (NE-
2)
West Single-Family
Residential
Suburban Neighborhood
Very Low Low Residential (L)
Page 171
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-018
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2025-00141
City of Rancho Cucamonga
July 23, 2025
Page 3
original subdivision layout and development standards, ensuring consistency with the General
Plan and allowing the site to be developed as originally intended.
b.The proposed Zoning Map Amendment will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The
proposal is for the amendment only which will change the zoning designation to align with the
approved subdivision and General Plan land use designation. Further, the proposed action does
not include any additional development of the site, and all existing buildings will remain in their
existing condition, thus the proposed Zoning Map Amendment will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare, nor will it be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
4.Based upon the facts and information contained in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15183
Compliance Memorandum, together with all written and oral reports included for the
environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no
substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment based
upon the findings as follows:
a.The Planning Department has determined that the Project is exempt from
environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, where it
can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a
significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The application is for a
Zoning Map Amendment only, with no new physical development or site disturbance authorized
by the proposed amendment. Therefore, the amendment will not result in any physical changes
or environmental impacts.
5.Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the draft ordinance, 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 23RD DAY OF JULY 2025
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY: Tony Morales, Chair
ATTEST:
Jennifer Nakamura, Secretary
Page 172
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-018
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2025-00141
City of Rancho Cucamonga
July 23, 2025
Page 4
I, Jennifer Nakamura, 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 23rd day of July 2025 by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 173
1
ORDINANCE XXXX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONING MAP
AMENDMENT DRC2025-00141, A REQUEST TO AMEND
THE ZONING MAP DESIGNATION FOR TRACTS 16072,
16072-1, 16072-2, AND 16072-3, TOTALING
APPROXIMATELY 150.79 ACRES, TO CHANGE THE
ZONING DESIGNATION FROM NEIGHBORHOOD ESTATE
2 (NE-2) TO LOW RESIDENTIAL (L), AND ENSURE
CONSISTENCY WITH THE CONFIGURATION AND
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF AN EXISTING 359 LOT
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, IN A
MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE DESIGNATION OF TRADITIONAL
NEIGHBORHOOD, AND FINDING AN EXEMPTION FROM
CEQA UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA
GUIDELINES
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals.
A.The City of Rancho Cucamonga (the “City”) is proposing to amend the
official Zoning Map to change the zoning designation for Tracts 16072, 16072-1, 16072-
2, and 16072-3, which collectively comprise approximately 150.79 acres. These tracts
are located within the northeastern portion of the City and were previously subdivided into
359 parcels for single-family residential development. The Final Maps for these tracts
were recorded between August and December of 2023.
B.The City has prepared Zoning Map Amendment DRC2025-00141, as
described in the title of this Ordinance, to implement the zone changes. Hereinafter in
this Ordinance, the subject Zoning Map Amendment is referred to as the “application” or
“Amendment.”
C.The City is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the constitution
and laws of the State of California.
D.The Amendment changes the zoning designation of the subject tracts from
Neighborhood Estate 2 (NE-2) to Low Residential (L) to better align with the original
subdivision configuration and applicable General Plan Land use designation of Traditional
Neighborhood.
E.On July 23, 2025, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a noticed continued public hearing with respect to the Amendment
and, following the conclusion thereof, adopted Resolution No. 25-018 recommending that
the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt said Amendment.
Page 174
2
F.On August 20th, 2025, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a noticed public hearing on the amendment and concluded said hearing on
that date.
G.All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
SECTION 2. Ordinance.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:
A.Recitals. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set
forth in the Recitals, Section 1, of this Ordinance are true and correct.
B.Findings.
1)Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council
during the above-reference public hearing, this Council hereby finds and concludes that
the proposed Amendment is in conformance with the General Plan goals, policies, and
implementation programs. The existing General Plan Land Use Map designation for the
subject parcels is Traditional Neighborhood, which allows up to 8 dwelling units per acre.
The proposed Low Residential (L) zoning allows up to 6 dwelling units per acre and is an
appropriate implementing zone. The Amendment restores consistency between the
Zoning Map and the 359-lot subdivision approved in 2004 and recorded in 2023. The
Amendment provides development standard more appropriate to the configuration of the
approved Final Maps and support implementation of the General Plan’s housing goals.
2)The Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The
Amendment assigns the zoning designation of Low Residential (L), which most closely
reflects the development standard under which the subdivision was originally approved
in 2004 under the now retired Etiwanda North Specific Plan. No construction or physical
modification are proposed under this action, and future developments will be reviewed
under a seperate applications in accordance with current City processes.
3) The Amendment has been processed, including, but not limited to,
public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the
California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
C. CEQA. The City finds that the Amendment is exempt from environmental
review pursuant to Section 15061(b) (3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which states that
where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the activity may have a
significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The application
is for a Zoning Map Amendment only and does not authorize any physical development.
The proposed zoning change aligns with the existing subdivision of 359 lots approved in
2004 and is consistent with the current General Plan land use designation of Traditional
Neighborhood. Therefore, the application will not have any specific impacts on the
environment.
Page 175
3
D. Approval of Zoning Map Amendment DRC2025-00141. Based on the
findings set forth in this Ordinance and the totality of the administrative record before it,
the City Council hereby approves Zoning Map Amendment DRC2025-00141 as set forth
in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
E. Zoning Map Amendment. The City Council hereby amends the official
Zoning Map reflecting the amendments set forth in Exhibit A.
F. Severability. The City Council declares that, should any section,
subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any
reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance,
and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof,
irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions,
sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
G. Enforcement. Neither the adoption of this Ordinance nor the repeal of any
other Ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of
ordinances, which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be
construed as a waiver of any penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation
thereof.
H. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effective thirty (30)
days after its adoption and shall be published or posted as required by law.
I. Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance
and shall cause it to be published in the manner required by law.
J. Nothing in this Ordinance is intended to conflict with the City’s approvals of
the Final Maps for Tracts 16072,16072-1, 16072-2, and 16072-3. Such maps are
intended to be consistent with the Amendment adopted under this Ordinance.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS __ DAY OF __________, 2025.
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
Page 176
4
I, Kim Sevy, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the
__ day of _____, 2025, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Page 177
EXHIBIT A
Page 178