Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-163 - ResolutionsRESOLUTION NO. 96-163 ^ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUC^MONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN SUBAREA 16 REDESIGNATION WITH A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals 1. There has been presented to this City Council, in conjunction with the Council's consideration of the recommended approval of General Plan Amendment 95-03A, Development District Amendment 95-02, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 95-04, and Tentative Tract 15727, a Final Environmental Impact Report. 2. The Final Environmental Impact Report referred to in this Resolution consists of that document dated July 1996, entitled "Draft Environmental Impact Report Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 16 Redesignation" together with the draft Final Environmental Impact Report dated October 1996, including written comments on the draft Environmental Impact Report and wdtten responses thereto submitted by staff of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and testimony presented during hearings on the recommended approval of the said General Plan, Development District, and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendments and Tentative Tract 15727 insofar as that testimony pertained to the environmental matters, as well as the revised executive summary, including revisions to the mitigation measures, as well as the mitigation monitoring plan. Hereinafter, the above referenced documents will be referred to as the "Final Environmental Impact Report." The entirety of the Final Environmental Impact Report is hereby incorporated in this Resolution by this reference. 3. The public comment period on the draft Environmental Impact Report was duly and lawfully closed on September 3, 1996, following due notice to the public and all applicable public agencies. 4. On October 9, 1996, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Final Environmental Impact Report and concluded said hearing on that date, and recommended that the City Council certify the draft Final Environmental Impact Report and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. 5. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 2 B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga takes the following action with respect to the Final Environmental Impact Report: Certifies that a Final Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for General Plan Amendment 95-03A, Development District Amendment 95-02, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 95-04, and Tentative Tract 15727 in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") with State and City Guidelines for implementing CEQA, and all other applicable laws and regulations. Further, that the City Council certifies that it has considered the contents of the Final Environmental Impact Report in considering the approval of General Plan Amendment 95- 03A, Development District Amendment 95-02, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 95-04, and Tentative Tract 15727; Hereby adopts: (1) the Statement of Findings (EIR) and Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached hereto as Attachment A, and (2) the Mitigation Monitoring Program, attached hereto as Attachment B, based upon the following findings: 1) The facts and findings set forth in the Statement of Findings (EIR) Statement of Overriding Considerations are supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record and the Final Environmental impact Report. 2) The Final Environmental impact report has identified all significant environmental effects of the project; there are no known potentially significant environmental impacts not addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report. 3) Although the Final Environmental Impact Report identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects that can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been reduced to an acceptable level by the imposition of mitigation measures on the project. These mitigation measures are attached hereto as part of the Mitigation Monitoring Program and incorporated herein by this reference. 4) Potential mitigation measures or project altematives not incorporated into the project (including the "no-project" alternative) were determined to be infeasible based upon the considerations set forth in the Statement Resolution No. 96-163 Page 3 of Findings (EIR) and the Final Environmental Impact Report and other substantial evidence in the administrative record. The cumulative impacts of the project in relation to other projects in the area have been considered, and, except with respect to those unavoidable impacts described in the Statement of Findings (EIR), mitigation measures are incorporated into the project to reduce such impacts to insignificant levels. 5) The unavoidable significant impacts of the project that have not been reduced to a level of insignificance, as identified in the Statement of Findings (EIR) and the Final Environmental Impact Report, have been substantially reduced in their impacts by the imposition of mitigation measures. The remaining unavoidable significant impacts are outweighed by the economic, social, technological, legal, and other benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 6) The Final Environmental Impact Report has described a reasonable range of alternatives to the project (including the "project" alternative), even though these alternatives might impede the attainment of project objectives and might create other significant economic, social, legal, technological, or environmental impacts. A good faith effort was made to incorporate alternatives in the preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, and reasonable alternatives were considered in the review process of the Final Environmental Impact Report and the ultimate decisions on the project. Pursuant to provisions of the California Public Resources Code Section 21089 (b), this application shall not be operative, vested, or final, nor will building permits be issued or a map recorded, until (1) the Notice of Determination (NOD) regarding the associated environmental action is filed and posted with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino; and (2) any and all required filing fees assessed pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4, together with any required handling charges, are paid to the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino. In the event this application is determined exempt from such filing fees pursuant to the provisions of the California Fish and Game Code, or the guidelines promulgated thereunder, except for payment of any required handling charge for filing a Certificate of Fee Exemption, this condition shall be deemed null and void. 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 4 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 20th day of November, 1996. AYES: Alexander, Biane, Curatalo, Gutierrez NOES: Williams ABSENT: None ATTEST: . ~ ~/~:. ~. .- ~'L~ ,~ ~ Debra J. Adarrie;', CMC, City Clerk William J. Alex~0~fer, Mayor I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 20th day of November, 1996. Executed this 21st day November, 1996, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, ~MC, City Clerk Resolution No. 96-163 Page 5 FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS I. INTRODUCTION This Statement of Findings of Fact has been prepared for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 16 Redesignat:ion project. The City of Rancho Cucarnonga prepared an environmental impact report (EIR) for the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines. The EIR was subject to the review and approval by the Ranch Cucamonga Planning Commission and City Council, and was certified as adequate by the City Council on November 20, 1996. !1. DESCRIP:rlON OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The project site is located in the southwestern portion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga in San Bernardino County,. Known as Subarea 16 of the City's Industrial Area Specific Plan, the project site is 142 gross acres in size, and is bounded by Sixth Street to the north, Archibald Avenue to the east, Fourth Street to the south, and Cucamonga Creek Charmel and Hellman Avenue to the west. The proposed project consists of two components. The first compon~'tt involves the redesignation of 91 acres of the subarea from Industrial Park to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). Because the City is concerned about potential land use compatibility, problems, the impacts associated with future industrial park development on the remainder of the subarea is also evaluated as part of this project component. The second project component is a proposed '042 single family dwelling unit subdivision on/-7 acies of the pruposed redesignation area. III. FINDINGS OF FACTS The California Environmental Quality, Act (CEQA) Public Resources Code Section 21081, and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provide that: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings: a. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. b. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility or jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. c. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives ident:Lfied in the EIR." After reviewing the Final EIR and the public record on the project, the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby makes the findings in Section IV, V, and VI regarding the significant effects of the proposed project pursuant to Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 6 IV. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGABLE TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE LAND USE IMPACTS Implementation of the proposed project would result in the removal of 91 acres of industrial park designated land from Subarea 16 of the City's Industrial Area Specific Plan, and its redesignation for low-medium density residential use. The proposed redesignation is somewhat inconsistent with the City's General Plan policy which calls for industrial park uses a.long Fourth Street. The proposed development is also inconsistent with the adopted Master Plan for the area which calls for different phasing, access and drainage improvements than currently proposed. Although the industrial park uses would be restricted through implementation of the Industrial Area Specific Plan's performance standards, it is probable that some nuisance noise, c~or or ll, ghting would impact the proposed adjacent residences beyond the propond setback and require attention by City code erfforcement. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,. the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding The potentially significant effects will be reduced to a level of insignificance through implementation of the following required mi.'~gation measures: [LU-1] The City shall ado'pt land use amendments and development standards for Subarea 16 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan which will supercede the provisions contained in the adopted Master Plan for Subarea 16. The citywide Master Plan of Storm Drains shall also be revised to reflect the currently proposed development. These administrative actions shall take place prior to final tract map approval of the Cucmmonga Comerpointe project. [LU-2] The City should modify the list of Subarea 16's permit-ted and conditional uses to exclude or limit more noxious ones. This modification shall occur prior to Final Tract Map approval of the Cucamonga Cornerpointe project. [LU-3] Future industrial development within Subarea 16 shall be subject to the following building limitations: · Height Limitation: 25 feet within 100 feet of abutting residential development. · Rear Property Line Building Setback: 45 feet when abut-ting residential development. · No loading doors/faciLities, outdoor activities/storage nor mechanical equipment shall be located beyond the rear wall of the subject industrial building. [LU-4] For the lots within the Cucamon~ Comerpointe subdivision which abut the remaining industrial park portion of the subarea, the following features shall be included in order to reduce future residents' perception of neighboring industrial park activities: Resolution No. 96-163 Page 7 [LU-5] a. An eight-foot slump block ;vall shall be constructed along the cornmen property line which separates the residential and industrial park lands of the subarea. The base of the wall shall be planted with a 16- foot wide buffer of evergreen ;'ines and dense evergreen trees (eight feet of landscaping on each side of the property line wag). b. Homes on lots whose backyards abut the industrial park shall be set back 60 feet from the coa-am~'t property, line. Homes on lots whose sideyards abut the industrial park shall be set back 30 feet from the cc~mon property line with additional wall and window insulation to ensure interior noise levels to '45dB CN'EL. c. Minimize the number of ~indows which look onto the industrial park. Windows which do look onto the industrial park shall be double- paned. _%'he cc&ris for the Cucamonga Comerpointe residential development shall disclose the presence of the adjacent industrial park and, to the extent feasible, describe the potential nuisances which might be generated by the industrial park. AIR QUALITY IMPACT5 Development of Subarea 16 with residential and industrial park uses would increase the daily generation of pollutants in both the short-term and the long-term. Significant long term air pollutant emissions would be generated by vehicular trips going to and from the subarea, and, indirectly, as a result of the use of electricity and natural gas in machines and appliances. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. Fact in Support of the Findirlg The potentially significant effects will be reduced to a level of insignificance through implementation of the following mitigation measures: [AQ-2] All development within the subarea shall be subject to applicable provisions of the City's adopted trip reduc-ffon ordinances (Ordinance No. 522 and 523, Adopted April 6, 1994) as follows: Industrial Park Development a. Office parks with 1,000 employees or more shall provide onsite video conference facilities. b. Industrial development over 325,000 square feet in size shall provide a rninimum of one shower facility accessible to both men and women for persons waking or bicycling to work. c. Bicycle storage facilities at the rate of one rack or locker per 30 spaces (minimum of a three-bLke rack) shall be provided within all development and related to plan.ned and existing bicycle trails in accordance with the Development Code Requirements. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 8 d. Off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for office/industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area as designated for use by car pools and vanpools. e. Convenient pedestrian circulation shall be provided throughout all projects to connect public streets, parking areas and public transit facilities with buildings and pedestrian open spaces. Residential Development f. Cucamonga Cornerpointe's roadway improvements to Fourth Street shall include a bus tunaout. g. Single-family development of 500 or more urdts shall provide a telecommuting center or conizibute toward development of one in an amount satisfactory to the City Council. FIRE PROTECTION IMPACTS E. evelopment of the subarea as proposed would result in a considerable increase in demands for ~.h~: various fire protection, suppression, and emergeng, medical services provided by the F, anci~o Cucamonga Fire Protection District. The potential need for relocation of Fire Station ~'- to meet this demand would not be adequately covered by revenues generated through standard property taxes. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding The potentially significant effects will be reduced to a level of irtsignificance titrough implementation of the following mitigation measure: [FP-1] All property within the present boundaries of Subarea 16 shall be annexed into Mego Roos District $5-1 in order to assist in fzmdimg Fire Station ~-'s relocation and/or the hiring of additional personnel. Annexation of the subarea shall be completed prior to recordation of Cucamong-a Cornerpointe's Final Tract Map. Subarea landowners shah each contrf~ute their pro-rata share of the administrative costs of annexation. POLICE PROTECTION IMPACTS Development of the subarea as proposed would result in additional residents, employees, pedestrians, and vehicular traffic in the project area, which would increase the existing demands for the various law enforcement and protection services provided by the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Depa~iaLent. This impact is considered to be cumulatively significant in that the need for additional officers may ultimately result in the need for new or expanded police facilities. Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 9 Facts in Support of the Finding The potentially sig-nificant effects will be reduced to a level o[ insignificance through implementation of the following mitigation measure: [r-lI All development in the subarea shall include the following desig-n features to reduce the potential for criminal activity,: a. Street and night lighting should be provided on the project site to aid crime prevention and enforcement efforts. Lighting standards should meet or exceed existing City, standards. b. Landscaping should be designed so as to not conceal potential criminal activities near windows or doors. c. All garages should be enclosed. d. The use of 1ouvered windows should be prohibited. SCHOOL IMPACTS Development of the residential portions of the subarea would result in the generation of new students that would attend schools administered by the Cucamonga School District and the Charley joint Union High School District. Additional students may also be generated from future employees of the proposed industrial park. Because both of the two school districts have indicated that the existing enrollment levels are at or near maximum capacity, the proposed project's impact to schools is considered to be potentially significant. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding The potentially sigr~fica_nt effects will be reduced to a level of insignificance through implementation of the following mitigation measure: IS-1] Each residential development within General Plan Area 95-03A shall be conditioned to participate in the CJ'USHID's CFD No. 2, and shall negotiate and enter an agreement with the CSD for school impact mitigation prior to issuance of building permits. WATER SUPPLY IMPACTS The Cuca.monga County Water District has indicated that the existing trunk lines that se~'e the site can not adequately accommodate the project's future water demands without a significant decline in water pressure. Although the project applicants would be required to pay Water Development Fees to the District, these fees would not be sufficient to reduce the potentially significant impacts relative to existing water distribution facilities to less than significant levels. F~ Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 10 Facts in Support of the Finding The potentially si,~icant effects will be reduced to a level implementation of the following mitigation measure: [w-1] of i.n.;ignificaace through In addition to paying connection fees and installing all required waterlines on the project site, the Cucamonga Comerpointe or the first major development of the area shall construct a 12" water main in Fourth Street bet'ween Cucamonga Creek Channel and Archibald Avenue. If Cucamonga Comerpointe is the first major development of the site, then the 12" water main shall be installed prior to final inspection approval. If the Industrial buildings are the first major development of the site, then the 12" water main shall be installed prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy. Because other development within the subarea will also be dependent upon this water main, a refund agreement shall be established with the Cucamonga Cou_n ,ty _Water District in which each development within the project site shall provide a pro-rata funding, based u, von the completion oi residential units of each particular development. STORM DRAINAGE IMPACTS Development of the subarea as proposed would increase the arnotrot of impermeable surfaces and reduce the time of concentration, thereby increasing the peak stormwater runoff potential from the project site. Because drainage facilities have not been identified for the Blessent and Cook properties, stormwater runoff impacts from these two areas of the site are considered to be potentially sigrffficant. In addition, the Cucamonga Comerpointe system does not appear to provide for stormwater runoff from future industrial park developmeat within the Cucamonga Channel tributary, area. With regard to potential flooding impacts, future development on the westerly portion of the Blessent property, and the northwesterly portion of the Cook property may be significantly affected by the Hellman Avenue flood hazard area. Development of the subarea may also generate potentially significant water quality, impacts because of the nature of the land uses and the considerable area of impermeable surfaces wkich would be consWacted on the project site. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding The potentially significant effects will be reduced to a level of insignificance through Lmplementation of the following mitigation measures: [SD-1] In order to avoid the potential sheet flow flooding that would be generated from Sixth Street, building pads proposed along Sixth Street shall be raised in accordance with Ordinance 54.5. In addition, it is the City's policy that storm drams be installed whenever: 25-year storm runoff exceeds the capacity of a street (curb-to-cv_rb); a 100-year storm rumoff overflows the street right-of-way; or street lanes are not kept "dry," du~-Lng a 10-year storm. These criteria will determine if a storm drain will be required within Sixth Street. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 11 [SD-2I [SD-3] [SD-4! In order to avoid the impacts of the existing 100 year flood zone along Hellman Avenue, develovment on the Cook and Blessent properties which would be located within the flood zone shall either be responsible for the construction of the master plan_ned storm drain in HelLman Avenue, or the raising up of the building pads by 3 to 4 feet within that flood zone, in accordance with Ordinance 545. bIore precise hydrology calculations would be required to pinpoint the "safe" firdshed elevations of these sites. If the raising of building pads is implemented, flooding would continue to occur along Hellman Avenue and at any project ingress/egress locations. As such, erosion control measures would have to be incorporated into the fill slope of the raised buLlcling pads. In order to avoid internal flooding problems within Subarea 16 as the area develops, a revised master drainage plan should be prepared prior to the _City preparing conditions of'approval for the Cucamonga Comerpointe project. This report must identify the size and locations of all ohsire storm drains, demonstrate that these storm drai.ns can adequately accommodate runoff from "upstream" areas within Subarea 16 and specify, the locations of proposed points of discharge within either the Archibald Avenue or Cucamonga Charmel tributary areas. In order to ensure that the project's future runoff into Cucamonga Creek Charmel can be adequately accommodated, the Army Corps of Engineers shall be consulted, and if necessary, the impermeable surface areas wit_bdn the project site shall be reduced. In addit-ion, a preliminary drai.nage plan for the project shah be subrrdtted and all storm drain designs shall be approved by the City Eng-inee_r prior to final map approval. To rnirdmize the pollution of stormwater runoff, a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SW"PPP), iden ' ,trfy4ng best management practices for use both during construction and operation of all proposed residential development shall be develoved prior to Cucamonga Comerpointe final tract map approval, in accordance with Re~onal Water Quali,ty Control Board requ.izements. A master SWPPP for non-residential land uses shall be developed prior to const2~uction of such uses. The SWPPP for the non-residential land uses shall require the construction and monitoring of more comprehensive pollution control facilities, both in terms of number and in effectiveness, for removing a variety of potential pollutants. Such facilities should include, but are not [imir~:~.d to, subsurface sedimentation and filtration structures to treat "first flush" runoffs. In addition, the plan must include provisions for a coordinated, periodic sweeping program for all paved surfaces which ~cludes the application and vacuuming of approved detergents for hydrocarbon removal, and an approved disposal proyam. In addition, the SWPPP must demonstrate how runoff from the industrial portion of the project wLU be prevented from discharging onto the residential area, such as through the const:ruction of berms. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 12 CULTURAL RESOURCE5 IMPACTS Development of the subarea as proposed may ultimately' result in the demohtion of the historic Luca~ Ranch Complex. Because the Luc~ Ranch Complex is eligible for a local landmark designation as well as the National Register of Historic Places, the proposed project's impacts to cultural resources are considered to be potentially significant. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant envirorumental effects identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding The potentially sig'nificant effects will be reduced to a level of insignificance through implementation of the fogowing mitigation measure: [CR-1] Pursuant to the commurdt'y design element of the City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan, all new development within the subarea should incorporate historic themes. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 13 Vo SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CAN NOT BE REDUCED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE T RAFFIC/CIRCULATION IMPACTS By Year 2001, the peak hour trips ~om Subarea 16 would cause significant impacts at the intersection of Archibald Avenue/Fourth Street. By Year 2015, Subarea 16 traffic would significantly impact two intersections: Vineyard Avenue/Fourth Street, and Archibald Avenue/Fourth Street. In addition, the intersections of Hellman Avenue/Fourth Street and H~ilrnart Avenue/Sixth Street will be sig-nificantly impacted unless they are signalized. Although, in theory, roadway improvemenU are available to reduce significant impacts, there may be insufficient right-of-way available to accommodate these improvemenU, and thus, significant traffic impacts may be unavoidable at certain locations. Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant envirortmental effects iden6hed in the ErR. Facts in Support of the Finding Implementation of the following mitigation measures will substantially reduce but not completely mitigate the significant effects: [T-I] Each development in Subarea 16, including the Cucamonga Comerpointe subdivision, shah be responsible for mitigating traffic impacts by contributing its pro-rata share of the list of improvements shown below, in accordance with the City's policies regarding traffic impact fees and traffic mitigations. Each development shall coordinate with the Cid' of Ranc~ho Cucamonga Enginee."ing Depar~ent to determine whether t_he City'$ required traffic impact fees are sufficient to cover the development's pro-rata share of these improvements. Year 2001 Archibald Avenue/Fourth Street · Add one eastbound Left-turn lane · Add one westbound Through lane · Add one southbound Right-turn lane · Add one north.bound Through lane The above improvements are already planned by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. This will increase the number of existing through lanes from two to thzee westbound and two to three northbound. Hellman Avenue/Fourth Street · Signalize intersection Hellman Avenue/SLxth Street · Signalize intersection(optional) Year 2015 Vineyard Avenue/Fourth Street · Add one northbound Through lane Resolution No. 96-163 Page 14 This will increase the number of existing through lanes from boo to three in the northbound direction. Archibald Avenue/Fourth Street · Add one eastbound Left tu.m lane Coy 2001) · Add one eastbound Through lane · Add one westbound Through lane (by 2001) · Add one northbound Right-ram lane · Add one nord~bound Througa lane (by 2001) · Add one sout.hbo ,u.nd Right turn lane COy 2001) · Add one southbound Through lane · Upgrade existing intersection signal This will increase the number of existing through lanes from two to three eastbound, two to three westbound, two to three northbound, and two to three .southbound. Hellman Avenue/Fourth Street · Signali~'e intersection COy 2001) Hellman Avenue/SLxth Street · Signahze intersection AIR QUALITY IMPACTS Developmertt of Subarea 16 with residential and industrial park v. ses would increase the daily generation of pollutants in both the short-term and the long-term. In the short term, ,typical construction activities could generate on the order of 69.7 pounds of carbon monoxide, 8.7 pounds of reactive organic gases, 77.4 pounds of nitrogen oxides, 8.9 pounds of sulfur oxides and 1.575.5 pounds of fine particulate matter each day. Should the entire subarea be developed more or less simultaneously, the daily construction emissions would be higher. If the site is developed in a more piecemeal fashion, then daily emissions would be lower, but they would occur over a greater time period. In addition, the subaxea's contribution to cumulative increases in carbon monoxide "hotspot" concentrations is considered to be significant. F~d~e Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the sigrtificant environmental effects identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding Implementation of the following mitigation measures will substantially reduce but not completely mitigate the 5igrtfficant effects: [AQ-1] Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained onsite and kept to a minimum by following the dust control measures Listed below. a. D~ring clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water macks or sprinkler systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving t.he site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. b. Du~in~' g consWaction, water macks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this wouJd include wetting down such 10 Resolution No. 96-163 Page 15 [AQ-2] areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day, ~nd whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. c. After clearing, grading, earth mo~4_ng, or excavation is completed, the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated immediately by watering, revegetating, or spreading soil binders to prevent w4_nd pickup of the soll u~til the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. d. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. e. Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin. .~ll development withi_n the subarea shall be subject to applicable provisions of the City's adopted trip reduction ordinances (Ordinance No. 522 and 523, - Adopted April 6, 1994) as follows: IndustTial Park Development a. Office parks with 1,000 employees or more shall provide onsite video conference facilities. b. IndustriM development over 325,000 square feet in size shall provide a minimum of one shower facility accessible to both men and women for persons waking or bicycling to work. c. Bicycle storage facilities at the rate of one rack or locker per 30 spaces (minimum of a th.ree-bLke rack) shall be provided within all development and related to planned and existing bicycle trails in accordance with the Development Code Requ. Lrements. d. Off-street parking dose to the building shall be provided for office/indust~al facLUties at the rate of 10 percent of the total park.Lng area as designated for use by car pools and vanpools. e. Convenient pedestrian cLrculation shall be provided throughout all projects to connect public streets, parking areas and public transit facilities with buildings and pedestrian open spaces. Residential Development f. Cucamonga Comerpointe's roadway ~.mprovements to Fourth Street shall include a bus turnout. g. Single-family development of 500 or more u_n.its shall provide a telecommuting center or contribute toward development of one in an mount satisfactory to the City, Council NOISE IMPACTS Development of the subarea as proposed would increase the number of vehicular trips which uHli~e the roadways adjacent to the site and, as such, incrementally increase the amount of traffic noise generated on the local roadways. Although development of the subarea would not result in an audible increase, subarea traffic in combination with cumulative project traffic would cause an audible increase which can.not be avoided. 11 Resolution No. 96-163 Page 16 Because the project site is currently exposed to unacceptable ambient noise levels, deveiopment of the proposed residential u..~s would result in exposure of additional populations to unacceptable ambient noise levels. Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the sigrfi. ficant environmental effects identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding Implementation of the following mitigation measures will substantially reduce but not completely mitigate the signLficant effects: [N-l] Pursuant to Sect/on 17.02.120 of the City, Development Code, grading and other construction act/vities which involve the use of heavy equipment shall ~ restricted to Monday through Saturday 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., excluding holidays. [N-2] Applicants for residential development within the subarea shall have an acoustical engineer conduct and submit a final noise study at the time of submittal of plans for building permits on homes which will border Fourth Street, Sixth Street and Hellman Avenue. The final noise study shall verify e,,cisting and future noise ambient noise levels based upon field measurements taken after the ramps linking Arcl'fibald Avenue and Interstate 10 are open. Based ulxa't the updated noise characterization, the study will discuss how outdoor levels at the homes can be attenuated to less than 65 dB CNEL, identify the builct/ng materials and construction techniques to be uHli~ed to reduce indoor noise levels to 45 dB cNrEL, and verify, the adequacy of mitigation measures included in the building plans. Any proposed sound barr/ers shall be designed in a manner which is acceptable to the City. The building plans wLLl be checked for conformance with mitigation measures contained in the final noise study and conditions of approval. SOLID WASTE IMPACTS Full development of the subarea would result in the long-term daily generation of additional solid waste. The amount of solid waste from the proposed project would be less than what is expected Lf the entire subarea was developed under its current industrial park designation. However, given the extremely limited mount of available capacity at both the Milliken and Mid-Valley landfills, the proposed project is anticipated to result in a cumulatively significant contribution to the re~onal solid waste disposal crisis. Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. Resolution No. 96-163 Page 17 Facts in Support of the Finding Implementation of the fogowing mitigation measures would reduce but not completely mitigate the significant effects: [SW-1] Recyclable waste materials generated during construction of any development within the subarea shah be separated out so as to facilitate the recycling of these materials by the contracted trash hauler. [SW-2] City maintenance of the public park shall include the recycling of green wastes and the use of cornposted materials. [SW-3] All proposed dwelling units in the subarea shall be designed with adequate indoor/outdoor storage space to facilitate the separation and recycling of recyclable materials. [SW-4] Each industrial park deve!opme-nt shall participate in the citywide, non- residential recycling prog-ram, at the time it becomes available through private, contracted haulers. 13 Resolution No. 96-163 Page 18 VI. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Section 15126(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that EIP, s describe a "range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which could feasiblv attain the basic objectives of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of th~ alternatives." Four alternatives to the proposed project were identified: 1) No Project Alternative; 2) Low-Medium Residential Alternative; 3) Low-Medlu~m Residential/Commercial/Office; and 4) Low-..Medium Residential/Office. These four alternatives are described below. Alternative 1: "No Project" There are two scenarios which are both defined as the "No Project" Alternative. The first scenario is the literal interpretation of the "no project, "which means maintaining the projecz site as it exists today (Alternative 1A). Because the first scenario typically is not a feasible alternative, a second "no project" scenario was also identified. The second scenario assumes that the project site would be developed as currently permitted under the City's zoning and general plan desig-nations for the site (.alternative lB). Alternative lB consists of 2,390,180 square feet of industrial park buildings and a five-acre public park. Alternative 1A: No Build Because the No Build Alternative would not permit any additional development, it would result in the least amount of impacts compared to the proposed project and the other alternatives. However, this alternative would not meet the objectives of the proposed project and would not provide the same amount of benefits as the project (i.e., park site, infrastructure improvements, jobs, revenue to the City, etc.). Alternative lB: Currently Permitted Btdldout .Alternative lB would generate more vehicle trips than the proposed project, resulting in greater impacts relative to traffic/circulation, air quality, and noise. This industrial park alternative would also generate more sewage and refuse than the proposed project, resulting in greater sewage and solid waste impacts. In addition, Alternative lB would require a greater amount of impervious surfaces than the proposed project; this would result in more surface runoff than the project. Because this alternative involves more industrial square footage than the project, it has the potential to generate greater stormwater pollution impacts because there would be a greater potential that hazardous materials would be used. Although A/ternative lB would generate more jobs than the proposed project, it would not meet all of the objectives of the project. Alternative 2: Low-Medium Residential Throughout Under this alternative, the entirety of Subarea 16 would be removed from the Industrial .Area Specific Plan and redesignated for Low-Medium Residential (4 to 8 dwelling units per acre). The exception would be the public park designation which is currently designated on the general Plan Land Use Map and which is currently proposed as part of the Cucamonga Cornerpointe development. The maximum number of dwelling units anticipated under this alternative would be 1,036. Although Alternative 2 would result in less land use compatibility impacts than the proposed project, the policy inconsistencies are considered to be somewhat greater than the project because there is no retention of any lands for industrial uses, and because the inconsistency with SCAG's g-rowth projections would be even greater. In terms of noise compatibility, this alternative is considered to be worse than the proposed project because, 14 Resolution No. 96-163 Page 19 by resultiaag ~ substantially more dweLLing units than the proposed project, it could expose a greater number of sensitive receptors to existing unacceptable ambient noise levels than the proposed project. It is also expected that demands for police protection would be greater under this alternative than that of the proposed project. This is because residential uses generate more calls for service than industrial uses. In addition, Alternative 2 would generate an estimated 1,019 students, resulting in greater impacts to schools than the proposed project. Alternative 2 would also generate greater water supply impacts than the proposed project. Although Alternative 2 has been identified as the "Envixonmentally Superior Alternative," it would not provide as many jobs or revenue to the City, as the proposed project and would not meet all of the project objectives. Alternative 3: Low-Medium Residential/Commercial/Office Under this alternative, the western portion of the subarea, including the Cucamong-a Comerpointe site and the Cook and BIessent properties, would be withdrawn from the Industrial Area Specific Plan and would be redesignated for Low-Medium Residential ,use with a five-acre public park. Therefore, the residential buildout of this alternative would be the same as the proposed project. The remaln~g 46 acres of the subarea would also be withdrawn from the Industrial .4xea Specific Plan and redesignated. Up to 16 acres of the site would be redesignated for commercfial use and 30 acres would be redesigrtated for office use. The anticipated, non-residential buildout of this alternative is approximately 217,800 square feet of commercial space and 553,340 square feet of office space. · The land use policy consistency of taUtis alternative is considered to be worse than the proposed project because not only would the entire site be inconsistent with the adopted Master Plan, but traffic and air qua.lity generation would exceed SCAG's growth forecasts. Under th3.s alternative, the number of vehicular trips generated by the site would be $1 percent higher than that generated by the proposed project· This suggest that both ohsire and offsite sensitive receptors would ex'perience a greater ambient noise level than anticipated under the proposed project. The air pollutant emissions would exceed SCAQM'D's sigrdficance thresholds and are much greater than the emission levels expected under the proposed buildout of the subarea. In terms of consistency with the AQIv[P, this alternative is considered to be ~consistent because it would generate a higher rate of daily emissions than anticipated under the site's current industrial park designation. The demand for police protection under Alternative 3 would be greater than the proposed project because commercial and office land u_;es typically generate more calls for service than industrial uses. In addition, water supply impacts under this alternative would also be greater than those generated by the project. Although Alternative 3 would generate less stormwater runoff than the project to the Archibald Avenue drainage area, it would generate more runoff to the Cucarnonga Creek drainage area· This alternative would not meet all of the objectives of the proposed project. 15 Resolution No. 96-163 Page 20 Alternative 4: Low-Medium Residential/Office Under this alternative, the western portion of Subarea 16, including the Cucamonga Comerpointe site and the Cook and Blessent properties, would be withdrawn from the Industrial Area Specific Plan and would be redesignareal for Low-Medium Residential Use with a five-acre public park. The ma.x. Lmum residential buildout would be the same as the proposed project. The remaining 46 acres of the subarea would also be withdrawn from the Industrial Area Specific Plan and would be redesignated for an 858,350-square foot office building. ~'~e land use policy consistency impacts of Alternative 4 would be greater than that of the proposed project because this alternative, by not retaining any industrial park lands, would be completely contrary to the City's intent in setting aside lands for industrial development. The a. Lr pollutant emissions under Alternative 4 would exceed SCAQMD's significance thresholds and are substantially greater than the emission levels expected under bu~Idor~t of the proposed project. In addition, the numberof vehicular trips generated by this alternative would be for~r percent kigher than that generated by the proposed proje~. Th~s suggest that both ohsire and offsite sensitive receptors would experience a greater ambient noise level than anticipated under the proposed project. The demand for police protection is also considered to be slightly greater than what is expected under the proposed project because calls for service by the office uses are expected to be greater than that of the industrial park uses. Alternative 4 would generate more water supply impacts than the proposed project. Also, stormwater runoff to the Cucamonga Creek drainage area would be greater than that of the proposed project. F~ally, this alternative does not meet all of the objectives of the proposed project. 16 Resolution No. 96-163 Page 21 VII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The Cali£omia Environmental Quality, Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines provide that: "CEQA requires the decision-maker to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable adverse risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse impacts may be considered acceptable. Where the decision of the public agency allows the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final FIR but are not at least substantially mitigated, t. he agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other i_rfformation in the record. This statement may be necessary, if the agency also makes a finding under Section 15091(a)(2) or (a)(3). If any agency. makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the Notice of Determination." (Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines.) Project benefits are defined as those improvements or gains to the community that would not occu.r without the proposed project. 1. Impacts from Proposed Project As stated in Section V, the proposed project would result in sigrtificant unavoidable impacts relative to traffic/circulation, air quality, noise, and solid waste. 2o Project Benefits The City of Rancho Cucarnong-a finds that the following substantial environmental benefits will occur as a result of approval of General Plan Amendment 95-03A, and associated Development Dist:'ict Amendment 95-02, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 95-04, and Tentative Tract 15727: · Tentative Tract 1572_7, an 82-acre, 342 lot subdivision will provide an added beneficial residential character to the e.'dsting single family neighborhood north of Sixth Street. The inclusion of a five-acre neighborhood park as a part of the tract project wLLl provide recreational activity potential in a residential neighborhood where lit'de presently exists. · Applicants for development will be required to mitigate all on.site impacts and specified offsite LmpacLs through installation of frontage improvements consistent with the City of Rancho Cuc'among-a General Plan's Circulation Element, as well as con~-"ibute to the City's Nexus Fee Program for offsite impacts. · Project applicants shall be conditioned to participate in City waste minimization programs to reduce the flow of municipal solid waste to landfills. Project applicants shall be conditioned to provide methods to facilitate the recycling of solid waste material by contract trash haulers. · The land use arnendm~ts, while redesignating a total of 92 acres for residential development, retains a sigrdficant portion within Subarea 16 for industrial .and commercial related activities that will provide a positive cost benefit to the City when ultimately developed. 17